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!

How Steve Jobs' Legacy Has Changed

Soulskill posted about 2 years ago | from the still-grabbing-headlines-a-year-later dept.

Apple 420

On the anniversary of Steve Jobs' death, reader SternisheFan sends in a story from CNN about how the Apple co-founder's legacy has changed since then. "... in the 12 months since, as high-profile books have probed Jobs' life and career, that reputation has evolved somewhat. Nobody has questioned Jobs' seismic impact on computing and our communication culture. But as writers have documented Jobs' often callous, controlling personality, a fuller portrait of the mercurial Apple CEO has emerged. 'Everyone knows that Steve had his "rough" side. That's partially because he really did have a rough side and partially because the rough Steve was a better news story than the human Steve,' said Ken Segall, author of Insanely Simple: The Obsession That Drives Apple's Success.' ... In Steve Jobs, Isaacson crafted a compelling narrative of how Jobs' co-founded Apple with Steve Wozniak, got pushed out of the struggling company a decade later and then returned in the late 1990s to begin one of the most triumphant second acts in the annals of American business. But he also spent many pages chronicling the arrogant, cruel behavior of a complicated figure who could inspire people one minute and demean them the next. According to the book, Jobs would often berate employees whose work he didn't like. He was notoriously difficult to please and viewed people and products in black and white terms. They were either brilliant or 'sh-t.' 'Among Apple employees, I'd say his reputation hasn't changed one bit. If anything, it's probably grown because they've realized how central his contributions were,' Lashinsky said. 'History tends to forgive people's foibles and recognize their accomplishments. When Jobs died, he was compared to Edison and Henry Ford and to Disney. I don't know what his place will be in history 30, 40, 50 years from now. And one year is certainly not enough time (to judge).'" Apple has posted a tribute video on their homepage today.

cancel ×

420 comments

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

Good News Apple Fans! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41557531)

You can get a blowjob from another man. It's only gay for the guy who is GIVING the blowjob.

Re:Good News Apple Fans! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41557581)

STFU, GTFO, you homophobic blithering idiot.

A year already? (5, Insightful)

SirGarlon (845873) | about 2 years ago | (#41557545)

Since Steve Jobs has been in the headlines every freaking day since he died, I would never have guess it happened a whole year ago.

Re:A year already? (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41557573)

Since Steve Jobs has been in the headlines every freaking day since he died, I would never have guess it happened a whole year ago.

in our society we glorify sociopathic assholes who only care about making money and enforcing their narcissistic vision.

Re:A year already? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41557601)

No, we don't glorify you asshole. Next.

Re:A year already? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41557607)

Most people we admire for one thing or another are disgusting human beings in person. Check the records. From Jean-Jacques Rousseau to Sartre, a long line of really ugly people fill the wet dreams of many.

Re:A year already? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41557689)

Most people are disgusting human beings in person.

FTFY.

Re:A year already? (3, Funny)

MysteriousPreacher (702266) | about 2 years ago | (#41557649)

in our society we glorify sociopathic assholes who only care about making money and enforcing their narcissistic vision.

Why not start Whiny Bitches with Chips on Their Shoulders Day? It'd certainly strike a blow for your incredibly marginalised segment of society.

Compared to Henry Ford (2)

Latent Heat (558884) | about 2 years ago | (#41557723)

Um, so he hated Jewish people?

Re:A year already? (4, Informative)

am 2k (217885) | about 2 years ago | (#41557965)

in our society we glorify sociopathic assholes who only care about making money and enforcing their narcissistic vision.

In Isaacson's book, there's a chapter on how Jobs told Larry Ellison to stop caring so much about making money, and thinking more about the products. I don't think making money was his driving force. I definitely won't argue about the other two characteristics you've described, though :)

Re:A year already? (5, Insightful)

Valor958 (2724297) | about 2 years ago | (#41558003)

I certainly don't like Apple, and didn't like Jobs... but I completely understand why he did what he did, and the vision he had. He gave an interview on NPR I listened to, where he basically laid it all out. He was emulating his father and ideals he and his father shared. Make everything come together and function together. The walled garden approach the Apple embodies has it's ups and downs like any other business model. The major flaw, imho, is their approach and implementation. Jobs was a severely flawed person, and in a seat of power to make his flaws more glaringly apparent, with fuel for the fire.
I say let the man rest in peace, and let Apple go where it may. Apple will NEVER advance if they keep trying to emulate Jobs. Jobs was not Apple, and Apple can and will survive without him. But now, they have the opportunity to change.

Re:A year already? (4, Informative)

am 2k (217885) | about 2 years ago | (#41558143)

Apple will NEVER advance if they keep trying to emulate Jobs. Jobs was not Apple, and Apple can and will survive without him. But now, they have the opportunity to change.

While I agree with you, the last time Apple tried to change post-Jobs, it went horribly wrong. There's a huge difference when career managers are in the driver's seat, compared to the ones that founded the company and defined its core values. I think Steve Jobs wanted to avoid that when he nurtured his successors (Tim Cook & Jony Ive) early, but that also means they're probably reluctant to change too much of his success strategy. We'll see how long they will be in control, but I'm afraid of what will come afterwards.

It flies (1)

roman_mir (125474) | about 2 years ago | (#41557699)

Time certainly flies.

Re:A year already? (2)

kthreadd (1558445) | about 2 years ago | (#41557857)

Since Steve Jobs has been in the headlines every freaking day since he died, I would never have guess it happened a whole year ago.

Maybe your should stop reading MacWorld then?

Re:A year already? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41558071)

I think he might have been reading CNet or iCNet whatever it is known as these days.

Last sentence (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41557551)

"And one year is certainly not enough time (to judge)."

So what's the point of this article then?

Re:Last sentence (5, Insightful)

dkleinsc (563838) | about 2 years ago | (#41557593)

So what's the point of this article then?

pageviews and ad revenue, I presume.

Re:Last sentence (5, Funny)

kthreadd (1558445) | about 2 years ago | (#41557859)

And flame wars!

Re:Last sentence (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41557599)

So what's the point of this article then?

Page views.

-- MyLongNickName

Re:Last sentence (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41557603)

I grant both of you the Captain Obvious award.

Re:Last sentence (2)

cyborg_zx (893396) | about 2 years ago | (#41557931)

And I grant you the Lieutennent Predictable Riposte award.

Re:Last sentence (5, Insightful)

bhagwad (1426855) | about 2 years ago | (#41557801)

I think 30-40 years later history will in fact judge him poorly compared to Edison and Ford. I mean refining a smartphone design is one thing. But do we really want to compare it with the world changing achievements of mass vehicular transport and light bulbs and DC current.

Let's get some perspective huh?

Re:Last sentence (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41557997)

Ford didn't invent the DC current, idiot.

Re:Last sentence (3, Funny)

bhagwad (1426855) | about 2 years ago | (#41558091)

Didn't say he did. Strawman much?

Cuts people off in traffic (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41558039)

When my brother was cut off in traffic one day, he road-raged to the side of the guy who cut him off to yell at him and saw it was Steve Jobs. Steve gave him a "WTF Asshole" look, and sped off. My brother was in shock.

That's the Steve Jobs I think of.

Re:Last sentence (-1, Troll)

SilentStaid (1474575) | about 2 years ago | (#41558041)

Yeah, it's not as if he and Apple are largely responsible for making personal computing mobile thereby changing the day to day routines of a good portion of the developed world or anything.

All kidding aside despite the content - could you honestly tell me when the last time you went 24 hours without using a smartphone? Unless you're a cave dwelling neckbeard who refuses to use a smartphone for monetary, physical or philosophical reasons (or because you're a dirty, dirty hipster) - your life has been irrevocably changed along with the majority (50.4%) of the United States population.

Source: http://techcrunch.com/2012/05/07/nielsen-smartphones-used-by-50-4-of-u-s-consumers-android-48-5-of-them/ [techcrunch.com]

Re:Last sentence (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41558113)

Wow I was using a smart Phone before Apple even got into the business. Hell I even used the original iPhone and I am not talking the apple product. I guess I don't buy the Apple invented the smartphone crap.

Re:Last sentence (3, Interesting)

bhagwad (1426855) | about 2 years ago | (#41558123)

Slight problem with your analysis - I was using touchscreen smartphones and installing applications on them long before the iPhone. My first was a second hand Palm Tungsten T in 2004 when I was in college. My second was two years later - an O2 with Windows Mobile.

If you want to count Apple/Jobs marketing abilities as legendary, I have no problem with that since if another company had come out with an exact copy of the iPhone it would definitely not have gotten the same media coverage and overwhelming response.

Jobs refined the design of smartphones and made them popular. I've stated that in my first comment. I just don't think it compares to the the inventors the summary was mentioning.

One Year Later (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41557553)

And this insignificant choade is still clogging up my newsfeed.

What did he really do, other than be a CEO?

I'd much rather hear about Woz and his technical brilliance as it is what Apple was really marketing in the early days.

Re:One Year Later (2)

somersault (912633) | about 2 years ago | (#41557641)

What did he really do, other than be a CEO?

You are an idiot. I don't like the guy, or a lot of the stuff he did, but it's obvious that he did a hell of a lot. I'm happy with how he's changed things, if only because now we have phones and tablets that are actually a pleasure to use, rather than a pointless attempt at recreating desktop OSes on a tiny screen.

Re:One Year Later (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41557697)

Yes, because the market would not have naturally gone that way anyways. after all, he is the genius behind this technology right? He created the Gorilla glass in his basement and shat iPhones out his ass like a queen bee. He was a CEO and nothing more. the company he was with may have created some nice devices, but they will soon go the way of the dodo, just like jobs.

Re:One Year Later (1)

somersault (912633) | about 2 years ago | (#41557767)

Things were shit until the iPhone came out. Before then, Windows Mobile was the best phone OS, and that says a lot. I've never actually wanted an iPhone. I stuck with Windows Mobile until Android 2.x devices were coming out, but all the competition between Android and iOS has been great. I don't know how things would have turned out if the iPod and iPhone didn't come out, but I don't think things would have been as good yet. We'd still be getting tech focused devices rather than experience focused. Don't get me wrong, I love customisation and still prefer Linux to OSX for example, but I lean towards the Mint end of the scale than Gentoo and all that. I used Ubuntu until they Unified it..

He was great at directing design as well as being a CEO. Even if he was copying a lot of the time, he's still the one that put this stuff into the mainstream, and ensured that everything was done to a pretty good standard.

Re:One Year Later (3, Insightful)

Nerdfest (867930) | about 2 years ago | (#41557833)

I'm not happy with how things are going because of him and Apple. It seems to now be considered acceptable to lock down personal computing devices as if they were game consoles. Look at the next version of Windows ... you must go through Microsoft to but something in their 'Modern interface'. No sideloading on windows phone I believe? How long do you think it will be before OS X is the same? I think the only thing stopping Microsoft from locking the whole OS right now is the legal implications.
 
I've said it before; people have fough long and hard to break free of the iron grip IBM had on computing in the 70's and 80's, and after than from the walled garden of AOL. People realized the dim future of being locked in. Now, they seem to be sprinting towards it. At some point, people will likely realize that they want their freedom back, but I think the golden handcuffs will have to get a bit tighter.

Re:One Year Later (1)

somersault (912633) | about 2 years ago | (#41557943)

Windows on the desktop is becoming more irrelevant, and Windows Phone have been irrelevant for a long time. Let MS continue to strangle themselves if they will. It's just another plus to me.

I don't really see people accepting lock-in of the type you describe on the desktop. It's not really a big limiting factor on phones, but a lot of people use Android anyway, and I'm seeing a lot more anti-iPhone sentiment online these days (in memes and funny pictures made by people who are obviously just as stupid as people who choose to use iOS).

Anyway, I think there will always be options for those of us that don't want lock-in. For those that don't really care, at least they are less likely to have their machines infected. I think that's a big positive too.

Re:One Year Later (2)

awyeah (70462) | about 2 years ago | (#41558133)

It seems to now be considered acceptable to lock down personal computing devices as if they were game consoles.

I've got a Mac and an iPhone. I'll agree with you on the iPhone side. My iPhone is "locked down" in the sense that without rooting it, I can only install curated applications... although so far, I haven't found something I want to do that I can't.

But I disagree with you on the Mac. I've been using PCs since the early 90s. I use Linux (and occasionally Windows) at work. I bought my first Mac this year. In no way is it locked down any more or less than any of my Windows, Linux, or FreeBSD boxes. In fact, because I can very easily compile and install just about any *nix application on it, I feel like it's more open than my Windows box ever was.

It truly is great to have a fantastic GUI OS, while at the same time being able to drop to a terminal and use the standard suite of UNIX tools when I want.

Execution (3, Interesting)

sjbe (173966) | about 2 years ago | (#41557981)

He was great at directing design as well as being a CEO. Even if he was copying a lot of the time, he's still the one that put this stuff into the mainstream, and ensured that everything was done to a pretty good standard.

Running a successful business isn't always about being genuinely unique. Most of it is execution which is something successful companies are really good at. For an example look at Coca-Cola. Nothing particularly unique these days about a cola soft drink, and Coke was by no means the first fizzy sugary drink, but they execute the details of their business brilliantly. In some ways Apple is the same. They rarely are first with any single component of their products but when Apple has been successful they have executed the entire product better than pretty much anyone else. The whole becomes something more than the parts. The iDevices weren't the first of their kind but each of them was the the first to get the whole package (for lack of a better term) "correct" in a way that the public found appealing. The iPhone redefined the smartphone market in much the same way that Tolkien redefined the fantasy novel genre. Every successful smartphone since clearly has cribbed some of its DNA from the design of the iPhone. Whether you like Apple or not, one has to admit that Apple has executed their business model extremely well and with great discipline for the last decade or so and they have the financial results to show for their efforts.

Re:One Year Later (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41557741)

I think the GPs question though is what did he DO.

He certainly didn't design any of those devices, Jonathan Ive and his team did.

The problem with Jobs is that it's hard to tell if it was really all him, or if his prescence at Apple was merely coincidental with some great staff being the ones who really deserve the credit - i.e. Ive.

Re:One Year Later (0)

somersault (912633) | about 2 years ago | (#41557819)

Well, he's the one that brought in the Unix base for their OSes. Then even if he didn't design anything in the software or hardware himself, he's the one that chose the good designs and tossed out the ideas he didn't like. He had decent taste at least.

Thinking back to the Mac OS days in the 80s and early 90s, Macs were nicer looking and often nicer to use than Windows, Amiga Workbench, Acorns, Ataris, etc. At least some of that must have been Steve himself.

Re:One Year Later (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41557695)

What did he really do, other than be a CEO?

All firms have a CEO. This is not enough apparently...

Re:One Year Later (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41557709)

While Steve may not have been the engineer that Woz is he certainly was more than a CEO. He influenced concepts on design and human interface. If you don't think that's big than you're a fool. How a person interacts with a technology is just as important as the technology itself. I think we'd be in a better environment if more developers had a real appreciation of that.

Did they patent the casket design? (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41557557)

Just curious how much apple is getting on royalties for caskets with rounded corners.

Re:Did they patent the casket design? (1)

kthreadd (1558445) | about 2 years ago | (#41557875)

Nothing.

rip stebe (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41557569)

timb is fucking up my ios. rip. rip.

Kiss his dead ass, why don't you. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41557583)

I love how assholes who manage to scam the public with glossy covers on basic crap are 'complicated'. What a crock! Jobs was a first rate con-man, hack and total jack-ass. He could sweet-talk an audience and tell them just what they wanted to hear, but in private he would rip your head off and shit down your neck if it was even possible you were an underling in his world.
Steve Jobs is dead and buried and good riddance. One ass-hat down, a billion or so to go.

Re:Kiss his dead ass, why don't you. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41557611)

One ass-hat down, a billion or so to go.

Hopefully you're next

Just a theory (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41557615)

But I think he is some kind of statis on his way to LV-223 to tell his creators about how shitty their liver designs are.

If you don't care about people (4, Insightful)

davide marney (231845) | about 2 years ago | (#41557621)

You can get a lot done in this world if you don't care about people and give yourself free reign to push, abuse, over-praise, or cajole them to get where you want them to go. Its too bad you have to be horrible person to bring out the best in people.

Re:If you don't care about people (1)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | about 2 years ago | (#41557845)

You can get a lot done in this world if you don't care about people and give yourself free reign to push, abuse, over-praise, or cajole them to get where you want them to go. Its too bad you have to be horrible person to bring out the best in people.

Who says you have to? There is definitely more than one way to skin a cat here.

Re:If you don't care about people (5, Interesting)

BasilBrush (643681) | about 2 years ago | (#41557849)

I never met, let alone worked for Steve Jobs, but I did have a teacher that outsiders might have described like this:

"But he also spent many pages chronicling the arrogant, cruel behavior of a complicated figure who could inspire people one minute and demean them the next. According to the book, Jobs would often berate employees whose work he didn't like. He was notoriously difficult to please and viewed people and products in black and white terms. They were either brilliant or 'sh-t.'"

(Substituting student for employee, and work for product. And note this was a teacher of adults, not children.)

The outsider would be wrong in thinking that the teacher didn't care about his students - he wanted the best for them. It's that he taught Via Negativa, a pedagogical technique more common in continental Europe. That the way to get people to produce the best, original work is to heavily criticise that which is not good or average or unoriginal. Those without talent will fall by the wayside, but those with talent end up producing their best work.

Those who have never experienced it, or who fell by the wayside, won't understand the rewards of working under this technique. But the proof is in the results.

Re:If you don't care about people (1)

Rogerborg (306625) | about 2 years ago | (#41557967)

Well, you know what They say: those who can, do.

Jobs also only had one talent that I could see: saying "No". Apple employed some brilliant people, and Jobs shitcanned the ones who weren't up to scratch.

As They also say, it takes a dictator to make the trains run on time. <Godwinned>

Re:If you don't care about people (2)

BasilBrush (643681) | about 2 years ago | (#41558025)

Well, you know what They say: those who can, do.

And what the saying misses out on is that teaching *IS* doing. Teaching is a skill that requires talent. There are good, bad and exceptional teachers. The same goes for leadership.

Re:If you don't care about people (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41558093)

Jobs also only had one talent that I could see: saying "No". Apple employed some brilliant people, and Jobs shitcanned the ones who weren't up to scratch.

I think his bigger talent was in saying "Yes". Recognizing the really good ideas, refining and promoting them.

That's what's missing in so many other companies. At Microsoft, for example, they obviously have a large R&D budget, but continued to promote the same two already successful products (Windows and Office) to the detriment of anything else. Then when the iPhone wow'ed everyone, Ballmer looked for something to get the attention back.

"Do we have people working on this multitouch stuff? There you go. Bam!" Big-ass table.

I'm sure more than 95% of the people know what it is to work in a place where preserving the status-quo is considered good enough by management. Steve Jobs' differentiating characteristic as a manager was a willingness to change the products and the company. An openness to new ideas.

Re:If you don't care about people (3)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | about 2 years ago | (#41558185)

At Microsoft, for example, they obviously have a large R&D budget, but continued to promote the same two already successful products (Windows and Office) to the detriment of anything else.

Really, only Windows and Office? What about this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox [wikipedia.org]

One of the most successful consumer entertainment system out there, and Microsoft is doing it. I will bash Microsoft any day, but to say that their only successful products are Windows and Office is pretty closed-minded.

Re:If you don't care about people (1)

pimp0r (1030222) | about 2 years ago | (#41558043)

I have been on the receiving end of that and I can tell you it is a terrible teaching method. I ended up quitting the class and taking the final exam separately, where I got top marks on my own. Certain few types of people may react well to that method, but everyone else gets to suffer.

How about avoiding a method that has such a high chance of harming students and instead let the motivated ones get on with learning.

Re:If you don't care about people (2)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | about 2 years ago | (#41558073)

the proof is in the results

The results? I have seen whole groups of graduate students run for the hills because their adviser treated them like this. I have seen bright people get so fed up that they give up on a research career and go work in industry. Perfectly capable people can become so demoralized that they forget whatever dreams they had, and turn their attention to getting paid large amounts of money to do boring or destructive work. I call that wasted talent, a result of uncontrolled, dehumanizing elitism that fails to develop a student's skills or abilities.

It is wrong to think that only those who lack talent will fall by the wayside; it is also those who have talent but who are not able to utilize that talent who will be left behind. Sometimes talented people need to be taught how to use their talents, not just berated when they go down the wrong path. I would say that most talented people require that sort of guidance, and that graduate school should be an apprenticeship, something that develops people rather than beating them up.

It is not just about graduate school. One the best undergraduate courses I took was the third year engineering design lab course. I pulled my first all-nighter there, I learned how much caffeine it takes to come to edge of psychosis, and I worked harder than ever before to complete my project. Yet I was proud of what I did, and that course developed my ability as an engineer -- something that no other course before or afterward really did. The instructor for the course did not berate students who were struggling, he met with them, he taught them how to manage an engineering project, and they were able to meet the requirements. When a group missed a deadline, they did not see dismissal or yelling; the instructor would reach out to them and see if they needed help. I was not the only person who came out of that course a better engineer: everyone came out better, regardless of their talents or innate abilities.

Re:If you don't care about people (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41557901)

So working really hard on a stylish phone qualifies as "the best in people" now? Sorry, but just no. I also don't believe that one has to be a callous, abusive jerk to inspire people.

Re:If you don't care about people (2)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | about 2 years ago | (#41557961)

Its too bad you have to be horrible person to bring out the best in people.

It's a good thing that statement is false: you can bring out the best in people without being a horrible person. There is another management style, where a boss works with their employees to develop their skills and help them overcome their weaknesses. You can bring out the best in people without resorting to tyranny:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Miner [wikipedia.org]

Re:If you don't care about people (1)

Trip6 (1184883) | about 2 years ago | (#41557987)

Mod parent up. This is EXACTLY Jobs' MO. All Jobs cared about was providing a positive user experience for the technology-ignorant masses. He fought tirelessly against engineers who worked hard inventing features to throw into products and thus were their champions, whether they added to the user experience or not. Look at all the devices where the engineers have too much control over product design and features - way over engineered and complicated, not designed with the user in mind, and nowhere near the market share of your typical like Apple product. Jobs was the consummate product manager, who typically has no power, but he was also in charge.

Style varies (1)

sjbe (173966) | about 2 years ago | (#41558035)

Its too bad you have to be horrible person to bring out the best in people.

You don't have to be a horrible person though you probably have to be a demanding one. Steve Jobs had a particular style that apparently was effective but it's not hard to find examples of people who have great success without the rough edges. Ghandi is a pretty good example of a guy who by most accounts was a pretty decent person and seemed to get the best of out of people. Being a leader requires you to ask things of people that they may not always want to do. You can persuade, cajole, order, demean, bully, ask, etc. There are many ways to get people to act and usually you need some combination of all of them. You can do things without being a jerk though one has to admit that sometimes being a jerk can be a useful tactic - Steve Jobs being a prime example.

Jobs himself could not be reached for comment (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41557623)

Since we couldn't find the road to Hell with our iPhone 5.

well sometimes customers are dumb (1, Flamebait)

slashmydots (2189826) | about 2 years ago | (#41557691)

I can't believe how misled Apple customers and fanboys are. They just see the device and get obsessed with that "I'm better than all my friends" marketing campaign that Apple pushed for years. Apple propped up their egos and now Steve Jobs in a god apparently.
Back in reality, he was a rude, overcontrolling guy and that showed in his products. They control EVERYTHING like tech nazis and abuse a pretend monopoly whether it exists or not for every product they make. They treat everyone from their customers to their app writers like crap, block out anyone making competing products, control pricing of their products with nonstop threats to vendors, etc. They're a terrible company and Steve Jobs is responsible for them operating that way. Apple fans need to wake up to reality and see that and STOP BUYING APPLE PRODUCTS!

Re:well sometimes customers are dumb (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41557789)

They control EVERYTHING like tech nazis and abuse a pretend monopoly whether it exists or not for every product they make. They treat everyone from their customers to their app writers like crap, block out anyone making competing products, control pricing of their products with nonstop threats to vendors, etc.

Apart from your partisan ranting, sounds a lot like MS

Re:well sometimes customers are dumb (5, Insightful)

geogob (569250) | about 2 years ago | (#41557811)

These kinds of comments make me sad. Obviously, the apple product have no appeal for you. You fail to see the interest in them, which is ok. But you also fail to understand others might have other views, other needs, other interests and different values. You fail to see that you fail to see. You believe your view is the only view; a sort of anti-fanboy.

Although you are correct on many points - and I would understand anyone saying "these products are not for me" based on these points - you wave a positions as bad, if not worse, than those "fanboy" you cry about. You have the right to your view. But believing a large consumer group is misled based on your personal view is so arrogant. It makes me sad.

Re:well sometimes customers are dumb (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41558173)

Shut up faggot.

Re:well sometimes customers are dumb (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41557815)

You have a very warped view... try actually looking up the lawsuit history of various companies, including Nokia, Motorola, Samsung, or even Microsoft. Try Cisco. See Apple actions within historical context. You have no idea what abuse or control is like if you didn't really understand Microsoft in the 1990's. You can't have a "pretend" monopoly if you have far, far less than 50% of the market. You might not like that Apple's products tend to drive the industry of late, but that isn't due to legal or monopolistic reasons, but rather, they're ability to take technology and deliver it in ways that delight customers more often than other tech companies.

As for control, the customers want a curated app store. So many kids use iPod Touch and iPhone products. Yes, there are issues of balance and policies. Are you as pissed at Microsoft, Sony, or Nintendo for their far more draconian console environments?

Re:well sometimes customers are dumb (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41557817)

sorry that you're a poor

Re:well sometimes customers are dumb (2, Funny)

MysteriousPreacher (702266) | about 2 years ago | (#41557929)

I know you're a bit angry and all, but I wanted to clarify something. What is a pretend monopoly, and how would one go about abusing a non-existent pretend monopoly.

Also, if you were to describe how long its been since you had sex with a human, would we be talking days, weeks, months, years or n/a?

Pointless article but... (-1)

rolfwind (528248) | about 2 years ago | (#41557725)

The legacy of Steve Jobs will be simple.

The PC and Bill Gates will be remembered for making the computer cheap enough to turn the masses into geeks. (And of course, Bill's massive generosity.)

Steve Jobs will be remembered for making the computer, the MP3 player, and smartphone mainstream friendly and fashionable enough that it was no longer geeky to have a digital lifestyle - that alone massively growing the industry and driving mobile computing innovation (for instance, ARM chips being a lot more advanced now than it would have been absent these fashion trends). He'll also be known for dragging exterior computer design out of the hands of penny pinching accountants and out of the boxy era of the 8-bit Nintendo controller. While he wasn't first for industrial design in electronic gadgets, the computing realm and the gadgets around it always seemed particularly resistant to mainstream reform - relegating any company that did otherwise to the cost and exclusivity of a Bang & Olufsen with little impact on the average person.

Without Apple, we very well still have floppy drives and serial connectors on our notebooks. Hell, a lot of them still pretty much look like the plastic pieces of shit from the 90s but things have improved.

Re:Pointless article but... (1, Insightful)

Vintermann (400722) | about 2 years ago | (#41557853)

This comment is a good illustration of people's high opinion about Jobs.

But no, we would absolutely not have floppy drives or serial connectors. And we would still have touchscreen UIs. And rounded corners.

Re:Pointless article but... (-1, Flamebait)

Karlt1 (231423) | about 2 years ago | (#41557909)

Right, because the Android devices that were prototyped before the iPhone was introduced didn't look like Blackberry knockoffs.

Re:Pointless article but... (1, Insightful)

rolfwind (528248) | about 2 years ago | (#41558009)

But no, we would absolutely not have floppy drives or serial connectors. And we would still have touchscreen UIs. And rounded corners.

You say the first part but can you prove it? I remember the uproar when Apple came out with a computer without a floppy drive. Was it the original iMac? Anyway, from what I recall, Apple introducing the usb port coincided with them withholding the floppy.

The main complaint from people here, while acknowledging that it was absolutely past it's time in terms of data storage, was about the all powerful emergency boot disk. A lot of equipment still such as industrial robots or things like music synthesizers still use this. There was no USB drives around at the time and it was one of those circular problems - we can't get rid of the floppy because of this need, we don't want to spend time making another way to fulfill this need since the ubiquitous floppy fulfills it. When I looked just, like, 5 years ago, serial ports were still on a lot of the notebooks. Not so anymore. And the parallel port also had a particularly long life on desktops - way past it's prime.

That was the nature of the PC industry. It's why Microsoft was backwards compatible to the point of being painful for an extremely long time. It comes down from established user base and was manifested when things like the iPad announcement when a huge percentage of posts here predicted its demise simply because they couldn't see using one, and thus unable to look past themselves, thought it was the same with everyone. The PC industry is rife with examples like that and to an extent the tail wags the dog - people sometime don't know what they want until they have it and most companies go by the consumer focus group approach which would have yielded very dissimilar results.

It's works much the same way in the gaming console industry, with Nintendo playing the role of Apple.

Now, while you can point at me and yell Apple fanboi, I think an Apple dominated world would have been disastrous (app store being the norm by the late 90s, total lockdown, anyone?), unless you have some concrete counterargument, I think I can leave now.

Re:Pointless article but... (4, Insightful)

crazyjj (2598719) | about 2 years ago | (#41557873)

The Commodore 64 and Jack Tramiel will be remembered for making the computer cheap enough to turn the masses into geeks.

FTFY

Re:Pointless article but... (1, Troll)

squiggleslash (241428) | about 2 years ago | (#41557989)

Damned right.

Growing up, I never met a single person with an Apple computer in the UK. Even in the US, the Apple II seemed to have occupied the same niche as Britain's BBC Micro - a "respectable" computer for the slightly-to-very wealthy, and agencies like schools answerable to the political elite.

The men who actually worked to get computers into the hands of the masses are people like Tramiel, Bushnell, and Sinclair. The computers that built the revolution were the Commodore 64, Atari X[LE], the Sinclair Spectrum, et al. Those were the machines you'd find if you skydived into a random neighborhood and broke into the first house you saw. Those were the computers we used.

I'm not dissing Jobs here but I think Apple's contribution to the revolution is severely overrated. With the PET coming out within a month of the Apple II, it's obvious there was a drive in the late seventies from multiple corners to create this market. But it's also obvious that without Apple, the revolution would have happened anyway. Without Tramiel, and the console-home computer war, I think it's unlikely the home computer would have made it into enough homes to shift it from an expensive gimmick, into a part of everyone's lives.

Re:Pointless article but... (3, Interesting)

crazyjj (2598719) | about 2 years ago | (#41558055)

There was one kid in my neighborhood who had an Apple. He was the kid with yuppie parents who liked to show off (they were in debt up to their ears with various status symbols). Most everyone else had Commodores. A few had Sinclairs (marketed in the U.S. under Timex [wikipedia.org] ) and Atari 400's and 800's.

The PC's and Apples back then ran in the $1,500 - $2,000 range (that would be probably $5,000-$6,000 in today's dollars). They were way outside the reach of the working class. The real computers for the masses were the ones in the $200-$800 range.

Re:Pointless article but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41557923)

Intel has done far more to push outdated technologies out the door that Apple ever has.... albeit so you have to buy the next thing... but still it wasn't apple

Re:Pointless article but... (1)

kthreadd (1558445) | about 2 years ago | (#41557937)

Yes he did a lot of things, but personally I've always been much more interested in what he did at NeXT. In some ways, after his return to Apple I would say that the old Apple died and was replaced by a rebranded NeXT.

This for example is pure gold to watch:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qb7foG1rtlA [youtube.com]

It's from the late 80's and describe the process used to build the logic board in a NeXT workstation. From what I understand this is something that involved Steve Jobs much more than for example iPod. After he returned to Apple the number of people around him increased so much that it's not really that simple to say that he made the MP3 player mainstream. His team did that, and he was a big part of it but very little of what he did at Apple was something that came entirely from him.

Re:Pointless article but... (1)

JDG1980 (2438906) | about 2 years ago | (#41558061)

Without Apple, we very well still have floppy drives and serial connectors on our notebooks.

Floppy drives were already dying; due to their stagnant capacity of 1.44mb, very few people used them for actual data storage by the turn of the century. By the time Apple removed them, their function had been reduced to emergency booting (and, on Windows, loading SATA/SCSI/RAID drivers on install). The advent of cheap CD-R drives, combined with the ability to boot the system directly from a CD, made the floppy drive unnecessary on PCs as well, and thus it was gradually removed.

As for serial ports, Apple didn't remove them much earlier than most mainstream PC vendors. Once dial-up lost its popularity, the serial port was no longer needed for external modem support, and the number of serial mice dwindled to the point where the connector became an unnecessary cost.

Regarding Jobs' treatment of employees ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41557735)

It reminds me of those cads who seek the affection of women by peppering them with subtle criticism to manipulate a woman's low self-esteem. It's a tactic employed by the callow, the desperate, and the lazy. Jobs was kind of a turd .

This sentence tells me a lot about Jobs. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41557761)

He was notoriously difficult to please and viewed people and products in black and white terms.

Black and white thinking is the thinking of someone who's in adolescence or an alcoholic.

This explains quite a bit about his personality and his treatment of people.

He may have been a fantastic businessman but he pretty much failed at everything else in his life - especially at things that I think a much more important than consumer gadgets; like being a loving father.

Re:This sentence tells me a lot about Jobs. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41557893)

He was notoriously difficult to please and viewed people and products in black and white terms.

Black and white thinking is the thinking of someone who's in adolescence or an alcoholic.

This explains quite a bit about his personality and his treatment of people.

He may have been a fantastic businessman but he pretty much failed at everything else in his life - especially at things that I think a much more important than consumer gadgets; like being a loving father.

No, it is the thinking of somebody who writes everything that isn't 'great' off as something he/she does not want to peddle to their customers. Steve did not always get it right but he got it right more than most other people about what was an excellent product and what was mediocre or worse. If you want to change the way people use digital devices you have to have that 'black or white' attitude, if you constantly settle for 'gray' solutions you become Dell or Hewlett Packard. Whatever you may think of Steve he did turn the Mobile Phone and to an extent the PC markets on their heads with the iPhone and iPad and if somebody had postulated 15 years ago that Apple was destined to become a major player in music/movie distribution and the manufacture of music players that person would have been laughed out of the room.

Dennis Ritchie? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41557769)

I still remember Dennis Ritchie, not a marketeer who sold stolen things.

Nobody? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41557779)

Really? Nobody has questioned such a broad overstatement of importance? Ever? Anywhere? Seismic impact... please...

We will forget him. (3, Insightful)

Massacrifice (249974) | about 2 years ago | (#41557783)

When Jobs died, he was compared to Edison and Henry Ford and to Disney

These guys became popular because they provided something GOOD AND CHEAP to the masses - light, cars, culture. They weren't elitists, not did they try to create new churches (well maybe Disney). Jobs legacy will not endure as well as Gates, for he was never one to compromise in order to touch everybody. He created his own bubble and died within it. Had he had the clout to push his excellent design antics along with a all-american bargain price, then maybe he would have changed the world in a durable fashion. He just changed computer's GUIs.

Re:We will forget him. (1)

Vintermann (400722) | about 2 years ago | (#41557907)

Henry Ford wasn't an elitist?

The reason Jobs has been compared to those three is that they all had a reputation for being horrible assholes in addition to (arguably) contributing valuable things to humanity. Ford was an honest to God Nazi, Disney was an employee abuser and McCarthyist, and Edison electrocuted animals to smear his opponents' technology.

Really? Nobody? (2, Interesting)

obijuanvaldez (924118) | about 2 years ago | (#41557785)

"Nobody has questioned Jobs' seismic impact on computing and our communication culture"

Challenge accepted.

Did he really change how many people use computers or how much influence those computers have in their lives or did he just change which brand of computer they purchased?

Re:Really? Nobody? (1)

Servaas (1050156) | about 2 years ago | (#41557939)

If you know so little about the road computers and GUI's have taken you really shouldn't be the one to accept challenges like this. Jobs, and the team working for him did change computers and GUI's for the better.

Re:Really? Nobody? (1)

obijuanvaldez (924118) | about 2 years ago | (#41558013)

The point was to question what someone said no one had questioned. If you can't see that your reasoning is already flawed and you really shouldn't be one to throw down another challenge.

BTW, I know quite a bit about the path computing and graphical user interfaces have taken and I still think it is a valid question. Would no one else have continued the work from Xerox PARC? Jobs was not in charge of Apple from 1985 until 1997. Computing and adoption of graphical user interfaces as the norm soared in that time. And I don't think it was due to what he was doing at NeXT.

History doesn't honor the humble. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41557807)

As many have pointed out, Steve Jobs has been in the headlines so often it's almost like he never left. Meanwhile a far more humble man who made a much larger contribution to computing died nearly 12 months ago: Dennis Ritchie.

Move along (4, Interesting)

damaki (997243) | about 2 years ago | (#41557835)

Jobs has been dead for a year and I don't care. His being dead was news, but this is no news and totally uninteresting.
Has any new line of text popped up in his biography? No.

Re:Move along (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41557993)

Thanks for your opinion, which nobody cares about. Please resume your life of irrelevancy and one day history will look back at your legacy and realize that you had no significant accomplishments.

TL;DR: go fuck yourself.

Jobs' abrasiveness at work wasn't the problem (5, Insightful)

crazyjj (2598719) | about 2 years ago | (#41557847)

It was his complete sociopathic disregard for even those in his non-work life that was the problem. This was a guy who tried to deny his daughter's paternity, had an almost pathological hatred of charity (even ending all of Apple's charitable programs when he came back in the 90's), and routinely screwed over even friends and family for money.

His problem wasn't that he was demanding or brutally honest at work. I can respect that. His problem is that he was a complete and total heartless asshole in every aspect of his life. And, if Marley was right, I imagine he's wearing a very ponderous chain indeed right now, made of tons of electronic junk that will be forgotten within a matter of years.

Re:Jobs' abrasiveness at work wasn't the problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41557949)

And, if Marley was right, I imagine he's wearing a very ponderous chain indeed right now, made of tons of electronic junk that will be forgotten within a matter of years.

I envision that on the first day, he was given a golden chain with an iPad on it. On the second day, an iPhone on another goldeen chain. By now he's wearing 4 different models of iMacs.

Re:Jobs' abrasiveness at work wasn't the problem (4, Insightful)

interkin3tic (1469267) | about 2 years ago | (#41558011)

This was a guy who tried to deny his daughter's paternity, had an almost pathological hatred of charity (even ending all of Apple's charitable programs when he came back in the 90's), and routinely screwed over even friends and family for money.

And Henry Ford was an anti-semite, Walt Disney was at least accused of being one too. Edison was a bigger jerk. He even electrocuted an elephant in an effort to spread FUD about the competition. A public legacy often ignores some very glaring faults: society is fairly willing to forgive and forget the details. After all, we're not remembering those people so much as we are remembering what they did for us.

That said, the culture on the internet is more cynical than people are talking around the watercooler. If this discussion right here is any indication, Jobs may have come a little too late for his personal foibles to be similarly forgotten. In fact, thanks to The Oatmeal, there seems to be some going back and adding those negative details into Edison's legacy.

Edison, Ford and Disney eh? (4, Informative)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | about 2 years ago | (#41557897)

Gosh, I happen to like the program QI and Edison I learned from that program was a thief. Jeremy Clackson described Ford as someone about who nothing good could be said with Ford being an outright nazi and Disney is not much better.

If that is supposed to be Jobs GOOD legacy bit, I hate to see what his BAD legacy is going to look like.

The real legacy of these people is now after all that they didn't real do what they did, that what they did had already been done and that their personalities sucked.

Jobs didn't invent the smartphone, he didn't invent the computer and if he had never been, tech would still have happened just with different logo's. There is a lesson in there, humanity is more then just a handful of names. And our advances happened at multiple times in multiple locations, it doesn't depend on ONE person. The one person type people are the ones who like to think in thousand year empires. I actually find it quite comforting that if X didn't introduce the phone, Y would have. I don't need fake heroes to look up to. Jobs was a prick and his legacy will either be that he made such a terror of himself that Apple failed immediately without him OR he made such a terror and when he died Apple did just fine without him.

Either ending, he is still a prick. And what did it all get him? An early grave. If you wonder why I hate him? He sought out alternative medicine at the end, lending credibility to that evil which has seen the death of many.

Re:Edison, Ford and Disney eh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41557991)

"re: He sought out alternative medicine at the end, lending credibility to that evil which has seen the death of many."
WTF has that got anything to do with his work or his legacy - everyone is entitled to do what they want regarding their personal health.

Re:Edison, Ford and Disney eh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41558179)

Well, I would have posted something but since you've said about all I decided to leave just a comment.

I am not the type of person to appreciate only one name; but I do have a (what I think true "good") name that I always remember, and that is James C. Maxwell (I really like what this guy did at his time because he was one of the few physicists of that time who had the mathematical ability to explain electromagnetic interactions the way he did - but nevertheless there were others who stated the principles before him).

I don't know if Jobs really had the ability to design (and/or) implement the things that are attributed to him today (which other actually thought of and implemented before he did).

Edison and Henry Ford and Disney (0)

fitteschleiker (742917) | about 2 years ago | (#41557945)

All cunts...

Comparison is right on target (1)

JDG1980 (2438906) | about 2 years ago | (#41558005)

When Jobs died, he was compared to Edison and Henry Ford and to Disney.

That sounds about right to me. Those guys could be spectacular assholes, too.

Sure Jobs was an a-hole, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41558021)

You'll find that many of the top 0.01% of their fields are total a-holes. Just comes with the territory of being an extremely successful person. Michael Jordan was a total a-hole. Larry Ellison and a few others whose names escape me at the moment.

Scumbag (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41558045)

He was a rich scumbag derelict father. Just that simple selfish act for so many years is enough in my mind to place him in the same class as a drug dealer on the street.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?