Live data from Hacker News

Steve Jobs's Real Genius

newyorker.com

31–40 of 152 posts

Re: Steve Jobs's Real Genius

#31
post #24
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine if every car manufacturer copied the design of the "perfected" Ferrari until almost every car sold was inspired by that Ferrari. Then I would say that the designer of that car had contributed to society. People forget what phones looked like in 2006. My parents now both have smart phones that look a lot like iPhones (but aren't) that they spend hours using a day. Like him or not, you can't argue Steve Jobs di…

Steve Jobs wasn't the designer of the iPhone. Other people made it while he cracked the whip. For some reason, a lot of the press is giving him credit for everything at Apple in spite of his infamous reputation for taking credit for other people's work. Jef Raskin said these things in regards to the Macintosh project: "What I proposed was a computer that would be easy to use, mix text and graphics, and sell for about…

Chapter 10 of Issacson's book spends quite a bit of time talking about Raskin vs Jobs on the Macintosh. Raskin is sourced several times for that chapter. The Macintosh would have been a very, very different product if Jobs had not taken over, and demanded a very different system than the one Raskin had envisioned.

The Issacson Analysis (backed up by Atkinson) was that Raskin had envisioned an underpowered, less expensive system that would not have had many of the features that made the original Macintosh "Insanely Great."

I like Gladwell's analysis - Jobs was a great _editor_ He didn't necessarily create very much, but he was driven to relentlessly critique until something great emerged.

It's amazing how valuable a function that can be, particularly in the presences of great engineers who can rise to the challenge.

The reason people praise Steve Jobs is not because he designed anything (though he may have had a few design suggestions) - but because his singular drive to release great products resulted in so many being created (and then, quite logically, being copied by everyone else)

The Macintosh, iPod, iPhone, iPad all came about because of Steve Jobs, and have changed the technology that we use every day. Love him, or Hate him, you can't take that away from him.

Re: Steve Jobs's Real Genius

#32
post #24
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine if every car manufacturer copied the design of the "perfected" Ferrari until almost every car sold was inspired by that Ferrari. Then I would say that the designer of that car had contributed to society. People forget what phones looked like in 2006. My parents now both have smart phones that look a lot like iPhones (but aren't) that they spend hours using a day. Like him or not, you can't argue Steve Jobs di…

Steve Jobs wasn't the designer of the iPhone. Other people made it while he cracked the whip. For some reason, a lot of the press is giving him credit for everything at Apple in spite of his infamous reputation for taking credit for other people's work. Jef Raskin said these things in regards to the Macintosh project: "What I proposed was a computer that would be easy to use, mix text and graphics, and sell for about…

I guess I'm curious to know why so many people kept working for Jobs and Apple given that behavior? Did his "bluntness" command the respect that fueled other peoples' achievements?

Re: Steve Jobs's Real Genius

#34
post #29

It has some truth to it, but ignores a lot of salient facts in favor of a cute argument (insert Gladwell dig here). Steve Jobs' had many parts to his genius. Tweaking products until they were really finished was one. But I would say the most important (and impressive) part of his genius was holistic thinking . He wasn't a programmer, a hardware engineer, an industrial designer, an advertising copywriter, or an archit…

It's also important not to leave out his ability to convince people of his vision. From Jurveston:

"During this time, corporate partners came to appreciate Steve’s enthusiasm as the Reality Distortion Field. Sun Microsystems went so far as to have a policy that no contract could be agreed to while Steve was in the room. They needed to physically remove themselves from the mesmerizing magic to complete the negotiation."

He used it in negotiations, with employees, with customers, and partners. I know he certainly used it with me - I eventually had to _force_ myself never to watch a product rollout by Jobs, I was so incapable of not becoming infatuated with the next great thing he would reveal...

Outside of his RDF, I still believe, that essentially, his central accomplishment was to take technical gadgets, refine, demand, and finesse, until they came out so beautifully put together, we just had to have them.

His ability to attract and motivate great talent was probably the third prong that contributed to his success. And you are right, to suggest he was just a tweaker, is a gladwellic troll that he's posing to simplify a scenario to fit in well with his article.

Re: Steve Jobs's Real Genius

#35
I guess Steve Jobs' real genius is that people here are still talking about him so long after he's dead.

A bunch of self proscribed hackers find him more interesting than either John McCarthy or Dennis Ritchie. When in fact he was just more successful monetarily. And better at getting you lot to talk about him.

Re: Steve Jobs's Real Genius

#36

I never met Jobs and I know nothing about him personally. But if the stuff in this article is true, he was an obnoxious prick, genius or not.

This is so very true. The tinkering the article talks about didn't strike me as anything new or special because i do it every day in my job as a programmer. What i did get out of the article was this:

Steve Jobs was a completely insufferable asshole.

Re: Steve Jobs's Real Genius

#37
post #29

It has some truth to it, but ignores a lot of salient facts in favor of a cute argument (insert Gladwell dig here). Steve Jobs' had many parts to his genius. Tweaking products until they were really finished was one. But I would say the most important (and impressive) part of his genius was holistic thinking . He wasn't a programmer, a hardware engineer, an industrial designer, an advertising copywriter, or an archit…

"But I would say the most important (and impressive) part of his genius was holistic thinking. He wasn't a programmer, a hardware engineer, an industrial designer, an advertising copywriter, or an architect, etc. But he deeply understood the essentials of those fields and was able to harness them to create a hugely successful business and set of products."

I still have no clue about how he managed to do it. For example, I think that Cocoa and Next technologies are very elegant and are at the foundation of Apple current success. Yet how can you lead the developments of those technologies if you don't understand them. Why it didn't go the same way, of let say, Symbian.

I'm not an expert in CS (not even close), but to me it looks like there is very little crust on Apple technologies. And I don't think that this is the case for all the other mayor tech companies, where I observe a significative amount of technical debt. One explanation might be that there was great technical people on board and in charge. But this is the norm for all multinationals. How he managed to design so few products that are "bad apples" (pun intended).

This is a really core issue for me. I'm a business guy by education (two Masters of Management) who always has been oriented to software development (I always liked it and the basis of C always have been intuitive). When the App Store launched I started to work with a CS Engineer to develop an app. While the arrangement was workable, I felt I was missing so much without the proper technical knowledge. How can you lead if you don't understand fully the field. Consequently, having the chance, I took the next two years of my life learning sw development, graphic/UI, design, and a bit of web development. Financially and mentally it was a very costly decision that kept me on the verge of burning out and, yet, I don't understand if it was the right choice.

I would love to hear the opinion of the community.

Re: Steve Jobs's Real Genius

#38
post #4
post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> of Jobs' rant on Gates' supposed lack of imagination Where can I read this rant? Or do you have in mind Jobs' rant about __Microsoft__ having no taste which is completely different thing.

No, he means _Gates_ google: Jobs on Gate no imagination "Bill basically has no imagination and never find anything, that’s why I think he’s more comfortable this time on philanthropy rather than technological. He’s just shamelessly take others’ ideas," There's also another much older quote, which I think is an awesome one for Bill Gates: "You're ripping us off!", Steve shouted, raising his voice even higher. "I trus…

This was from Folklore, right?

http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=A_Rich_Neighbor_N...

Re: Steve Jobs's Real Genius

#39
post #18
post #5

There are no words that can sum up Steve Jobs genius and his contributions to modern society. On the other hand, I can't help but notice how much press/literature there has been on his genius and I think it's starting to be excessive. Maybe it's just me, but I'm not a fan of literature that praises success and goes in-depth into the lives/processes of talented people(that's why I'm not a fan of Gladwell's Outliers bo…

"his contributions to modern society" I'm reading this a lot, but I have a hard time figuring what Jobs contributed to society. There are a lot of cars and there are 'perfected' cars like Ferrari. But does that mean the creators of Ferrari contributed to society?

I'm reading this a lot, but I have a hard time figuring what Jobs contributed to society.

Everyone who uses a personal computer, smartphone, or tablet of any description, or has watched a 3D computer-animated film, has been affected, for the better, by his life's work. So have the millions around the world who make a living, directly or indirectly, from the businesses he built.

Re: Steve Jobs's Real Genius

#40
Who is this Gladwell guy and what did he invent or made that is worth noting?

Or did he simply take someone else's opinions using someone else's language and tweaked them a little bit to make them appear as his own?

Post reply on HN