I think in some way he was all of those things and none of them at the same time.
Steve Jobs didn’t
31–40 of 40 posts
Re: Steve Jobs didn’t
#32My interpretation of this post is a bit different from the others that I see here. I see this as being about cutting through all the cliches and platitudes that we tend to run into when we talk abou Steve Jobs, and pointing out the truth behind them. "Steve Jobs was a charismatic visionary with a knack for design who created revolutionary products." ...sounds like something the press would say about Jobs doesn't it?
Yes, and the people who do not understand or like Apple prefer to see the company and its products as the mystical results of one man.
Horace has presented the elements of the process clearly, but they are not interested in grasping it.
Re: Steve Jobs didn’t
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
I find such sentences as: >Steve Jobs was not a futurist. He just built the future one piece at a time. to be almost hypnotically devoid of meaning and disrespectful to the reader. Why not just say what's true? A good reader can be stunned by the truth, without needing to be lead through a difficult contradiction for dramatic effect.
Well sure. I mean, Abe Lincoln could have shortened the Gettysburg Address to "Let's free the slaves and reunite the union", but that wouldn't have had the same impact as the speech he did give. There's nothing wrong with presenting a difficult idea that has a more dramatic effect. Do you think Moby Dick or War and Peace are considered great due to their simple ways of communicating ideas?
As long as you don't lose accuracy, sure. I think many of these crossed that line. They remind me of the tendency for bloggers to make a link-bait headline that obviously sounds bad, then they spend their whole post redefining what those words mean so at the end, their title is a good thing.
Re: Steve Jobs didn’t
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
I find such sentences as: >Steve Jobs was not a futurist. He just built the future one piece at a time. to be almost hypnotically devoid of meaning and disrespectful to the reader. Why not just say what's true? A good reader can be stunned by the truth, without needing to be lead through a difficult contradiction for dramatic effect.
Well sure. I mean, Abe Lincoln could have shortened the Gettysburg Address to "Let's free the slaves and reunite the union", but that wouldn't have had the same impact as the speech he did give. There's nothing wrong with presenting a difficult idea that has a more dramatic effect. Do you think Moby Dick or War and Peace are considered great due to their simple ways of communicating ideas?
Apologies for the digression, but this subject matters to me. The Gettysburg Address is perhaps the greatest example of writing that's stunning without being difficult to interpret. For that matter of War & Peace is clear and generally free of embellishment.
I agree with scott_s that the whole article is written more in the style of linkbait than a challenging poem.
Re: Steve Jobs didn’t
#35"Steve Jobs did not design anything." Not true. Look at the history of Apple. He definitely did.
This man begs to differ: http://reprog.wordpress.com/2010/09/06/steve-jobs-never-had-...
Even if everything he says in this blog is true, I still think Steve designed products. There are many aspects of design, and I don't think anyone is suggesting that Steve did them all on any product, but he did some of them on many products throughout his entire career.
Re: Steve Jobs didn’t
#36"Steve Jobs did not design anything." Not true. Look at the history of Apple. He definitely did.
This man begs to differ: http://reprog.wordpress.com/2010/09/06/steve-jobs-never-had-...
And Raskin is quoted there, and Raskin was the guy who wanted the Mac without mouse. I think it's obvious that Jobs in fact designed Mac, in a sense -- realized his vision. It's also very clear that Jobs even cared a lot about every detail of his products.
See also the last link in the article which leads to:
http://folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&story...
"ultimately, if any single individual deserves the honor, I would have to cast my vote for the obvious choice, Steve Jobs, because the Macintosh never would have happened without him, in anything like the form it did. Other individuals are responsible for the actual creative work, but Steve's vision, passion for excellence and sheer strength of will, not to mention his awesome powers of persuasion, drove the team to meet or exceed the impossible standards that we set for ourselves. Steve already gets a lot of credit for being the driving force behind the Macintosh, but in my opinion, it's very well deserved."
Re: Steve Jobs didn’t
#37I HATED this list. A few rebuttals to point out why... Steve Jobs did not create products he created an organization. No. He was partially responsible for the creation. He sat in on design meetings and offered input and feedback. Plus he vetoed bad idea (just as important) Steve Jobs did not wrest market share from competitors he created new markets: Tell that to Creative Labs and Microsoft. Creative labs had an MP3…
You're so close to understanding this essay, and yet I fear you're a thousand miles away. I'm going to kill the poetry by trying to explain it, but try translating each phrase like this: When you read: "Steve Jobs did not [do X], he [did Y]." read it as: "It's not so much that Steve Jobs did [legendary thing X], as that he did [apparently simple thing Y, and did you notice that by doing so he just happened to accompl…
I had a similar reaction to grandparent. On reflection, my issue is that while the author may intend this as a tribute to steve, it comes across to me as exploitation. The author uses steve's death to advance an ideology. You say "poetry", I say "crass marketing". On the occasion of his death, let steve be steve, not a way to argue a point.
Re: Steve Jobs didn’t
#38Steve Jobs didn't really create that much. It's easier to choose than to create. Jobs was a "chooser" of other people's good ideas.
Re: Steve Jobs didn’t
#39I thought the title of this is annoying linkbait, so here's the "article" in its entirety: Steve Jobs did not create products. He created an organization that predictably and reliably created emotionally resonant products. Steve Jobs did not make movies. He made a company that predictably and reliably made blockbusters. Steve Jobs did not wrest market share from competitors. He created new markets that attracted and…
"Steve Jobs" is now link bait.
Re: Steve Jobs didn’t
#40I thought the title of this is annoying linkbait, so here's the "article" in its entirety: Steve Jobs did not create products. He created an organization that predictably and reliably created emotionally resonant products. Steve Jobs did not make movies. He made a company that predictably and reliably made blockbusters. Steve Jobs did not wrest market share from competitors. He created new markets that attracted and…
"Steve Jobs" is now link bait.
I was more referring to the "cliffhanger" "didn't" suffix.
I suspect the above post is getting moderated into oblivion because the impression is that I'm complaining about the Jobs coverage, but that's not the case at all. I'm not at all bothered by all the Jobs submissions. He did so much to make me not hate computers.
I don't think comparisons made between he and Edison/Ford/etc are hyperbole at all.