Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
'Steve Jobs' Poised to Become Amazon's Top-Selling Book for 2011
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
haters just gonna hate...
Well, regarding "agendas" you can say the exact same thing for those sitting on the other side of this debate.
You could have said the same thing about Michael Jackson when he died, since he's not a President of a country or some saintly figure, but in the end what difference does that make?! Clearly this person affected millions of people in some positive tangible form or another thus that's mostly why he's getting the current press coverage in the first place.
Also, in case you forgot to check the calendar, Steve Jobs died only two weeks ago and he had a biography scheduled for an early 2012 release** that got bumped up to now since it made more marketing sense to capitalize on book sales based off the natural surge of interest generated by his very recent death. So none of this recent press coverage should be surprising to anyone.
**side thought: maybe SJ thought he was going to pass away sometime early next year hence that original book release date?
Exactly.
Yes, Steve Jobs was a jerk at times, and in general a control freak during the course of his life, but let's give the man some credit where credit is due: he highly encouraged the people that were going to be interviewed for the book to be honest in their assessment of him, pointing out both the good and bad in his personality, and that's something to respect because most people, especially in positions of power and influence, want to be showered with praise and have their faults cleverly covered up with either circumstantial rationalizations or just avoid controversy all together by glossing over the nitty-gritty details of their life. Whereas someone like Steve Jobs is wiling to wear it on his sleeve for all to see. Weak people just don't do that. And for this SJ deserves some credit, despite his obvious flaws.
I simply disagree with this standpoint that licensing the Mac OS earlier on would have helped Apple "own" the market, because that assumes the OS itself wouldn't be watered down as a result of the licensing.
Of course I'm speculating here, but I think part of the consideration to not license it was to minimize any "design by committee" issues that would present itself when trying to make the Mac OS function on other computing platforms. The best way to guard against that, and thus stay true to Steve Jobs vision for the highest user experience, was to avoid licensing. Of course the natural downside to this is that the Mac OS platform is going to cost more to develop and implement at first, but over time this cost comes down, provided the system catches on. If anything that's where I would begin & end giving Bill Gates credit for, he did help make it affordable to get a computer into the average person's home much more than the Macintosh ever did, but the overall quality and satisfaction of actually building and using DOS is another matter.
No doubt about that, and it seems to be working like a charm.
Well, regarding "agendas" you can say the exact same thing for those sitting on the other side of this debate.
You could have said the same thing about Michael Jackson when he died, since he's not a President of a country or some saintly figure, but in the end what difference does that make?! Clearly this person affected millions of people in some positive tangible form or another thus that's mostly why he's getting the current press coverage in the first place.
Also, in case you forgot to check the calendar, Steve Jobs died only two weeks ago and he had a biography scheduled for an early 2012 release** that got bumped up to now since it made more marketing sense to capitalize on book sales based off the natural surge of interest generated by his very recent death. So none of this recent press coverage should be surprising to anyone.
**side thought: maybe SJ thought he was going to pass away sometime early next year hence that original book release date?
Exactly.
Yes, Steve Jobs was a jerk at times, and in general a control freak during the course of his life, but let's give the man some credit where credit is due: he highly encouraged the people that were going to be interviewed for the book to be honest in their assessment of him, pointing out both the good and bad in his personality, and that's something to respect because most people, especially in positions of power and influence, want to be showered with praise and have their faults cleverly covered up with either circumstantial rationalizations or just avoid controversy all together by glossing over the nitty-gritty details of their life. Whereas someone like Steve Jobs is wiling to wear it on his sleeve for all to see. Weak people just don't do that. And for this SJ deserves some credit, despite his obvious flaws.
I simply disagree with this standpoint that licensing the Mac OS earlier on would have helped Apple "own" the market, because that assumes the OS itself wouldn't be watered down as a result of the licensing.
Of course I'm speculating here, but I think part of the consideration to not license it was to minimize any "design by committee" issues that would present itself when trying to make the Mac OS function on other computing platforms. The best way to guard against that, and thus stay true to Steve Jobs vision for the highest user experience, was to avoid licensing. Of course the natural downside to this is that the Mac OS platform is going to cost more to develop and implement at first, but over time this cost comes down, provided the system catches on. If anything that's where I would begin & end giving Bill Gates credit for, he did help make it affordable to get a computer into the average person's home much more than the Macintosh ever did, but the overall quality and satisfaction of actually building and using DOS is another matter.
No doubt about that, and it seems to be working like a charm.
Last edited:
Isn't that the complaint about the Motorola Macs? That licensing nearly killed Apple?
You sound to me like someone who's lived in a hole for three decades, devoid of the ability to assess people, happy to believe nonsense.
When Steve speaks about his rivals, he does so from a position of heightened awareness, unrivaled ability and a very reasonable intolerance of mediocrity.
He's 100% right about Android, the two faced lizard at Google, Microsoft and the clown currently running the latter. But I've been saying these things for years.
I agree with the person you posted. The book was good in the sense that it told thing as is. After reading it, I respect Steve as a business person but learned volumes about his character. He wasn't an ******* - he was a truly bitter person. People should aspire to matching his success but nobody should want to become him. He was a lousy human being.
I realize that it sounds blunt and could be said much better, but after all, it's how Steve would have said things.
Has any president or pope impacted the world as much as Steve Jobs did? Personal computing industry, phone industry, digital music, MP3, tablet PC, etc. We aren't talking one avenue (politics, religion) but conquering multiple avenues.
Careful, I've been accused of blasphemy here....but I took it as a compliment.
Absolutely the former have far more impact on the history of the world.
Presidents and Popes affect worldwide war or peace, the distribution of massive amounts of wealth and jobs, humanitarian attitudes, the freedom of individuals and countries, and indeed the fate of the entire planet.
In comparison, Jobs is a tiny blip. He was a facilitator and salesman of devices that enhanced some people's recreational time and media consumption more than anything else. Millions bought his wares; billions could not.
All those things existed before and without him. His companies did not invent PCs, MP3 players, smartphones or tablets. His fondness was in "reinventing".
Lacking technical skills of his own, he had his employees refine such things into easier to use popular items. He worked very hard to find new ways to make money from them, mostly depending on a walled garden approach and legal attacks to fend off competition.
Top entrepreneur, yes. Presidential-like impact, no.
Kudos to you. Excellent post. I think what you posted should be obvious to most.
I am 20% of the way through the book. Id hate to have worked for the man when success wasn't imminent, why else would you subject yourself to his treatment? I am going to miss the "guarantee" of sorts he offered about the quality of products coming out of Apple just knowing he was working there.
Id love to talk about the book a little more but I don't want to post any spoilers..
Id love to talk about the book a little more but I don't want to post any spoilers..
The problem with this is that you are generalizing the term president and pope. Of course a president in general SHOULD have more impact, but can you name a president in our recent era that had changed the fate of the entire planet as you stated?
What are you typing your message on? A personal computer? An iPad? Apple was the first company to make the personal computer commercially successful. There is a computer in practically every home in every country. What recent presidential action compares to that?
What tablets were popular before the iPad? Who made the public believe it was a necessity?
What did smartphones look like before the iPhone? What do they look like now? Do you know when he first unveiled the iPhone and had to compare it to current smartphones at the time, they all looked like Blackberries with keyboards? And what does every phone resemble now?
Last edited:
First of all - I don't think the OP was setting anyone up - unless you consider someone making a counterpoint to what's "popular" and someone immediately needing to jump on it to prove him wrong.
Obama is pulling troops out of Iraq after 8+ years.
Nixon's relationship building with China (psssss - if he hadn't - where would Apple make all of their products?)
Two "recent" but important world changing events. Which wasn't your original statement. Funny how you made that clarification in this latest post. Because I can throw you a lot more things presidents have done which have changed the world for the better without that comment.
I also think you're confusing important with luxury.
No one NEEDS an iPad. No one NEEDS a smartphone. They are luxury items. #firstworldproblems.
I'm not diminishing Jobs or Apple's contributions - but keep perspective. As you said yourself - "Who made the public believe it was a necessity."
Operative phrase there "made the public believe"
Simply inserted "recent" because I didn't want examples of George Washington and Abraham Lincoln. No conspiracy I swear.
Pulling troops out of war does not have as much impact as bringing home computing to the forefront of the world and changing the entire smartphone industry.
By your example, any leader who wants to bring their soldiers home should have statues built.
I think far too many people "remember" things like this wrong.
----------
Your original statement was "Has any president or pope impacted the world as much as Steve Jobs did?
ANY. not any recent. Maybe not conspiracy - but you just said you didn't want example of George Washington or Abraham Lincoln. Why not? Because it proved your original statement completely false? Convenient.
http://reviews.cnet.com/4321-6452_7-6555456.html
http://reviews.cnet.com/4321-6452_7-6600061.html
Just Google "best smartphones of 2005, 2006, and 2007." In fact ANY year before the iPhone was unveiled.
I think I proved my point.
You havn't proved anything and you have to look at the links you put because there is a number of smartphones there WITHOUT keyboard and that doesn't look like BB.
You have said that ALL the smartphones were like BB and this is false, there were a lot of smartphones without keyboard and touch only.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia_7710
And that's just one.
Also the LG Prada in 2006.
Keep FUD'ing...