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 Ponders His Legacy In Never-Before-Seen 1994 Video
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
But these museums are for tech fans. Majority of people holding a mobile phone won't know anything about Steve's contribution or origins of Apple.
Like there're museums showing the history of vessels, but do we, not vessel fans, know without Googling who invented and built the first steamer? Do we appreciate the inventors of electric engines/cars when we take a ride on a subway train? Do we know their names? Can we say when was the very first ride or how this original train looked exactly? Will we even consider it as important inventions 500 years later when we will make daily flights to other planets? Most people will never know such things neither ask themselves those questions. They'll just use the current technology and take it for granted. But at the same time most people can and will appreciate the architect who built Sacre Coeur or Eiffel Tower. Simply by passing by or seeing a picture of a beautiful building. Even if they don't know the name of the architect a lot of people 500 years later still can see, enjoy his creation and think "yes, that guy was a genius".
So in the global sense in technology field it's true that after years "no one will see your sediment."
But Steve was a great guy, he created fantastic products and he will be remembered by many (albeit not most) of Apple users for a long time if Apple will follow his vision and build new life changing things upon his foundation.
He may not have been the nicest human being to be around but he had a gift. And there has yet to be an interview with him that does not fascinate.
I think the important thing is the company. Not what it used to make, but whether it still making exciting stuff that people want to buy. In 50 or 100 years time, I suspect that this era will be known for PCs, Windows, Mice with only a few people being aware of distinctions between Apple, Windows or Gem. In the same way that people in general aren't very interested in the original IBM tabulating machines or whatever happened to Digital.
And very few people will be displaying Apple Lisas as objets d'art in the corner of their living room.
But, if Apple are still around and significant in 100 years time and still retaining their values. Then, that surely is the kind of legacy that Steve would have wanted.
And very few people will be displaying Apple Lisas as objets d'art in the corner of their living room.
But, if Apple are still around and significant in 100 years time and still retaining their values. Then, that surely is the kind of legacy that Steve would have wanted.
Equally so the work any engineer does on computer technology is already standing on the shoulders of thousands of years of people who spent their lives working out bits and pieces of the math, philosophy, science, art that goes into any computer. When you hold an iPhone you're holding the culmination of culture that extends back to the mists of time. When you think of it that way you're getting all these devices at an incredible bargain. You're simply not paying for most of the zillions of person hours that culminate in this device.
The Smithsonian National Museum of American History is for tech fans? I thought it was for people who liked history. My mistake.
I very much doubt that. There are people who enjoy museums, to learn about our past. I enjoy seeing the really old like greek statues, egyptian mummies, and dinosaur bones, but I also really enjoy more modern history like Alexander Graham Bell's phone or equipment and the first 'modern' board games like the history of Monopoly. No matter what subject, there will be history museums for it, and Steve Jobs will be remembered there as a part of that history, along with countless others.
'Don't stand the test of time?' what baloney is that? Did egyptian mummies not stand the 'test of time', in that we don't bury people that way anymore, thus we should discount all that and not show them in history? What in the world are you saying?
The Mac, the original iPhone, and the original iPad will definitely be in history museums along with pictures of Steve Jobs. That's a given. No Samsung anything will be in museums yet, nothing is unique enough.
Just like the 'Ford Model T' was not the first car, it's given the prime real estate in history museums because it was the first popular car for the masses, and really started the automobile generation. This is exactly what the iPhone and iPad did for their genres. 'Windows' is the Model T of the computer field, not the Mac.
Last edited:
I'm just proud to be one of the "rare geologists" he refers to.
(The rest of this post is not directed toward TMar, but to the naysayers
Yes, there are people who will appreciate his works for a long time, but they will be the exception, not the rule. If you cover up the "Apple" branding on an Apple II, and show it to a random iPhone+Mac user now, they won't have a clue what it is. Same with the original Macintosh. Very possibly even the original gumdrop iMac. Show it to someone who only has an iDevice, no Mac? Even less likely.
And don't say "but everyone I know..." You're someone who comes to MacRumors, you are automatically an outlier, and very likely your friends and family are at least influenced by you as well.
No, Steve won't be remembered for a particular product. He'll be remembered for his process and progress. The Apple 1, original Macintosh, G3's, G4's G5's, OSX 10.1,2,3,4
original iPod, etc
. These are obsolete.
But those innovations led to entirely different paths for technology. Henry Ford didn't invent the automobile. He just created a cost efficient way to get it in the hands of the common person. iPod, iTunes, iPhone, iMac, iPad all turned the direction of the marketplace - in fact, they invented new markets that didn't exist before! I'm waiting for the next "new marketplace" to be developed by Apple, but I'm not optimistic. The new Mac Pro is not "innovative". It's a good tool, but it's just existing tech in a new package.
Innovation happens when you create something that didn't exist before. That's what Steve did. That was his vision. Like Henry Ford, Steve didn't invent the Apple I, MP3 players, Cell Phones or Tablets. He made them truly functional. He made us say "Oh, THAT's why I need it " That's what he'll be remembered for.
But those innovations led to entirely different paths for technology. Henry Ford didn't invent the automobile. He just created a cost efficient way to get it in the hands of the common person. iPod, iTunes, iPhone, iMac, iPad all turned the direction of the marketplace - in fact, they invented new markets that didn't exist before! I'm waiting for the next "new marketplace" to be developed by Apple, but I'm not optimistic. The new Mac Pro is not "innovative". It's a good tool, but it's just existing tech in a new package.
Innovation happens when you create something that didn't exist before. That's what Steve did. That was his vision. Like Henry Ford, Steve didn't invent the Apple I, MP3 players, Cell Phones or Tablets. He made them truly functional. He made us say "Oh, THAT's why I need it " That's what he'll be remembered for.
I also see a man who was removed from Apple, trying to distance himself from a then nearly bankrupt company, and determined to sell the Next to the world by trying to convince us that the Mac is not only obsolete but irrelevant.
Last edited:
I'm not sure what you mean by "most people". People who were not born or old enough to be aware of much aren't going to remember things. I was working at the time, and the first Mac made an immediate impact. I certainly think most professional people of the time who would have been PC users were aware of it; and if aware of it then, would certainly remember it, as it was unique, highly-publicized and iconic. Now, many people thought it was a "toy" vs. stock IBM PCs running DOS, but that's a different issue.
re: relevance
You also have to pick the correct examples, to find Apple products that WERE relevant in people's daily lives.
For example, the original Apple 1? A very poor choice from the standpoint that most people never used one, or remember it. It was, after all, the FIRST home computer -- solid at a time when most people had no idea what one did or why they'd want to own it.
However, talk to the average person about the Apple //e (and maybe show them a photo if the name doesn't ring a bell), and you'll often get a reaction of, "Oh, yeah! I used those back in school! Our computer lab was full of those!", or "That's the first computer I ever used in summer camp.... Played Oregon Trail on it all the time in the library."
Another group of people will likely remember the original Macintosh as the computer they first used all the time in college.
Younger generations will likewise have some memories related to more recent models of the iMacs, since those are so commonly found in schools today.
With so many iPhones in use world-wide, it will surely be remembered for decades to come, too -- even if only as nostalgia (similar to the way older people remember the rotary dial phone with a smile, while acknowledging it was a step forward to see it go away).
----------
I might upset a few Apple die-hards out there with this statement, but IMO, the garbage Apple pawned off on the public as "superior computers" in the mid 1990's is what drove me right back to Windows PCs.
When they canned Jobs, the company didn't really have any suitable successors in the wings, able to lead the company forward. Innovation stagnated and the only redeeming value left in the products was based on the things the Jobs era company initially created for them.
NeXT may not have succeeded either, but it wasn't for lack of a quality product. I think ultimately, NeXT only died off because of a very limited market of potentially interested customers who also had the financial ability to buy them. (At that time, most of the people who really "got" the computer revolution and were focused on it were younger kids/teens/twenty-somethings who didn't have a lot of disposable income.)
I recall some guys running a very successful little ISP in the 90's using all old NeXT hardware they purchased used after the hardware was discontinued. It was very reliable gear.
You also have to pick the correct examples, to find Apple products that WERE relevant in people's daily lives.
For example, the original Apple 1? A very poor choice from the standpoint that most people never used one, or remember it. It was, after all, the FIRST home computer -- solid at a time when most people had no idea what one did or why they'd want to own it.
However, talk to the average person about the Apple //e (and maybe show them a photo if the name doesn't ring a bell), and you'll often get a reaction of, "Oh, yeah! I used those back in school! Our computer lab was full of those!", or "That's the first computer I ever used in summer camp.... Played Oregon Trail on it all the time in the library."
Another group of people will likely remember the original Macintosh as the computer they first used all the time in college.
Younger generations will likewise have some memories related to more recent models of the iMacs, since those are so commonly found in schools today.
With so many iPhones in use world-wide, it will surely be remembered for decades to come, too -- even if only as nostalgia (similar to the way older people remember the rotary dial phone with a smile, while acknowledging it was a step forward to see it go away).
----------
I might upset a few Apple die-hards out there with this statement, but IMO, the garbage Apple pawned off on the public as "superior computers" in the mid 1990's is what drove me right back to Windows PCs.
When they canned Jobs, the company didn't really have any suitable successors in the wings, able to lead the company forward. Innovation stagnated and the only redeeming value left in the products was based on the things the Jobs era company initially created for them.
NeXT may not have succeeded either, but it wasn't for lack of a quality product. I think ultimately, NeXT only died off because of a very limited market of potentially interested customers who also had the financial ability to buy them. (At that time, most of the people who really "got" the computer revolution and were focused on it were younger kids/teens/twenty-somethings who didn't have a lot of disposable income.)
I recall some guys running a very successful little ISP in the 90's using all old NeXT hardware they purchased used after the hardware was discontinued. It was very reliable gear.
Thank you for posting this. I appreciated watching the full 15+ minutes, much better than the small snippet presented here. Grabbed it while I could as well
Steve got it wrong
Interesting video, but I think Steve Jobs got it wrong. He is like Henry Ford, the Wright Brothers and others that were the first to create things that everyone uses and will continue to use in one form or another. PEople like them will be known for centuries. I don't think he was giving himself enough credit. It was nice to see his humble side though.
-rich
Interesting video, but I think Steve Jobs got it wrong. He is like Henry Ford, the Wright Brothers and others that were the first to create things that everyone uses and will continue to use in one form or another. PEople like them will be known for centuries. I don't think he was giving himself enough credit. It was nice to see his humble side though.
-rich
Read the rest of my post. Also how many Macs (as showpieces) there're in the large world museums (non tech/computer museums)?
No mistake, but as I've been saying, artifacts placed in museums have changed their frame of reference. They are not are being viewed the same context as when they were current. This is not a small point, as Steve seems to be saying that technological objects effectively disappear after their useful life ends. This is not entirely true. If they are significant, they may well remain, but in an altered frame of reference. What those frames of future reference will be, we can hardly know. That's for the future to decide. Steve didn't know. He was only guessing.
----------
The interview was from 1994, before he returned to Apple. Those were his wilderness years. To me, it's clear he was trying to justify himself, partly by devaluing his contributions to Apple, of which he was no longer a part. I would not mistake this for humility.
Remember the early 1900's?
I'm pretty sure most of us weren't alive in those days. But if I say Ford Model T most of us have at least an idea of what I'm talking about.
The Mac and the iPhone will be remembered. Maybe not forever, but for the next few decades at least.
I'm pretty sure most of us weren't alive in those days. But if I say Ford Model T most of us have at least an idea of what I'm talking about.
The Mac and the iPhone will be remembered. Maybe not forever, but for the next few decades at least.
Living in Australia, I have no idea what the iPhone 1 looks like because it never arrived here. I do remember the first iPhone we ever got however and that will be remembered for a while. I think what Steve is trying to say is, making computers is not the same as painting Mona Lisa.
Who would have though only 10 years later he would be diagnosed with one of the most severe forms of cancer? He passed young, leaving behind loved ones and a legacy in his prime. It hits home for everyone, life is too short and no matter the money, can't be bought. Enjoy it, use all this tech to actually connect to loved ones, not through 1's and 0's, but in person, before it's too late.
I'm sorry to say but Steve misunderstands the renaissance. The artifacts of that era that are remembered are not the products, but outcomes of the patronage of wealthy families.
For example, the Medici's were bankers and textile traders, but we remember them not because their products stood the test of time, but because they used their wealth to expand social pursuits in art, music, science, religion and medicine. They also built some nice palaces.
Now take what Bill Gates is doing with his foundation in education, disease eradication and development and we may indeed be experiencing a new type of renaissance.
For example, the Medici's were bankers and textile traders, but we remember them not because their products stood the test of time, but because they used their wealth to expand social pursuits in art, music, science, religion and medicine. They also built some nice palaces.
Now take what Bill Gates is doing with his foundation in education, disease eradication and development and we may indeed be experiencing a new type of renaissance.