One of the most famous memos in all of Microsoft history was a first memo about cost-cutting which came about in 1993 (see early 90s recession). Mike Murray, leading HR, wrote the memo "Shrimp and Weenies"—before MS, Mike was at Apple, having led OG Mac marketing. 1/ (third try)
2/ The company was going through challenges like much of the macro-economy. Only we were worried “maybe this is it? PCs are saturated”—MSFT paranoia. GDP was down. Sales were slowing. We were getting complacent.
Still, memo could have backfired. MS in 89 was a “Velvet Sweatshop”
3/ Yet the memo had not only the intended effect but it was a (re-)turning point for the company. Mike wrote about 3 challenges—things we needed to change—featuring allegories we would never forget.
4/ Shrimp and Weenies: “…we fly coach class; we stay in reasonably priced hotels; we don’t ride in limos; we don’t have executive dining rooms; our office furniture is of good quality, but reasonably priced; when dining at company expense, we order weenies not shrimp.”
5/ T-shirts and Stupid Dog Tricks “…T-shirt can and should be a great team building device for a group … (i.e., shipping a product on time). On the other hand, we need to halt the growing practice of handing out random T-shirts…for simply attending a required business meeting.
6/ Headcount Growth & Lack Thereof “The company has always enjoyed an “n-1” theory of headcount growth. If a task absolutely, positively needs 5 people in order to get the work done, we allocate 4 heads to the task (and the work does get done). This is classic weenier thinking.”
7/ The Bottom Line
“Excess will destroy success. Is your team fueled by weenies or shrimp?”
8/ In a company with private offices, casual dress (a thing), and prided itself on being modern and lean this was a big huge deal. Every company was experiencing “belt tightening” but this seemed different because we were a symbol of national success.
This could have backfired.
9/ Instead it became a cultural touchstone—much like how BillG thought of the company 15 years earlier which was to always have cash on hand to meet payroll for a year.
The idea of being “shrimpy” was a shortcut for not being aligned with the company, customer, etc.
9A/ An OpEd to the weekly printed newsletter “MicroNews” a month later in support of Shrimp & Weenies going against the hold-out whiners was titled “Microsoft Did Not Promise You Club Med” and was widely posted on doors (we still had those).
10/ People started to talk about money not as their own but as shareholder and investor money.
11/ This didn’t last forever. As Mike warned us, being a big company is a constant fight to avoid Shrimp. In 2004 (other tough times) we famously did away with free (to use) gym towels—a favorite of joggers and bikers alike. The company practically imploded. Towels retuned in 06.
12/ The key failure was a sense of entitlement had taken over. Some companies in the news today are struggling with this reaction.
One company took a forward-looking view saying perqs and other benefits could easily be “penny wise and pound foolish”. Here’s Google’s S-1
13/ Not to “told you so” but there is no way this was going to last. I’d been battling these benefits in recruiting for a couple of years and just “knew”.
13A/ Google is even rumored to be cutting back on PC purchases. Oh my!
Being well-known for being thoughtful (aka frugal) in this regard, do the math. $5000/year for R&D can easily be $250M dollars domestic. And what gain (esp for a cloud company!) But Sheets and Slides, yikes!
14/ Many are using the “tech layoffs” to pile on to anti-BigTech or Silicon Valley. That would be dumb. As Mike noted, this is not unique to tech in any way. It is a product of scale.
At scale, everyone thinks some other group will make up for costs/savings. Just a fact.
15/ These stages of cutbacks are a natural evolution not just of tech companies but all companies. It is sad that it happens and feels like a cultural reset or “mean reversion”. It is. Scale is a challenge for every company and this is one of the steps.
A well-known hallmark of AI innovation over 65 years have been the cycles of AI winters.
Another less considered cycle has been that as soon as an AI solution can do something "promised" (aka hyped) that solution is not "really" AI as claimed. 1/2
2/We tend to forget collectively that it was AI (ML) that provided routing directions with maps, analysis in data lakes, and translation to name a few. Now those are just "services" that work spectacularly better than all previous attempts.
3/ But when something didn't deliver it became the start of another AI winter. Computer vision was like that in the 80s (never delivering) and perhaps led to a winter. Then the breakthrough of NN and ImageNet. Now we "forget" that Google Image Search is "AI".
The excitement over how GPT will impact software engineering is worthwhile. This is a step function change for a good set of s/w eng efforts.
Need to keep in mind the history of innovations in developing software. There's supply and demand… 1/4
2/ Historically, excitement in immediate term implicitly assumes the demand for software is roughly constant. This means "we" can catch up and get more done with less.
Many advances over history: compilers, IDEs, graphical debuggers, object-oriented programming, OSS, CICD…
3/ But the problem is with an increase in supply caused by better tools there comes a massive increase in demand. Efficiency begets more demand.
AND as it turns out efficiency creates new forms of complexity, which in turn will drive new innovations in tools.
GitHub's Copilot was Microsoft's first big OpenAI-based app. Now it's getting additional chat features for computer programmers bloomberg.com/news/articles/… // The innovation in programming is probably on par w/ high-level languages and core principles of abstraction. Incredible. 1/4
2/ It simply blows my mind to think about working with (and then on) one of the first "smart" programming editors. The big innovation—it "understood" syntax and semantics of a program as it was typed. Cornell Program Synthesizer (later 'Generator'). Ran on this PDP Terak.
3/ Here's a video of the lead investigator and my mentor Tim Teitelbaum (who just turned 80!) at the 25th anniversary of this ground-breaking work (that very much influenced Visual C++ --> Visual Studio).
Steve Jobs (aka the original "Mr Apple Computerman") in November 1981 (on the heels of the IBM PC launch) on describing the state of technology (they they invented) at the time. 1/
2/
Q. How "personal" computers will actually play a part in a normal person's life, even a person as normal as the average houseperson.
A. "That is the wrong place to start" …
3/ A. "What you have to say is that we are rapidly becoming a knowledge-based society and people are going to have to be trained in new. technologies. We are looking at tools which amplify people's intellectual rather than inherent physical abilities."
The use of AI in writing should be required of first year university students in fall 2023. When I started in school I was enrolled in an "experimental" section to test if computers/word processors made writing "worse". Fortunately Macintosh came out between fall and spring. 1/3
2/3 Once a technology is ubiquitous the only path for education is to broadly adopt it otherwise they end up on the other side and enforce not using it turning many students into cheaters. In the case of AI it is the worst case because the tech is available free in many forms.
3/3 At the start of the Spring semester at my college this is the debate going on. Seems completely misplaced to me to think every student will be "cheating" come the Fall. Imagine if the internet was treated this way? Or word processors? cornellsun.com/2023/01/30/cha…
“No losses associated with the resolution of Silicon Valley Bank will be borne by the taxpayer.”
“As with the resolution of Silicon Valley Bank, no losses [at Signature Bank, NY, NY] will be borne by the taxpayer.
Shareholders and certain unsecured debtholders will not be protected. Senior management has also been removed.”
“Any losses to the Deposit Insurance Fund to support uninsured depositors will be recovered by a special assessment on banks, as required by law.”