On Succeeding Steve Jobs • Hacker News Board

Re: On Succeeding Steve Jobs

#81

Post by kenjackson » Sat, Jul 23, 2011, 5:13 AM UTC

6ren wrote: post #70

kenjackson wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMHO there is a big difference between Apple and Microsoft, Bill Gates was surrounded by suits, Steve Jobs is surrounded by Engineers and Designers... You know very little about Microsoft. You're right there was a difference. Jobs was surrounded by engineers and designers. Gates was surrounded by engineers. Gates top business guy was a math geek from Harvard with not much in the way of business experience (Ballmer).…

How was Ballmer a "math geek"? He strikes me as an extroverted business guy - but I love having my assumption subverted. Wiki says he did maths and economics at Harvard - sounds business oriented. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Ballmer#Early_life and magna cum laude seems to mean 2A/2nd class/B/Distinction. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magna_cum_laude#Types

Among people who knew Ballmer in the past math geek (or similar) comes up a fair bit. Here's a PSA he did about learning math: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4219nb0dpeU. Here's an article that talks about his life which refers to him as a math whiz: http://www.networkworld.com/news/2009/102009-ballmer-bio.htm...

Magna cum laude typically represents about the top 20% of a class, with summa cum laude often around the top 5%. Although I'm unclear why the distinction mtters in this discussion.

Re: On Succeeding Steve Jobs

#82

Post by Raphael » Sat, Jul 23, 2011, 6:07 AM UTC

Let Apple figure it out.

Re: On Succeeding Steve Jobs

#83

Post by 6ren » Sat, Jul 23, 2011, 6:15 AM UTC

kenjackson wrote: post #81

6ren wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How was Ballmer a "math geek"? He strikes me as an extroverted business guy - but I love having my assumption subverted. Wiki says he did maths and economics at Harvard - sounds business oriented. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Ballmer#Early_life and magna cum laude seems to mean 2A/2nd class/B/Distinction. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magna_cum_laude#Types

Among people who knew Ballmer in the past math geek (or similar) comes up a fair bit. Here's a PSA he did about learning math: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4219nb0dpeU . Here's an article that talks about his life which refers to him as a math whiz: http://www.networkworld.com/news/2009/102009-ballmer-bio.htm... Magna cum laude typically represents about the top 20% of a class, with summa cum laude often around the…

Those people who knew him seems a good guide. In that video, he's talking about accounting math. Actually, I assumed "math whiz" meant proficiency in proving theorems, but the ordinary meaning of being good at arithmetic is reasonable, and probably what's meant here.

Although he's a maths geek in that sense, and he also went to Harvard, I think combing those two as "math geek from Harvard" suggests the theorem proving meaning.

To clarify: that wikipedia article says he graduated magna cum laude. I think to be a maths whiz, you need to be really good at it.

Re: On Succeeding Steve Jobs

#84

Post by shaggyfrog » Sat, Jul 23, 2011, 6:22 AM UTC

podperson wrote: post #78

shaggyfrog wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ive has certainly made appearances during keynote speeches before. Example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7JLjldgjuKI&t=0m25s This idea that Steve can't possibly share the spotlight with Ive is absurd.

Not saying he can't possibly share the spotlight, but that Ive is not extroverted. (Tim Cook isn't a keynote kind of guy either for that matter.) Scott Forstall is pretty good in keynotes. It reminds me a bit of "Tactics of Mistake" -- an old SF novel by Gordon Dickson. No ONE person can replace Steve, but maybe two or three can.

You stated "I don't think Ive has even appeared in a speaking role in a keynote" and I was demonstrating this to be untrue.

The idea that Steve Jobs can't be replaced by a single person is based on the requirement that Apple would have to continue on the exact same way. It won't. When a new CEO is appointed, it will be more of a "new normal".

Re: On Succeeding Steve Jobs

#85

Post by anactofgod » Sat, Jul 23, 2011, 6:29 AM UTC

As usual, Gruber is right.

And, the Wall Street Journal turned into the Yellow Journal years ago. I wouldn't wipe a parrot's ass with it, let alone lend any credence to what's printed in it.

Re: On Succeeding Steve Jobs

#86

Post by avjinder » Sat, Jul 23, 2011, 6:42 AM UTC

Jack Dorsey would be a good candidate for Apple CEO but I cannot imagine how he's going to handle three rapidly growing companies. He is the CEO of Square and the Chief of Product Design at Twitter and according to a recent interview, he mentions that he works 18 hours a day managing the two companies. Though Jack Dorsey is a good fit for Apple, he will never be CEO of Apple.

Re: On Succeeding Steve Jobs

#87

Post by jayfuerstenberg » Sat, Jul 23, 2011, 7:30 AM UTC

What's most important is what Steve Jobs has taught us.

If you have a relentless drive and a vision to make products better people will flock to you. It doesn't happen overnight but it does happen.

The next CEO will or won't embrace Steve Jobs' vision and the company's success will reflect that. It's inevitable, but the lesson has been learned and can be applied again and again by anybody who cares to.

Re: On Succeeding Steve Jobs

#88

Post by fuzionmonkey » Sat, Jul 23, 2011, 8:19 AM UTC

SoftwareMaven wrote: post #36

I think Tim Cook would be a mistake as awesome as he is (see http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2134181 ). Tim is too operations-focused, and that will bleed over into the products. Apple needs a design-oriented CEO. Tim can balance that and make the company amazing from an operations-perspective. I don't know who the person is, but I do think he (or she) exists.

I agree. The way Apple is run today is every other department exists to make Steve and his design pals happy.

Unlike most other technology companies, design is king and it should stay that way.

Re: On Succeeding Steve Jobs

#89

Post by tomlin » Sat, Jul 23, 2011, 8:23 AM UTC

Imagine you're dying of cancer and you have raised a few intelligent children to a certain age. Now you have to ask others to raise your children in your image. Not in their image, but yours. You might not trust anyone with your children, moreover, expect them to see the same vision you had for your children - which is based on the progressive iteration of your children's development.

Can anyone raise Apple like Jobs? Probably not. Does that mean Apple is doomed? No, it doesn't. Anything beyond is speculation.

Re: On Succeeding Steve Jobs

#90

Post by statictype » Sat, Jul 23, 2011, 8:27 AM UTC

technoslut wrote: post #73

emehrkay wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would assume that he called him a flake because Woz openly praises "the competition."

Flake may be too strong of a word but Woz is a little odd. It's not that he praises the competition but that he doesn't seem to be aware of the potential media storm that follows it. He also mentions that he only carries hundreds and advertises his whereabouts on Twitter. Then there is the painful appearance on Dancing with the Stars. It just wouldn't be the way a potential CEO would act.

I agree that neither would he be interested nor would he fit the role of CEO. But I don't see how he's a flake. The guy is brilliant and is an important reason why Apple ever got off the ground in the first place.