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

Steve Jobs's Real Genius

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 152 posts

Re: Steve Jobs's Real Genius

#101

Post by grayrest »

[deleted] wrote: post #96
grayrest wrote: post #67

I'm annoyed that Gladwell classifies Jobs as a tweaker. He's not. He's a tastemaker. From TFA: > When Vincent shouted, “You’ve got to tell me what you want,” Jobs shot back, “You’ve got to show me some stuff, and I’ll know it when I see it.” Can you imagine one of the British hacker/tweakers in the article (or a hacker/tweaker you know) EVER saying something like that? The respect I have for role comes from them havi…

[deleted]

Sure. I believe engineers are one of the major forces that improve society. There is a tendency from the business side to assign credit for this work to the person who provided the money (and in this case guidance) for the project. This annoys me but to a lesser extend because the money/environment really is an important part of the process.

In this case, Gladwell is basically crediting Jobs as being part of an engineering tradition that I highly respect without (afaict) Jobs actually possessing the key qualities of that tradition. Doing so makes Jobs look better at the expense of diluting the term, which strikes me as disrespectful to the hackers' accomplishments.

Edit: This is a response to (paraphrased) "Why are you so emotional about this?"

Re: Steve Jobs's Real Genius

#102

Post by vgm »

chubot wrote: 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…

There is something slightly ironic about Gladwell using quotes from other people's work to describe Jobs as a 'tweaker'.

Re: Steve Jobs's Real Genius

#103

Post by luser001 »

irrationalfab wrote: post #37
chubot wrote: 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 examp…

You'll be surprised how little time people have for useless embellishment if you keep them busy with real work.

Which is another way of saying that if a team is small and optimally sized they can't go off and do random nonsensical reinvention of wheels.

Many times parsimony is elegance.

When I first looked into it, I was surprised at the extent to which Mac OS X was based on Unix. It seems like they reuse as much as they can, and innovate only where they need to.

Re: Steve Jobs's Real Genius

#104

Post by vannevar »

chubot wrote: 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…

Also, the use of the word "tweaker" is a stupid rhetorical trick...

Can anyone name a single product that Jobs released that had not already been proven in the marketplace by another company, in substantially the same form? I can only think of one: the Newton. And Jobs never made that mistake again.

'Tweaker' sounds perjorative, but in fact that was exactly Jobs' genius: recognizing the design details that others missed, the tweaks that would turn a good product into a great one.

Re: Steve Jobs's Real Genius

#105

Post by siglesias »

vannevar wrote: post #104
chubot wrote: 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…

Also, the use of the word "tweaker" is a stupid rhetorical trick... Can anyone name a single product that Jobs released that had not already been proven in the marketplace by another company, in substantially the same form? I can only think of one: the Newton. And Jobs never made that mistake again. 'Tweaker' sounds perjorative, but in fact that was exactly Jobs' genius: recognizing the design details that others mis…

Tablet--not at all proven in the marketplace, and largely considered a failed product category before the iPad.

Re: Steve Jobs's Real Genius

#106

Post by killion »

vannevar wrote: post #104
chubot wrote: 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…

Also, the use of the word "tweaker" is a stupid rhetorical trick... Can anyone name a single product that Jobs released that had not already been proven in the marketplace by another company, in substantially the same form? I can only think of one: the Newton. And Jobs never made that mistake again. 'Tweaker' sounds perjorative, but in fact that was exactly Jobs' genius: recognizing the design details that others mis…

The Newton happened after Jobs left Apple.

Re: Steve Jobs's Real Genius

#107

Post by jfb »

chrischen wrote: post #32
Toady wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

There are a bunch of reasons; one of the primary ones is that it's awesome to work for a winner, and it's awesome to work on stuff that is part of the common culture (telling your mom that you can't talk about work but that she should check out the front page of the [i]Times[/i] next week is quite a rush). The downside is that you get a lot of the shouting and stomping around behavior copied from Jobs that trickles down -- after all, you get ahead by aping the Big Boss, right? Here's hoping that with Cook in charge the culture starts to mellow out a little.

Re: Steve Jobs's Real Genius

#108

Post by chubot »

zeteo wrote: post #86
chubot wrote: 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…

>Gladwell [...] adds this marginally related story about tweakers so the entire article isn't regurgitating [...] anecdotes I think you're missing the main point here. The computer revolution, as a large scale technological and social transformation, does bear comparison to the Industrial Revolution. Where does someone like Steve Jobs stand in this comparison? He was obviously neither the inventor of a fundamental te…

I said as much -- there is some truth to it.

However, there are thousands/millions of people that are "tweakers". That isn't Jobs' only talent or even his most salient characteristic. (The title of the article is "Steve Job's real genius".)

Did any of the tweakers mentioned in the article start 3 companies and make billions doing it?

I think it is backlash for giving Jobs all the credit for everything, which is a mistake. I agree he didn't "invent" the iPhone, as Obama claimed. He led its development. But it's an equal mistake to say that all he did was tweak things, which the article claims explicitly.

Re: Steve Jobs's Real Genius

#109

Post by chubot »

vannevar wrote: post #104
chubot wrote: 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…

Also, the use of the word "tweaker" is a stupid rhetorical trick... Can anyone name a single product that Jobs released that had not already been proven in the marketplace by another company, in substantially the same form? I can only think of one: the Newton. And Jobs never made that mistake again. 'Tweaker' sounds perjorative, but in fact that was exactly Jobs' genius: recognizing the design details that others mis…

The iPhone wasn't merely a "tweak" on existing cell phones, or even the Palm Pilot.

What's your standard? Name a few products. The Walkman? If the Walkman qualifies as an innovation, then surely the iPhone does.

Calling the Macintosh a tweak on the Xerox Alto I think is also hardly fair. If that is true, then all products ever released have been tweaks, which makes the distinction meaningless.

Re: Steve Jobs's Real Genius

#110

Post by sp332 »

killion wrote: post #106
vannevar wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, the use of the word "tweaker" is a stupid rhetorical trick... Can anyone name a single product that Jobs released that had not already been proven in the marketplace by another company, in substantially the same form? I can only think of one: the Newton. And Jobs never made that mistake again. 'Tweaker' sounds perjorative, but in fact that was exactly Jobs' genius: recognizing the design details that others mis…

The Newton happened after Jobs left Apple.

I thought I remembered a story about Jobs not allowing the Newton to be shipped until it actually fit in his coat pocket? Was that someone else?
Post reply on HN