>Playboy: And in the meantime? >Jobs: The developments will be in making the products more and more portable... maybe the merging of the telephone and the personal computer. Hard to believe this was 1984, it almost sounded like the original iPhone was 20+ years in baking
Depends on how much one read into the whole "merging" thing. Hindsight is 20/20 as they say...
Playboy Interview: Steve Jobs (1985)
71–80 of 122 posts
Re: Playboy Interview: Steve Jobs (1985)
#72Re: Playboy Interview: Steve Jobs (1985)
#73Re: Playboy Interview: Steve Jobs (1985)
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
Jobs wasn't Woz level, but he was no fool either.
True, he was no fool. What he was, was a wizard at spin doctoring. I have seen his kind in action in lesser circumstances, as they can pick up an idea, any idea, and then spin round and present it as their own without really knowing the depth of the topic.
Re: Playboy Interview: Steve Jobs (1985)
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
> pretty bad at explaining things I find this difficult to believe. An innate ability of humans is to teach others - evolution has selected for it, because humans need to be taught, as their living skills are not innate.
I don't see how the ability to teach others would be an evolved ability. Learning from others, yes. But teaching others is a different skill than learning.
Re: Playboy Interview: Steve Jobs (1985)
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
> pretty bad at explaining things I find this difficult to believe. An innate ability of humans is to teach others - evolution has selected for it, because humans need to be taught, as their living skills are not innate.
The same is true of many other animals, but I wouldn’t say a cat is particularly good at explaining how to hunt.
I've also seen a documentary that claimed humans have a unique ability to respond to pointing. Pointing is a big part of teaching. No animal has as lengthy a childhood as humans, and that is to teach them how to survive.
It just doesn't make any sense that people are inherently bad at teaching.
Re: Playboy Interview: Steve Jobs (1985)
#77> Jobs: Computers are actually pretty simple. We’re sitting here on a bench in this café [for this part of the Interview]. Let’s assume that you understood only the most rudimentary of directions and you asked how to find the rest room. I would have to describe it to you in very specific and precise instructions. I might say, “Scoot sideways two meters off the bench. Stand erect. Lift left foot. Bend left knee until…
I don’t know, should it be special to be able to explain things? I think it should actually be normal
Re: Playboy Interview: Steve Jobs (1985)
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
The same is true of many other animals, but I wouldn’t say a cat is particularly good at explaining how to hunt.
I have a cat who was separated from its mother too early. It shows some vague abilities at hunting, but is quite inept at it. I've also seen a documentary that claimed humans have a unique ability to respond to pointing. Pointing is a big part of teaching. No animal has as lengthy a childhood as humans, and that is to teach them how to survive. It just doesn't make any sense that people are inherently bad at teaching…
Whether it makes sense or not, what is your personal experience with others who try to teach you? Did you have nothing but highly effective teachers in school?
If you did, you are in the rare minority.
Re: Playboy Interview: Steve Jobs (1985)
#79Beautiful interview. Love him or hate him, you have to respect him. I loved this passage: Playboy: Do you know what you want to do with the rest of this lifetime? Jobs: There’s an old Hindu saying that comes into my mind occasionally: “For the first 30 years of your life, you make your habits. For the last 30 years of your life, your habits make you.” As I’m going to be 30 in February, the thought has crossed my mind…
So if you live longer than 60, I wonder that means of those years in-between, after age 30.
Re: Playboy Interview: Steve Jobs (1985)
#80I'm amazed at how mature he sounds in this interview at age 29, like far more direct, honest, confident and smart than say, Zuckerberg. He was very prescient and when wrong (he didn't anticipate the clone makers, saying there wouldn't be another $200M+ PC company) it was an area he really didn't care to be involved in.
Compared to Zuckerberg, sure. But 29 is hardly that young to be this articulate and wise. I feel like sentiments like this is much more about hero worship than a statement about how unusually well spoken he his compared to most people his age.