Steve Jobs Would Have Celebrated His 70th Birthday Today

[iGüey]

Thanks for all, Steve!

 

[akbarali.ch]

The guy who delivered engeneering v1000.0 as v1.0 to consumer.

 

[HazeAndHahmahneez]

RIP. Much respect.

 

[Mr_Ed]

A WSJ article from a few days back said the management top 250 ranking lists Apple first for innovation.

Re-read my post. It wasn’t about whether or not they innovate. It was about the lack of excitement related to it.

 

[I7guy]

Re-read my post. It wasn’t about whether or not they innovate. It was about the lack of excitement related to it.

Whether you feel “excited” or not for apples products is not relevant to that apple gets ranked very highly is my overarching point.

In other words, your subjective view is overridden by a prestigious ranking.

 

[Mr_Ed]

Whether you feel “excited” or not for apples products is not relevant to that apple gets ranked very highly is my overarching point.

In other words, your subjective view is overridden by a prestigious ranking.

That “prestigious” ranking is also subjective. So, we can expect you to stop posting your opinions here in MR forums as well very soon, since you clearly think doing so is inappropriate?

Nice try, though.

 

[I7guy]

That “prestigious” ranking is also subjective. So, we can expect you to stop posting your opinions here in MR forums as well very soon, since you clearly think doing so is inappropriate?

Nice try, though.

You can certainly have your opinion about Apple and given your opinion you vote with your $$$ accordingly.

But if it is said that Apple isnt innovative, there is more to it than an MR posters opinion. I take the opinion of a prestigious institution above an anonymous MR posters any day and all day.

But I do agree ones opinions influence their wallet.

And Apple has been awarded various accolades for quite a few years from institutions who have a better track record than the typical MR posters.

But yeah, nice try.

 

[Mr_Ed]

You can certainly have your opinion about Apple and given your opinion you vote with your $$$ accordingly.

I have, and I do.

But if it is said that Apple isnt innovative, there is more to it than an MR posters opinion. I take the opinion of a prestigious institution above an anonymous MR posters any day and all day.


But I do agree ones opinions influence their wallet.

And Apple has been awarded various accolades for quite a few years from institutions who have a better track record than the typical MR posters.

Except, and once again, I did not say Apple does not innovate. I said that I and others don't feel any excitement about their "innovations", which we very much used to in years past.

Our opinions on this clearly differ, but anyone participating in this forum knows that you often can't simply let an opinion different that yours be published here unchallenged. And as illustrated in this particular instance, you have no problem passing along inaccurate or irrelevant information to try to discredit a dissenting opinion.

The WSJ "Management Top 250" list, which Apple does top this year, is a ranking based on The Drucker Institute's list of America's Best Managed Companies.

Those rankings are based on a core set of principles, one of which is labeled "Innovation" (Apple is indeed ranked #1 for this principle).

The rub is that their definition has virtually NOTHING to do with how we, the end-users/consumers, perceive their "innovations." From Drucker Institute's page:

Innovation

• “Every institution…must build into its day-to-day management four entrepreneurial activities that run in parallel:
  
  1. organized abandonment of products, services, processes, markets…that are no longer an optimal allocation of resources;
  2. systematic, continuing improvement;
  3. systematic and continuous exploitation…of its successes;
  4. systematic innovation, that is, create the different tomorrow that makes obsolete and, to a large extent, replaces even the most successful products of today.”

If you care to further look into it, you'll find that out of the 11 data sources used to rank "Innovation", only one relates to "customers" and it is a composite of customers' perception of usefulness, quality, simplicity, coolness, uniqueness, variety and competence.

In other words, even if we ignore the fact that opinions of all stripes are part and parcel of any public forum, citing an utterly irrelevant ranking and passing it off as a factual rebuke of an opinion you don't share is just not a good look if you want to be taken seriously.

Opinions are not a "zero-sum game." Both, the fact that some of us don't find what Apple has been putting out lately exciting, and that Apple can be ranked #1 in innovation (by their definition) by a well know publication, can be true, and indeed they are.

But yeah, nice try.

Indeed.

 

[I7guy]

I have, and I do.

As you should.

Except, and once again, I did not say Apple does not innovate. I said that I and others don't feel any excitement about their "innovations", which we very much used to in years past.

Our opinions on this clearly differ, but anyone participating in this forum knows that you often can't simply let an opinion different that yours be published here unchallenged. And as illustrated in this particular instance, you have no problem passing along inaccurate or irrelevant information to try to discredit a dissenting opinion.

The WSJ "Management Top 250" list, which Apple does top this year, is a ranking based on The Drucker Institute's list of America's Best Managed Companies.

Those rankings are based on a core set of principles, one of which is labeled "Innovation" (Apple is indeed ranked #1 for this principle).

The rub is that their definition has virtually NOTHING to do with how we, the end-users/consumers, perceive their "innovations." From Drucker Institute's page:

Innovation

• “Every institution…must build into its day-to-day management four entrepreneurial activities that run in parallel:
  
  1. organized abandonment of products, services, processes, markets…that are no longer an optimal allocation of resources;
  2. systematic, continuing improvement;
  3. systematic and continuous exploitation…of its successes;
  4. systematic innovation, that is, create the different tomorrow that makes obsolete and, to a large extent, replaces even the most successful products of today.”

If you care to further look into it, you'll find that out of the 11 data sources used to rank "Innovation", only one relates to "customers" and it is a composite of customers' perception of usefulness, quality, simplicity, coolness, uniqueness, variety and competence.

In other words, even if we ignore the fact that opinions of all stripes are part and parcel of any public forum, citing an utterly irrelevant ranking and passing it off as a factual rebuke of an opinion you don't share is just not a good look if you want to be taken seriously.

Opinions are not a "zero-sum game." Both, the fact that some of us don't find what Apple has been putting out lately exciting, and that Apple can be ranked #1 in innovation (by their definition) by a well know publication, can be true, and indeed they are

Thanks for clarifying that excitement is subjective and annuseless measurement while innovation is measurable and has a purpose.

Innovation is the driving purpose as to why apple is successful. Apple doesnt come out and say it’s innovative but their products and services reek of it; even though many MR posters seem to think otherwise.

This prestigious firm that understands that innovation benefits customers. Customer do not have to know one whit about innovation. But companies have to have a culture of innovation.

Excitement is fleeting and doesn’t count for anything which is why I wanted to expand on the thought. I’m glad you went through the website and found out this is legit unlike many MR posters opinions.

Indeed.

Yep.