Slashdot Mirror
Steve Jobs And Jeff Bezos Meet The Segway
deadwood writes "Ever wanted to know what Steve Jobs and Jeff Bezos really thought about the Segway the first time he saw it? At the Harvard Business School site, there's an excerpt from the new book 'Code Name Ginger', giving a recounting of the Apple and Amazon bosses' first impressions of the device. Steve Jobs' gut reaction, quoted in the article: 'I think it sucks!'"
you probably saw this
http://www.gothamist.com/archive/002674.php
Disco Stu was talkin' to you.
Not the idea itself.
Stepping onto the Segway with it off is no difficult feat. It has two modes, only one of which will balance you. If you want to give it to somebody, you put it into the non-balance mode (Power Assist Mode). If you put your foot on the platform and push it upright, it'll come on, and you step on it, and off you go.
However, if you wait too long, it'll shut off, and when you step up, it won't turn on and you fall on your face. That's almost certainly what happened. (It's happened to me)
-twb
Not really. IBM's chipmaking prowess has akways been good and Motorola is kind of thrusting itself into DSP/cell phone jazz. Apple asked the industry for a new chip and IBM had the best on the table. I don't call that "bailing out" -- I call it taking products over relationships. The kind of thing I wish more industries would do...might see fewer MS tendrils...
Hey freaks: now you're ju
i don't get paid anything, i don't work with or for segway in any way (read my site) i'm just someone who bought a segway and writes about my experiences with it.
it does seem i'm the only person who has a segway that reads slashot and is willing to post (and get all sorts of nasty comments and insults). have at it.
>>> "Heh. Yeah, and Apple has what percent of market share?"
You can't visit a popular technology-oriented discussion board these days without hearing the oft-misconceived phrase, "Apple has 5% of the market and Windows has 95%.
There are two things wrong with this statement, the first being that if Apple has five, Windows must have 95. We as users of alternative operating systems know this not to be the case. Of course, a considerable number of desktop PCs do not bear the Windows logo.
The second problem is the implication that "market-share" can be used interchangeably with "installed-base." When most people use the word "market-share", what they really mean is "installed-base."
For example, while Apple's Macintosh market-share may be 3 percent, its installed-base is approximately 10 to 12 percent of the computing industry, a figure that's roughly similar to that of Linux based PCs.
When these figures are coupled with the remaining alternative operating systems on the market, Windows installed-base works out to be somewhere in the way of 80 percent -- a far cry from the 95 figure that is often touted.
So how does market-share play into the picture you ask?
Market-share is determined by quarterly or annual sales figures. The problem with market-share statistics is that it implies that all computers retain the same level of usability over time. It assumes that once a computer is sold, it will retain its productivity status for as long as its parts continue to function.
Unfortunately, usability statistics and replacement purchasing habits of consumers vary significantly between platforms thus causing the market-share figure to look skewed.
Linux users (for example) are known to keep aging computer hardware useful long after it was left for dead by its former Windows using owner. The open source community consistently manages to squeeze every last ounce of processing power from even the most aged hardware available.
Similarly, Mac users are known to keep their computers as primary productivity tools until the gears fall off. This is really a testament to the quality that Apple incorporated into its hardware and software over the years.
Unfortunately, the incorporation of quality into these platform's coding efforts will only fuel the notion that they are far less popular as what they are as long as market-share is the most commonly used gauge to determine platform popularity.
Because the Linux operating system's distribution model isn't tied directly to sales, it will never get a truly accurate gauge as long as market-share is touted over installed-base.
Apple on the other hand, may be in a better situation for the foreseeable future.
As we all know, the troubled economy has caused desktop PC purchases to fall to an all time low. This fact may actually work to Apple's advantage.
Everything Apple has been working toward pivots on the release of OS X running on next generation hardware.
Apple is scheduled to release next generation professional hardware in the coming weeks. The release of this hardware, when coupled with Apple's Panther operating system starts the completion of Steve Jobs' rebuilding of Apple.
It's this combination, which the computer using populace has been waiting for, many of which have said that they've been holding back their computer purchases for Apple to get the time table right.
This sudden sales windfall will occur in parallel with the PC industry's slow sales rate, which means that as long as the semi-misleading market-share statistic continues to be touted; Apple's percentage will likely jump from its current 3 percent status to double-digit growth, (somewhere in the 12 percent range) in as few as 6-9 months.
Remember, marketshare for any given company is calculated in relation to the sales of its competators. This will cause Apple's market share to make an even larger spike considering the fact that each individual PC manufacturer's sales wont be there to counter Apple's.
Of course, if the technology spinmeisters try to turn the table and tout installed-base (as they should have all along), Apple's current 12 percent status is covered there too.
It's a great book!
The Hollywood summary would go something like: "Soul of a New Machine" meets "Citizen Kane".
I read an advanced reader copy and really enjoyed it. Much more than I expected. Before I read the Introduction I was in eye-rolling mode "Another paeon to Dean Kamen". Fortunatly it isn't. It shows his good traits and his weakeness.
It is an intereting view of how an engineering team moves from a good idea to research project to production mode. And how a smart, guy with vision can get in the way of this.
Dean Kamen comes off as a rather souless, monomanical patriach with a serious control issue. I would have like to have heard more about him out of work hours.
Steve Jobs (and Bezos and Doerr) all make interesting cameo apperances. The "shit your pants" meeting in the excerpt is the most hilarious part of the book.
Steve Kemper is a good writer and an interesting speaker too.
Strongly recommended.
Steve Jobs heard about the work going on at PARC and offered 100 000 Apple shares in exchange for a demonstration of their work. Some of the PARC people (notably Adele Goldberg) were very unhappy to show Apple what they were doing, but Xerox said 'do it.'
They did it.
Jobs saw the Smalltalk environment, the mouse, pop-up windows, pull-down menus and the rest. So yes, he saw the inspiration for Macintosh windowing, but the Mac interface and the Xerox interfaces are different beasts entirely.
Oh and Xerox did very nicely out of those shares.
Best wishes,
Mike.
Actually, Jobs LOVED it and begged to be involved in the project. The "it sucks" quote came after he had been familiar with the device for months, and was referring specifically to the aesthetic design of the latest version that the team was working on, not the Segway in general.