This article is actually phenomenally ignorant of what it means to run an entity such as Microsoft. Ballmer is no gem, but the author suggests he failed because he didn't re-invent an inherited, gigantic behemoth constructed in the eyes of Gates, who hung around for years in a non-official capacity. Oh, and he lost to Apple.
Could he have done better? I guess. Could he have done worse? I'm sure.
I don't understand how anyone could have thought Ballmer was anything other than Gates choosing his friend to fill the job. He's always been completely out of touch with technology. He's completely a Suit and not a Geek, to put the stereotypes to work. What's worse is he's an egotistical suit that thinks he can just will the technology industry to follow his (Microsoft's) lead. He doesn't even want to understand technology or the end users' needs. He rode Gates' and Allen's coattails and he's comfortable in his riches. He has no motivation to attempt innovation and he's stuck in his comfort zone. Billions in residual revenue from Windows and Office upgrades? Good enough for him apparently.
They need a CEO with a strong openness principle and willing to listen two great advisors: a designer with strong UI/UX experience, and an engineer who knows how to implement those designs.
Summary: Drop Ballmer, get some Apple design sense, and keep shit open. That is how you'll move the industry forward with Microsoft leading the way.
Could he have done better? I guess. Could he have done worse? I'm sure.