Can Microsoft's Ballmer get away with it?

Sometimes Microsoft makes it too easy to point out how slow and stupid the company has gotten with little Stevie Ballmer in charge. Take, for example, Microsoft's claim that Ballmer knew next to nothing about his company's "Vista Capable" marketing campaign. And, therefore he shouldn't have to testify in the Vista class-action lawsuit that accuses the company of deceiving customers with the campaign.

In a statement to the court, Ballmer said, "I was not involved in any of the operational decisions about the Windows Vista Capable program I was not involved in establishing the requirements computers must satisfy to qualify for the Windows Vista Capable program. I was not involved in formulating any marketing strategy or any public messaging surrounding the Windows Vista Capable program. To the best of my recollection, I do not have any unique knowledge of, nor did I have any unique involvement in any decisions regarding the Windows Vista Capable program."

There's so much that's wrong with this that it's hard to know where to begin.

First, if Steve Ballmer, already Microsoft's top-dog since Gates started spending his time on his foundation, didn't know about what was what with a major advertising campaign, what the heck was he doing in charge of the company!? This wasn't just a new version of Microsoft Project; this was the long, long awaited new version of the company's flagship operating system Windows.

By the time, Vista finally showed up it incredibly long gestation period had become an industry joke. And, Ballmer didn't know what's what with its ad campaign? He didn't know that Vista couldn't possibly work well on the systems that Microsoft was declaring to be Vista Capable?

If that's true, as Microsoft is telling us now, then we have yet another reason Ballmer should be fired. While criminally greedy executives, such as those at AIG and Lehman Brothers, seem to have become the new normal for American corporations, this goes beyond money-grabbing to just plain old stupid.

But, wait, in that same statement, the Ballmer said, "On a few occasions in 2006, I had brief discussions about technical requirements and timing for the Windows Vista Capable program with executives from Microsoft's business partners, including Intel Corporation. However, those discussions took place at a very general level."

So, not only did he not know what was going on with Vista's advertising campaign or what its real technical requirements were, he was talking to major partners without knowing what he was talking about! This just keeps getting better and better.

As I see it, if Ballmer did know nothing, what was, and is, he doing as CEO? And, if he did know, well, that's why Microsoft doesn't want him sworn in. There's this little legal technicality called perjury, which might trip him up on the stand.

All-in-all, I'm willing to believe Ballmer really didn't know. I mean this is the same company where Mike Nash, Microsoft's corporate VP of Windows Product Management e-mailed Microsoft's top brass on Feb. 25, 2007 that "I personally got burned by the Intel 915 chip set issue that I bought PERSONALLY (eg with my own $$$)." "I know that I chose my laptop (a Sony TX770P) because it had the Vista logo and was pretty disappointed that not only wouldn't it run [Aero] Glass, but more importantly it wouldn't run Movie Maker." Nash felt that he had bought a "$2,100 e-mail machine."

Hey guy, a lot of other early Vista buyers felt exactly the same way. That's why they're suing you.

So, if the VP of Windows Product Management didn't know that Vista Capable machines were actually Vista Incapable why not the CEO? I mean this is a company where its senior management clearly doesn't know the first thing about its own products. But, hey, you don't have to believe me. All you have to do is believe Microsoft when it says its top leaders don't really know what's going on within the company.