Getting Steve Jobs Wrong • Hacker News Board

Re: Getting Steve Jobs Wrong

#91

Post by evanlong » Sat, Nov 19, 2011, 10:12 AM UTC

steve8918 wrote: post #40

n8agrin wrote: post #8

Theories on Jobs' character aside, the Jobs biography is an utter mess. Some sentences feel like they were pulled from a 6th grade book report. It's riddled with obvious statements and reads like it should have been published in People magazine. I realize I'm probably being too harsh, but I wish that I felt like Isaacson had invested into this biography, this once-in-a-lifetime-opportunity, the way Jobs likely invest…

I 100% agree. I'm basically finished the book (2 more chapters to go, but I skipped ahead to the last 2 chapters out of boredom). It reads like 2 different books: before coming back to Apple the second time, and after. The first half really makes him look like an utter wretch, and almost suggests that his success was a mistake. It basically talks about what an asshole Jobs was, and how he would yell at everyone, etc,…

Facts. They are a bitch.

Sorry the biography wasn't stimulating enough.

I take it you are a Jobs fan. Someone you look up to at and admire. So...

...would Jobs quit 2 chapters from the end? Or would he finish?

Re: Getting Steve Jobs Wrong

#92

Post by evanlong » Sat, Nov 19, 2011, 10:14 AM UTC

tomlin wrote: post #3

blinkingled wrote: post #2

I've been criticizing Gruber more often than not, but I found this one to be a to the point, fairly balanced piece - especially around the visionary vs. tweaker vs. inventor part. But his gripe about the Jobs' biography still doesn't make enough sense to me, particularly this part - What it was that Jobs actually did is much of the mystery of his life and his work, and Isaacson, frustratingly, had seemingly little in…

> I've been criticizing Gruber more often than not, but I found this one to be a to the point, fairly balanced piece - especially around the visionary vs. tweaker vs. inventor part. I as well. And I like Gladwell, I just think he and Isaacson have seriously misrepresented Steve Jobs and what he did in his life & at Apple.

Specific points please.

Re: Getting Steve Jobs Wrong

#93

Post by keithpeter » Sat, Nov 19, 2011, 10:23 AM UTC

WalterBright wrote: post #82

alexwolfe wrote: post #74

"The visionary starts with a clean sheet of paper, and re-imagines the world. The tweaker inherits things as they are, and has to push and pull them toward some more nearly perfect solution." Malcom fails to realize by his definition everyone would be a tweaker. Henry Ford - tweaker, Einstein - tweaker, Jobs - tweaker... I think its clear who the tweaker is and it isn't Einstein, Ford, or Jobs.

I don't think Einstein was a tweaker. His theories came completely out of left field.

Not completely left field. Relativity, Lorentz and Michelson knew there were problems with the standard formulation. FitzGerald had a go at resolving the issues, and the Maxwell group suspected there could not be an absolute reference frame. Quanta: Planck, the dialogue of Mach/Helmholz. There was a context and a problem situation that Einstein was able to resolve to some extent in a brilliant way.

Re: Getting Steve Jobs Wrong

#94

Post by calyth » Sat, Nov 19, 2011, 10:37 AM UTC

tomlin wrote: post #3

blinkingled wrote: post #2

I've been criticizing Gruber more often than not, but I found this one to be a to the point, fairly balanced piece - especially around the visionary vs. tweaker vs. inventor part. But his gripe about the Jobs' biography still doesn't make enough sense to me, particularly this part - What it was that Jobs actually did is much of the mystery of his life and his work, and Isaacson, frustratingly, had seemingly little in…

> I've been criticizing Gruber more often than not, but I found this one to be a to the point, fairly balanced piece - especially around the visionary vs. tweaker vs. inventor part. I as well. And I like Gladwell, I just think he and Isaacson have seriously misrepresented Steve Jobs and what he did in his life & at Apple.

I don't agree with Gruber's gripe about Gladwell's view of Steve Jobs being a tweaker.

It's easy to point out that no one is a visionary if a visionary has to come up with something completely fresh. And I agree with Gruber on that front.

Yet Gruber, and Jeff Atwood on a tweet, really had a problem with tweaker.

Casting that visionary / innovator argument aside, Gladwell rightly pointed out that Jobs improved on an existing object, and took it to the next level. Macintosh stemmed from Xerox, iPod stemmed from the existing music players, iPhone stemmed from the BlackBerry and Treos at the time. But he created new products that are truly leaps forward from what they were.

And he did it iteratively. Yet people see the word tweaker and think that was a put down.

To me, Gladwell's piece serves a good reminder to people that without Jobs, computers, music players and phones existed. Jobs created the computers, music players, and phones that we know it today. Drawing the percentage of change needed to call Jobs an innovator or a tweaker is like defining how many whiskers would have to be on a guy's face to call it a beard.

Re: Getting Steve Jobs Wrong

#95

Post by dorian-graph » Sat, Nov 19, 2011, 11:13 AM UTC

n8agrin wrote: post #8

Theories on Jobs' character aside, the Jobs biography is an utter mess. Some sentences feel like they were pulled from a 6th grade book report. It's riddled with obvious statements and reads like it should have been published in People magazine. I realize I'm probably being too harsh, but I wish that I felt like Isaacson had invested into this biography, this once-in-a-lifetime-opportunity, the way Jobs likely invest…

A lot of people here agree with you. I'm currently reading through it, I'm at chapter 14.

What would all of you have liked it to be?

Re: Getting Steve Jobs Wrong

#96

Post by gnaffle » Sat, Nov 19, 2011, 11:19 AM UTC

evanlong wrote: post #90

I guess I don't fully understand the idea that the biography is a "mess" or "flawed." Keep in mind, Jobs wanted Walter Isaacson to write his biography. Don't blame the author. Blame Jobs. You all so easily give him credit when he stands on the shoulders of giants. This seems like a logical leap. Give him credit for this too because it was actually genius. More seriously, what points make the biography flawed or a mes…

Like Siracusa said, Jobs picked the wrong guy: http://5by5.tv/hypercritical/42 http://5by5.tv/hypercritical/43 (Edit: I could go on for several pages to point out the books flaws, but this podcast does a good job of it.)

Do you really think people dislike the book because it was honest? Most of the criticism you see here is because the book never went much deeper than stating facts (and sometimes the wrong facts). This applies to more than just products.

Two non-product examples: We never get any good analysis on how Zen Buddhism affected him apart from his college days. When confronted with how cruel he can be, Steve Jobs just says "that's who I am". No deeper analysis here either (although Ive does try to give an explanation, Jobs isn't asked about that theory).

Re: Getting Steve Jobs Wrong

#97

Post by briguy » Sat, Nov 19, 2011, 11:46 AM UTC

I think that what differentiates Jobs from those other engineers mentioned in the article is that the skills that a Steve Jobs brings to the table would more llikely have been an asset to any type of product in any era. I am not an iPhone guy, however as an engineer, I am a huge Steve Jobs fan and am in constant awe on each example I read of the depth of his work ethic (perhaps his greatest skill). I think a better choice as an author would have been James Gleick.

Re: Getting Steve Jobs Wrong

#98

Post by paul » Sat, Nov 19, 2011, 4:49 PM UTC

steve8918 wrote: post #40

n8agrin wrote: post #8

Theories on Jobs' character aside, the Jobs biography is an utter mess. Some sentences feel like they were pulled from a 6th grade book report. It's riddled with obvious statements and reads like it should have been published in People magazine. I realize I'm probably being too harsh, but I wish that I felt like Isaacson had invested into this biography, this once-in-a-lifetime-opportunity, the way Jobs likely invest…

I 100% agree. I'm basically finished the book (2 more chapters to go, but I skipped ahead to the last 2 chapters out of boredom). It reads like 2 different books: before coming back to Apple the second time, and after. The first half really makes him look like an utter wretch, and almost suggests that his success was a mistake. It basically talks about what an asshole Jobs was, and how he would yell at everyone, etc,…

I think you're missing the point. He was an intense, emotional visionary. He believed in what he felt, not what others told him. That's why he smelled, why he was rude, why he cried all the time, and why he made people hate him. It's also why he was successful, and why he was able to unite teams.

Most people spend their lives engaged in a kind of Keynesian beauty contest, always trying to do or be what they think they are supposed to do or be. A true visionary has their own internal sense of beauty.

Re: Getting Steve Jobs Wrong

#99

Post by pilsetnieks » Sat, Nov 19, 2011, 4:57 PM UTC

evanlong wrote: post #92

tomlin wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've been criticizing Gruber more often than not, but I found this one to be a to the point, fairly balanced piece - especially around the visionary vs. tweaker vs. inventor part. I as well. And I like Gladwell, I just think he and Isaacson have seriously misrepresented Steve Jobs and what he did in his life & at Apple.

Specific points please.

Don't get me wrong, I like Gladwell and his writing but the usual criticism is that he cherrypicks useful facts and disregards conflicting ones so that he can build up his case. If you try to refute him point by point, you can't because every fact in his essays is correct. Every specific point is going to be correct and irrefutable but conclusion drawn from them would be just so wrong.

Re: Getting Steve Jobs Wrong

#100

Post by alexwolfe » Sat, Nov 19, 2011, 6:53 PM UTC

WalterBright wrote: post #82

alexwolfe wrote: post #74

"The visionary starts with a clean sheet of paper, and re-imagines the world. The tweaker inherits things as they are, and has to push and pull them toward some more nearly perfect solution." Malcom fails to realize by his definition everyone would be a tweaker. Henry Ford - tweaker, Einstein - tweaker, Jobs - tweaker... I think its clear who the tweaker is and it isn't Einstein, Ford, or Jobs.

I don't think Einstein was a tweaker. His theories came completely out of left field.

Everyone in any field has had help or inspiration from others. I'm just not a fan fo Malcom calling this tweaking, its is demeaning to everyone who's ever done anything. If Steve Jobs just "tweaked" things and wasn't and inventor than what does that say about everyone else in the world?

Its easy to take shots at someone after the fact, the reality is that maybe he wasn't everything people thought he was. He might not have been a sweetheart to work with, in fact he may have been a jerk. But, lets not kid ourselves into believing he didn't do that much and was just some tweaker at Apple, I call BS. Apple was basically dead when he returned, dead. It must have been a little more than tweaking to make it the most successful company in the world.