The final shoe from the last of Microsoft's old guard has dropped.

Six months after Steve Ballmer walked out of the corner office for the last time, employee number 30 has stepped down from the board. He remains Microsoft's largest shareholder — perhaps only until the check clears on his $2 billion purchase of the Los Angeles Clippers.

But like co-founders Bill Gates and Paul Allen, his time to move on, and aside, has come. The new CEO, Satya Nadella, has been firmly in control since Ballmer relinquished the CEO title in February. Whether severing his remaining fiduciary ties is Ballmer's way of eliminating any confusion about who's in charge, or just his way of going fishing, doesn't really matter. Having purchased the Clippers in one of the most controversial and high-profile sports transactions ever, it's not as if we won't be seeing Ballmer shout at the top of his lungs in a crowded room anymore.

This trajectory was easy to predict, but how major figures choose to leave — and how they are shown the door — can be very telling. A quick read of Ballmer's parting words, and the company's response, strike me as being in the "casually perfunctory" category. There appear to be no hidden agendas, although both documents allude to the fact that Ballmer doesn't seem to be entirely dropping out of sight. That might just be graciousness. Or it could be something pundits will remember should Ballmer actually show an interest in commenting on what Microsoft is doing down the road.

In his open, "Dear Satya" letter, Ballmer betrays no obvious animosity, but does casually mention that major shareholder thing:

I bleed Microsoft -- have for 34 years and I always will. I continue to love discussing the company's future. I love trying new products and sending feedback. I love reading about what is going on at the company. Count on me to keep ideas and inputs flowing. The company will move to higher heights. I will be proud, and I will benefit through my share ownership. I promise to support and encourage boldness by management in my role as a shareholder in any way I can.

Nadella politely acknowledges the power Ballmer still has to wield, while reminding his predecessor he has plenty to keep himself occupied:

As you embark on your new journey, I am sure that you will bring the same boldness, passion and impact to your new endeavors that you brought to Microsoft, and we wish you incredible success. I also look forward to partnering with you as a shareholder.

Nadellas' reply also is less than half the length. Not quite "Thanks! Good Luck!" but also not quite effusive in what should be the penultimate thing Microsoft writes about Ballmer for public consumption (there is no delicate way to say it: the ultimate will be his obituary).

What do memos mean? Tons. Nadella allowed former Nokia executive Stephen Elop to take all the heat for what amounted to his own decision to can about 18,000 people, mostly from Nokia, in what was widely derided as one awful note to staff. The murmurs about Andrew Mason being in over his head were rife, but when he was booted from Groupon he did so with humanizing humility.

What do you think? Would Ballmer have been more gracious not portfolio-dropping? Should Nadella's reply have been longer, as a sign of respect? Should Ballmer just fade into the tech sunset and focus on becoming a more successful tech-billionaire-turned-NBA-team-owner than Mark Cuban (Dallas Mavericks), Paul Allen (Portland Trail Blazers) and Ted Leonsis (Washington Wizards)?

Photo: Raveendran/AFP via Getty Images

