Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A secret call to Andy Grove that may have helped Apple buy NeXT (2018)

cake.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 87 posts

Re: A secret call to Andy Grove that may have helped Apple buy NeXT (2018)

#71

Post by jki275 »

rvz wrote: post #62
jki275 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s a different discussion.

Well you said: "Buying Next brought Steve back, and that's the only thing that kept Apple alive." earlier and the on-going lawsuits were critical for Apple's survival with them having to compromise a deal with Microsoft in order for Bill Gates to save them. The acquisition choice alone was half of the story even if NeXT or Be were bought and Apple still wouldn't be here without compromising a deal with Microsoft to i…

Apple would be dead if Steve Jobs had not come back.

Nothing MS did would have saved Apple if Jobs hadn't come back and turned the company around.

That's the end of the story.

Re: A secret call to Andy Grove that may have helped Apple buy NeXT (2018)

#72

Post by pjmlp »

kls wrote: post #66
linguae wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was in elementary school during Copland and the NeXT acquisition and so I wasn't there, but based on everything that I've read, the reason for the long gap between the purchase of NeXT in December 1996 and the release of Mac OS X 10.0 in March 2001 had largely to do with the inclusion of the Carbon API. The story goes as follows: after Copland was cancelled in 1996, Apple then pursued the idea of purchasing or lice…

Yep Adobe and their unwillingness to port was a big part of it. I think Steve carried that with him and gained a little joy in staking Flash in the heart when he did.

The irony is that Flash is pretty much alive.

After those actions, Adobe created an AOT compiler for Flash, so before Unity and Unreal took off, plenty of iOS games were actually AOT compiled Flash ones.

Following up on that, Animate was born.

Now thanks to WebAssembly and CheerpX, old Flash applications can keep on running.

Re: A secret call to Andy Grove that may have helped Apple buy NeXT (2018)

#73

Post by nl »

WalterBright wrote: post #68
usefulcat wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now all we need is a reliable way to identify a 'good' CEO without the benefit of hindsight.

Not just anybody is hired to be a CEO. A candidate has to have a track record of success. That's how.

Counter example: John Scully

Re: A secret call to Andy Grove that may have helped Apple buy NeXT (2018)

#74

Post by WalterBright »

nl wrote: post #73
WalterBright wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not just anybody is hired to be a CEO. A candidate has to have a track record of success. That's how.

Counter example: John Scully

Who'd you hire for the top job - someone with a track record of success, or another with a track record of failure?

Re: A secret call to Andy Grove that may have helped Apple buy NeXT (2018)

#75

Post by nl »

WalterBright wrote: post #74
nl wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Counter example: John Scully

Who'd you hire for the top job - someone with a track record of success, or another with a track record of failure?

I think I missed the bit where anyone said anything about hiring someone with a track record of failure?

A good track record maybe necessary but is clearly insufficient.

Having said that - ironically - Job himself wasn't exactly an obviously successful CEO prior to his return to Apple. He'd been fired from Apple previously, NeXT was one of many workstation manufactures and less successful than many direct competitors (eg Silicon Graphics).

Eric Schmidt is another example. Prior to Google he was CEO at Novell where (quoting Wikipedia): "He presided over a period of decline at Novell where its IPX protocol was being replaced by open TCP/IP products, while at the same time Microsoft was shipping free TCP/IP stacks in Windows 95, making Novell much less profitable."

Re: A secret call to Andy Grove that may have helped Apple buy NeXT (2018)

#76

Post by WalterBright »

nl wrote: post #75
WalterBright wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who'd you hire for the top job - someone with a track record of success, or another with a track record of failure?

I think I missed the bit where anyone said anything about hiring someone with a track record of failure? A good track record maybe necessary but is clearly insufficient. Having said that - ironically - Job himself wasn't exactly an obviously successful CEO prior to his return to Apple. He'd been fired from Apple previously, NeXT was one of many workstation manufactures and less successful than many direct competitors…

Jobs was very successful with Pixar.

Let me put it another way. Can we reasonably assume that people who find themselves in the position of needing to hire a CEO with their own money are not complete morons and will spend more than 5 minutes thinking about it?

Re: A secret call to Andy Grove that may have helped Apple buy NeXT (2018)

#77

Post by rvz »

jki275 wrote: post #71
rvz wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well you said: "Buying Next brought Steve back, and that's the only thing that kept Apple alive." earlier and the on-going lawsuits were critical for Apple's survival with them having to compromise a deal with Microsoft in order for Bill Gates to save them. The acquisition choice alone was half of the story even if NeXT or Be were bought and Apple still wouldn't be here without compromising a deal with Microsoft to i…

Apple would be dead if Steve Jobs had not come back. Nothing MS did would have saved Apple if Jobs hadn't come back and turned the company around. That's the end of the story.

It would be safer to say that history would certainly be different if that outcome happened. But you’re almost there on completing the actual story.

You do realise that to turn the company around in the first place you still need cash / stock in the company? The time that Jobs joined, Apple was close to bankruptcy and couldn’t afford to lose anymore lawsuits. He had to compromise with Gates with a lawsuit settlement to invest $100M+ shares in the Apple and offer Office on the Mac which essentially saved them from bankruptcy. There’s plenty of evidence to explain this outcome.

My point to this argument is regardless of Jobs returning from NeXT or not, he couldn’t have even performed the turn around without the investment from Gates and the company would be bankrupt anyway. The Microsoft settlement and the investment is the reason why Apple still exists today or else Apple would have no doubt be certainly bankrupt and finished. Period.

Re: A secret call to Andy Grove that may have helped Apple buy NeXT (2018)

#78

Post by nl »

WalterBright wrote: post #76
nl wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think I missed the bit where anyone said anything about hiring someone with a track record of failure? A good track record maybe necessary but is clearly insufficient. Having said that - ironically - Job himself wasn't exactly an obviously successful CEO prior to his return to Apple. He'd been fired from Apple previously, NeXT was one of many workstation manufactures and less successful than many direct competitors…

Jobs was very successful with Pixar. Let me put it another way. Can we reasonably assume that people who find themselves in the position of needing to hire a CEO with their own money are not complete morons and will spend more than 5 minutes thinking about it?

Let me put it another way. Can we reasonably assume that people who find themselves in the position of needing to hire a CEO with their own money are not complete morons and will spend more than 5 minutes thinking about it?

I'm lost. The original question was:

Now all we need is a reliable way to identify a 'good' CEO without the benefit of hindsight.

Your response was "A candidate has to have a track record of success."

People are pointing out that doesn't appear to be sufficient.

So I agree that people hiring CEOs aren't morons and think about it. But I'm still not sure what indicators are useful outside track record, or indeed if you think that is sufficient.

Re: A secret call to Andy Grove that may have helped Apple buy NeXT (2018)

#79

Post by WalterBright »

nl wrote: post #78
WalterBright wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jobs was very successful with Pixar. Let me put it another way. Can we reasonably assume that people who find themselves in the position of needing to hire a CEO with their own money are not complete morons and will spend more than 5 minutes thinking about it?

Let me put it another way. Can we reasonably assume that people who find themselves in the position of needing to hire a CEO with their own money are not complete morons and will spend more than 5 minutes thinking about it? I'm lost. The original question was: Now all we need is a reliable way to identify a 'good' CEO without the benefit of hindsight. Your response was "A candidate has to have a track record of succe…

> Your response was "A candidate has to have a track record of success." People are pointing out that doesn't appear to be sufficient.

I didn't say it was sufficient. For example, if I say "an airplane has to have wings" would you argue that isn't all it needs? Of course not.

There's a reason that English has the words "all", "only", etc. For example, there's a difference between "people like hamburgers" and "all people like hamburgers." There's a difference between "choosy people choose cheese" and "only choosy people choose cheese." English is not a programming language.

I suggest interpreting my messages from a presumption that neither am I a moron nor are people who select executives.

Re: A secret call to Andy Grove that may have helped Apple buy NeXT (2018)

#80

Post by nl »

WalterBright wrote: post #79
nl wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me put it another way. Can we reasonably assume that people who find themselves in the position of needing to hire a CEO with their own money are not complete morons and will spend more than 5 minutes thinking about it? I'm lost. The original question was: Now all we need is a reliable way to identify a 'good' CEO without the benefit of hindsight. Your response was "A candidate has to have a track record of succe…

> Your response was "A candidate has to have a track record of success." People are pointing out that doesn't appear to be sufficient. I didn't say it was sufficient. For example, if I say "an airplane has to have wings" would you argue that isn't all it needs? Of course not. There's a reason that English has the words "all", "only", etc. For example, there's a difference between "people like hamburgers" and "all peo…

I do understand English, but I don't understand what your point is in this thread?

You've said "A candidate has to have a track record of success. That's how", but every question people have raised to try and identify additional points the response hasn't really added any additional information.

If your point that "people who [successfully] select CEOs" have some additional criteria that they use (outside the track record) then: Yes! Great!

What is it?

Post reply on HN