Well, isn't it obvious? That once again Apple fans argue that Microsoft stole something from Apple while Apple clearly based their work on Xerox achievements and the whole situation is controversial?
I've seen these discussions a million times now.
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.
Time Magazine Names Steve Jobs Among 20 Most Influential Americans of All Time
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I've seen these discussions a million times now.
A more burning question:
So Albert Einstein having US citizenship for the last 15 years of his life makes him American? I mean I'd be more than thrilled to claim him as one of us, but it seems like they made some stretches to get people on this list, when someone such as Bill Gates could easily be on there.
So Albert Einstein having US citizenship for the last 15 years of his life makes him American? I mean I'd be more than thrilled to claim him as one of us, but it seems like they made some stretches to get people on this list, when someone such as Bill Gates could easily be on there.
Well, the personal computer has been a major technological achievement (perhaps as influential to society as the invention of the printing press) ... you have to give someone the recognition for that ... one could argue who best deserves that recognition ... Gordon Moore for the microprocessor ... Bill Gates for the Operating System ... or Steve Jobs and Wozniak for the personal computer ... pick your poison
Actually I don't need to give credit..
The PC would have evolved with out Woz, Jobs, or Gates the star proves that.
The printing press would be more influential as it spurred on literacy in the world. The PC spurred communication in the same way. I'll leave it to you to decide which is more important.
Dr. Moore, while being an innovator simply took Harvard architecture to it's logical conclusion. Much the same way IBM took Von Neumann to it's logical conclusion.
Because Mr. Jobs would never take a dump on someone right..he was all sweetness and light.
Gordon Moore for the microprocessor ... Bill Gates for the Operating System ... or Steve Jobs and Wozniak for the personal computer ... pick your poison
The first successfully mass marketed personal computer was the Commodore PET.
Apple II was the first successful marketed personal computer with a colour screen.
Let's stick to the facts.
Yeah, but I think a million times is conservative estimate. Apple didn't "clearly" base their work on Xerox. They hardly did at all, in fact. The only thing Xerox actually accomplished was building a proof-of-concept for a GUI-based computer. Neither Xerox nor Apple invented the concept, and nothing Apple did thereafter resembled the work at Xerox in more than the most superficial way. Apple moved the ball far down the field to the point where it made a difference. FWIW, the question of whether Microsoft "stole" ideas from Apple or anyone else isn't very important. The real "sin" against technology committed by Microsoft was taking the 11 years after the release of the Mac to develop a product that advanced the concept not one iota.
George Washington, Martin Luther King Jr, Thomas Edison, E. Hemingway, Thurgood Marshall, Abraham Lincoln, Susan B Anthony, Einstein, John Adams, A.G. Bell, Henry Ford, James Madison, Ben Franklin, Thomas Jefferson... that's about 15 in no specific order.
Jobs in the top 20? Absurd. Any historians on here that could finish that list for me?
/imo
Jobs in the top 20? Absurd. Any historians on here that could finish that list for me?
/imo
Again. This has been discussed a million times over many, many years. There is no point to argue about it again because both sides have strong arguments.
Okay.... that was brilliant. Period. And you owe me a new keyboard because I spit out my water on my desk when I read it.
I am a historian but I wouldn't bother with lists. They are arbitrary by their very nature. I as said above, Time is good at selling books but they are pretty lousy at history.
We can say in hindsight that the PC would have evolved anyway but when you consider IBM had such low confidence in it that they farmed out the PC's two most critical components to upstart new companies (the microprocessor to Intel and the OS to Microsoft) turning both of those companies into major new corporate powerhouses I am not sure how much longer it would have took.
Considering that PC's have fundamentally changed how we work, communicate, and play I would argue they are actually more influencial than the printing press or at least near the same level of importance.
Also, it is human nature to assign great achievements to one person who gets there first or most publically. So just as Gutenberg gets the credit for inventing the printing press (even though the Chinese had printing for 1000 years before that) and Newton gets the credit for discovering Gravity and inventing Calculus, we can assign the PC to someone. Personally I think it should go to all three people - Moore, Gates, and Jobs. As I said these things are always subjective but the transition of the computer from the isolated hobby of a few long hair types to one of the most critical elements of modern society is a great achievement and deserves acknowledgement ... regardless of who we give it to
You seem to have missed the point. This isn't a patent lawsuit we're debating this time—it's about influence, and I was just speculating about who had the greater influence between Bill and Steve. I don't think it's really possible to say who had the greatest influence with any certainty, but what I stated was true… If there was no Steve Jobs, there would be no Apple, hence no Lisa, no Macintosh and no Windows (at least not in the same manner and timeframe, since Windows was really conceived and developed as a response to the Mac). I also went on to say that similar concepts would have arrive in time, and yes, there were of course other people who influenced Steve Jobs and Apple, and other people who influenced them, and so on, and so forth.
Again the question of influence really boils down to this… How different would the world be if a certain person had never existed? It's not an easy question to answer. I don't think anyone would question Albert Einstein's inclusion in the top 100 list, yet who's to say other people wouldn't have soon developed very similar theories had he never existed? Who's to say what might have happened had that butterfly not flapped its wings in the Amazon?
Hm...
While Jobs may or may not be debatable, they put Edison on but not Tesla?!?
FAIL!
http://theoatmeal.com/comics/tesla
While Jobs may or may not be debatable, they put Edison on but not Tesla?!?
FAIL!
http://theoatmeal.com/comics/tesla
I think part of it also has to deal with the fact that, for all his successes, he didn't really capture people's imaginations. They think of him as providing the tools they use for work, whereas they see Jobs as a Willy Wonka of sorts, with showmanship, fun, and joy. Look at Pixar's success to see what I mean. You really feel like Steve Jobs' heart was in everything.
I think it's interesting to see how many discussions seem to gravitate to this debate. It's the big black hole of any discussion involving technology (even remotely). Even more fascinating to me is how a grasp of the basic facts doesn't seem to stand in the way of having a strong opinion about what happened.
Someone's probably already mentioned this, but Einstein? Really? Didn't he live most of his life in Germany?
We can say in hindsight that the PC would have evolved anyway but when you consider IBM had such low confidence in it that they farmed out the PC's two most critical components to upstart new companies (the microprocessor to Intel and the OS to Microsoft) turning both of those companies into major new corporate powerhouses I am not sure how much longer it would have took.
Considering that PC's have fundamentally changed how we work, communicate, and play I would argue they are actually more influencial than the printing press or at least near the same level of importance.
Also, it is human nature to assign great achievements to one person who gets there first or most publically. So just as Gutenberg gets the credit for inventing the printing press (even though the Chinese had printing for 1000 years before that) and Newton gets the credit for discovering Gravity and inventing Calculus, we can assign the PC to someone. Personally I think it should go to all three people - Moore, Gates, and Jobs. As I said these things are always subjective but the transition of the computer from the isolated hobby of a few long hair types to one of the most critical elements of modern society is a great achievement and deserves acknowledgement ... regardless of who we give it to
This is why I don't really want to give credit to any of them...
Remember IBM was not the only manufacturer of computers at that time..I'll point again to the Xerox Alto, and Star..PC's as we know today would have happened..
Agreed. Most statements are very strong, e.g. "Microsoft STOLE from Apple", "Apple BLATENTLY COPIED Xerox in a mercenary way" etc..
Absurd! Many more influential people!
I admire(d) Steve Jobs and agree that he was very influential. But come on! There have been many other people who have had undeniable influences on American economy and culture. Being somewhat ignorant, I'm not even going to be able to come up with all that many really good ones, but they're at least comparable to Steve Jobs. Some examples:
- Albert Einstein (although he was an immigrant)
- Various other scientsts (Murray Gell-Mann, Richard Feynman, etc.)
- Bill Gates
- Ralph Nader
- Frank Lloyd Wright
- James Watson
- Elvis Presley
- Jonas Salk
- Walt Disney
- Alexander Graham Bell
- The Wright Brothers
- Andrew Carnegie
- Henry Ford
- John Rockerfeller
- Thomas Edison
- Martin Luther King Junior
- Weird Al Yankovic (it has been said that an artist knows they've made it if Weird Al makes a parody of one of their songs)
I admire(d) Steve Jobs and agree that he was very influential. But come on! There have been many other people who have had undeniable influences on American economy and culture. Being somewhat ignorant, I'm not even going to be able to come up with all that many really good ones, but they're at least comparable to Steve Jobs. Some examples:
- Albert Einstein (although he was an immigrant)
- Various other scientsts (Murray Gell-Mann, Richard Feynman, etc.)
- Bill Gates
- Ralph Nader
- Frank Lloyd Wright
- James Watson
- Elvis Presley
- Jonas Salk
- Walt Disney
- Alexander Graham Bell
- The Wright Brothers
- Andrew Carnegie
- Henry Ford
- John Rockerfeller
- Thomas Edison
- Martin Luther King Junior
- Weird Al Yankovic (it has been said that an artist knows they've made it if Weird Al makes a parody of one of their songs)
Gotta love stupidity of humans. Thoughts:
Jefferson vilified. But Edison not. Typical. They both belong, though.
Ali? Probably accurate about influence, but god I wish that was wrong. What is wrong with people? If they need an athlete to round things out, why not Jackie? Or Babe?
Jobs? Seems early. Leading the first to really influence a change to GUI/personal computing and leading the first real popular tablet format is certainly influential, I think, but the tablet thing hasn't even fleshed out, yet. Maybe 20 years from now he would belong, we'll see.
We sure have romanticized Sitting Bull.
Louis. I really need to buy some albums.
Ben? Where are you, Ben?
Jefferson vilified. But Edison not. Typical. They both belong, though.
Ali? Probably accurate about influence, but god I wish that was wrong. What is wrong with people? If they need an athlete to round things out, why not Jackie? Or Babe?
Jobs? Seems early. Leading the first to really influence a change to GUI/personal computing and leading the first real popular tablet format is certainly influential, I think, but the tablet thing hasn't even fleshed out, yet. Maybe 20 years from now he would belong, we'll see.
We sure have romanticized Sitting Bull.
Louis. I really need to buy some albums.
Ben? Where are you, Ben?
I think he rightly deserves to be on the list. He was THE reason the computer that Woz built ever made into the stores. Woz wanted to give this stuff away (!) -- at the helm, he transformed computers; Hollywood and the 3D animation part of it with Pixar (which is a huge part of hollywood these days) digital sales of music, movies, books and all manners of digital content; the Apple stores are legendary and are enjoying a growth like no other (including biggest retail sales numbers per square foot); brought to the world the iPod, the iPhone and the iPad, which have sold 410 million thus far, about 45 million just in the last 3 months. Those devices, especially the iPad, have revolutionized those ares far beyond what anyone would've imagined. The iPad is not only a device used to casually read a book, but is used daily in education, sales and the medical fields. Influential? Absolutely. We have just scratched the surface. There is a reason why Apple went from just about bankrupt to the biggest company in the world in 15 years... Steve Jobs. There has been no businessman or tech proponent like him ever. We are certainly in the technology revolution and will be from now on and he is a gigantic reason.
-----------------------------------
By the way...
Ali should be on the Sports List, if they had one. By the way, some are saying here that you have to be dead to be on the list (generally when arguing for Gates' inclusion)... Muhammad Ali is alive.
Lists are so arbitrary anyway that we shouldn't get bent out of shape when someone is included and someone else was overlooked.
-----------------------------------
By the way...
Ali should be on the Sports List, if they had one. By the way, some are saying here that you have to be dead to be on the list (generally when arguing for Gates' inclusion)... Muhammad Ali is alive.
Lists are so arbitrary anyway that we shouldn't get bent out of shape when someone is included and someone else was overlooked.