Fair enough -- and he has a point. Google has skyrocketed from nothing in less than ten years to where it is today, and the company is looking to grow even faster with new data centers, product offerings, media partnerships and acquisitions in the advertising world. Although I can see why Ballmer said what he did, the CEO is forgetting that innovators and newcomers can disrupt a level playing field and turn entire industries on their heads.
It can be argued that Google has done that (to a point). Google has won the internet search war -- and Yahoo! Inc. (NASDAQ:YHOO) and Microsoft can compete but will probably never be able to overtake Google. In a case of "too little, too late," the software giant has many solid businesses, but it lost this one.
If Ballmer is right and Google is growing too fast to manage itself -- playing in too many sandboxes -- it sure does not seem that way. Google, in my opinion, wants to get information about anything to anyone through any medium necessary -- while connecting buyer and seller and making money on each transaction to feed its coffers. Is that so big a task? It's huge.

Every time we write a critical post about Time Warner or Microsoft, or expose a negative fact, rumor or analysis, the refrain renews: fire the CEO!
It's nothing new, but it's worth evaluating her reasons for the radical battle cry. She argues that Parsons is all about politics (in fact, he's rumored to be angling for a 2009 run for New York City mayor), a skill that helped him avoid perishing in the "shark tank" that has been Time Warner's boardroom for the past decade and earned him credit as being a "Teflon Don," but has failed miserably to maintain Time Warner's legacy as a creative, entrepreneurial culture where good managers were rewarded "generous financial incentives for producing solid earnings growth." Fire Parsons, she says, and maybe that creative culture can be revived.
Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer can't get no love. His 








