Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Steve Jobs Crowned "Person of the Decade"

CmdrTaco posted more than 3 years ago | from the well-if-smartmoney-says-so dept.

Apple 346

longacre writes "Apple CEO Steve Jobs won over 30% of the vote in an online poll published by personal finance and investing news site SmartMoney.com, enough to earn their 'Person of the Decade' title by a solid margin over luminaries such as Warren Buffett (17%), Ben Bernanke (13%) and Google founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page (12%). From the article: 'Certainly, Jobs accomplished more than probably any other CEO since he returned to Apple in the late 1990s: Not only did he revive sales at the failing computer company, he led the stock to a more than 700% increase in value, and forever changed the way people buy and listen to music.'"

cancel ×

346 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Mohamed Atta or GW Bush (4, Insightful)

BadAnalogyGuy (945258) | more than 3 years ago | (#30582950)

I can't name anyone else who could have had more of an impact on the world than these two assholes.

Steve Jobs introduced some nice toys, but that's nothing compared to the impact of dismantling the American way or life.

Re:Mohamed Atta or GW Bush (1, Insightful)

jerep (794296) | more than 3 years ago | (#30582978)

But those toys were used to distract the mindless american consumers while the two assholes destroyed everything!

Price of Underwear Goes Up (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#30583298)

as Apple fanboys wet themselves and shit themselves. Here's three boners for Steve Jobs! You faggots.

Yeah, it's been 5-10 minutes. It's time for an Apple story!

Re:Mohamed Atta or GW Bush (5, Insightful)

mcvos (645701) | more than 3 years ago | (#30582982)

Well, the poll was by an investment site. I can imagine them appreciating someone who sends stock prices into the stratosphere more than someone who sunk the economy.

Re:Mohamed Atta or GW Bush (1)

RingDev (879105) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583348)

Who other than Bush could have gotten the price of gas back under $3 a gallon?!!? Sure he had to all but destroy the economy and risk the world power structure, but we have cheep gas again!!

-Rick

Re:Mohamed Atta or GW Bush (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#30583556)

Disclaimer: I'm only a moderate conspiracy theorist nut-job.

Gas prices in the US fell $0.25 the week after Obama did his Mideast campaign tour. It continued to fall to sub-$2 range (in my area at least) until the pirates started taking control of the oil tankers.

~fugnutish

Re:Mohamed Atta or GW Bush (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#30583576)

Define "Cheep"

Growing up, there was an outcry if the gas prices jumped over $1 ($0.97 was common for a few years). Gas goes up in spurts, first to $1.50 to settle at $1.25 being cheap, then $2.50 to make $2 seem cheap, and eventually $4 so that $3 doesnt seem too bad. Sure, its down to $2.50 again, but the only other commodity that I have purchased in the last 15 years has shown the same increase in price, and that is stamps. I am sure there are others, but I have been relatively unaffected.

Re:Mohamed Atta or GW Bush (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#30583734)

movie tickets

Re:Mohamed Atta or GW Bush (0)

bonch (38532) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583494)

Are you talking about Bush, or the Democats who controlled Congress since 2006? Is that branch of the government free from blame because they happened to be controlled by your favorite political party at the time? Just curious how this whole blame thing [tinyurl.com] works.

Re:Mohamed Atta or GW Bush (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#30583770)

Controlled, hahaha. Right, Dubya was signing legislation right and left that those Democrats in Congress were handing to him.

Re:Mohamed Atta or GW Bush (1, Troll)

bonch (38532) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583408)

Dismantling the American way of life? Give me a break with the melodrama. The American way of life is chugging along as usual, donut in hand.

44% actually want Bush back [politico.com] after seeing how the Democrats have handled things.

Re:Mohamed Atta or GW Bush (1)

pleappleappleap (1182301) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583678)

Guess what, that's a minority.

Re:Mohamed Atta or GW Bush (2, Insightful)

operagost (62405) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583552)

2004 called. They want their rant back.

Have you noticed what Obama, Pelosi, Reid, and Frank are doing? And they're doing it faster.

Who made the list? (1)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583708)

SJ is probably the best of that list, sure, but what a crappy list.

Re:Mohamed Atta or GW Bush (1)

Haber-ery (1320533) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583840)

"... in an online poll published by personal finance and investing news site ...."

say what you want (4, Insightful)

Darth_brooks (180756) | more than 3 years ago | (#30582996)

Say what you want about the rampant fanboyism, the DRM, and the culture of "idea X is dumb and there's no reason for us to support it HEY CHECK OUT OUR NEW FEATURE WE CALL IT iX AND IT IS TOTALLY AWESOME AND UNIQUE BECAUSE IT'S WHITE!" that permeates apple, but there are probably very few of us that wouldn't want to take a time machine back to Dec 2000 and buy a few thousand shares of APPL at $7.50.

(Of course, you could always just get hired by Apple and back date your stock option.....i keed i keed....)

Re:say what you want (1)

Cronock (1709244) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583128)

Say what you want about the rampant fanboyism, the DRM, and the culture of "idea X is dumb and there's no reason for us to support it HEY CHECK OUT OUR NEW FEATURE WE CALL IT iX AND IT IS TOTALLY AWESOME AND UNIQUE BECAUSE IT'S WHITE!" that permeates apple, but there are probably very few of us that wouldn't want to take a time machine back to Dec 2000 and buy a few thousand shares of APPL at $7.50.

(Of course, you could always just get hired by Apple and back date your stock option.....i keed i keed....)

It's Apple's purpose to generate revenue. Steve Jobs has done that without question. They've also done it with some pride and been a leader rather than a follower. If I had a company and I wanted it to become the leader in its field, I would want a man like Jobs at the helm. He may be a control freak, but he's proven he's effective.

Re:say what you want (2, Insightful)

selven (1556643) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583148)

And there are very few of us who wouldn't want to take a time machine back to 2003 and buy a few thousand shares of GOOG.

Well... since we ARE talking time travel... (3, Funny)

denzacar (181829) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583402)

And there are very few of us who wouldn't want to take a time machine back to 2003 and buy a few thousand shares of GOOG.

I'd rather go to 1890 and get me a couple of shares of GOGH.
Vincent van, that is.

First decade of this millennium (0)

mcvos (645701) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583008)

Is this the right place to point out that the first decade of this century and millenium has one more year to go?

Any sequence of 10 years is a decade, I guess. So who was last year's person of the decade?

Re:First decade of this millennium (2, Insightful)

Nikola Tesla and You (1490547) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583078)

size([0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9])=10

Re:First decade of this millennium (1)

Nikola Tesla and You (1490547) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583686)

Please read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decade [wikipedia.org] . Both conventions are correct since both represent a period of ten years, but the article is using the convention 2000-2009.

Re:First decade of this millennium (0)

kamikazearun (1282408) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583106)

2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 - That's 10 years gone by.. almost. WTF are you even talking about?

Re:First decade of this millennium (1, Informative)

selven (1556643) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583164)

There was no Year 0 so the indices start from 1 in this case. The second millennium ended at the end of 2000 and this decade will end at the end of 2010.

Re:First decade of this millennium (3, Funny)

Myopic (18616) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583282)

INCORRECT! Year zero doesn't even enter into the question, because as we all know the current epoch started with the year 1970. Thus, decades in our epoch end with zeros.

Re:First decade of this millennium (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#30583540)

1970? What epoch are you in? We all know OS X was released on 2001. We still have one more year to go before this decade is over.

Re:First decade of this millennium (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#30583300)

That may apply if you're talking about the [X] century. But decades are normally referred to by their second-to-last decimal digit. They're referring to the ending decade (ten years), not the 200th decade AD.

Re:First decade of this millennium (2, Informative)

Rob Kaper (5960) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583388)

There was no Year 0 so the indices start from 1 in this case. The second millennium ended at the end of 2000 and this decade will end at the end of 2010.

Yes and no. This decade, the first of this millennium, ends at the end of 2010. But this decade, the naughties, does however end in a matter of days. They're not mutually exclusive, various decennia can co-exist.

Re:First decade of this millennium (1)

mcvos (645701) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583750)

Isn't any sequence of 10 years a decade? So who was the person of 1997-2006?

Re:First decade of this millennium (1)

Traa (158207) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583446)

"There was no year 0" should be placed in the context of the original folks who came up with the calendar and had it wrong. There have been various corrections to the calendar since, and calling the years xxx0 through xxx9 a decade is one of them.

Re:First decade of this millennium (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#30583182)

The calendar has no year zero.. So first decade is year 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10.. Second is 11 thru 20.. i.e. This current decade is 2001 thru 2010. The media makes the same mistake as they did with saying 2000 was the new millennium and then in 2001 go "whoops". That is what he/she is talking about!

Re:First decade of this millennium (1)

Myopic (18616) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583308)

You have made the assumption that the cycle of decades must have started with the first year of our counting. That's a wrong assumption. Same with millennia.

Re:First decade of this millennium (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#30583688)

A decade is the definition of ten years. Since we are talking about a year in a calendar that starts with a cycle of 1, then there is no assumption to be made, but facts. If you can prove there was a year zero, then your assumption, that the parent is wrong, might be a fact too.

Re:First decade of this millennium (0, Troll)

berwiki (989827) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583604)

how angry does that make you? you nerdy little bastard.

Re:First decade of this millennium (1)

ShatteredArm (1123533) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583192)

Wait, you're posting on Slashdot and you didn't consider zero-indexed counting? All this time, I thought this site was just for nerds.

Re:First decade of this millennium (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#30583386)

But our year system isn't 0-indexed. There is no year 0. So the first decade was 1-10, the first century 1-100, etc.

Re:First decade of this millennium (0, Redundant)

maxume (22995) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583710)

Well, there isn't a year zero, so the first millennium AD spans the years from 1 AD to 1000 AD.

Re:First decade of this millennium (2)

kamikazearun (1282408) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583228)

Well I'll be damned. In any case, I blame the media for my stupidity :-D And I think my comment was the cause for your down-moderation. My bad!

Re:First decade of this millennium (1)

mcvos (645701) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583702)

And I think my comment was the cause for your down-moderation. My bad!

Thanks a lot for that!

(No problem really. I still have plenty of karma left.)

Re:First decade of this millennium (1)

westlake (615356) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583658)

Is this the right place to point out that the first decade of this century and millennium has one more year to go?

The only thing that matters to a kid on his first big cross-country trip is watching the odometer roll over from 9999 to 10000.

There is a awe and magic in this sort of thing that no logical argument is ever going to change.
 

Re:First decade of this millennium (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#30583684)

Hmmm....0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 = 10 years so 2010 is the start of the next decade isn't it?

Re:First decade of this millennium (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#30583716)

you numbnut

the 80s = the decade 1980-1989
the 90s = the decade 1990-1999
we are now wrapping up the decade 2000-2009

Also, this stupid "this millennium didn't start until 2001" bullshit is so fucking stupid. Even if there was no year zero, it makes so much more sense to consider 1900-1999, 2000-2099 and so on as centuries and 1000-1999 as a millennium

Re:First decade of this millennium (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#30583790)

We decided to start counting from zero at the turn of the millennium (well a year prior in the old reckoning...). My gamble that the 2000->2001 parties for the "real millennium" would be even bigger due to people "realizing" that fact (and of course, looking for ever more excuses for ever bigger parties) did not come to fruition.

Apparently, people can't be bothered to use a consistent counting when "we can party now, right" is operative, and can't be counted on to use inconsistent counting later on for reasons I can't think of a funny way to express.

Masterminds (0)

zeroRenegade (1475839) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583024)

If influencing the highest number of people in the world is the main factor in the poll, then I agree with it. A lot of people from some countries could care less about what is happening in other countries, but everyone in the world wants an iPod or iPhone! As sad as that is, it has directly affected culture everywhere. Now, I wish the poll would reference the masterminds behind Steve Jobs like Steve "Evil-Eye" Bertrand, or many others who have rallied behind Steve Jobs to make one of the most powerful companies of the decade. The iPod has influenced culture everywhere, where significant events mainly affect the nations involved. Since it is a finance poll, I'd say it would be the number of people in their market share.

Re:Masterminds (1)

Arthur Grumbine (1086397) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583792)

A lot of people from the United States could care less about what is happening in other countries, but everyone in the United States wants an iPod or iPhone!

FTFY. Kool-aid drinking aside though, it strikes me that Brin/Page or Jimmy Wales has done far more to affect culture, politics, and industry than the entire music industry. More than 70% if internet users rely upon Google's algorithms to find the information they want. When it comes to learning about a given subject/topic (even if in just a basic sense of the word 'learning') Wikipedia has become the de facto source (for better or worse) for hundreds of millions of internet users. If you want to fixate on a small niche of human activity you could just as easily talk about how Microsoft/Sony/Nintendo have directly affected culture everywhere with the continued growth/use of video games. There are more gamers than iPod or iPhone owners. Everyone in the world wants an Xbox 360/PS3/Wii!

Steve Jobs Crowned "Person of the Decade" (1, Flamebait)

Wood Sealer (1709714) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583036)

Wow He's really a good choice. I brought an iphone an year ago and now I'm so addicted that I just can't live without it. 700% increase is a lot, great job Steve..

Re: Steve Jobs Crowned "Person of the Decade" (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#30583370)

Thats because you are a tool

What about the iPod person? (1)

Qwavel (733416) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583042)

It came down to one thing: the iPod caused the revivial of Apple. It led to the iPhone and gave them the financial resources to improve OS X.

So, what person, or team of people are responsible for making the iPod happen (for all I know maybe that was Steve Jobs)? Shouldn't they be getting all of the accolades now?

Re:What about the iPod person? (2, Informative)

gregarican (694358) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583154)

Here he [ideafinder.com] is.

Re:What about the iPod person? (2, Insightful)

Myopic (18616) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583332)

You are forgetting the iMac, which was the product that changed everything at Apple.

Re:What about the iPod person? (1)

Tetsujin (103070) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583748)

You are forgetting the iMac, which was the product that changed everything at Apple.

And gave us three years of "Bondi Blue" computer hardware...

Yes, but is he still an asshole? (1, Insightful)

Synn (6288) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583046)

I love how our culture writes off if a person is an asshat or not so long as he's successful. I guess we even expect the behavior.

Is a man a good father, good husband? Is he a positive influence on the people around him in his life? Is he happy and fulfilled? Who cares, as long as the stock options go up.

Re:Yes, but is he still an asshole? (2)

LOLLinux (1682094) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583110)

Did you miss the part that this was from a website about investing?

Re:Yes, but is he still an asshole? (1)

MickyTheIdiot (1032226) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583136)

I was going to complain about the CEO worship. But the parent pretty much explains it.

Re:Yes, but is he still an asshole? (1)

ShatteredArm (1123533) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583244)

Shouldn't he be the guy who provided the most opportunities for investors to make money? If so, I'd argue that their favorite person should be Alan Greenspan, because, for better or worse (almost certainly worse), he flooded the market with credit, which inflated stock prices across the board (including AAPL), and opened the door for an excellent shorting opportunity in 2007-08. His student, Bernanke, then created another way for investors to double their money by exchanging future stability for short term gain. I'm sure Greenspan made investors far more money than Steve Jobs did; it just came at the expense of pretty much anybody who is not a smart investor/trader.

Re:Yes, but is he still an asshole? (1)

mister_playboy (1474163) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583296)

Doesn't that just prove his point? He's complaining that everything that isn't money-related is considered totally irrelevant, and you're replying that it's okay because it's from a site focused only on money-related matters to the exclusion of all else.

The award is called "person of the decade", not "profit-maker of the decade". All the things Synn mentioned are vital components of being a person.

Re:Yes, but is he still an asshole? (2, Insightful)

nomadic (141991) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583142)

Yeah, that bothers me too, Jobs is a classic narcissist, and stock price shouldn't be the measure of a person's worth.

Re:Yes, but is he still an asshole? (3, Funny)

Tetsujin (103070) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583766)

Yeah, that bothers me too, Jobs is a classic narcissist, and stock price shouldn't be the measure of a person's worth.

Yeah! You have to factor in how many shares they've got, too!

Re:Yes, but is he still an asshole? (4, Insightful)

khallow (566160) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583222)

Is a man a good father, good husband? Is he a positive influence on the people around him in his life? Is he happy and fulfilled? Who cares, as long as the stock options go up.

So you think we should nose into these peoples' personal lives as part of the evaluation process? I have a couple different questions to ask here. Since when did we ever care? How can we care? There's been bouts of faux morality over the millennia, but the bottom line is that collectively we don't care and most of us would hate it if the rest of world evaluated us on this criteria. Then there's matter of whether we're capable of making any such judgment. There are untold numbers of people who have improved my life. I only know a few thousand or so of them. I don't have the mental capabilities or knowledge to evaluate most of their lives.

Further, I don't see the reason why this stuff should matter. There are many ways that a person can succeed in life. Why should we expect someone to succeed in all of them?

Re:Yes, but is he still an asshole? (3, Insightful)

KibibyteBrain (1455987) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583268)

I'm not really setting out to endorse him, but he is the only "luminary" in business right now one could consider that actually gave people actual products and didn't just find ways to push money around. To actually produce and still be a financial success is worth something, even if your contribution is just giving out music players to tweens. Far more than can be said for finance guys who gave out risky loans so they could buy new cars did for anyone, who the readers in this magazine no doubt also idolize.

It's so sad to see... (2)

carlhaagen (1021273) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583058)

...how certain people (dare we guess what OS they use? Could possible THEY be fanboys as well?!) INSTANTLY tag this "fanboi" etc. when the vote comes from the economy sector. It seems there is no end to the pityful behavior of the tiny minds of the /. grannies. Shoo, shoo! Crawl back under your stones, you hate-sick critters!

Most ways are overrated or overstated. (1, Interesting)

Aldenissin (976329) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583104)

"...From the article, 'Certainly, Jobs accomplished more than probably any other CEO since he returned to Apple in the late 1990s:

So? What did he do in the LAST decade? Shouldn't that be what matters?
 

... and forever changed the way people buy and listen to music.

Really? I don't have an iPod. More Americans don't than do. What did he do exactly that change the way we listen to music? MP3 players were already coming into prominence. Perhaps he accelerated it, but he didn't change the way we do it.

Oh yea, he created the iTunes. Yup, he did indeed singlehandedly come up with a way to purchase music online, to put DRM into it, and was the first to do so. /end sarcasm.

  If anything, he did convince many companies to forgo DRM, and for that, I do give him credit for. So in that way, he did change the way we listen to music.

Re:Most ways are overrated or overstated. (2, Informative)

Myopic (18616) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583366)

The "last decade" is synonymous with "since the late 90s".

Change the way we listen to music.... (1)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583772)

What did he do exactly? He sure didn't invent the mp3 player.

Re:Most ways are overrated or overstated. (0)

jo_ham (604554) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583804)

Are you kidding? The iPod changed everything about portable music.

Yes, there were other mp3 players before the iPod, in the same way there were other smartphones before the iPhone - the iPod took the concept and made it popular for the people. Maybe *you* don't have an iPod, but millions of Americans (and other people in the world too by the way, there are other land masses on the planet too y'know) do. It changed the walkman/discman/minidisc idea and extended it. You don't just listen to headphones when you're a kid any more, or when you jog - now people do it everywhere - while commuting, while walking, at home. Your mum probably has an iPod and listens to it, where before she'd never bother with a walkman - the inconvenience of tapes and the size of the device make it not worth the hassle.

The iTunes store didn't come along until long after the iPod totally changed the landscape already, although if we're going there, the iTunes store was the first online music download service that was A GIGANTIC RUNAWAY SUCCESS, unlike almost any other download-based or even subscription-based online music store. DRM was mandatory at the behest of the content providers (no DRM, no content), but it was a stated goal from the very outset that Apple didn't want DRM but had no choice (if that choice meant no store). There is no longer DRM on the iTunes store for music.

Mp3 players were just another tech until the iPod came along - it wasn't the first, or even the best, but it was certainly the one that changed the portable music world.

And he does a pretty good two step... (4, Funny)

number6x (626555) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583130)

Not to mention his appearances on 'Dancing With the Stars' [youtube.com]

Oh wait, wrong Steve.

Never mind

what seriously? (2, Troll)

runyonave (1482739) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583170)

Steve Jobs is the farmer and the current generation of fancy-clothed-hip-young-lifestyle people are his sheep.

i SERIOUSLY do not get what is so great about Apple products. All they do is take a pre-existing product, add gloss and make it look nice and the sheep come pouring in. What a stupid time we live in, Idiocracy is not far away.

BTW I'm not a M$ fan-boy, but I would take aMicrosoft product (or Linux) over Apple any day. Practicality over aesthetics I say.

Re:what seriously? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#30583224)

MS were the same in the 80s, they had a huge fanbase too, not because of quality, but because it wasn't IBM. Today we have Apple as the MS because they're not MS. Tomorrow we'll have google because they're not apple.

Re:what seriously? (0, Redundant)

Dog-Cow (21281) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583538)

Thank you for sharing your ignorance and stupidity. Slashdot was feeling a bit empty without them.

Am I crazy... (4, Insightful)

liquiddark (719647) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583196)

Didn't the last decade contain Google's entire rise to dominance? The "start page to the internet" and all that? How exactly does Apple's crappy e-store compare with that achievement, exactly? One has to think that the results of the poll are about flash rather than true impact.

Re:Am I crazy... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#30583286)

It's a self selecting web poll, which means it's entirely meaningless anyway.

Re:Am I crazy... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#30583454)

It is not *entirely* meaningless. It's just the only thing you can conclude is that those who voted in the poll thought Steve Jobs was the person of the decade. So while proper statistical inference is not possible, there is some meaning from a Fisherian/info theory point of view.

Re:Am I crazy... (3, Interesting)

DeadDecoy (877617) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583434)

Everyone tends to vote for the name they recognize the most rather than the person that contributes the most. However, to be fair, Jobs did oversee the rise of Apple; helped develop Pixar which helped create the new genre of computer animation; and pretty much ushered in digital music while gatekeepers (RIAA) sought to prove its illegitimacy and stop it. If all Apple did, was simply produce a music-based e-store, they'd be on the same level as napster or pandora. Fact is, Jobs has done a lot to change Apple, which has in turn, changed our culture. Personally, though, I would have picked Sergey Brin and Larry Page (for information distribution) or Warren Buffet.(for distribution of resources). While their names are less visible, think their work has been more essential in improving the fundamental aspects of our society.

Re:Am I crazy... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#30583866)

Fact is, Jobs has done a lot to change Apple, which has in turn, changed our culture.

Define "our".

I know lots of people who do not own a Mac, iPod, or iPhone. I don't know anyone who does not use Google.

Yes, you are a bit nuts (4, Insightful)

SuperKendall (25149) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583588)

Look, I would have voted for Google myself as having greater impact, part of the problem is that the impact is not as widely noticed or has been forgotten since we are all used to how things are. But I think you are a little bit guilty of that with Apple as well.

If nothing else, Apple single-handedly made the entire music industry give up DRM, ironically (well not really ironically since it's an inevitable side effect of the technology) by using DRM to place Apple between customers and music labels in a way the labels could not control. We all just take DRM free music for granted but we'd not have that generally available yet without Apple, because the market would have remain too fragmented to force the need for DRM free music to get around Apple.

You may call it a "crappy store" but it was the first time selling music online ever went anywhere, and to date is far larger than any other online music presence and even most real world stores. I'm not sure how you can dismiss that out of hand as irrelevant.

And then of course they actually made smartphones a generally desirable product instead of a niche with corporate and technical users.

So in at least two areas they greatly expanded the whole range of the market, not just their own marketshare. That is why they deserve to be in the top list, even if you can quibble about who is really at THE top.

Re:Am I crazy... (1)

lorsungcu (1709736) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583850)

I've always felt that without the 'iphone/ipod attitude' that focused attention on design, simplicity and functionality, a site like google wouldn't have made it. Steve didn't win because of an e-store. Your comment is as sensational as you think TFA is.

I'd like to thank those gents (and ladies)... (3, Interesting)

stakovahflow (1660677) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583220)

at the FreeBSD foundation and those among us that helped improve OS X's source via the OpenDarwin project. (And then Steve Jobs gets credit? Not in my book...)

Too dang bad Apple had to put it (the OpenDarwin project) down. As if over 90% of the kernel didn't come from the open source community...

Those guys/gals who did all that code and testing are the ones who really deserve to take a bow...

Oh, yeah, congrats Mr. Jobs.

Good job giving no credit to the grunts toiling for your profit margin...

Sorry to be a pessimist...

Just a thought, though...

--Stak

Re:I'd like to thank those gents (and ladies)... (1)

Archangel Michael (180766) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583522)

Or:

You can thank Jobs for bringing attention on a massive scale to FreeBSD project, enough to garner the attention of the open source community to send developers to it.

Or do you think all those developers went to FreeBSD and the OpenDarwin project because FreeBSD was cool on its own merits???

If it wasn't for Jobs, FreeBSD (and OpenDarwin) would have been Yet Another UNIX, languishing in the marketplace.

Of course, Apple sucks for pulling the rug out from underneath the developers, but that is another story.

I don't mix the two up. Apple needs to be praised, and chided for OpenDarwin. Praised for Opening the source, and chided for shutting the project down.

Recognition (2, Insightful)

slasho81 (455509) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583258)

Jobs is far from being man of the decade, but if this poll is evidence of anything, it's that Jobs is a marketing guru.

Invalidated article (1)

dada21 (163177) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583262)

The minute someone puts Ben Bernanke on a "Person of the _____" list as a choice, the list is invalidated. Bernanke, like Greenspan, created policy that causes recessions and depressions and then makes them worse.

I can't understand why people continue to give any credibility to these deadpulp periodicals and their online offspring.

Re:Invalidated article (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#30583314)

You do realize that Time's Person of the year is not an award right? It is a recognition of influence during the year.

Re:Invalidated article (2, Insightful)

Archangel Michael (180766) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583536)

My view of Bernake, summed up in one word ...

Treason

Re:Invalidated article (1)

nomadic (141991) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583662)

He levied war on the United States, adhered to its enemies, or gave them aid or comfort?

Though the list is fluff.. (1)

Junta (36770) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583634)

It at least didn't say *Good* person of the ____. I.e. Hitler was a strong candidate for 'person of the century' in Time magazine's reckoning, but happened to be edged out by positive people (probably because they feared people assuming 'person of the century' was automatically an honor and therefore it was safer to go with Einstein). Most of these lists purport not to measure 'good' but how influential a person was.

Useless (2, Insightful)

Mikkeles (698461) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583264)

So, out of a bunch of people who have done bugger all other than accumulate wealth, Jobs won.

Changed the way people listen to music? Sorry, no. (4, Insightful)

GreatBunzinni (642500) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583266)

and forever changed the way people buy and listen to music.

Really? Everyone was already downloading and listening to MP3s a good while back before the first iPod was released to the market and iTunes was launched. I mean, Napster was up and running since around 1999 and, way before that, IRC was swarming with channels dedicated to transferring MP3 albums through DCC file transfers. The mIRC [wikipedia.org] world was packed with scripts to automatically handle that stuff. Before that there was already a pretty extensive sneakernet [wikipedia.org] dedicated to exchange music files through CD-Rs packed with MP3. Heck, back in 1994 I knew a group of people who were ripping CDs to WAV files and lending hard drives with that stuff (they were idiots but to each it's own). So, how exactly can a corporation "forever change the way people listen to music" if everyone was already doing exactly that for years before the company released a product?

Apple deserves credit in exploring the "pay to download music files" market, particularly by convincing record companies to authorize a new business model to sell their product. Yet, they didn't changed any habits. They realized that there was an extensive and overwhelming demand for downloading music (there was a heck of a lot of people doing that) and they invested in an attempt to capitalize from that demand. They succeeded at that. But changing the way people listen to music? No, they didn't. They were successful in riding the wave but I'm sorry to tell you, they didn't changed any habits.

Mod Parent Up! (3, Insightful)

mpapet (761907) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583488)

The summary was written in the Steve Jobs Reality Distortion Field.

Remember people, Apple is a follower just like every big corporation. In the MP3 player's case, they waited for the industry to grow 'big enough' then sold a unique-enough player with total subservience to the media conglomerates and backed it up with extreme amounts of advertising.

Could any other company do the same? Probably not. One main reason being Jobs' participation in device design. The other being an advertising budget that no rival would ever commit. That doesn't justify the overblown reference to the ipod.

Upon Reflection (1, Flamebait)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583274)

I'm glad Steve Jobs turned Apple into the company it did. Now that Apple PC's and MP3 Players and Phones are so expensive, I can make fun of those pompous pricks who think they are better than everyone because they have a certain iTem.

Now I don't have to feel ashamed for using a PC.

*half hearted smile*

*lowers head*

*breaks into tears*

Re:Upon Reflection (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#30583478)

``I'm a PC''

Also, (3, Insightful)

mxh83 (1607017) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583292)

Obama won a peace prize.

I assume (4, Funny)

ThatsNotPudding (1045640) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583304)

I assume they will back-date the award to the 90's.

Mod Parent Funny. (1)

mpapet (761907) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583516)

For many of you, this comment would be a whoosh moment.

The usual caveat with online polls (5, Insightful)

jayme0227 (1558821) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583358)

They tend to skew towards the young, tech savvy, and vocal. I'm sure many slashdotters have voted in polls on sites that they didn't frequent because someone told them it was a good idea, and we all know how vocal Apple Fanboys are.

That aside, Jobs was very important this decade. He helped bring about a credible threat to the Windows OS (causing Microsoft to make many positive changes), he helped to reform the music industry, bringing the aging RIAA and record companies to their knees, and he has shown the direction that telcos must move in as far as mobile computing by causing AT&T's 3G network to buckle. He was very influential, especially in the field of computing, and more deserving than most.

Now, personally I would have said that GW Bush was the most influential person of the decade. He was the most powerful man in the world for 8 (technically 7, whatever) years. He made an enormous power grab for the executive branch, changed how the country views terrorism (be scared, very scared), and brought several countries into two wars, one of which is hopefully mostly over, and the other with no end in sight. Also, under his watch, the worldwide economy took an enormous tumble due to his lax policies, with considerable help from previous presidents, especially Clinton and Reagan. To me, his influence was far greater than anything Jobs has done.

Barack Obama? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#30583360)

At the beginning of the decade, he was a political unknown. At the end of the decade, he is President. That's a pretty good accomplishment.

Nine down, one to go... (1, Redundant)

Ironchew (1069966) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583404)

So, this wraps up another Decade of Dreadful Apple Ads [slashdot.org] . (I couldn't resist.)

Well, if Steve was crowned -- (1, Funny)

dwiget001 (1073738) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583490)

-- he'd be "King", not merely "Person" of the decade!

Voice: :"Well, I didn't vote for ya."

Other voice: "You don't "vote" for a King."

Ad infinitum/absurdum.

People of the Year (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#30583652)

With him leveraging someone else's organ, wouldn't it be more appropriate to use the plural? Persons of the year?

Slashdotters not on the ball (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#30583706)

A self-selecting Web poll for Person of the Decade, and the result is not Rick Astley [ask.com] ?!

Ballmer (1)

CmdrPorno (115048) | more than 3 years ago | (#30583806)

Whoever wrote this list appears to have omitted Steve Ballmer. I assume the article will be corrected in short order.

Really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#30583876)

What has Steve Jobs done to stop world-wide suffering with all his wealth? Bill Gates for person of the decade.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>