To the contrary, I found the WSJ report showed the direct correlations between the times when Ballmer began to pick up the majority of the work and the decline in the _innovation_ coming out of Microsoft's camp. Their report makes the Gates/Ballmer division of how MS plays ball quite clear.

As they explain, Gates is all about MS innovating and building their own tech. Ballmer is about finding a compromise and playing it slightly more safe (because he's a businessman first and foremost while Gates is a hacker). Sure, it's a huge risk to gamble with one of the world's biggest companies, but Gates knew how to play that game.

Just take a look at the "innovations" that have come from MS post-2001 and compare them to their work prior to that. There's a clear distinction in the aim/position MS took on in the market. Of course correlation isn't causation, but it's still food for thought.