8.時代華納（Time Warner Inc.）

當時：1,850億美元

如今：570億美元

變化：-69%

9.花旗（Citigroup）

當時：1,780億美元

如今：1,510億美元

變化：-15.17%

10.甲骨文（Oracle Corp.）

當時：1,670億美元

如今：1,470億美元

變化：-11.97%

????除了?？松梨冢?000年1月市值排名前十的公司如今的市值都趕不上當年。而且大多數公司市值的降幅都高達兩位數，其中三家公司降幅比微軟還大。

????而且這還沒有包含戴爾（Dell）、雅虎（Yahoo）等2000年1月市值排名稍靠后的眾多科技公司，如今這兩家公司的降幅也超過了微軟。

????必須重申，我不是說鮑爾默是個搖滾明星。微軟的市值、科技市場占有率以及在各個領域的情況都出現了后退。

????但值得注意的是，他接手這家全球市值最高的公司之時，正值微軟所在行業(yè)推動經濟處于泡沫的時期。微軟的降幅巨大，但部分原因是因為微軟從最高處跌落。鮑爾默的傳奇——是非曲直——都不應當依據2000年1月的那場非理性繁榮來判定。（財富中文網）

8. Time Warner Inc. (TWX)

Then: $185 billion

Now: $57 billion

Change: -69%

9. Citigroup (C)

Then: $178 billion

Now: $151 billion

Change: -15.17%

10. Oracle Corp. (ORCL)

Then: $167 billion

Now: $147 billion

Change: -11.97%

????Outside of Exxon Mobile, every single other company in the Top 10 from January 2000 is worth less today than it was then. And most by double digits -- three of which had worse percentage losses than Microsoft did.

????And this doesn't even touch on a series of other tech companies that were a bit lower down the market cap list in January 2000, including Dell (DELL) and Yahoo (YHOO), which also lost more market cap than did Microsoft on a percentage basis.

????Again, I'm not saying Ballmer was a rock star. The company did lose stock market value, tech market share and all cache all over the place.

????But it is worth remembering that he took over the world's most valuable company in the midst of an economic bubble driven by that company's industry. The fall was steep, but that was partially because Microsoft began from the highest brand. Ballmer's legacy -- for better or for worse -- should not be predicated on the irrational exuberance of January 2000.