Live data from Hacker News

Sergey Brin: Irate Call from Steve Jobs

techemails.com

261–270 of 398 posts

Re: Sergey Brin: Irate Call from Steve Jobs

#261
post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

P(a) = 0.1, P(b) = 0.1, P(c) = 0.8, "Oh, let's only look at cases a and b".

Yes, because a and b represent a specific combination I said I was interested in exploring. What you've shown doesn't lower the plausibility of those scenarios. Are you being intentionally contrarian or is there a reason why you are trying to muddy a simple thought experiment?

That makes it unreal. It changed the environment too much to exclude it. Ignoring it breaks stuff. I'm not saying thought experiments are bad — do them often myself — I'm saying my response to get thought experiment itself is: it can't work like that (riffing of an unrelated but recent comment from yesterday where I'm the one doing the thought experiment as an existence proof, it's a "spherical cow in a vacuum" model).

Re: Sergey Brin: Irate Call from Steve Jobs

#262

Do we know who “redacted” is? I’ve heard stories that Google set up development office in Denmark because one of their V8 developers wanted to move home and he was “that good” that it was worth setting up an office just to keep him on staff.

It doesn’t say if “redacted” accepted an offer, so possibly Don Melton, Dave Hyatt, or Ken Kocienda? None of them left Apple until much later, so this is just speculation in descending order of assumed-Stebe-irateness.

These February 2005 emails make for an interesting timeframe since that was the year of the Apple/Google default search engine deal. I can’t find a more exact date for the search deal than “2005”, so it’s possible both were under negotiation simultaneously with no cause/effect relationship, but it sure is an interesting coincidence https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/25/technology/apple-google-s...

Re: Sergey Brin: Irate Call from Steve Jobs

#263
post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is he just a bully? From everything I've read in the last twenty years, there was not one single facet of Steve Jobs' life in which he was not a bully.

This is also my impression after reading Isaacson's biography and Creativity, Inc. At Pixar, he behaved like a feudal lord because he pretty much owned the place and they relied on his money to keep the lights on.

> At Pixar, he behaved like a feudal lord because he pretty much owned the place and they relied on his money to keep the lights on.

How do you mean by "behaved like a feudal lord"?

Admittedly not read up on Jobs (sacrilege in this venue, I know), so I'm struggling to understand why he who pays the piper calls the tune is somehow objectionable.

Re: Sergey Brin: Irate Call from Steve Jobs

#264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We are careful to adhere to non-compete agreements if we have established these with any company. Hiring non competes do exactly this regardless of whatever benefit of the doubt you wish to grant (not to mention it clearly establishes they’ve done this regularly prior to this so it wasn’t even a one off). More importantly, these were already clearly established case law as illegal in California. So these are Califo…

I had to do quick refresh of Palm history, but it looks like they did not survive, but it does not indicate to what extent Apple may have been involved in it. Still, it is good to see there are some CEOs that were at least willing to say equivalent of 'not cool'.

I joined just before the Pre launch straight out of university so at the time I was still very very green and didn’t have special insights. I think there were three main challenges. The first is we bet wrong on 2 strategic directions: physical keyboards (blinded because of history / Blackberry making us think it was an important market segment that would resist Apple) and screen size (trying to zig and capture value while the market zagged to chase volume). There were knock on effects for sliding keyboards (more complex manufacturing, more RMAs because of defects in the keyboard, higher cost, etc etc). The screen size probably hurt a lot because while most people would love a smaller form factor, the larger screen is more addictive in terms of media consumption, games, large text for older people. Apple made this mistake too btw and lagged a bit the Android competitors that pushed screens yet larger, but they adjusted quick and they had a huge war chest by that time.

It was recoverable and if I recall correctly we had no keyboard prototypes with larger displays floating around but we failed to prioritize that properly / probably limited volume to shift from the Pre design after one year because of the upfront investment we’d have had to have made for the lines. Palm Pixi sacrificed the sliding aspect of the keyboard (typically candy bar) but went with a smaller screen with fight the actual market direction.

The second big factor in the downfall I think was our ads. Verizon totally fucked up our advertising further (positioning the Palm phones as “for moms” in extremely sexist advertisements). I wish I could say this was Verizon’s fault since they actually had control of the co-branded advertisements if I recall correctly. Anyone remembering the travesty of those original Pre ads though will know it was a disaster. Worse - the Jon at an all hands was all gung ho about it. Wasn’t sure if there was just no steering the ship because of budget or something and he was just trying to salvage it, but regardless those ads went out. High concept is fine for an art class. Not for smartphones without any hype and the general public inundated with smartphone = iPhone, android was “that knockoff iPhone”, and Blackberry was “the phone they make me use at work”. No one knew palm and our ads did a poor job articulating that to the general public, especially since we didn’t have the hype machine that iOS did (not that they needed it - they had really top notch pr/marketing/advertising people in the wake of the desktop OS wars and then the iPod rocket ship). Btw, Android failed at countering Apple’s marketing until Sony cracked it many years later: copy Apple almost to the letter in design, create clear descriptive messaging that explains what’s better about your phone (or at least equal), and take away Apple’s “coolness” by commoditizing as much of the phone as possible. This was many years later though.

Side note: a girl I went on a first date with mentioned she loved the Pixi because of the smaller design. Maybe this was just trying to connect with me about my work, but I maybe it was also a missed opportunity on a niche beachhead market segment: second phone for women to put in a clutch for the night out which you could also use as a “phone for your kids”. The second one is particularly valuable but if you want to learn more read about how the companies carefully track how chat and social media apps do with kids and will sacrifice adoption with older generations to protect that - today’s kids are tomorrows yuppies with disposable income.

Finally something went horribly wrong with the Verizon deal. I don’t know what actually happened but it turned out that Palm somehow ended up on the hook for all unsold phone inventory on our books while Verizon forced us to premanufacture a ton (our leadership got overly excited and made too much without thinking through the consequences? Not sure). This was also around the time that Apple had ended their AT&T exclusivity and started shipping on Verizon. Did Apple strongarm Verizon into screwing Palm over in retaliation to this non compete stuff? We certainly were poaching very hard from Apple. Still, even if they did put the nail in the coffin (which I doubt because it just wouldn’t be worth it for the minnow that we were), we were clearly making a lot of missteps on the business front.

WebOS itself was also a technical mistake in a way:

1. Web tech was too early. In particular, we were finding and fixing JIT bugs not only in v8 (dedicated team that if I recall correctly was second to Google at the time in size and far more familiar with V8 ARM), but also the CPU (because QCOM had shitty chips at the time and wasn’t bothering to test cache invalidation of dynamically generated code).

2. Performance of web tech was too immature / CPUs were too slow. We were perceived as being slower than Android which was saying something.

3. While no one bats an eye at react native and electron today, the software ecosystem wasn’t as mature which meant apps in our store weren’t very compelling because they just couldn’t do all that much (and then the native SDK basically capitulated to that for games).

However. I don’t see the technical pieces as fatal mistakes in and of themselves. Given time we would have fixed these, brought down memory usage, etc etc. the technical team was phenomenally strong and we recognized technology gaps early and fixed them by iterating (eg Luna bus 2 got replaced DBus with a proprietary implementation that was waaaay better). Still. When you’re competing with Android and iOS at the time, it wasn’t a great spot to be in. On the other hand we were showing off core OS UIs that only now have started catching up a decade later. And even then, it would be close. So all in all probably more of a correct long term bet at the sacrifice of certain near term performance, but one the company wouldn’t live to see validated.

I don’t think it requires Apple doing much if anything out of the ordinary course of normal competition. I’m sure they were more worried about the impact of Chrome and Android. But who knows. Jobs was known for his anger and I doubt anyone will care because ultimately we ended up being a small player dead by the side of the road along with all the others.

Re: Sergey Brin: Irate Call from Steve Jobs

#265
post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, because a and b represent a specific combination I said I was interested in exploring. What you've shown doesn't lower the plausibility of those scenarios. Are you being intentionally contrarian or is there a reason why you are trying to muddy a simple thought experiment?

That makes it unreal. It changed the environment too much to exclude it. Ignoring it breaks stuff. I'm not saying thought experiments are bad — do them often myself — I'm saying my response to get thought experiment itself is: it can't work like that (riffing of an unrelated but recent comment from yesterday where I'm the one doing the thought experiment as an existence proof, it's a "spherical cow in a vacuum" model…

It's not a nonsensical "spherical cow in vacuum" thought experiment to say "Pixar exists but some employees are treated bad" vs "Pixar doesn't exist". If you think that it becomes impossible for a rational mind to weigh those two choices, then there's no point in me continuing this discussion with you.

Re: Sergey Brin: Irate Call from Steve Jobs

#266
post #260

Imagine how different the world would be if Google really went with the "enhanced version" of Firefox instead if building Chrome.

There’s no guarantee an independent Firefox could have survived “Embrace, Enhance, ???” at all. Maybe this timeline isn’t so bad since Chrome being what it is means there are actual good reasons to choose Mozilla’s Firefox :)

Re: Sergey Brin: Irate Call from Steve Jobs

#267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't make that bet. Jobs played favorites and I believe he was known to amply reward his favorites.

Would he reward a favorite who was just about to jump ship before he got the offer rescinded?

> about to jump ship

Sounds like a traitor to me ...

Re: Sergey Brin: Irate Call from Steve Jobs

#268

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not sure how the laws work but from reading that justice.gov link, anti poaching agreements are illegal and are actually enforceable, right?

And that is in the infamous anti-worker US; though I think you meant unenforceable (the companies wouldn't be able to use the legal system to enforce them) In the rest of the world Steve Jobs / Apple would have been in a bigger trouble just from the start of the emails.

The US is far from the worst. It typically rates behind European nations and ahead of much of Asia-Pacific, Africa and the Middle East.

Here’s one recent comprehensive labor report, for example. https://files.mutualcdn.com/ituc/files/2022-ITUC-Rights-Inde...

Re: Sergey Brin: Irate Call from Steve Jobs

#269
post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That makes it unreal. It changed the environment too much to exclude it. Ignoring it breaks stuff. I'm not saying thought experiments are bad — do them often myself — I'm saying my response to get thought experiment itself is: it can't work like that (riffing of an unrelated but recent comment from yesterday where I'm the one doing the thought experiment as an existence proof, it's a "spherical cow in a vacuum" model…

It's not a nonsensical "spherical cow in vacuum" thought experiment to say "Pixar exists but some employees are treated bad" vs "Pixar doesn't exist". If you think that it becomes impossible for a rational mind to weigh those two choices, then there's no point in me continuing this discussion with you.

If Pixar didn't exist, the same people would do the same (or close enough) work under a different brand. Quite possibly with each other. That's as distinct as two identical dice placed in no specific order, i.e. not. Ergo, not a realistic scenario.

Re: Sergey Brin: Irate Call from Steve Jobs

#270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Shrewd business", bullying, tomato, tomahto.

Bullying implies a power imbalance. This is google we are talking about. They did poach a huge chunk of the safari team. They then did launch a competing browser and aggressively pushed that browser globally. They forked the mainline project of WebKit and created blink - for reasons relating to Chrome product roadmap. It was a big deal when they did it. But Jobs predicting this is what they were up to and calling goo…

> But Jobs predicting this is what they were up to and calling google and complaining they are poaching a whole team from Apple. Is bullying?

How would you feel if you were actively looking for another job and the CEO of your company repeatedly called one the the companies that was going to give you an offer to yell at them and try to intimidate them with threats of "war" into not hiring you?

That sure sounds a lot like bullying, even if you don't think it is bullying, it is certainly an illegal business practice. This isn't just my opinion, but that of the DOJ and the court.

While that case was settled without a trial, I'll note that the judge took the rare step of rejecting the first settlement agreement because Apple and Google didn't pay enough.

Post reply on HN