Skip to main content

Microsoft to cut 18,000 jobs in the next year

Microsoft has announced that it will lay off up to 18,000 workers in the next year, in what is by far the largest number of employees that will be cut by the company in its history.

In a letter sent to employees earlier this morning that Microsoft also released to the public, company CEO Satya Nadella confirmed that 12,500 of the job losses will be due to the company's acquisition of Nokia's Devices and Services division in April, when it added 25,000 new workers.

Nadella added:

We are moving now to start reducing the first 13,000 positions, and the vast majority of employees whose jobs will be eliminated will be notified over the next six months. It's important to note that while we are eliminating roles in some areas, we are adding roles in certain other strategic areas. My promise to you is that we will go through this process in the most thoughtful and transparent way possible. We will offer severance to all employees impacted by these changes, as well as job transition help in many locations, and everyone can expect to be treated with the respect they deserve for their contributions to this company.

In addition to the job cuts associated with the Nokia deal, Nadella also indicated that Microsoft will "have fewer layers of management, both top down and sideways, to accelerate the flow of information and decision making." More information on these decisions will likely be revealed on July 22, when Microsoft announces its latest quarterly financial results.

This decision to cut 18,000 positions dwarfs the 5,800 job cuts that Microsoft announced in 2009, at the height of the worldwide economic recession which happened at that time. In a separate press release, Microsoft said that it expects to incur pre-tax charges that will total between $1.1 billion to $1.6 billion over the next year. Those charges will include "$750 million to $800 million for severance and related benefit costs, and $350 million to $800 million of asset-related charges."

What do you think of this move by Nadella and Microsoft to eliminate so many positions in the company?

Source: Microsoft (opens in new tab), Microsoft (opens in new tab)

178 Comments
  • Damn...
  • Indeed...
  • It is all good. That company needs to clean house. He talked a lot about changing cultures and flattening this disfunctional place. And you start by cutting once and cutting deep. You don't want to do this 3 times. Although on second thought, if most of those come from nokia, it means about 5K will come from MSFT itself which is far too little. I was expecting at least 10-12K from MSFT and the rest from nokia given how it is MSFT and its culture that are the problem, not nokia.
  • True, it is MS that needs to change not the recently acquired d & s division.
  • They will cut from both. Not major Nokia and minor MSFT. All areas.
  • It's not "all good" for the thousands of families that will probably lose their main source of income.
  • Those people will find new work. Stop being so dramatic.
  • Have you ever been laid off?  I have, and while I found work quickly, it's still hell for the families involved.  Stop being so flippant.
  • I've been laid off. I know what it's like. You can either treat it like it's the end of the world, or you can pick yourself up, dust yourself off and keep on trucking. These laid-off employees are going to get fat severance packages, will be able to collect unemployment, and armed with a resume that includes a stint at Microsoft, will likely be able to find new work quickly. It's life. Shit happens. These laid-off employees will be fine.
  • Right....Most ppl get laid off with no severance pay! Matter of fact most of my close friends and relatives have gotten laid off without severance pay and fortunately they are doing ok. Microsoft probably has over 100k employees... can't keep all of them forever...
  • Yes, having MS on your resume will be of big help.  They hire only the best and I'm sure they will be fine. The serverance costs average out to $44K per employee.
  • What it means is you will just have to wait a bit longer for your next update. These people aren't being replaced by machines.
  • Having Microsoft on your resume is no small feat and fairly certain these people will find jobs in no time.
  • I completely agree with the cuts. I have worked in two companies in the past where this happened and in the end the companies both came out better in the end. It is often the culture of s company that causes it's downfall.
  • What happened to you? Pardon me if I sund cheeky, but I just wanted to know.
  • rightly said!
  • What an @$$H***, 18,000 are going to lose their job and to you "its all good".  Had Nokia shareholders not been greedy and sold out a lot of these individuals would still have a means to put food on the table.  
  • Calm the f*** down, Microsoft will likely provide them with opportunities for jobs, they don't just kick them out. Holy s***.
  • No, they're doing job cuts.  A very small minority will find opportunities within MS but the rest will, in fact, be kicked out.
  • Those people will find new work. These aren't unskilled laborers depending on the one factory in town.
  • I get it's bad to lose the a job but it's not completely hell. Well, for a few it might be but I'm certain that for most of them they will receive a nice severance and with a job at Microsoft in the curriculum they can get another job easily. Again, not all of them of course, but most of them
  • I'm not trivializing their situation but imagine how many more jobs will be created if MSFT pulls a 180 and starts firing in all cylinders. This will probably create more jobs at MSFT than they are losing today long term, but imagine all the dev jobs that will be created world wide. The anemic MSFT mobile ecosystem has lead to a lot of people having to find new jobs in other areas. The demand for .NET WinRT programmers will skyrocket and a lot of new jobs will be added long term. this can be good for everybody.
  • Yeah but its better than ALL of Nokia handset division employees going unemployed. Nokia was not on a good trajectory alone you know
  • Companies exist to make their owners profit, not give you a job. Jobs are just a beneficial side effect.
  • How can you say that it's MS to blame and not Nokia? If Nokia had been run correctly in the first place MSFT wouldn't now own their devices and services division.
  • 1) MSFT is a dysfunctional company. Read Satya's memo. 2) nokia made some bad choices, but the horrible performance of windows phone was partially to blame for their final outcome. I can't point at any of the nokia WP devices and tell you they did a fundamental error. IT was the software that screw them in the end and the lack of speed from MSFT. 3) this would have happened regardless of what nokia's outcome was. Satya has a big agenda and flattening MSFT and chagning the culture is where it is at. read his memo. MSFT is poisoned. He's going to bleed it out.
  • I bet you also own a multi billion dollar company and know exactly what your talking about. Shut the hell up! MSFT is a blooming company and has always been, your so dramatic
  • May be necessary but definitely not good. They can fire the whole company but without better software and new ideas it will not help them.
  • I have a lot of friends in there. Everytime I talk to them about working there, it goes like this: -everybody tries to screw each other. -everybody tires to take credit at the end. It becomes an idividual competition. -you do better by not being a team player than if you are. You can have all the engineers and new ideas that if you have a poisoned culture, it won't matter. This is why MSFT has been trailing in many areas they once were the leader.
  • This is exactly what MS is trying to fix.  It was caused by the really terrible stack-ranking system.  I imagine with time and the new ranking system MS employees will begin to trust each other again.
  • +Icon. Couldn't agree more :)
  • I cannot believe the lack of consideration to the people that will lose their jobs over this "all good" layoffs. I have family members who have worked for Microsoft for over 12 years. I'm very certain it won't be "all good" for our financial situation if the cuts hit home. Their old enough where trying to get a new job is extremely difficult with ageism still a huge prejudice in tech industry.
  • I wouldn't say 'damn'. MS has 127000 employees. I've seen muc
    h worse... and with no such positive outlook.
  • Wow, Nadella is making serious changes. Wonder how many positions will be added?
  • Added?  Unlikely.  Like many other corporations, they'll either outsource more projects, or just do more work with less people : /
  • It says right in the article that they are adding new positions...
  • You did not read the article did you? They are cutting in some areas, and adding in others
  • You guys don't send a lot a time in corporate do you?  Adding = shifting.  They'll be adding roles, not positions.  Watch the actions, forget the verbage.
  • Like 30 words to spread gossip? Stop with the layoff crap already. It is sad and will be bad enough when it happens. Facebook already shows us what negative press does to the general public during their little experiment.
  • you're not seriously saying FB experiments = MSFT restructuring?
  • I think he does neonspark... I think he does lol
  • No, but WPC in general has this issue of pointing out the negative. I guess that's what most media does. But if Dan or Sam say something negative, the fan base usually follows.
  • That makes sense compared to the Facebook case...
  • I'm sorry for all the folks affected
  • I'm not. They have Microsoft on their resumes. They'll be able to find new opportunities quickly.
  • You may not have ever been impacted by a layoff - lucky you. This MS business decision is valid and I understand the need to discuss the impact in the context of mobile devices and technology in general, however doing so without compassion reflects poorly on those individuals.
  • I have a feeling that Nokia and Microsoft should've stayed seperated, at least from the employees point of view
  • +2520 It seemed like a good idea though.
  • Probably wouldn't have stopped the bloodletting at Nokia and might have been even worse. NOK was failing and could have gone out of business completely. I bet the severance benefits are better under MSFT (never good to lose your job, but better than it might have been under NOK).
  • I bet they are not! Nokia gave amazing severance packages at every turn during their fall from grace.
    Nokia actually has a social conscience. Microsoft are just w**kers that installed Elop as their Trojan horse, who then forced Nokia to make a catastrophic strategic decision...and who are now destroying lives on a huge scale.
    I think Microsoft have earned their Micro$oft nickname once more.
    I feel so sorry for Nokia. They are the only reason I bought into Windows Phone. It's a tragedy for such a proud company to fall to the sword of Microsoft's corporate reshuffle.
    I hope Finnish law nails Microsoft. Bleed Microsoft dry - give those Nokia workers real recompense
  • So now you know what severance package Microsoft will offer them and that it won't be good. Boy, they need to call your asap!
  • The people are likely working under same contracts as they did when under Nokia. Nokia going Android might have saved those jobs, but also might not have. The customers are currently in Android's and iOS's side, thus so is the money; unless they are able to expand the market one company's success will always mean layoffs for the other.
  • I have a feeling that many of those 25K employees were non-essential to the operation of D&S but Nokia transfered them to Microsoft anyway so it's Microsoft that will have to do the culling and bear the pain AND the expense of the cuts.
  • 18000 families..:(
  • 18000 new exciting opportunities in life.
  • What can be more exciting than working for Microsoft? Apple, or Google?
  • Well, I guess that's a way to spin it - but it will be hard for those affected by the layoffs to look at it that way. This will be hard on the ones laid off and their families.
  • He said 12500 layoff are a result of the acquisition of Nokia, not that 12500 will be from the 30k Nokia employees. Out could 6250 current MS and 6250 of the newly acquired from Nokia, but its nice to know most people here have an inside source.
  • 12,500 from Nokia and Nokia X is dead.
  • How many people does Ms employee, what is that in % terms?
  • A bit over 100,000 employees not counting the Nokia people brought in.
  • About 15% IIRC
  • That's a pretty massive cut, percentage-wise, for any company. Yikes.
  • I think they were in the high 90s before this nokia venture and around 120K post nokia purchase. Still too many people. They'll be over 100K which is over what they were pre-nokia. Meaning it isn't much of a cleanup of the core problem.
  • They gained a mobile design / production unit though, so an increase in employees was to be expected imho
  • But if they took 25,000 from Nokia and are laying off 18,00 then they've essentially kept 7,000 people for the new division. Consider how many duplicated positions there were between the Nokia hardware department and the Surface hardware teams. They'll be cherry picking the best (read best fit) staff and also use the same opportunity to cull middle management.
  • They're only laying off 12.5k from the Nokia division, the rest are from the rest of Microsoft.
  • They are paying off 12500 because of the acquisition, not from the acquisition. We don't know where those layoffs are taking place.
  • The beginning of the new economic crisis. How are those families going to pay off their debts or spend?
  • probably MSFT is letting them invest in stock, which probably gets them more money than working at MS
  • People in debt I don't feel sorry for. As for spending, MS/Nokia isn't the only employer.
  • Well it depends what kind of debt. If you have 5 credit cards all maxed out then no, I don't feel sorry for you. If you have a mortgage or student loans to repay then yes, I do feel sorry for you.
  • Mortgage and student loans? Nope, don't feel sorry those either. If you can't afford it, don't buy it. People over extending their credit is what keeps those prices inflated.
  • You're a f****ing idiot, I bet you didn't pay for your student loans and I'm assuming you even went to college after stating such an idiotic response.  Just cause mommy and daddy paid for your stuff its still debt only in their name.
  • ACtrip's just butthurt because he's one hell of a f***er.
  • Or he could have saved up and paid for college out of pocket like I did.  It really highlights the sad state of mind people have that the only ways to pay for college are debt or "mommy and daddy".  Students loans are a stupid idea and no one should take them.  Most jobs you get out of college couldn't help you pay for them anyway.
  • You're right, I didn't pay for my loans. Because I never got a loan. I worked while I went to school and paid my way as I went. It's too expensive to do that now because of idiots like you borrowing to the hilt and just throwing it at them.
  • Well I'm lucky enough to live in a country where university education is free and given to those who are intelligent enough rather than the wealthiest. Still, need a loan to pay for food, accommodation, transport etc. and banks don't give mortgages to people who can't afford to pay them back(well maybe in America if the articles I have read are correct). I guess the poor should just stay poor and the rich shouldn't have to worry about scum running around the campus or buying houses in their neighborhood using a banks money.
  • You start with a shithole you share with friends you pool money to buy outright. This requires *gasp* a job. You save your money until you can afford to upgrade to a little better by yourself or a lot better with a working wife.
    It always amazes me, so many going to school and damn near none of you know a fecking thing about personal finance or asset management.
  • What if you have maxed out credit cards because no bank would give you a loan? That happens quite a bit.
  • Sounds like the bank didn't give them a load for a reason then...
  • Yeah, and that reason is malfeasant big wigs on Wall Street who engaged in years of dishonest practices just to pad their own coffers but ultimately ended up ruining the global economy, leading to massive bankruptcies by people and banks alike, resulting in the post-hoc tightening of loan procedures, resulting in qualitified people not being able to get loans they need, resulting in them having to take credit the only place they can get it--credit cards with exorbitant rates that trap them in poverty while the CEOs responsible for the mess cash out on undeserved, egregious bonuses.
  • Poverty? Poverty is homelessness. Poverty is a shack with no power and an outhouse. And not long ago, that was an achievement for the average person in the US. Stop pointing fingers at others to excuse your entitlement or own fiscal irresponsibility. You know what I love seeing? A young person bitching about how broke he his on his computer or smartphone.
  • You need to look up the definition of poverty. It's broader than you think. You also need to take a sociology class and learn how inequality is a social phenomenon more so than an individual one. Finally, you need to stop jumping to conclusions and judging people you know nothing about. I am not poor, nor did I ever say I was. I am just not myopic and can see the larger work around me. Many people are in poverty through no fault of their own.
  • Lol, 100% excuses and bullshit.
    I know what poverty is, I grew up in it. I know what the government thinks it is and they are two different things entirely. Real poverty doesn't include a power bill or a TV.
  • Poverty is socially constructed, socially embedded, and socially caused. Calling centuries of sociological theory "excuses" just makes you look naive.
  • No, it makes me a practical practitioner who actually lived through it and escaped it vs your "academics" who try to redefine a language to fit their narrative for political purposes and propaganda.
    "Poverty" changes from person to person with their expectations for what they consider as the minimum needed for an acceptable life standard. In actuality, it's forced to live without luxury and all decisions are made on practicality in relation to necessities required to survive.
  • A "practical practitioner"? Nice. If you're referring to social science as a "narrative for political purposes and propaganda" then I'm done talking to you. Science trumps all and anyone who argues against science is not worth arguing with, especially someone who scoffs at centuries of empirical research. Poverty is a social construction, not an individual construction.
  • that is just irresponsible
  • If your credit is bad enough that a bank won't give you a loan at all, then you don't need to be maxing out credit cards.  This happens a lot, because the type of people who can't get a loan are the type of people who would do something like max out all their credit cards.  I solved the problem easily, I don't own any credit cards.
  • Meanwhile, you baby needs diapers, your wife needs to eat, the electricity bill needs to be paid, but you're unemployed because you just got laid off due to years of poor management by the company you've served for decades. How conveneient for you not to own any credit cards (this is actually a pretty stupid thing to do, but that's another topic); must be nice not being poor.
  • Your baby doesn't need a box of diapers from the store. Your baby can do just fine with linen you rewash and reuse. But your biggest mistake there is working at a company for decades and becoming complacent, relying on others' stability for your own.
  • Cloth diapers still cost money. Regardless, it was an example. You're completely missing the point. There are basic needs that some people cannot fulfill, and the reasons they cannot are largely not their own. You are seriously rebuking the concept of stable employment?
  • No, you're missing the point. You call me naive and run off about diapers? Please. Cloth costs money? Any church or social organization is more than happy to provide clothes for a baby to shit in. The fact it is even a problem is another sign of the crap you're shoveling. Having a child early in life is one of the best ways to keep yourself in poverty. With the amount of birth control available today, yes rubbers can be gotten free, it is another personal decision or irresponsibility which keeps the person in a state of poverty by his or her own actions.
    Stable employment is only good if there is opportunity to achieve and grow. Otherwise, it is laziness, complacency, and proof of a person's unwillingness to grow, take responsibility for their own life, and their own security.
  • Having to go to an NGO for donations on basic goods needed to rear a child rather than being able to buy those things oneself is the epitome of poverty. It's a social problem, and you're naive dismissal of it is absurd. I won't even get into the disgusting classism of your comments that young, under-privileged people should be criticized for having children, as if they don't already have it bad enough you're scolding them for trying to gain some enjoyment out of life by trying to govern their reproductive strategies. Disgusting. Calling 'stable employment' laziness just reaffirms how detached you are from reality and social theory. I propose you look up Harrison White's notion of 'vacancy chains'. These opportunities you think are growing on trees for every 'non-lazy' person out there to pursue is a myth, part of the false consciousness. Most people don't have access to the same opportunities. It's called structural inequality. You learn about it in Sociology 101.
  • Not owning a credit card is stupid!?  Wow, you are so misinformed.  I have a years worth of living expenses saved up and currently have no debt.  If I were to lsoe my job today (unlikely) I have an entire year to find a new one.  Since I've spent a lot of time improving myself and increasing my skill set, I don't have much difficulty finding jobs.
    must be nice not being poor.
    Credit cards don't help with a situation of being poor, it makes things worse.  That's financial management 101.  You will not find a single financial consultant worth their salt that will recommend keeping credit cards.  In reality, owning a credit card is stupid.
  • Yes, not owning a credit card--in fact, not owning several credit cards--is stupid, assuming you use them responsibly by paying them off in full every statement. First, you build credit. This allows you to get more credit and lower rates, so when you need to get a home or auto loan, you can get one and you can get one cheaper. Second, using credit cards essentially gives you a 30-59 day free loan to yourself. If your statement ends on the 5th of every month and you have a massive purchase coming up--say you're buying a used car for $10,000. You can put it on your card on the 6th of July and you will not have to pay for it until the 5th of September. Third, you earn cash back, 3-5% on all your purchases. So, by not having a credit card you're 1. limiting the potential of your credit score, which will increase the cost of money you borrowin the future via higher interest rates, 2. you're paying for everything up front instead of hanging onto your money for up to another 59 days, and 3. you're missing out on a 3-5% discount on everything you buy. Finances 101.
  • Having good credit isn't important if you don't plan on borrowing money.  Besides, paying off your entire statement every month is actualyl bad for your credit.  Part of your credit score is how well you can hold onto debt and pay it over a long period of time.  You should leave around $20 on your credit card if you are really trying to build your credit score.  That being said, I have had credit in the past, and still have a mortgage at the moment.  Once this is paid off though, I have zero intention of getting a loan ever again.  Spending money you do not have is never a good financial decision, period, end of story. If I'm buying a used car for $10,000 guess what I do, I save up the money to buy it.  If I can't save up $10,000 then I buy a cheaper car that I can afford.  It's really not that hard of a concept.  Don't spend money you don't have.  As for the cash back stuff do you honestly think Credit card companies wouldn't do that if they didn't make money off of it?  Even then, there are debit cards now that offer the same cash back incentives, use one of those. Now for your points; 1) I have no intention of borrowing money in the future. 2) There is really no benefit to this, paying up front is better. 3) Not missing out on this at all, my debit card hsa the same benefits. Finances 101, don't spend money that you don't have.  The fact that we even need to have this conversation shows just how sad the state of things have gotten.  Having a good credit score shouldn't be a badge of honor, having no credit score should be.
  • 1) Having a good credit score is beneficial for more than just borrowing money. Your credit score also affects your insurance rates (care, health, life, etc.) as well as your rental and employment prospects. 2) Yes, there is a huge benefit to it: a 59-day interest free loan to yourself. You can then use that money in investments to make more money. Never give away your money a second sooner then necessary. 3) Debit card cash back programs are generally not as generous as credit card programs because credit cardsearn banks higher transaction fees, who then pass more of that on ward to customers. Yes, credit cards offer this because they profit from it, but only from irresponsible customers who don't pay their balances on time. You should profit from them just as the banks do. Taht's nice that debit cards do similar things, but you'd still be missing out on the previous two benefits by using them instead of credit cards. I'm not talking about spending money you don't have. I'm talking about the opposite of that. Having said that, your mantra is pretty shortsighted. Many fantastic companies started off on small business loans. You have to spend money to make money and, for most young individuals and organizations, that requires getting a loan. There isn nothing wrong with that. If loans were not available, our technology in 2014 would be stuck in 1928.
  • We are pretty of topic at this point and it's pretty obvious that nothing I say will change your mind. I am going to continue practicing what I preach and living with financial peace and security. Have fun doing what you do, I hope your debt doesn't catch up to you some day, it can easily get out of hand.
  • I don't have any debt. Never paid a penny in interest on any loan or credit card, but have gotten lots of money back on credit card usage.
  • That's like saying "I drilled a bunch of holes in my boat and nobody will let me borrow their boat." You've proven you can't manage your money and you want someone to loan you theirs?
  • Such naivete. No, most poverty is inflicted by macro-socioeconomic forces, not individual mistakes. Take Sociology 101. Second, I am not poor. In fact, there is a very high probably I have more assets than you. I'm just not as blinded by false consciousness as you.
  • No, it's caused by irrational dependency on others and piss poor fiscal responsibility. Maxing out your credit cards, having children early... YOUR FAULT. I've taken sociology and beat my professor into submission with life experience vs his ridiculous misconceptions which are much the same as the ones you're trying to shovel.
    As far as assets go, can you beat my $23 million?
  • It is a univerally accepted fact that nearly all poverty is caused by macrolevel variables, not micro-level ones. The fact that you're trotting out baseless right-wing political propaganda that places all blame for poverty on 'lazy, irresponsible' people demonstrates you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.  As for your $23 million in assets, you think you earned that by yourself? You didn't. Heed President Obama's words of wisdom: "You didn't build that." You have such a pathetic understanding of how society works and wealth accumulates that it's mind boggling. You should take some of that $23 million and sign up for a sociology class at a local community college, for you badly need a more theoretically informed perspective on reality.
  • the same way anybody else does: get a new job.
  • Exactly.  What is wrong with people these days... they think they're entitled to keep the same job forever.  It's pathetic.
  • This won't even put a dent into economy.
  • For most of the folks they'll follow standard protocol and provide severance packages.  The time and amount depend on seniority and time in the company.  For those Nokia employees being cut, it may be more harsh.  It depends on how Finnish companies do their business.
  • Satya be like "MSFT needs to change, so let's fire everyone!" :D
  • wow I was thinking 10-15K so this blows my estimate. But way to go redmond. Out with the old, in with the new.!
  • Not overly surprised. Sucks, but they did take on what like 25,000 employees from Nokia? Im sure alot were redundant. Im sure some "new positions" will also be created and people being layed off will likley fill those.  Feel for the people being let go though. :(
  • Unfortunate this has to happen. How necessary, time will tell.
  • And how many of these will simply be Nokia staff? I can imagine quite a lot with overlap in similar positions and MS likely to keep their own rather than fire someone who's been at MS for years.
  • Yeah, like j Allard, Synofsky, Green, Ballmer, etc
  • Satya should begin with firing himself
  • Why not start with Elop?
  • What's wrong with Satya?  He hasn't been CEO for long, but I like his vision and where he wants to take the company.
  • Shit... Feel sorry for all those people and their families! Assuming a lot of these are Nokia employees, do you think this will mean a change in design and innovation with future devices?
  • I think first, many support staffs will be eliminated as they are redundant. Then Asha and X will be reduced/killed, so their design team and factory workers will be affected.
  • :( :/
  • The number keeps rising it seems whoa
  • Good thing I start next week...
  • Ms should open up its own unemployment office now...the local one will be overwhelmed by ex Ms employees...sad! They definitely won't be buying anymore Ms products that's for sure!
  • Damn, the bulk of these must not be Nokia but from MS... Still sorry for those who are going to be made redundant.
  • This is sad for those losing jobs, but necessary for Microsoft if they hope to revamp things and remain profitable.
  • Dang
  • Agree that trimming is neccessary, but strange that the cuts are in Nokia. Nokia is the only part that did any noticable innovation on WP in the last 3 Years. I guess no good deed goes unpunished...
  • They never said the cuts would come from Nokia specifically just that 12k were because of the deal. I'm sure a lot of Nokia will be laid off but MS undoubtedly wants to keep the part that kept WP alive the last few years and let go some of the WP team from MS who have done...less than stellar work. 
  • Wow. They will most certainly be a different company after this. Hopefully they get rid of the guy who got rid of the TechNet subscriptions and Media Center. I feel bad for the other 17,998.
  • Damn. Just scary numbers to say the least.
  • Dam. Its always sad to see when ppl lose their jobs. And so many of them will be affected. I know this is just business but still... Still a bitter pill to swallow. All the best of luck to those affected.
  • Wow.. Perfect :D
  • My guess is that many of the Nokia job losses are in manufacturing. MSFT needs to contract actual assembly of phones with outside companies anyway. It will be interesting to see where the 5000 job cuts are at MSFT itself. My hope is that total includes the idiots that designed the WinRT API and framework.
  • What a cold hearted bastard!
  • I think Nadella is being this way to start change. Some bad things may happen, only because current states are wasteful and unnecessary. Then, better things will replace. Happened to me on my blog.
    Posted via Windows Phone Central App
  • About friggin time. MSFT needed this new mindset 10 years ago. Lack of vision for the future has left this company with a big uphill battle. Its not too late to beat Google, but odds are against them without a a new way of thinking
  • I hope he knows what he is doing
  • douchebag move
  • TBH I was expecting more. One of the greatest internal complaints is middle managers defending their silo to the detriment of other BU. So getting rid of that should help. But I was expecting 12-20% of workforce.
  • Anyone else notice this tidbit in Nadella's press release: In addition, we plan to shift select Nokia X product designs to become Lumia products running Windows. This builds on our success in the affordable smartphone space and aligns with our focus on Windows Universal Apps. I first saw this par