Behind a Steve Jobs Keynote

Shree writes "The Guardian has an article about what it takes to prepare that smooth Steve Jobs-style keynote. When Steve launches iPhoto and says 'here we have 5000 or so photos', he actually means here we have 5000 or so carefully picked photos ... " From the article: "Objectively, Apple Computer is a mid-sized company with a tiny share of its primary market. Apple Macintoshes are only rarely seen in corporate environments, and most software companies don't even offer Apple-compatible versions of their products. To put it another way, Apple is just bit larger than Cadbury-Schweppes and about the same size as Nike or Marks and Spencer in terms of annual sales. Such comparisons come up short in trying to describe Apple's place in the world of business, because they leave out a key factor: Steve Jobs."

Comments

Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[jmp_nyc]

The power of Steve Jobs is that he is able to get people to notice what he's doing. Part of that includes his large following of people who hang on his every word. It shouldn't come as a shock to anyone that he works very hard to maintain the effortless appearance of his public persona in order to maintain that following.

Apple makes great products, sometimes jumping into market segments that have other businesses with a head start, makes them slick and easy to use, then markets the hell out of them. The iPod wasn't the first portable mp3 player, but it put the product on the map. If next week's keynote unveils a media-centered Mac Mini with DVR features, it won't be the first such creature (Microsoft's been trying to break into that segment for a while, and Bill Gates just demoed similar features in Vista), but I guarantee that Jobs will unveil products that are much closer to market, and that the proportional effect on Apple's sales will be tremendous...
-JMP

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[wiz31337]

In a highly complicated world with new technology popping up daily, Steve Jobs does a great job at simplifying things to make an outstanding and lasting impression. The image of Apple is depicted perfectly in every one of Jobs' keynotes, down to the last little detail Steve makes sure everything is perfect.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[theStorminMormon]

I've heard a lot of people say that a lot of (presumably other) people hang on Steve Jobs' every word. But somehow I've never met anyone who actually did seem to hang on the words of Steve Jobs. The buzz around Apple products seems grounded in reality - the buzz around Jobs seems like manufactured press.

He's like the CEO equivalent of Paris Hilton: everyone's sure he's famous, no one's really sure what he's famous FOR. No really, there a ton of sex tapes going around the internet - that's not enough to make someone famous. As far as I can tell Paris got famous because she was famous. As far as I can tell, Jobs is famous for the same reason: because he's famous.

-stormin

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[pHatidic]

Actually, the Rio 500 was what put the mp3 player on the map. 279 dollars for 20 or 22 low quality songs.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[Ohreally_factor]

Actually, the Rio 500 was what put the mp3 player on the map. 279 dollars for 20 or 22 low quality songs.

Remind me to never ask you for directions. =)

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[luvirini]

Thus Apple gets much more "bang for buck" with their advertising by doing it this way. The article discusses how NIKE for exaple introducing something basically gets ignored. The oney and effort that Apple puts int the "show" are thus worth every cent.. multiplied by a large number.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[pHatidic]

Remind me to never ask you for directions. =)

I'm willing to sell mine if you want it.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[DDLKermit007]

I remeber that piece of crap...I got it for free from Rio and still didn't think it was worth it.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[Ohreally_factor]

Your map or or Rio? =)

Hang on to it. It could be worth a fortune someday.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[Microlith]

Why he's famous should be obvious.

He's the CEO that came back and saved Apple, giving us the iMac, iPod, and MacOS X.

He also presents his company's creations with a flair that Bill G. simply doesn't have, and other companies simply can't muster cause their products really don't have any style.

Paris Hilton is famous too, but honestly for reasons I cannot fathom. Is stupidity that popular?

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[Have Blue]

That's not a fair comparison- Steve really is involved with product design and really does contribute ideas that steer development. In the 80s he was instrumental in making the platform viable and immediately after returning to Apple in the late 90s he fixed all the problems Amelio introduced and started the company moving in the direction it's going today. He doesn't code or sculpt prototype cases or anything like that, but it's Steve's high-level decisions that make those things happen.

So, while he may be "famous for fame" right now, that fame really did come from something concrete- unlike Paris.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[pHatidic]

I got mine for free from pointclick.com (click banners to get money during .com boom). My friends and I clicked on the banner ads for 72 hours straight right after it launched. When we had to be in school we'd go to the library and start opening so many new windows in IE that the whole OS would crash. We had one person assigned to crashing all the school computers, and another person assigned to rebooting them and getting them set up again. We just kept going in a big circle around the library for like three days until we all got life bans. I feel like I personally put that website out of business.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[garcia]

No really, there a ton of sex tapes going around the internet - that's not enough to make someone famous.

That explains everything! Bill Gates posed in Teen Beat magazine. No wonder he's so famous!

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[Ohreally_factor]

I got news for you. The problems Apple had were not introduced by Gil Amelio. Amelio kept Apple alive during his tenure. If Amelio hadn't been there, there would be no Apple for Jobs to come back to. Furthermore, it was under Amelio that Apple bought NeXT (or as some wags would have it, NeXT bought Apple for negative $400 million), paving the way for Jobs to retake the helm.

No, if you want to blame Apple's problems on anyone, it should be Spindler and Sculley.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[theStorminMormon]

When I see MS do something stupid I don't generally blame Bill Gates. I mean, the day to day vulnerabilities, the crappy design, the shoddy interfaces, none of that can really be attributed (in my understanding) to Bill. The anti-competitive practices and other 'big picture' stuff, sure, but the nuts and bolts stuff? In a round about way of course if Bill is hiring the poeple that are hiring the people that are hiring the people that are doing stupid stuff it's ultimately his fault - but there's a lot of other input.

Maybe Steve just has a much more powerful impact on his own company than CEOs do in general, but I've always figured that CEOs did more with broad-picture stuff and were somewhat disconnected from the detailed operations. We just blame the CEOs or credit the CEOs for things that, in a lot of ways, seem to be beyond their control because as humans we're always looking for something concrete to pin blame/honors on.

But I've never been a CEO and I haven't studied Apple. I'm a little reluctant to believe that any one person can really be credited with stuff as diverse as the iPod, Final Cut Pro, the Mac Mini, etc and still have time to run around making speeches all the time.

-stormin

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[yog]

Keep in mind that when Steve Jobs left Apple the first time, he went off and founded Next Computers, which came out with a remarkable Unix-based GUI. He captured the public's imagination with the Next cube but made a couple of strategic errors such as initially restricting the product to the educational market. A reporter asked him how an ordinary person could acquire a Next cube and Jobs famously replied, "Enroll."

Jobs also co-founded Pixar Animation Studios, the premier animation film company that has created such blockbusters as Toy Story and The Incredibles.

Then when Jobs returned to Apple, taking over from a string of lackluster bean counter executives, he inspired the company to produce some world class products such as the iPod and the iMac. The iPod is the must have product of 2005, and the Mac laptops are at the top of their class.

I'd say Steve Jobs is more than just a showman, though clearly he loves the limelight. Microsoft is the white bread, corporate standby that does the heavy lifting on corporate and consumer desktops but is otherwise an uninspired market follower, not a market leader.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[imdx80]

Apple stuff gets ignored just as much as Nike's, it will kick off a blog storm get a story posted here (and maybe a dupe or two) and probably a link to the story on the front page on newsites. In won't be a front page story in major papers or 'top the hour' on a news show, non techie people won't be discussing it over drinks anymore than when Nike announced adding a 'powerbar' to certain shoes. The only techie storys that are normally seen on the main segments of news shows are when certain products, like the ipod, are selling in huge numbers (and when stocks are running low).

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[Peter Cooper]

Who modded the parent post up? It's totally devoid of fact.

Steve Jobs initially became famous over twenty years ago for leading the company who developed the, then, most successful microcomputer of its generation, the Apple II. He then pushed his boundaries of fame with the whole Macintosh / 1984 commercial thing and became seen as a visionary and leader of the industry. This was no accident or coincidence.

He then bankrolled and managed (in the business sense, rather than creatively) Pixar for many years, eventually engineering a clever IPO and became a centimillionaire in the process (and now a billionaire).

To compare Steve Jobs to Paris Hilton is ridiculous. Jobs has put in a lot of hard work, a lot of money, and run himself ragged on his route to success.. he was no overnight sensation.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[Anonymous Coward]

Whenever I've actually listen to him, he came across as a raving, uncaring meglomaniac.

Personally, I believe he'd be a failure if not for all Apple's wealth.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you mean he's only doing his jobs ?

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[soft_guy]

I'd agree except that I've talked to a lot of people at Apple both before,during, and after Steve Jobs return. He really is personally involved in the 5% of the most important decisions at Apple at any given time. That amounts to tremendous personal attention to the details of what is going on - and it also sets the tone for the other 95% of the decisions that get made when he isn't around.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[Prophet of Nixon]

The Rio 500 wasn't a piece of crap; it was indestructible, had good battery life, and was easy to operate even inside of a pocket (very tactile controls, and buttons were different shapes)... all features which are notably lacking in Apple's MP3 players. It also had the ability to bookmark files (though only 1 bookmark) which was occasionally handy. About its only downside was that it was initally limited to loading via musicmatch jukebox (which is awful), but there were some open source apps developed fairly quickly to cover that.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[theStorminMormon]

What I'm really getting at is that a lot of Job's fame is not the result of what you think it is: hard work and vision. A lot of people work hard and have vision. But if you work hard and have vision in an industry that's not en vogue it doesn't matter.

You point out all his hardwork and vision in the 80's, but the fact is that the same people that cared then are the ones that care about that now - practically nobody. Computers were not real part of mainstream culture in the 80s the way they are now. They were important then in the way the space program was important: evidence of what we as a collective people could do with tech. But nobody owns their own shuttle yet, and practicaly everyone has a PC/digital camera/mp3 player. Nobody owns stock in NASA, a lot of people own stock in Apple, nobody watches movies made by Neil Armstrong, but Jobs founded Pixar.

What I'm getting at is not that Stever lacks either talent, hard work, or vision, but that we attribute these things to him more because of where he is than because of who he is. ANd I don't mean to argue that this is definitively true - just that I'm a bit skeptical of your point of view and though I'm open to being shown that I'm wrong you haven't done it yet.

-stormin

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[wolfponddelta]

Yeah, Pixar is definitely a catastrophic failure, isn't it? Apple was not doing well in the wealth department before Jobs' return (yes, caused partially by the way he handled things before he left, but that's only a part of it). His return, and the products created in the wake of it, are major factors in the reason Apple's currently doing so well. Whether or not Steve is a megalomaniac, and despite the fact that he's always been a marketer and "visionary" rather than a creator, he is one of those people who can make others listen just by speaking. He conveys the simplicity in function and elegance in form that is the hallmark of Apple products. Whether or not one would want to hang out at a party with someone like that is a different matter, but to downplay his role and abilities in such a way is merely trollish.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[Anonymous Coward]

But I've never been a CEO and I haven't studied Apple. I'm a little reluctant to believe that any one person can really be credited with stuff as diverse as the iPod, Final Cut Pro, the Mac Mini, etc and still have time to run around making speeches all the time.

Jobs is extremely involved in the day to day design of the products. He has final say on everything.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[Overly Critical Guy]

We need more perfectionists like that in this industry. This is an interesting read.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[Billy Donahue]

Obviously, you haven't seen the Steve Jobs sex tapes.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[charlieOReilly]

Man, this is horrible, but I'm automatically going to trust the guy with the three digit id.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[Overly Critical Guy]

He's famous because his strict perfectionism helps shape products like the iPod. He also has a way of presenting new technology in a simple way that is meaningful to people. Bill Gates and others present stuff as though they're talking to engineers and marketing droids.

I would think being the CEO of the company putting out the iPod, iMacs, and so on would be famous. Comparing him to Paris Hilton seems quite trollish.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[Justarius]

At the end of the day, the CEO of a company is the top salesperson of that company. They're not necessarily pushing a product, but their pushing their version or vision of the future that the company is taking. Jobs does an excellent job at that - with or without the reality distortion field. I would actually say that a "reality distortion field" is necessary for any salesperson. You want the customer to believe in you, and one of the easiest ways of doing that is using ethos. Appeal to emotion - it gets you a lot further than using logos or pathos, for the gran mayority of people.

Couple the appeal to emotion, an apparent genuine enthusiasim for the company, a good speech writer (using NLP, if necessary to change tempo, tone of voice and speed to keep the audience keen), and good ad-lib, and you've got them sold on whatever it is at first sight. Of course, to keep this going, you also need products that reflect that vision. Whatever your opinion may be of the performance/ease of use/or some other technical criteria of the macs may be, they are some of the coolest or well designed products out there in the industry for consumers/pro-consumers today. The products reflect whatever Jobs is saying, the image is sold along with the product and it becomes a cultural icon. Many other companies have pulled this off in the past in other industries - i would venture to say that IBM has sold a similar concept of "coolness" in the corporate world (different criteria, such as stability, servicibility, or whatever you want to call it) with their adverts - something that other companies have yet to do in that same segment.

Think about it this way: in what other industries does the product reflect the feeling or image that the company is trying to push? I would say the Mini Cooper is probably a close example. I think Sony has pulled off the idea pretty well in the past, specially with the Walkman in the late 80s/early 90s.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[SyncNine]

Uh, maybe you and I are thinking about different Rio 500s. My Rio lasted about two weeks before a solder joint internally that connected the battery to the rest of the unit broke. When I opened it to fix it I realized that the idiots had soldered a think stranded wire directly to a metal plate as opposed to running it through something or mounting it in any way shape or form. After applying some flux to actually make it stick, it lasted for a few months before the thing just *stopped* playing MP3s.

If that's what you mean by 'indestructable', I'm thinking that 'indestructable' doesn't mean what you think it means.

In all rights, however, I could have just had a lemon Rio. Doesn't mean that the design wasn't shoddy, just that mine was particularly shoddy. Thank god I got it for free.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[anothy]

heh. funny, but unfortunate. Amelio had a misstep or two, but it really was his two predecessors who really screwed the company. this is independently verifiable.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[f0rtytw0]

Amelio wasn't so bad. Just recently there was a posting about this http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/12/23/ 0850242&tid=187&tid=3 The full story being here: http://lowendmac.com/orchard/05/1221.html

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[thatguywhoiam]

Jobs also co-founded Pixar Animation Studios [pixar.com], the premier animation film company that has created such blockbusters as Toy Story and The Incredibles.

Minor point: I don't believe SJ 'co-founded' Pixar, but rather he acquired it from George Lucas, who originally started it alongside ILM. But Pixar had not even produced its first feature at that point (only Tin Toy IIRC). SJ and John Lasseter are to be credited with turning Pixar into what it is today.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[Yocto Yotta]

Hey dude, Have Blue was saying Amelio set Apple on it's current positive path. That said Amelio's actions with his personal jet and all that jazz didn't help him at all, but it didn't have anything to do with Apple's problems. How dare you say such nonsense to someone with a three digit UID anyway?!?! ;)

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[SteeldrivingJon]

Frankly, I don't get your point.

For example, Pixar didn't become a Hollywood and pop culture darling until after 10 years of laboring in obscurity. The hard work and vision of the 1980s started when it was not en vogue, as you put it.

"What I'm getting at is not that Stever lacks either talent, hard work, or vision, but that we attribute these things to him more because of where he is than because of who he is."

No, we attribute these things to him because he's had major business and/or technical successes several times. And those successes have never been due to market dominance ala Microsoft, where a crappy product can be a financial success just by virtue of the size of the installed base. NeXT was tiny. Pixar had no leverage to *force* the audience to like their films.

Your argument would be more applicable to someone like Mark Andreesen.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[Yocto Yotta]

Whoops, I reread his comment . . . he was implying that Jobs corrected Amelio's "mistakes." Down goes my karma and up goes your ego.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[qazwart]

One of the reasons why NeXT was only offered for the education market was an agreement Jobs worked out with Apple. Apple wouldn't sue NeXT if he kept NeXT just in the college market and stayed out of the other Markets Apple thought they were in.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[mkiwi]

To compare Steve Jobs to Paris Hilton is ridiculous. Jobs has put in a lot of hard work, a lot of money, and run himself ragged on his route to success.. he was no overnight sensation.

And Paris Hilton is some kind of sensation? I'd call her a whore.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[DDLKermit007]

It most definately was indestructible. Mine survived a few drops from high places onto concreete without too much damage, but the ammount of music allowed onto it was pretty asstacular. You could barely fit more than a CD onto it and the playback quality was pretty horrid, but it was the first.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[theStorminMormon]

The example may have been extreme, but I didn't say he was like Paris in general, but that he was like Paris in a specific way: self-sustaining buzz has more to do with his fame than whatever started the buzz in the first place.

Your quote: I would think being the CEO of the company putting out the iPod, iMacs, and so on would be famous further substantiates this hypothesis. If anyone who was the CEO of such a company would be famous, than it is in fact true that Steve's fame is not a result of Steve's actions or attributes. You're really just begging the question, was it something remarkable about Steve that led to these products? To some extent of course it was, but I think we tend to overstate both the blame and the credit we give to CEOs because it's human nature to want to find a specific, concrete cause for success and failure.

-stormin

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[theStorminMormon]

I'll try to clarify my point for you then.

Steve Jobs was likely just about as brilliant, full of leadership, etc. in the 1980s as he is now. I'm sure he's grown and changed some, but for the sake of argument let's say he's roughly the same person. Yet in the 1980s very few people knew who Stever Jobs was. Now a lot of people know who he is. Clearly, then, to a large degree his fame is not a result of who he is.

So the second possibility is that the fame is a result not of who he is, but of what he has done. Clearly Apple is more successful (in terms of public perception) than NeXT. Fine, but the question is why? I'd say there are two problems. 1 - I'm skeptical that Steve's influence on Apple is that pervasive. Do you think that if you were an engineer you'd go from creating something like the Rio to something like the iPod just because Steve was now your boss's boss's boss's boss? 2 - Even if Steve was responsible for development of the creation of the specific products (which I doubt) the fact that those products are so important to our society now and at this time is something entirely out of Steve's control. He didn't invent MP3s, he didn't influence America's deeply materialistic culture, etc. etc.

What this all demonstrates is that there is a whole barrage of reasons for Steve Jobs fame that have nothing to do with who he is or what he specifically did. And yet we attribute the success of Apple to him anyway because he's the man in front. And we, as people, like to have things clear cut. We like to be able to blame the incredibly complex system that goes into a major corporation on the behavior, quality, and decisions of men and women that we'll never even meet in person for 5 minutes.

What does this have to do with Paris? People like celebrity in and of itself, not just celebrity for something. People like to turn individuals into icons. Sometimes a buzz becomes self-sustaining (nothing draws a crowd like a crowd). All of these factors, I believe, have a lot more to do with what we think of Steve than Steve himself personally does.

-stormin

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[Prophet of Nixon]

You could also completely drown it, then air it out, and it would work fine. After that incident, I filled mine with shoe repair gel, which made it practically waterproof too. The amount of music was indeed asstacular (~14 typical tracks at 128 k/s), but it was simple enough to change (and semi-frequent change happened to be feasible with how I used the thing at the time).

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[theStorminMormon]

You had me convinced at first, but then you bring in the statistics. If Apple people say "things have been different since Steve came, and it has directly influenced the quality of my contribution to the work" than maybe Steve really does deserve many of his accolades.

But if his contribution is 5% direct and then having an "influence" on the other 95%, then skepticism again rules the day. He'd have to have an "influence" of greater than 50% to be the real "leader" (in the sense of being more than 50% responsible for the decisions being made). Otherwise he's just a substantial contributor who's efforts at Apple are still overshadowed by the efforts of everybody else (and yet there are many articles on Steve for any one article you might find on other Apple employees or Apple employees as a whole).

-stormin

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[faedle]

most successful microcomputer of its generation, the Apple II

Actually, that honor would go to the Commodore 64.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[cayenne8]

"Paris Hilton is famous too, but honestly for reasons I cannot fathom..."

Well, for one thing...she's "hot".....

She sure looked good in that hamburger commercial in the bathing suit washing that car...YUM!

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[charlieOReilly]

There has to be some algorithm to compute slashdot opinion sway on such topics... possibly taking id size and other stats into account ;-)

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[cayenne8]

"Man, this is horrible, but I'm automatically going to trust the guy with the three digit id."

I think that may be a good idea. But, wait...isn't 616 the revised number of the Beast????

:-)

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[Kadin2048]

Now I'm usually a big fan of Apple, but I think you're not really giving credit where credit is due (although not your fault, virtually nobody does). The decision to kill Copland and buy someone else's OS -- the key decision that led to the return of Jobs, the production of Mac OS X, and perhaps saved the company -- was not Jobs'. It's usually attributed to Ellen Hancock, originally of IBM, and who Jobs ridiculed and later basically ran out of the company.

Jobs is brilliant, don't get me wrong, but I'm not sure that the credit for Mac OS X and for acquiring NeXT should be entirely his. If it hadn't been for Hancock, someone from outside the company who basically had to tell them when it was time to pull the plug, Apple might have continued along the twisted road that was Copland until finially running out of steam. And the acquisition of NeXT, along with Jobs, might never have happened.

See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copland and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ellen_Hancock

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[kalel666]

Yeah, he wears a different kind of turtleneck in those.

And its definitely not black.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[Kadin2048]

Are you kidding?

Whatever Apple announces at the MacWorld keynote will make the regular Fox/CNN news cycle, I guarantee it. At the very least during their business or tech blurb sections, if not during the regular rotation. It will probably appear somewhere in the Wall Street Journal within a few days, once it's had a chance to affect their stock price, and if it's anything significant (like a DVR, or like the video iPod was).

In fact if Apple doesn't release anything, that by itself will probably generate a certain amount of mainstream press non-coverage coverage. There will be articles like "2006 Not the Year For Video?" or "Computers in the Living Room? Jobs says no", ad infinium. Those might not make television news, but they'll get filler space in the sunday papers or on web sites.

Every time Apple farts, the world listens. In fact there are whole articles in mainstream publications about the amount of press coverage Apple receives, even when nothing is going on (meta-meta stories?).

Although I'm not offering this as conclusive proof of anything, it is suggestive. I did a quick search of the Google News aggregator:
Microsoft - 47,100
Apple - 24,200
IBM - 9,110
Linux - 5,290
Sun Microsystems - 2,140 (a search on "sun" turns up mostly articles unrelated to the company)
"Red Hat" - 1,480

If nobody cares about Apple, explain how a company with less than a twentieth of the marketshare of Microsoft manages to get 50% of the press coverage?

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[shess]

I've heard a lot of people say that a lot of (presumably other) people hang on Steve Jobs' every word. But somehow I've never met anyone who actually did seem to hang on the words of Steve Jobs.

You've obviously not met the right people. I can't recall if I've actually met Jobs (he certainly wouldn't know me), but I once sat two places down from him at a lunch with a small group, and have been in some relatively small audiences when he spoke, and some relatively large audiences of course. I'm generally a very negative person, I nit-pick movies to death and am a really unfortunate person to sit next to in an audience. That said, Jobs definitely has that reality-distortion field. When you hear him talk, you believe. In a smaller group, you believe even more. It's really amazing, and it's something I've not really experienced with any other famous speaker.

Often enough, though, a half hour later you're out in the lobby talking to your colleagues, and you're wondering what the heck that was all about. When he manages to combine the Jedi Mind Trick with actual substance, it's really amazing to behold. He manages this often enough to keep Apple going. There are enough great hits that it keeps a certain segment of people coming back time and again, hoping that this hit will be the one.

[Personally, though I sometimes flirt with going back into the fold, I've been ex-NeXT/Apple for 7 years and counting. I eventually got sick of the manipulation.]

And don't kid yourself that he's just a pretty face for the company: Jobs makes things happen. Some of them are good things, some of them are bad things, but he motivates people to get stuff done, and that's why it all works.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[theStorminMormon]

I'm not exactly saying Jobs is just a pretty face - I just think that perhaps we credit CEOs and executives too much in general. I mean Enron is one thing, that really WAS the management's direct decisions at work. But the general success or failure of a company in the market place seems to me to be too complex a question to come down to being one person's fault or not.

-stormin

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[flatland_skier]

I suspect that Job's talent is more in the rejection rather than the creation of new products. Job's has an amazing ability to see crap, identify it and reject it without worrying about how much money has been spent in developing it!

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[dal20402]

Yuk. Overcooked chicken. :6 How anyone thinks she's hot is beyond me.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[theStorminMormon]

I'd be curious to hear where you got this from, examples, etc.

-stormin

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[dal20402]

To expand on what the other reply said...

Amelio didn't make great product decisions, and it certainly took Jobs, the iMac, etc. to get Apple back into public favor.

But Amelio, not Jobs, was the real financial savior of the company. When he was hired, there were going to be losses as far as the eye could see -- Apple really had not got its costs under control, and seemed to have no motivation to change old losing business practices such as custom-building all components and pricing without considering the rest of the market. Amelio, not Jobs, really got Apple to move toward industry-standard components and better inventory/distribution practices; Apple, while continuing to shrink, stopped losing money on his watch. It turned from Mercedes-Benz circa 1991 into Porsche circa 2004.

Like the other guy said, no Jobs without Amelio. I wish people would give him his due.

Jobs, for his part, is successful because he's a showman. People like entertainers, pure and simple. (That's why Paris is a mystery... she's not entertaining in any way...)

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[Ohreally_factor]

I think it's the Dewey Decimal number of the Beast.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[Anonymous Coward]

Paris is popular because she's obscenely rich trailer park trash. So a huge portion of the American public can identify with her, thinking "yeah, that's what I would do if I had that much cash!"

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[Overly Critical Guy]

self-sustaining buzz has more to do with his fame than whatever started the buzz in the first place.

Yeah, except for the whole iMac/iPod revolution he spearheaded at Apple, which proves he's famous for his results and not this "buzz" you keep referring to. The buzz exists because of results.

Your quote: I would think being the CEO of the company putting out the iPod, iMacs, and so on would be famous further substantiates this hypothesis. If anyone who was the CEO of such a company would be famous, than it is in fact true that Steve's fame is not a result of Steve's actions or attributes.

No, being the CEO of the company putting out the iPod and iMac means you're the guy in charge leading these developments at your company. Particularly in the case of Steve Jobs, who was famously critical of early iPod prototypes and demanded the ability to access any piece of music within three clicks, to cite one famous example. Jobs also put all the NeXT guys in charge and removed a lot of dead weight at the company, as well as slashing the product line to something like six from 20+.

You're really just begging the question, was it something remarkable about Steve that led to these products?

Yes. He spearheaded their creation, promoted Jonathan Ive, and was involved in their development processes. His perfectionism and high standards meant he refused to release anything less than stellar, and he chose the higher-ups and put in charge a lot of guys he had worked with at NeXT as well as gave people like Jonathan Ive free reign with his development budget to spend half a year on things like making an iMac G5 that doesn't wobble when you bump it.

To some extent of course it was, but I think we tend to overstate both the blame and the credit we give to CEOs because it's human nature to want to find a specific, concrete cause for success and failure.

But in the case of Steve Jobs, it's been stated many, many times how involved he is in the design process and how critical he is of things that don't meet his high product standards. To compare the talentless, do-nothing Hilton to the CEO of tech company Apple who helped develop and release the iPod/iMac/etc. is insane.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[kesuki]

As far as I can tell Paris got famous because she was famous.

It might help if you knew her last name Hilton She's famous for being a billionaire heiress.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[Anonymous Coward]

Which just proves that not even super-geeks are immune from Steve's Reality Distortion Field.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[theStorminMormon]

That's incredibly sloppy logic that is obviously flawed. Not all billionair heiresses are famous: as in have their own TV shows and are household names. Sure it helped that Paris is an heiress to billions, but that's not sufficient to explain her fame. In fact, a lot of billionaires work rather hard to keep their families out of the limelight and away from fame.

So no, Paris is not famous for being a billionaire heiress.

-stormin

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[Anonymous Coward]

You do not seem to have an understanding of how a business works. The senior management sets the course the company is supposed to go and they delegate the specific details to people who they pay to do a job. If someone is directly influencing over 50% of your job, then why are you still employed? A WalMart greeter makes more decisions on how to do their job than that. I work in the electrical industry, we would consider you to be a reactive load (KVAR). For the uninformed, that means you do no real work.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, that honor would go to the Commodore 64.

Actually, no it would not.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[kesuki]

Well, you see those 'not so famous' billionaire's daughters etc, spend vast amounts of time and energy to Avoid becoming famous. Paris spent as much time in hollywood as she could. She WANTED to become famous. and for a billionaire heiress, that's a very easy thing to do, if you want it.

believe you me there are camera men tying to get pictures of every billionaire and their family that are alive, and only fear of imprisonment or worse keeps them at bay most of the time... Billionaires made their money somehow, and there are always people willing to make news out of it somehow.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[Ashen]

id size? Really?

Well you're all wrong! I was the one that saved Apple!

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[cayenne8]

"Yuk. Overcooked chicken."

Well, I very much prefer to get them skinny. They tend to 'fatten up' over time...so, if you start with them being small, then they stay desirable longer...

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[Andrew Tanenbaum]

Bill G lacks flair? Haven't you seen his DOOM video?

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[ceoyoyo]

Apple doesn't seem to go for the "it's good enough that they won't sue us" quality level that most corporations do. It's refreshing. Sometimes they screw up, but most of the time they do a good job. More importantly, they WANT to do a good job, and there's pride in the work, right from the bottom to the top. Pretty old fashioned. We need more of it.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[Anonymous Coward]

Quote: "Paris Hilton is famous too, but honestly for reasons I cannot fathom. Is stupidity that popular?"

No, but nice asses are...

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[drsquare]

Hi Steve.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[Anonymous Coward]

The Vic20 sold one million before the Apple ][, except the Apple ][ did it over several years whereas the Vic 20 did it in one year.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[SteeldrivingJon]

"Do you think that if you were an engineer you'd go from creating something like the Rio to something like the iPod just because Steve was now your boss's boss's boss's boss?"

Well, yes, because Steve Jobs wouldn't sign off on a Rio, which would pretty much put an end to funding the work.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[SteeldrivingJon]

There are old stories of Jobs walking around Apple back in his first stint, popping into an engineer's cubicle looking at the work in progress and declaring his disapproval by saying "This is shit." He is rather notorious as being difficult to work for and hard to please, though perhaps he has mellowed in recent years.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[SteeldrivingJon]

" Clearly Apple is more successful (in terms of public perception) than NeXT. Fine, but the question is why?"

The issue is not really success, but quality of work. NeXT did excellent work. They weren't as "successful" as Apple, but then they were in an entirely different situation. Arguably, Apple's current success is to some extent the result of giving NeXT the much larger resources and market position of Apple.

Pixar has long done excellent work. Pixar didn't take off until they started making feature films with distribution by Disney, but it's clear from their early short work that the ethos of high standards has always been there.

The question is, who is the gatekeeper at Apple and Pixar. Who steers the company, who sets quality standards, who has final go/no-go authority on products, who has the authority to decide that a product is not good enough? Who do the engineers and designers and creative types ultimately have to impress? That's Steve Jobs.

He's not necessarily the engineer or designer coming up with the ideas, but the problem is never coming up with ideas. Ideas are a dime a dozen. The trick is squelching the bad ideas and designs and helping bring the good ones to market without letting them become sucky on the way.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[alset_tech]

Maybe Steve just has a much more powerful impact on his own company than CEOs do in general, but I've always figured that CEOs did more with broad-picture stuff and were somewhat disconnected from the detailed operations.

It has been reported that Steve Jobs decides the order of the applications in the Dock when a new machine cold boots. Of course, someone must decide the order of these apps. The significance is that the CEO considers it important enough to have a hand in it.

Not so disconnected, I think.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[theStorminMormon]

You're saying that if you were an engineer you would design crap unless someone MADE you design better?

-stormin

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[theStorminMormon]

That's a perfect example of how Steve handles things differently than the typical CEO, thanks. I'm not trying to argue here that Steve doesn't deserve the fame he gets, I'm just skeptical until and unless I read stuff like this that (albeit unconfirmed) lends credence to the idea that Stever really is different.

So... thanks for that tidbit.

-stormin

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[mr100percent]

*BLAM* "Don't interrupt me." Priceless.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[BJH]

I've seen better delivery from a UPS guy.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[Stephan Schulz]

Man, this is horrible, but I'm automatically going to trust the guy with the three digit id.

Good idea. Please contact me via email for that bridge deal!

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[faedle]

You must be new around here.

From Wikipedia:

During the Commodore 64's lifetime (between 1982 and 1993), total sales exceeded 22 million units. According to the Guinness Book of World Records, the Commodore 64 still remains the best selling computer model of all time.

If that wasn't enough, the combined sales of the Atari 400/800/XL series also outdid the Apple ]['s combined sales during the 8-bit era.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[faedle]

Actually, the Commodore VIC-20 was the first computer (if you don't count the Atari 2600) to sell 1 million units, at least according to Mike Tomczyk's book.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[anothy]

id size (lower is better) is only one part of the algorithm. besides, the guy with a three digit ID already blamed it on Amelio, so you can't even win on that one.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[Anonymous Coward]

I was at the release event for MSN 8.0 in Central Park a few years back; Michael Eisner also appeared onstage with Gates to show Disney's involvement in the project, along with Mickey and Minnie Mouse. The discomfort that Gates exuded when an actor in a Minnie Mouse costume hugged him was astonishing to me - it's inconceivable that Jobs would ever react like that.

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[jcr]

Well, for one thing...she's "hot".....

Dude, you really need to get away from the TV.

-jcr

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[jcr]

Oh, that's funny. Touting Windows 95 as "the" game platform, using a game that was developed on NeXT machines.

-jcr

Re:Not surprising. That's what Jobs does.

[SteeldrivingJon]

If she wasn't rich, nobody'd think she was anything but an average-looking skinny chick.

Title and summary

[MasterOfUniverse]

are completely different.

Re:Title and summary

[Anonymous Coward]

How the fuck is this off topic?

Re:Title and summary

[vertinox]

Title and summary are completely different.

They were trying to think different.

and what a job he does...

[brabo]

And owning apple-stock would make you ponder; who will lead apple/my money after steve goes away..? he won't be there 4 ever, will he?

But as for now, he *does* put apple on the map!! Go Steve!!!

Re:and what a job he does...

[Saint37]

The best thing Apple can do for their stock price in my opinion is to completely open up their architecture by switching completely to x86. This will only add their reputation of simple elegant designs.

http://www.stockmarketgarden.com/

Re:and what a job he does...

[Ohreally_factor]

My guess is that Phil Schiller is the heir apparent. If (God Forbid) Jobs were to drop dead, I'm sure the market would (over)react*, but Apple has succeeded not just because of Steve's leadership, but also because of the team he has put in place. He doesn't run the company single-handed, despite his legendary status and mythic qualities.

*Buying opportunity!

Re:and what a job he does...

[Anonymous Coward]

I bought Apple stock last week, you insensitive clod!

65 pieces... and now you tell me Steve might die someday!

Great Story

[JWW]

I digg

Oh wait...

This story has been on digg TWICE already. /.'s a little slow on the uptake here.

Re:Great Story

[Anonymous Coward]

For the 500th time, who cares..?

Re:Great Story

[Slashcrap]

This story has been on digg TWICE already. /.'s a little slow on the uptake here.

Yes it has hasn't it? And I am going to demonstrate the reason why most of us don't give a shit for your Digg advocacy by reposting some of the intelligent and insightful comments from the discussion :

Nick says, "lets not forget, He is a sociel engineing king, he knows how to say anything and wont say it unless he knows it will stick"

Matthew says, "I posted this yesterday: http://digg.com/apple/Behind_the_magic_curtain"

Dickyducky says, "God!"

Fudgebrown says, ":-("

The rest of them are variation on Digg or No Digg. And the thing is I'm not even trying to make the users look retarded. Those were pretty much the best comments.

So yeah, Digg may well have posted this before. But how long did you spend reading the discussion? I am assuming it wasn't long because personally spending more than 5 minutes on Digg makes me want to exterminate the entire human race.

Re:Great Story

[JWW]

Ummm.... Ok apparently I can't make fun :-) of /.

Don't get me wrong /.'s a great site and you're right the discussion here is valuable (outside of any ID flamewars, they're getting boring ;-).

But there's room for improvement too. My earlier comment basicaly was to indicate that /. got scooped on this story.

Digg has good points and bad points, just like /.

Slashdots REALLY strong point is the discussion attached to the stories.

Diggs strong point is there story submission and (effectively) story moderation system. Slashdot need to work on getting stories posted faster and eliminating dupes (notably dups are a digg problem too). Perhaps /. could use subscribers to help editors choose what story submissions should be posted. Note: I'm not a subscriber, but that would be a great perk to add to /.

Digg of course, needs to competely revamp its comment system since as you have said, it blows.

All in all /. has some competition for technology stories. I RTFA from a digg posting, so from that perspective this story was behind, but obviously I'm now involved in the discussion here.

All I really want is for both sites to engage in friendly competition to make each other better, so I'll have two great sites to frequent instead of just one.

Re:Great Story

[Thalagyrt]

I also find it amusing how here on Slashdot, everyone complains when there's a dupe, but on Digg as far as I can tell everyone seems to love seeing the same article twice...

Re:Great Story

[utexaspunk]

so true, and so sad. digg gets good stories, and they make it to the fron page faster than /., but the comments are totally worthless because they're not threaded, and thus no real coversations ensue, and thus few actually bother to comment or read the comments.

Imagine if digg's comments worked the way /.'s do, or if /.'s stories were user-moderated the way digg is.

What's the /. editors' hangup on having control anyway? I guess that's the only way they can ensure Roland Piquepaille, **BeatlesBeatles, Sterling Allan, and whomever else pays to get on /. actually get what they want...

alas, even if the stories are lame, the discussions are usually interesting enough to keep me coming back. It would be nice to see a site that lived up to potential, though...

Re:Great Story

[Rakshasa Taisab]

I'm abit confused... In what way are those comments different from what is seen on /.?

Re:Great Story

[nine-times]

But there's room for improvement too. My earlier comment basicaly was to indicate that /. got scooped on this story.

You can only get 'scooped' on a story if you're a reporter, i.e. you're writing your own stories. Otherwise, you see, we'd have to say that the Guardian scooped everyone. They had the story first. But that's because they actually had a writer write the thing, and Slashdot/Fark/Digg/whoever are just news aggregators (and discussion groups) that provide links to the story.

News aggregators, however, can only be accused of being "too slow". Is Slashdot "too slow"? Well, the story is dates yesterday, and the story isn't so old as to be irrelevant or out-of-date, so I'd say no. Insofar as it's a news aggregator, since I got the story in a timely fashion, I don't see room for complaints. That someone else got to the story slightly faster is far less important to me than a) whether I got the story, and b) quality of the user-experience of the news aggregator.

Re:Great Story

[Slashcrap]

I'm abit confused... In what way are those comments different from what is seen on /.?

The difference is that while both sites have a lot of crap and pointless comments, I have never seen an interesting, insightful or funny post on Digg. Most of the comments there average 1-4 words, with "Digg" being the most common closely followed by :), "teh" and "gay".

On Slashdot there are discussions, however flawed. Digg seems to be an attempt to prove the infinite monkeys theorem.

Re:Great Story

[Slashcrap]

Ummm.... Ok apparently I can't make fun :-) of /.

You are more than welcome to make fun of Slashdot. If you think that I believe otherwise I refer you to my username.

I just get annoyed with the amount of comments advocating Digg simply because it posts stories before Slashdot. As a link farm it's a great site but in terms of community and discussion I cannot even find the words to express its lameness.

Re:Great Story

[Anonymous Coward]

Digg ;-). LoL

Re:Great Story

[Jessehk]

I guess I'm not the only one. I hate digg comments. Pitiful...

Re:Great Story

[Anonymous Coward]

Darn, at least some of our trolls and retards have class. Plus the moderation gets out a lot of those crappy comments...

But I do agree dig's comment sections are a fark.com-like cesspool.

Re:Great Story

[Ohreally_factor]

This is slashdot. We should be arguing about how slow or fast the dupes are.

Re:Great Story

[bar-agent]

This is slashdot. We should be arguing about how slow or fast the dupes are.

Or else wondering what a Beowulf cluster of dupes would be like.

Bad analogy

[belg4mit]

Cadbury Schweppes was a bad name to throw in there because they seem to be ubiquitous in the UK.

Re:Bad analogy

[Anonymous Coward]

do they even have M&S in the US?

Re:Bad analogy

[CmdrGravy]

Damn right, I live near Bournville - the throbbing industrial heart of the Cadbury Schweppes empire.

Re:Bad analogy

[Bazzalisk]

Hell, in Birmingham (England) you can barely go a few kilometres without seeing a Cadbury-Schwepps or Cadbury-Trebor-Basset sign. Around the corner from where my Father lives is the Bournville "village" - and the train station is all decorated in Cadbury colours.

It's been a while since the city was owned by the Cadburys and the Chamberlaines - but the indications of that time remain.

Re:Bad analogy

[belg4mit]

I think you forgot an M. :-P

Apparently not, though we've heard of it (by full name)
http://www2.marksandspencer.com/thecompany/our_sto res/index.shtml

Comparison with Nike and M&S is specious

[Snamh Da Ean]

It is a strange comparison because, even though revenue may be in the same ballpark figure as these other companies, they are not growing as quickly as Apple has done since it launched the iPod, and while Apple may be medium sized now, it is steadily getting larger. It is also well known to anyone aged 16-30 - how many American readers know what product M&S sells, or what its famous for.

I also don't understand why he appears to suggest that announcements made by the CEOs of other companies are scrutinised by brokers and other analysts. It was interesting to see all the work that goes into Jobs' presentations, but I think the author of the article was over-egging the importance of these presentations by attempting to diminish the size of Apple's importance and comparing the impact of the announcements to those made by other similarly sized companies. A bit dishonest I feel

Re:Comparison with Nike and M&S is specious

[CastrTroy]

Also, It's hard to compare Macintosh with Nike. I'm sure that the revenues of the two companies might be the same. But Nike has a much larger market share. I Don't know very many people (if any) who have never owned a pair of Nike Shoes. On the other hand, I can probably count on my hands the number of People I know with a Mac.

Re:Comparison with Nike and M&S is specious

[dchallender]

Well, the Marks and Spencer quote may not mean much to Americans - but that quote *was* from the article - which was from the website of a UK newspaper. I do not think the UK has yet got to the point where all articles are written with an eye to being fully understood in the US, they still have hints of local flavour (and spelling ;-)

Re:Comparison with Nike and M&S is specious

[iainl]

"American readers know what product M&S sells, or what its famous for"

Probably very few. However, The Guardian is a UK paper, and the vast, vast majority of its readers will know who M&S are.

Re:Comparison with Nike and M&S is specious

[ozric99]

It is a strange comparison because, even though revenue may be in the same ballpark figure as these other companies, they are not growing as quickly as Apple has done since it launched the iPod, and while Apple may be medium sized now, it is steadily getting larger. It is also well known to anyone aged 16-30 - how many American readers know what product M&S sells, or what its famous for.

Why would a British newspaper care whether 16-30 year old Americans know about a company mentioned in one of their articles?

Re:Comparison with Nike and M&S is specious

[mwvdlee]

Besides, who is the big "Microsoft" in Nike's world, if Nike can be compared to Apple?

Re:Comparison with Nike and M&S is specious

[Andrewkov]

Marks' closed all their stores in Canada a few years ago, so it's image isn't great here (they appear to be a struggling company, I mean). I had no idea they are as big as Nike and Apple.

Re:Comparison with Nike and M&S is specious

[Snamh Da Ean]

That is the point exactly - I know that the Guardian is a UK paper, the issue I was raising was that the comparison wasn't a good one, because people in both the UK and the US have heard of Apple, but only people in the UK have heard of M&S, therefore, it is a poor comparison between a UK/European one and a global one on the lips of every teenager in the world, and a lot of people besides.

Re:Comparison with Nike and M&S is specious

[easter1916]

Yeah, they moved into the Republic of Ireland years ago, too... the general reception wasn't great after a couple of years. The food hall is superb, but when it comes to clothing, it wasn't very stylish, a bit dowdy... I don't think they're doing very well there. But once again -- take me to an M&S food hall! I miss it so much (living in St. Louis now).

Re:Comparison with Nike and M&S is specious

[Elwood P Dowd]

I think the author of the article was over-egging the importance of these presentations by attempting to diminish the size of Apple's importance and comparing the impact of the announcements to those made by other similarly sized companies. A bit dishonest I feel

Ok. Compare it to presentations from companies 10x as large as Apple. Apple still gets more attention.

Re:Comparison with Nike and M&S is specious

[radish]

on the lips of every teenager in the world
What a small world you must live in.

Re:Comparison with Nike and M&S is specious

[Achromatic1978]

Hasn't that always been the case with M&S? I was born in Scotland, but moved to Australia when I was five, so I don't really know... but from my extended family, it's always the older members (a la 60+) who are touting "Marks and Sparks" as the place to buy stuff, not my 34 yo cousin and his wife.

Re:Comparison with Nike and M&S is specious

[MysteriousPreacher]

Oh I wouldn't like to move to far from the M&S we have here. The food is bloody amazing and they sell stuff that you can't easilly find elsewhere (in Cork, Ireland).

Re:Comparison with Nike and M&S is specious

[MysteriousPreacher]

Well since the Grauniad has a wonderful reputation for typos, they'd most likely print the name as S&M. Now that may get some 16-30 Americans interested.

Re:Comparison with Nike and M&S is specious

[easter1916]

Just goes to show how long it's been since I last visited Pana, boyah... (from Macroom, Co. Cork, but in the US). I had no idea M&S had even opened in Cork.

Re:Comparison with Nike and M&S is specious

[MysteriousPreacher]

Ah, you should get back for a visit. It's a small food section but a lot of stuff in there. It's in the Merchant's Key shopping centre near the bus garage. I think M&S has been open at least 5 years now.

Bad news for you. The Lobby lost their licence to hold live music upstairs though. I think that tears the heart out of live music in Cork city.

Re:Comparison with Nike and M&S is specious

[easter1916]

No!!! The Lobby, The Phoenix and the Donkey's Ears were where I always went out (lived briefly on MacCurtain St. and then in Douglas). This was 1986 to about 1991... that's sad.

Re:Comparison with Nike and M&S is specious

[MysteriousPreacher]

yeah. bloody sad that is. They still do music downstairs but it's not the same. The Phoenix is still open, I think they do some kind of music upstairs. Not sure what kind of music but one night I was in the bar downstairs and I think they had kids up there listening to drum & bass.

Where's the Donkey's Ears? Never heard of that place. I've just been here since 2000 and it's changed a lot in 5 years. The place is growing like a mad bastard.

Re:Comparison with Nike and M&S is specious

[easter1916]

The Donkey's Ears used to be next to The Phoenix -- another great music pub. Used to be some mad bastard in there who'd jump up on the bar to do Seanachoi sometimes; "Whist a while and I'll tell you a story..." It was insane down there and in Sir Henry's for Sweat Night (Thursdays) in the late 80s, wicked e around at the time too.

We'd stand outside smoking weed, watch as the guards approached, and then flick the butt into the Lee right as they got to us. Used to drive them mad! Every now and then they'd just come in and search everyone in the pub who looked halfways dodgy.

Re:Comparison with Nike and M&S is specious

[MysteriousPreacher]

Ah, the Donkey's Ears must be gone by now. There are three pubs in that stretch. The Lobby on the corner, another pub next to it and then the Phoenix I think. The other pub is called Charlies. Funny old place. I think they have early opening so night shift workers and alcoholics can get their fix at 9am. Slightly rough and ready crowd in there but not a bad place for a pint.

Re:Comparison with Nike and M&S is specious

[easter1916]

That's where the Donkey's Ears used to be! Nice talking to you man. Have a good one.

Re:Comparison with Nike and M&S is specious

[MysteriousPreacher]

Cheers mate, been fun. Small world.

the most important part

[BushCheney08]

They forgot the most important things -- the Levis blue jeans and Gap black turtleneck sponsorships.

Re:the most important part

[winterlong]

Or conversely, if we go back to the infamous commercial - Aldous Huxley's post-mortem sponsorship.

Re:the most important part

[adisakp]

They forgot the most important things -- the Levis blue jeans and Gap black turtleneck sponsorships.

FWIW, Steve Jobs does not shop at the GAP -- he normally wears Issey Miyake black turtlenecks. It's BIG $$$ designer wear that just happens to look like something you can much cheaper. And if you have the $$$, you can wear it without giving an air of pretension because only those in the know will have any idea that you spent that much on your clothes.

Issey Miyake is a fashion designer whose cologne for men (L'eau D'Issey) seems a lot more common (not to mention a lot more affordable) than his clothing.

Re:the most important part

[c_forq]

I think you mean George Orwell.

Re:the most important part

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't forget the New Balances.

It's the industry, folks

[JamminBen]

Steve Jobs doesn't do anything that anyone else in his position wouldn't do. The reason he's such a personality and driving force is because he sells awesome gadgets to the exact people who want them. Jobs is like Ralph Lauren or Steven King. He gives his people (customers) what they want and has a personality to boot.

People who use Macs picture themselves as a blend of geek and artist. A shiny, beautiful piece of equipment that is easy to use and gets the job done is like a little slice of heaven to them. So when Steve Jobs does his dog and pony show, everyone laps it up.

The difference between Macs and clothing or books is that the personal computer industry, being the interface between pop-culture and the mysterious world of high tech, gets more press and money thrown at it than most other industries. So when there's a new marketing effort it gets picked up by more of the world than similar efforts in other industries.

This isn't to say Steve Jobs doesn't deserve credit for being good at what he does, but I don't think he's particularly unique in his approach or methods.

Re:It's the industry, folks

[Anonymous Coward]

You couldn't be more wrong.

Re:It's the industry, folks

[obender]

Jobs is like Ralph Lauren or Steven King.

I don't believe that, I have yet to see a post on Slashdot with the subject: Netcraft Confirms it ... Steve Jobs, dead at 54

Re:It's the industry, folks

[Edzor]

giving people what they want, or
telling people what the need?



(yes the italics were not striclty needed, but i thought what the hay i'll go nuts!)

Re:It's the industry, folks

[Anonymous Coward]

> Steve Jobs doesn't do anything that anyone else in his position
> wouldn't do.

Um. Huh?

> This isn't to say Steve Jobs doesn't deserve credit for being
> good at what he does, but I don't think he's particularly unique
> in his approach or methods.

Again: huh?

Steve has been described in lots of different ways. "Not unique" is not among them.

It's absolutely true that there's quite a bit of mythology around Steve, and much of it is overblown. None of this suggests that he is simply another Bill Gates copycat.

Now Bill: I suspect Bill is just doing what anybody else in his position would do. Survival by crushing all others. This is, sadly, how large publicly traded businesses are designed to work.

Re:It's the industry, folks

[jtnishi]

The reason he's such a personality and driving force is because he sells awesome gadgets to the exact people who want them. Jobs is like Ralph Lauren or Steven King. He gives his people (customers) what they want and has a personality to boot.

I always thought that Jobs didn't give people what they want, but rather give them a product that they realize that they want when he gives it to him.

Power of the Reality Distortion Field at work. You might not want it now, but once Jobs presents it, and you see it, it becomes so much harder to not want it.

Showmanship and Attention to Detail

[Ohreally_factor]

None of this scrupulous preparation should be a surprise, coming from Jobs. He's always had a flair for the dramatic, and he knows how to achieve it. Contrast it with the disastrous keynote given by Gil Amelio:

There were bad omens from the beginning. Instead of having a speech laid out word for word, Amelio would speak from a detailed outline. According to Amelio, his writer (whose identity has yet to be revealed) was behind schedule and making excuses. Revisions continued to be made up until show time.

To make matters worse, the TelePrompTer malfunctioned, garbling most of the text that had been loaded on it.

The other presenters did not fare so well either. Nobody had told them where they would enter the stage or how to stand so the cameras could pick them up.

Because of the malfunctioning TelePrompTer, Amelio had to ad lib the order of appearances and ended up inadvertently snubbing Muhammad Ali. What was scheduled to last for 1-1/2 hours droned on to 3 full hours, ruining the finale of Steve Wozniak appearing with Steve Jobs.

Macworld San Francisco was a disaster, and Amelio was in the middle of it. The press had a field day with his poor performance, spawning a new term in Apple parlance, a droneathon. Amelio was embarrassed by his performance and took the blame for it. Only later was it revealed that he was largely a victim of the mistakes of others.

Source: 500 Days at the Helm: The Rise and Fall of Gil Amelio by Tom Hormby

Re:Showmanship and Attention to Detail

[Gulthek]

Have you ever given a public speech? It is FAR better to speak from a detailed outline than read something word for word.

Of course, this means you have to know what the hell you're talking about. It seems like the only serious problem was the teleprompter and lack of a stage director. There is absolutely no excuse for the lack of a physical backup for the prompter OR for a competent stage director for a coordinated presentation.

Re:Showmanship and Attention to Detail

[Ohreally_factor]

There's public speaking and then there's show biz. An actor doesn't memorize an outline of a script. He memorizes the script. Jobs is all show biz. He's not up there giving a speech. He performs. I guess you gotta see it with your own eyes.

Re:Showmanship and Attention to Detail

[Anonymous Coward]

I found that is is easier to speak from a detailed outline if you have written it out word for word beforehand. You don't need to bring the word for word with you however, just be familiar with it and have worked out how you are going to say things. Then the outline will prompt you to say what you want without you having to scan lots of text or look like you are just reading direct form notes.

Re:Showmanship and Attention to Detail

[rjstanford]

Actually a surprising number of scenes performed by good actors, they're doing an awful lot of variance based on knowing the scene, knowing their characters. Lines can often change from take to take.

Re:Showmanship and Attention to Detail

[Gulthek]

I've also watched the last two keynotes by Steve Jobs. I've also worked in theater and public speaking.

Good actors get into character and ad-lib, you'd be surprised at how much actors will change a script (for good or ill). Good speakers get into their presentation, feel out the audience and ad-lib.

Re:Showmanship and Attention to Detail

[The Fun Guy]

I've given lots of public speeches, and I've been in a number of plays, and it completely depends on the audience and the intention of what you are trying to do as to wether you should work from an outline or a script.

If you are simply trying to convey information, then working from an outline is fine, since you can move sentences and phrases around and still deliver the same content.

If you are trying to elicit a specific emotional response, then you *must* script it out, down to the length of the pause between phrases and when to nod your head. In theatre, a ton of time is spent on "blocking"... establishing where to stand when saying one line, when to move to another mark for the next line, wether the emotional impact of the line is better if delivered facing stage right vs. house right, etc. All of this stage business will either enhance or detract from the emotional impact of your lines.

You simply cannot effectively manipulate the emotional response of your audience by going out there are winging it. Jobs isn't trying to simply introduce a new product - any marketroid could do that. He's trying make people fall out of their chairs with excitement at sight of the new product. A standing ovation in the room is what builds excitement, word of mouth, brand loyalty and market impact. A round of polite applause heralds a product with no lasting impact.

Re:Showmanship and Attention to Detail

[willutah]

If you really want to appreciate Steve Jobs, watch Wednesday's Bill Gates keynote at CES 2006. At one point he tactlessly suggests that the weather could have been Time's Person of the Year if there had just been one more hurricane, and his presentation is so full of filler words ('um' and 'aw') that you wonder if he ever even practiced. Then the project manager for Vista gets up and tells us he is "super" excited. Puleeze.

Re:Showmanship and Attention to Detail

[grouchomarxist]

Only later was it revealed that [Amelio] was largely a victim of the mistakes of others.

That's really BS. As CEO the buck stops with Amelio. No one else can take the blame for that disaster. He had plenty of time to rehearse, but from what I heard he refused to. He also wore a particularly horrible patchwork sweater, which I dubbed the "Frankensweater".

Amelio's been trying to re-write his history at Apple, but the truth is that he performed badly. What he did well was buying NeXT and (unintentionally) putting Steve Jobs back into power.

Re:Showmanship and Attention to Detail

[c_forq]

Only in movies, not in live theater (which this is). In live theater if you try to adlib you are quickly dropped (actors usually memorize the ends of lines of others to know when to give their line, so if someone adlibs it can throw the other actors off). If Steve had multiple takes I'm sure he would do the same as the movie actors you cite.

Re:Showmanship and Attention to Detail

[dar]

You simply cannot effectively manipulate the emotional response of your audience by going out there are winging it.

The average actor can't but a few can. See "Whose Line Is It Anyway?"

Re:Showmanship and Attention to Detail

[rjung2k]

The average actor can't but a few can. See "Whose Line Is It Anyway?"

Actually, the folks on WLIIA? -- as with all other improv acts -- do a lot of rehearsals before each taping. Not that they memorize their roles to every last detail, but they do know in advance what the topics will be, and what they'll do for each one.

The whole "we're making it up spontaneously" is just an act.

Re:Showmanship and Attention to Detail

[spac3manspiff]

I guess you haven't seen George Bush speak then.

Re:Showmanship and Attention to Detail

[ceoyoyo]

Never, ever give an overly rehearsed or memorized scientific presentation. You might be able to get away with it to a regular audience, but if your audience is specifically there to find out if you know what you're talking about, you're going to get burned. If I can I like to ask a question in the middle of someone's memorized presentation. It completely throws them off (not part of the script) and usually they can't answer even the simplest questions, even if they actually DO know the answer.

On the other hand, if you don't know what you're talking about, by all means, memorize the speech.

Re:Showmanship and Attention to Detail

[ceoyoyo]

Precisely. There's a difference between knowing your topic and memorizing your lines. If you memorize, chances are it's going to be obvious, especially when something goes wrong, and it will, and you're left with your mouth hanging open.

A good presenter can't memorize his lines because he doesn't know how the audience will react. It's actually kind of funny to watch the panic in a memorizer's eyes when he realizes he's lost the audience but doesn't have any choice but to follow the script.

Re:Showmanship and Attention to Detail

[Anonymous Coward]

The whole "we're making it up spontaneously" is just an act. Really? So when an audience member would randomly choose a key element for the next improv scene, that was also known in advance? Proof, please. Of course they know all the "games" they do, but knowing the subject matter for any particular instance ahead of time is a much different thing.

Re:Showmanship and Attention to Detail

[Ohreally_factor]

Good actors get into character and ad-lib, you'd be surprised at how much actors will change a script (for good or ill). Good speakers get into their presentation, feel out the audience and ad-lib.

On camera, yes.

On stage, unless it's specifically improv, no.

Other responses to this idea have put it better than I could, but in stage productions, one generally sticks to the script, and a fundamental principle is that the words of the playwright are sacrosanct. This is in contrast to cinema (at least in Hollywood), where the writers are generally treated as shit (unless they are also the producer or have a megahit track record), and the director is usually seen as the "auteur".

Re:Showmanship and Attention to Detail

[Achromatic1978]

Audience topic choice is a bit laughable - for one, an idea could be pulled from the air, preconceived... what are people going to do, start yelling "/I/ didn't hear anyone call that idea out!". Likewise if you use cards... however, some of that stuff I do believe is spontaneous, and at times it shows - they do a far better job than I would... but you can see how polished some of the routines are... and contrast that to some of the (usually songs) where they're really working and struggling just to find a rhyme, and the 'comedy' is in the randomness, not inherently funny lyrics.

influence

[phiber9]

"...To put it another way, Apple is just bit larger than Cadbury-Schweppes and about the same size as Nike or Marks and Spencer in terms of annual sales..." Apple influences IT market as much as AMD or Intel do. Sometimes even more.

Re:influence

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

Apple influences IT market as much as AMD or Intel do. Sometimes even more.

Agreed. Apple is in a market that puts them up against a monopoly. You're hear a lot more about new Nike shoes if there were only two companies making shoes, and Adidas had not yet implemented waterproofing, air cushions, and just this year finally started putting tread on some of their shoes. Of course you can always try those build your own sandals kits.

Re:influence

[MysteriousPreacher]

Of course you can always try those build your own sandals kits.

Heh heh. I'd love to stumble across a shoe forum where the argument between the noob Nike sheeple and the 'build your own sandals' geeks breaks out.

Thank you, funniest comment of the day.

interesting...

[cj7wilson]

The things that impressed me most about the article were the apparent commitment to excellence that Steve Jobs has; His hands-on, detail-oriented, perfectionistic level of involvement; and the demi-god status he appears to receive from his employees. That's why he's so successful, IMHO.

Re:interesting...

[Anonymous Coward]

and the demi-god status he appears to receive from his employees

Except putting the fear of god into them, that's not the usual sentiment I hear from people I have talked to and read about when it comes to working at Apple. I think many would be surprised how their corp culture differs from their public image, at least in parts of the org.

the show's worth it

[escay]

honestly a steve jobs' show is as exciting as an episode of Desperate Housewives (though no cleavage is involved) - it's not the dull drone of a corporate talk. it's quite fun to watch and i regularly watch all of his addresses - can't wait for his MacExpo keynote! no wonder a lot of work goes into it - who can forget the priceless moment where he pulled out the ipod nano out of his coin pocket in his jeans!that's good stuff...

Re:the show's worth it

[Anonymous Coward]

though no cleavage is involved

It's that damn turtleneck...

Apple

[revery]

I think describing Steve Jobs as a rock star of the business world is fairly accurate. People forget that no matter how much technology changes or how many articles talk about the evolving nature our society, people are still primarily influenced by their reactions to others as individuals. For whatever reason, Jobs captivates those around him. He demands a reaction, and it is frequently visceral. What's more, is that he is able to make it work for him instead of against him (we all knew people in high school who had, to some degree, this type of personabut for whatever reason, it was their greatest handicap). It's the kind of thing that other CEO's, though they may be more financially successful than Jobs, are frequently jealous of.

Just my 2 cents.

Re:Apple

[Quiet_Desperation]

I think describing Steve Jobs as a rock star of the business world is fairly accurate.

In the modern lexicon, maybe, but it's still annoying. The Discovery Channel was running promos for their King Henry VIII special, and some historian was calling him a rock star. Bleah...

It's OK if once in a while something in this universe *isn't* hip, folks.

How you deliver is important

[mcwop]

10 years ago I went to see the band Helmet, and it appeared that they were getting on stage to play as the lights went dim. Instead they played that 12 minute Michale Jackson video (the one with teh black panther in it). The audience was very irritated, becuase not many Helmet fans probably like MJ. However, when the band got up there, and the video ended the audience went nuts. It was very effective.

Jobs knows how to show a product to enhance the consumer's understanding. Example, I went to Sandisk's site yesterday to check out their upcoming mp3 players. The site does a horrible job letting the consumer know things like size (Apple shows the tiny Nano in someone's hand), I have to read a all the text (not that I mind reading, but the impact is not the same). Jobs, and his helpers, know how to deliver a pithy, and flashy message.

Re:How you deliver is important

[Anonymous Coward]

10 years ago I went to see the band Helmet

God damn! I envy you for seeing Helmet 10 years ago. Fuck!
Well, atleast I hope it was a good show. Consider yourself lucky. ;)

Re:How you deliver is important

[mcwop]

Show rocked. I am lucky to be old enough to have seen many cool bands in the day. DK, Bad Brains, Black Flag - seen all these and more in the early 80's.

Infectious

[thunderpaws]

When Steve Jobs speaks he shows enthusiasm for Apple and the products, which is expected of someone in his position. What makes his keynotes so notable is the way he invites the audience and the faithful to join in his enthusiasm, as if all are participants rather than customers.

a mac-head by any other name....

[thatshortkid]

funny how the guy that wrote the very pro-steve and pro-apple piece is named mike evangelist.

can't make this stuff up......

Re:a mac-head by any other name....

[bheer]

Heh yes. A name right out of Jennifer Government...

Re:a mac-head by any other name....

[FredFnord]

Even funnier if you remember that, in the dark, 'Apple-is-dying' late nineties, there was an Apple information email list (with tens of thousands of members) called the 'Evange-list'. And that there is actually a position at Apple called 'Chief Product Evangelist'.

Perfect name for the place, really.

-fred

Well... yeah.. So people prepare and rehearse

[loraksus]

And, as a result, they don't look like idiots when plugging in a scanner BSOD's their box in front of a couple of thousand people ;)
That all said, even non-fanboys have to admit that there is something about an apple keynote that is a bit different than what the rest of the industry has. You don't see people actually "excited" about a Microsoft event (or really, any computer related event).
The vast majority are actually quite boring and to be completely honest, I think the only "excited" people at these events are those getting free food, swag or the latest copy of vs.net and a xp pro CD.
I'm not saying that the events aren't informative, and I'm not advocating that people turn release events and conventions into E3, but it would be nice if some events tried to be a bit more like apple.

Re:Well... yeah.. So people prepare and rehearse

[vertinox]

You don't see people actually "excited" about a Microsoft event

"Developers!!! Developers!!! Developers!!! Developers!!! Developers!!! Developers!!! Developers!!! Developers!!! Developers... AARRRRGH!"

*throws a chair at the apathetic audience*

Steve Jobs spoke unto me

[Dystopian Rebel]

And my myopia, plantar fascitis, and unibrow were cured!

Re:Steve Jobs spoke unto me

[Avumede]

That's odd. Bill Gates spoke to me, and now I have TWO unibrows!

Steve Jobs is...

[Billosaur]

...the greatest carnival barker ever. "Step right up and see the iPod... no looking behind the curtain... Step right up, get your first look at the new Intel Macintosh... No sir, no touching the merchandise unless you plan to buy..."

Re:Steve Jobs is...

[Quiet_Desperation]

Yeah, but the difference is that Apple's wares are actually cool.

Not to take anything away from the bearded lady and Snake Boy, of course.

Fun Jobs

[digitaldc]

The team and I spent hundreds of hours preparing for a segment that lasted about five minutes...My team picked the best and confidently presented them to Steve. True to his reputation as a perfectionist, he hated most of them....But Steve never does the demos of the pro software; he always relies on someone on the product team more familiar with its features and operation.

Sounds like a fun job.

Behind a Jobs keynote?

[fak3r]

Obligitory:

• smoke
• mirrors
• reality distortion machine
• black mock turtle necks
• Steve practicing saying "It's insanely great!" and "...and it's available immediately!"

Hey, hey, hey, I love Apple as much as the next guy, but you have to admit Steve is quite the showman (salesperson).

Re:Behind a Jobs keynote?

[Overly Critical Guy]

It's all in good fun. When you're seeing the guy present such kick-ass products, it's fun to get caught up in it all. People love the guy for it.

Plus, in the engineer/marketing oriented world of the tech industry, it's nice to have a presentation that's got actual personality and excitement. Apple is trying to give you products to use in your daily lives. If people aren't excited about them, Apple would consider them failures.

Re:Behind a Jobs keynote?

[lpangelrob]

You know, as a Mac owner, I can concede this.

If I took a step back and looked at the computer world, and at the world in general, I see things run similarly. Nintendo is most like Apple, in that they covet their secrets and rely on their fanbase while making their platforms available to the widest audience possible. That the success of the DS mirrors the success of the iPod is more than coincedence. Both are liked and do a good job making money for investors. Microsoft, Sony and Dell do a decent job making money by scale and occasionally innovate. Unsurprisingly, the level of innovation closely mirrors how big (vocally speaking, of course) their fanbase is.

I would like to think Southwest did the same thing in the airline business, but Apple isn't exactly consumer friendly. Nintendo is ($199 Gamecube at launch?!?). Their innovation was that they found a way to be profitable in a deregulated airline industry... and keep passengers happy (except for the cattle method of boarding). It seems to be working quite well for them.

Reinvention just is one of those ways of doing business, and in the long run (20+ years), the best way to keep your company afloat. (Probably one of the reasons it's called the Nintendo Revolution). I hear IBM did a lot better after they changed things up, but I haven't read Who Says Elephants Can't Dance? yet.

I know why he's famous....

[wandazulu]

...because if there is anyone in the industry who could be described as an oracle to what the future holds, he's it. But more than just predicting it, he directs the company to make it. The NeXT machine heralded the future back in 1988....Unix-based, security-focused OS with a great GUI and awesome development tools. Did he actually write any of it? No, but unlike another operating system (*cough* Linux) that has awesome tech but remains a bit ... unfocused ... and an operating system that seems focused on the wrong things (*cough* Windows) Steve Jobs had/has a clear vision of what he wanted, and where things should go. And frankly, whether you like him as a person or not, he seems to have been pretty much correct.

Consider this example: The original iMac had no floppy drive and used USB ports instead of ADB. People *howled*, but time has proven him right...the iMac did more to jumpstart widespread adoption of USB than anything else (I had two PCs that had USB ports that went to the junkyard without ever having been used). On top of everything else, I'm sure companies did a good business for awhile selling ADB-to-USB converters and USB-based floppy drives.

Jobs is the only guy who has the cajones to risk alienating everyone to push the tech world further, and the world always catches up. *That* is why he is deservedly famous.

BTW, contrast this to Wozniak who is also decidely famous, but as the wizard who made it all work. It's too bad the two of them didn't collaborate on more things...maybe those warp drives wouldn't be so far off after all...

Re:I know why he's famous....

[Anonymous Coward]

Ngghh... slobber... lick..

Are you enjoying that Jobs' cock? Now... the only question left is: spit or swallow. Given your obvious devotion, I'd guess swallow and treasure it.

Re:I know why he's famous....

[Dun Malg]

BTW, contrast this to Wozniak who is also decidely famous, but as the wizard who made it all work. It's too bad the two of them didn't collaborate on more things

Jobs is a marketer, a schemer, a salesman. Jobs didn't really "collaborate" on anything with Woz so much as he rode him like a skilled horse to success. Look at the early Apple stuff: every bit of technical genius you see is from Woz alone. Really, Jobs isn't fit to polish Woz's shoes. The Nolan Bushnell/Breakout story is the classic example.

Re:I know why he's famous....

[Anonymous Coward]

Jobs is the only guy who has the cajones to risk alienating everyone to push the tech world further, and the world always catches up.

I really hate to nitpick but:
    cajones = drawers (the kind you put stuff into)
    cojones = what you meant

Re:I know why he's famous....

[anothy]

"The best way to predict the future is to invent it" --Alan Kay

Re:I know why he's famous....

[Johnny Mnemonic]

Consider this example: The original iMac had no floppy drive and used USB ports instead of ADB.

An oft cited example, but I think a more crucial one was the use of 802.11b in the original iBook. That has also spread wildly.

One could argue that Jobs is good at spotting successful trends early, and directs his hardware development accordingly, rather than dictating the direction of the market, but who cares? Often technology you see in Macs today you see in PCs in 2 years.

That said, there's been a number of mis-steps, too, usually the tech that was developed in house at Apple eg FireWire. Disappointing that they don't even include it on their new iPods--does make one wonder if it's going away. Fewer and fewer peripherals bother to support it at all, now, in favor of USB 2.0. BlueTooth is another example--while widely supported on Macs, it just still kinda sucks when trying to find and use a non-Apple BT product. That trend has yet to take off.

Re:I know why he's famous....

[acaben]

And what a demo. Poor Phil Schiller (isn't that the perfect name for a VP of Marketing?) had to jump off the top of the stage onto a matress 10 feet below witih an iBook open and streaming video while he was falling. He truly is Apple's fall guy.

Re:I know why he's famous....

[cioxx]

Look at the early Apple stuff: every bit of technical genius you see is from Woz alone. Really, Jobs isn't fit to polish Woz's shoes.

Those are strong words.

I bet you'd feel differently had you known that Jobs, himself, designed the interface of the original Mac calculator.

Re:I know why he's famous....

[quietpenguin]

Who howled about the death of ADB?

The early adoption of USB was one of the best things about Steve's return to Apple.

Many of us will be very sad to see Firewire disappear though; very sad.

Re:I know why he's famous....

[Anonymous Coward]

BTW, contrast this to Wozniak who is also decidely famous, but as the wizard who made it all work. It's too bad the two of them didn't collaborate on more things...maybe those warp drives wouldn't be so far off after all...

Woz was the engineer who made it happen initially yes, back in the days when a computer could be designed and built by one man. Now Jobs has hundreds of such engineers to direct. Woz did what most of us would do if we struck the lottery: took the reward and retired! Good for him.

Re:I know why he's famous....

[krakelohm]

I think 'schemer' is a little too rough. For every sucessfull venture there has to be a good salesperson. Jobs is a good salesperson no doubt about it, but how do you justify schemer?

Re:I know why he's famous....

[wandazulu]

Anybody who had software that required a dongle howled...I remember a chain of dongles hanging off the keyboard of some video editing macs I used. We waited quite a while for some of the companies to come out with a USB one. Apple did throw folks like us a bone with the G3 with its one ADB port, but it was clearly stated from them that this was it, USB from now on.

Re:I know why he's famous....

[wandazulu]

Actually, I think FireWire was a hit; when it came out USB was at 1.1...far too slow for external disks. Now that USB has caught up, there doesn't seem to be such a pressing need for the original FireWire. My only disappointment is that there isn't more things taking advantage of FireWire 800.

Re:I know why he's famous....

[Anonymous Coward]

No se describe cajones (drawers) se escribe "cojones ."

Re:I know why he's famous....

[jjares]

I'd really love to see the sources where all that bunch of crap come from. I mean, he may not be a technichal genius, and he is more of a marketing guy, but the article shows him as a crook and a thief.

Re:I know why he's famous....

[conJunk]

ta for the interesting article. it leans a little heavily on inherintly biased language for my taste, but it with exception of a litteral interpretation of some of the more colorful metaphores, i reckon it's an accurate one, especialy the closing:

And when [they're gone], [the industry] will remember Jobs, but they'll cry for Woz.

That's truth right there.

Re:I know why he's famous....

[Blakey Rat]

Except Woz's inventions would have gone exactly nowhere if he hadn't had someone out there getting investors, making sales, branding the products.

Engineering skill is great, but to say that that's the ONLY thing that makes a company successful is a ridiculous claim.

Re:I know why he's famous....

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple with its 3% market share didn't usher in USB by ditching the floppy drive. USB was ushered in by the consortium lead by Intel that developed USB, because they wanted USB.

Re:I know why he's famous....

[Anonymous Coward]

The hard part about intellectual property isn't selling it. It's creating it. People sold tonics and snake oil to hapless people as a regular form of business. People sold rain making to ruined communities, and went on their way to sell it somewhere else.

Sales, contrary to what salesmen like to tell you, isn't an especially precious commodity. It is undeniably useful, but its figureheads dwarf the real precious commodity which is the ingenuity that brings into existence that which can be sold. This isn't even just a matter of engineering, which is a process in the general case, but rather actual creativity and the intellectual capacity to make those ideas reality.

Steve Jobs gets on stage, people attribute Apple's success to him, he even gets credited for things other companies do when people rewrite history and credit Apple with them. Steve Jobs the man that resold Wozniak's labor to Atari at a massive profit is dropped, and Steve Jobs the creator of Apple computer and bringer of everything from the original Apple to the iPod is elevated to godhood.
While Steve Wozniak is relegated to that much-heralded position of "if it wasn't for Steve Jobs, Wozniak's inventions would be nowhere."

People like you are stupid. Seriously stupid. You'd jerk off Steve Jobs, but you probably don't know anything about Gauss. Please die. If it wasn't for Wozniak, Steve Jobs with his educational accomplishments and personal skills would be selling cars.

Re:I know why he's famous....

[Anonymous Coward]

FireWire isn't going away in the short term (5 years, perhaps 10).

It would be *stupid* for Apple to drop it from their systems; for starters, what would they do with iMovie, which ships with every system, and depends on almost all consumer digital movie cameras having FireWire/iLink.

So they dropped FireWire from the iPod. Big deal, USB 2 is fast enough, and a large fraction of their customer base (PC owners) are very likely to have USB 2, and likely to not have FireWire.

Jason O'Grady has a lot to answer for regarding his hysterical "FireWire is going away" articles.

Re:I know why he's famous....

[kilgortrout]

Let's not get carried away on Jobs' oracular skills - he's had his missteps too. For one he failed to see that being a software company on an open hardware platform is a superior business model to being a hardware company on a closed hardware platform. There's a reason why Gates and MS cleaned Jobs' and Apple's clock back in the day apart from the usual MS underhanded tactics and just plain good luck. Their business model and vision of the future was superior in a pure business, not technological, sense.

Re:I know why he's famous....

[daviddennis]

Asking someone to die because he likes Steve Jobs seems a little extreme, no?

Wozniak has come and gone, primarily because he made enough at Apple to live for the rest of his life in comfort. That was his motivation, and so he did it and now he's a schoolteacher. I can sympathise. Making high-tech products is a tough job. A lot of people who make their pile get sick of their tough jobs with little social interaction and go on to someone else. I'd consider JWZ to be another excellent example. He made his pile at Netscape, and he created the DNA Lounge, which I'm sure gives him as much of a social life as anyone would want.

Steve is a different type of guy. His single goal is to make Great Products. I don't think he's personally even that interested in selling them at a profit. The profit is means to an end, so he can make still more Great Products.

I'm typing this on a 17" PowerBook running MacOS X right now, and I can tell you, it is a Great Product. That's why I'm an Apple customer. Steve Jobs guides the technical people and makes sure they aspire to greatness instead of mediocrity.

I know in my own mind, as a technical person, how easy it is to say "Hey, this is good enough, let's go on to the next thing" instead of "Hold it, it's not great yet, let's do this and make it best in the world." I try to be my own goad, to make sure my product is the best. But it's hard and that's because Steve's role is hard, and necessary, in any company that wants to truly aspire to greatness, instead of creating stuff that's "just OK".

So few people make great products, because most people are willing to settle for lousy ones, like Windows or cheap PCs. But for those who love great products, and can afford them, it's Steve we have to thank, because he had the strength to demand only the best from technical people, including Wozniak.

D

Re:I know why he's famous....

[PapayaSF]

I certainly agree that Jobs deserves much credit as a visionary, and many of the things he's pushed (USB, FireWire, UNIX-based OSes, etc.) have been fine ideas that worked out well. His visionary nature can sometimes collide with practical reality, though, such as the first time he tried to kill floppy drives: not with the iMac but with the original NeXT cube in 1988.

Yup, the NeXT cube first shipped only a 256 MB optical drive. At the time, blanks cost about $50, and back then downloading software wasn't really an option, so software distribution was problematic. When asked about the lack of a floppy drive, he dismissed it as "'70's technology." I remember thinking: "Well, keyboards are 19th century technology, but I wouldn't want a computer without one." Jobs did relent and NeXT cubes got floppy drives in 1990.

Re:I know why he's famous....

[laffer1]

Firewire 800 sucks because the connector is different. Its not backwardly compatible. Although there are problems using usb 1.1 devices in 2.0 ports sometimes, end users don't notice a difference in old devices working typically. Firewire 800 on a g5 is great for an external disk though.

Re:I know why he's famous....

[Dun Malg]

Engineering skill is great, but to say that that's the ONLY thing that makes a company successful is a ridiculous claim.

WTF with the strawman? Nobody claimed anything of the sort! The original claim implied that Jobs was a party to the engineering genius that built the early apple stuff, which is absurd because Jobs is and was always a salesman, not an enginner. Woz was the engineer.

Try reading and responding to what I actually wrote, rather than making shit up.

Re:I know why he's famous....

[ceoyoyo]

I wouldn't call Firewire a failure. It was originally developed in the 80's as a way to connect hard drives (can you say serial ATA?) but then the Apple engineers realized it could be used to connect all kinds of devices, particularly external ones (hm, sounds like it might have inspired USB...). Firewire serves Mac users very well. If you're doing decent digital video or audio even today chances are you're going to be using Firewire (and you can buy a card for your PC for about $20).

I choose Firewire if I can -- USB has a much simpler controller and compensates by requiring a lot of crunching from the main CPU.

Re:I know why he's famous....

[Dun Malg]

I think 'schemer' is a little too rough. For every sucessfull venture there has to be a good salesperson. Jobs is a good salesperson no doubt about it, but how do you justify schemer?

Jobs enlists his pal Woz to "help" him improve the Breakout board design (Woz did the all the work, really). Nolan Bushnell paid a bounty of $5000 to Jobs for reducing it to 30 ICs intead of 80. Jobs told Woz he got $700 and magnanimously split that with him, giving Woz $350. Jobs is more than a schemer, he's a prick. There is no reasonable defense for such behavior.

Re:I know why he's famous....

[GaryPatterson]

Possibly.

Where is Steve Wozniak now? Technical genius is just not enough - to succeed you have to have genius at the right moment. I've no doubt that he was a driving force behind the Apple I and Apple II, but since then..? His efforts have largely come to nothing more than dabbling.

It's terribly sad to see someone with such a record and with such potential not use it, but that's what happened.

When the industry history is written, Jobs will be the guy who got Apple on the map and kept it there, and Woz will be the guy who started Apple with him, but disappeared. The winners write history, and Jobs is one of the biggest winners in computing. Outside of places like Slashdot, few people have even heard of Woz.

Re:I know why he's famous....

[Johnny Mnemonic]

If you're doing decent digital video or audio even today chances are you're going to be using Firewire

Y. But check again in 3 years, and I think the options will have diminished. The telling will be if Apple releases the new Intel Macs without it. I think it's even money that they won't.

I choose Firewire if I can

I do too. But it's starting to feel like the option is harder to find.

Re:I know why he's famous....

[ceoyoyo]

Which is incredibly unfortunate. Maybe this is the real Dell legacy... a total loss of diversity. MS pronouces USB is the way to go so Dell puts it in their computers. Firewire is at best an option because that would cost an extra $2 or so. Nobody buys the option, of course, so nobody has Firewire, so it dies, leaving us with USB and a monoculture.

Re:I know why he's famous....

[Bing Tsher E]

.the iMac did more to jumpstart widespread adoption of USB than anything else Windows 98 did more to jumpstart widespread adoption of USB than anything else. It was a 'niche' thing with miniscule sales of USB peripherals and a weird header on the motherboard until Windows 98 came out supporting it. Oh, and Apple had it earlier. It was like ADB or anything else back then that most people ignored.

Re:I know why he's famous....

[R3d M3rcury]

"[...] sounds like it might have inspired USB [...]"

Actually, it was ADB that was the encouragement for USB. USB 1.0, if I remember correctly, ran 1.5Mbps, slightly faster than ADB's 1.0Mbps. Intel didn't really push it, though.

Re:I know why he's famous....

[Anonymous Coward]

Firewire 800 is backwards compatible, the connector isn't though.

Re:I know why he's famous....

[Ohreally_factor]

"The best way to predict the future is to invent it" --Alan Kay

How in the hell did this end up modded as a troll?

Re:I know why he's famous....

[toddestan]

Consider this example: The original iMac had no floppy drive and used USB ports instead of ADB.

The iMac was ahead of it's time, but not really in a good way. The first iMacs did not have a CD burner, USB flash drives weren't common, nor did most people have broadband or home networks. That meant the only way to get data off of an iMac for most people was through the slow 56K modem. Which made backing the thing up impossible. Or you could go buy a USB floppy drive so you could have what everyone else already had. The iMac truly was the disposable computer of its day.

Re:I know why he's famous....

[krakelohm]

Yes, and back when I was 14 I picked on this girl till she cried. I was a dick. Now I don't do that anymore because I have matured and grown up. So how does something that Jobs did 2X years ago justify you still calling him a prick? Who has he personally screwed over in the last year to warrant that?

Re:I know why he's famous....

[mr100percent]

ADB is 10Kbps. USB1 (low speed) was 1.5Mbps and USB 1.1 was 12Mbps. This comes from Apple's original USB webpage.

Re:I know why he's famous....

[mr100percent]

Windows 98 didn't seem like much of a killer seller. Windows 95 SP2 I believe had USB support. It was when all those USB peripherals came out that were compatible with both the iMac as well as the PC. Those ports were included but rarely used, until the iMac became a bestseller and people started getting PC/Mac USB Zip Drives and colored mice and stuff.

Re:I know why he's famous....

[anothy]

eh. clearly someone doesn't like me, Alan Kay, the future, or some combination thereof. i rather thought i was being quite relevant to the parent. oh, well; i'm over it.

Re:I know why he's famous....

[Dun Malg]

Yes, and back when I was 14 I picked on this girl till she cried. I was a dick. Now I don't do that anymore because I have matured and grown up. So how does something that Jobs did 2X years ago justify you still calling him a prick? Who has he personally screwed over in the last year to warrant that?

Every 14 year old is a little asshole. There is a distinct difference, though, between some kid teasing a girl and a 21 year old man lying to and fucking over one of his (supposed) best friends for a few thousand dollars. His autocratic management style is also well known. I've met enough borderline sociopathic hard-sell types to know one when I see one, and Jobs is one of them. People like that are pricks. You don't get to the positions where Jobs is and has been by being a nice guy, you get there by being a charming, intelligent, asshole. Nice guys don't stay CEO anywhere. They end up taking things personally and going off to become a schoolteacher. I have nothing personal against Jobs, I just recognize him for what he is: an intelligent, charismatic, "nothing-personal-it's-just-business" type prick.

Re:I know why he's famous....

[krakelohm]

Well I guess we will just have to agree to disagree. Good points though.

Re:I know why he's famous....

[jcr]

Unix-based, security-focused OS

Well..

Let's not pretend that UNIX is "security focused". Let's face it, UNIX was a bitch to secure over the last twenty years, and it's still sorely lacking in many ways (die, setuid! die! die! die!). The reason that people think of UNIX as a secure OS is that it's usually compared to MS's train-wrecks.

-jcr

Re:I know why he's famous....

[jcr]

Jobs isn't fit to polish Woz's shoes.

Woz would disagree with you.

SJ is why Apple became a business at all. Woz was a great engineer, but most people like him work 30 years for somebody else and retire. SJ got Markkula involved, he made the first sales, he beat up the parts vendors, and basically got the whole operation off the ground by sheer force of will.

-jcr

Re:I know why he's famous....

[jcr]

Actually, Phil jumped from a balcony on IL 3 into an airbag. Four stories, not 10 feet.

-jcr

Re:I know why he's famous....

[mr100percent]

Now I remember! He had an accelerometer attached to the iBook and the live reading graphs on Steve's iBook, so when Phil fell you could see the spike on Steve's iBook.

Re:I know why he's famous....

[Ohreally_factor]

Yes, you were being relevant. The clueless mod probably has never heard of Alan Kay, who, among many other achievements, was the first "Apple Fellow".

Re:I know why he's famous....

[MysteriousPreacher]

True, an external backup device was essential really. Still, the floppy would not have been use for anything but the smallest files. I used to backup files from my Power Mac 7100 on to floppy and that was painful enough, even just small font collections and simple photoshop files were a trial. I used to love that Zip drive of mine.

Re:I know why he's famous....

[DAldredge]

Steve Wozniak is now a teacher. He is doing exactly what he wishes with his life which isn't exactly a bad place to be.

Sex tapes of Jobs

[kfaroo]

... there a ton of sex tapes going around the internet

Ooh, really? Can someone point me to where I can find some?

you're right

[nomadic]

..because if there is anyone in the industry who could be described as an oracle to what the future holds, he's it. But more than just predicting it, he directs the company to make it. The NeXT machine heralded the future back in 1988....

And like he foresaw, NeXT is now at the nexus of modern computing. I mean, everyone here has a NeXT machine, and when was the last time you saw a non-NeXT computer in an office?

Re:you're right

[Kupek]

NeXT was the basis for OSX.

Re:you're right

[Liselle]

And like he foresaw, NeXT is now at the nexus of modern computing. I mean, everyone here has a NeXT machine, and when was the last time you saw a non-NeXT computer in an office?

You need a hit with the clue-by-four, sir, NeXT lives on in every OSX machine.

Re:you're right

[Varkias]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X

Despite its branding as simply "version 10" of the Mac OS, it has a history largely independent of the earlier Mac OS releases. It is based on the Mach kernel and the BSD implementation of Unix, which were incorporated into NEXTSTEP, the object-oriented operating system developed by Steve Jobs's NeXT company after he was forced from Apple in 1985. Meanwhile, Apple attempted to create a "next generation" operating system of its own (see Taligent and Copland), but with little success. Eventually, NeXT's OS--by then called OPENSTEP--was selected to form the basis for Apple's next OS, and the company purchased NeXT outright. Jobs was rehired, and later returned to the leadership of the company, shepherding the transformation of the programmer-friendly OPENSTEP into a system that would be welcomed by Apple's primary market of home users and creative professionals, as a project known as Rhapsody. After some missteps which threatened the loyalty of independent developers to Mac OS, and changes of strategy to ease the transition from Mac OS 9 to the new system, Rhapsody evolved into Mac OS X.

I'd say that Steve Jobs WAS right in predicting the future. Many elements of Mac OS X are derived from the operating system developed at NeXT. Supposedly the next version of Windows takes many cues from the current Mac OS X.

Re:you're right

[Overly Critical Guy]

NeXT is at the nexus of modern computing. Its ideas are still unmatched in competitors' products, and most importantly, the Cocoa API in OS X is the updated NeXT API, so it lives on as the premiere app development tool.

What a lame post. That's like saying the Nintendo Entertainment System didn't herald the future of console gaming just because it's not in every bedroom anymore.

Re:you're right

[gb506]

Come on, man. Nobody uses Commodore 64 or Amiga anymore, but that does not mean they didn't have an impact on computing. The insinuation that Jobs has not had an effect on computing is preposterous and worthy of ridicule.

Say what you will about NeXT, but it was a super OS.

Re:you're right

[Anonymous Coward]

Gee, I guess that my NeXT Cube, upgraded with a CDROM drive, Turbo board and 4GB of SCSI storage isn't real then? It's still my laser printer, time server, archive storage, etc.

Not bad for a machine still on its OWM 1989 power supply.

Re:you're right

[Ucklak]

Supposedly the next version of Windows takes many cues from the current Mac OS X.

Probably visually but not functionally. Windows is still the tired OS it was 10 years ago, although exciting it was then. NT did alot for the underpinnings but it still has that START button and convoluted menu system that is confusing as hell.
I don't understand why MS just doesn't have the cajones to bring forth a new OS and support legacy through VM technology. If Linux hackers can do it on their time, what the hell is MS doing?

I'd like MS to actually do something instead of being a follower with a 'me too' approach yet flaunt 'we're a billion dollar corporation and we're the leaders because of it'

Re:you're right

[xtracto]

Ok ok... lets rephrase parent:

And like he foresaw, OSX is now at the nexus of modern computing. I mean, everyone here has an OSX machine, and when was the last time you saw a non-osx computer in an office?

Apple products are like Puma products, overpriced. There are a lot of better products which cost less on the market. I have used OSX and I do not see the benefits, for me it is a resource munching OS.

the iPod is again an overprized gizmo, you can find great portable players which play MORE formats (ogg for example) and which are not as overpriced as iPod.

Of course I will be moded down but unlike all the slashdot sheep-teenager with mod points I do enjoy expressing my opinion.

Re:you're right

[jacksonj04]

For the physical product, yes they are overpriced. For the sheer 'it just works' factor and the support, it's fair.

iPod and iTunes just work. iPhoto plays nice with both of them. They all integrate perfectly with OS X, which runs like a charm on my Mac Mini. The whole thing is displayed in perfect colour on a monitor which needed no configuration, and is controlled by a well designed and manufactured keyboard and mouse. This "it just works" is what you pay for. As for iPods playing more formats, some people aren't bothered by being able to play 101 formats of music on the train. AAC and MP3 work well enough for my music I want to listen to on a regular basis, OGG doesn't feature much in an environment trying to avoid format wars.

Next in line for this ease of use is Windows. Windows Media and it's swathes of music players works after a fashion, but is nowhere near as intuitive or reliable as Apple's solution. Drivers are mostly solid, but problems aren't dealt with elegantly at all. OS integration with things such as media is getting better but isn't there yet (Although the beta shows that it's well on the way for Vista).

Then there's Linux and Co. coming last in the ease of use charts. Improving, but ultimately a cobbled together set of individual components. I know this is the entire idea, and I love working with Linux for many tasks, but the fact it is just a set of loosely connected pieces with no unification (Where should config files live, for example?) relates to its free status. You aren't having to pay anybody to keep it together.

Re:you're right

[nomadic]

the Cocoa API in OS X is the updated NeXT API, so it lives on as the premiere app development tool.

Are you on crack? You think anything having to do with Cocoa, OS X, or Apple in general qualifies as a "premiere app development tool"? How many people do you really think use macs as opposed to PCs?

Re:you're right

[nomadic]

I'd say that Steve Jobs WAS right in predicting the future. Many elements of Mac OS X are derived from the operating system developed at NeXT. Supposedly the next version of Windows takes many cues from the current Mac OS X.

No, he wasn't. First of all OS X has a what, 5% market share? Hasn't exactly caught on.

Secondly, he was responsible for BOTH SYSTEMS. How the hell is that "predicting"? Anyone can predict their own behavior.

Thirdly, let's see how many elements the next Windows borrows from THE NeXT-SPECIFIC aspects of OS X. That's the discussion we're having.

Re:you're right

[MysteriousPreacher]

the iPod is again an overprized gizmo, you can find great portable players which play MORE formats (ogg for example) and which are not as overpriced as iPod.

Depends on WHAT you're AFTER really. Great is A subjective term and if another product works for you then you're making the right decision based on your needs.

'over priced gizmo' is a very subjective term since it's based on your personal opinion on how much you'll pay for an item which in this case is obviously less than many other people are willing to pay. Steak is an over-priced gismo, minced beef tastes good and can be used to prepare many more types of meals than steak can. Also, mince is more versatile to store since you can mould it in to the shape you need. I'll never buy steak again.

Of course I will be moded down but unlike all the slashdot sheep-teenager with mod points I do enjoy expressing my opinion.

Oh boo hoo. Everyone else is a sheep and just a core few of us really know what's going on here. Why not use the term 'sheeple' instead, that's fairly trendy among the elite.

Re:you're right

[skribble]

What? Have you ever worn a pair of Puma Kings [FLASH ALERT!] on the Pitch? They totally are worth every dollar/pound/euro/... whatever. So clearly you have no idea what you are talking about either with shoes or computers.

Re:you're right

[Anonymous Coward]

NT is a much more modern kernel than XNU. The presence of a Start button in the user-interface has nothing to do with anything but the "visual" aspect.

Microsoft doesn't radically break their user-interface because they have billions of satisfied customers that don't want to relearn to use their computers to satisfy the desires of some self-important douche on Slashdot using the name Ucklak. The interface changes they make are already confusing-enough for older people.

Re:you're right

[shmlco]

If you can't seen the value then you can't, and in that case you're right, other products will work for you just fine. As to your opinion, accepted as such, rejected as such.

Re:you're right

[Kupek]

Of course I will be moded down but unlike all the slashdot sheep-teenager with mod points I do enjoy expressing my opinion.

I sincerely want a (-1, Martyr) mod for people who basically dare the moderators to mod them down, implying that any moderator who mods them up is cool like them. Let your comments stand on their own merit; this "I'm so different from the masses" stuff is silly.

Anyway, back on topic, Jobs saw that NeXT was good technology and used it well. That's basically the gist of what was being said.

Re:you're right

[Overly Critical Guy]

Are you on crack? You think anything having to do with Cocoa, OS X, or Apple in general qualifies as a "premiere app development tool"?

Yes, absolutely. Cocoa is the top, #1 application development tool. It beats the pants of everything out there. From stuff like CoreData to the NIB files of serialized interfaces for instant GUI prototyping. Just from Cocoa alone, all my app's text input boxes have free system-wide dictionary look-up, spellchecker, etc.

How many people do you really think use macs as opposed to PCs?

What does this have to do with anything? Not to mention most of those people aren't developers anyway.

Next.

Re:you're right

[javaxman]

No, he wasn't. First of all OS X has a what, 5% market share? Hasn't exactly caught on.

An interesting way of looking at things, but by the same metrics, BMW hasn't exactly caught on, either.

It might be more correct to notice that the Mac computer market share has more than doubled since the introduction of OS X. 5% doesn't look to impressive until you look back a few years at 2.3%...

Thirdly, let's see how many elements the next Windows borrows from THE NeXT-SPECIFIC aspects of OS X. That's the discussion we're having.

Are you going to ignore the NeXT-like elements of the *current* version of Windows? OK, but still... why ignore the fact that Windows is trying to catch up to OS X in many ways? Oh, and yea, OS X often borrows from Windows as well ( user switching as the only example I can think of, but there must be others ).

Re:you're right

[zoomzit]

Slashdot secret hint of the day:

How to be modded "5+ Insightful"

Begin by spouting lots of drivel that is pointless, meaningless nonsense. Draw a widely inaccurate troll-like conclusion from said drivel and conclude with "Of course I will be modded down..."

Slashdotters far and wide will assume your incompetence is brilliance and your quest for mod points as a sign of your freewilling don't-give-a-damn attitude. Watch them mod points roll in!

Damnit it's called reverse psychology! Why do slashdotters fall for this every time?

Not that I am calling out the parent alone on this. I am just sick of the phrase "Of course I will be modded down..." on the end of every semi-confrontational post.

Re:You're right

[Anonymous Coward]

You're a fucking moron.

Re:you're right

[laffer1]

Microsoft doesn't need to include anything from NeXT anymore. They've already used it. Hmm.. an object oriented framework for applications? Microsoft has that now. X's in the right hand corner to close windows... done. (not next specific, but one of the oldest oses i've used with it) Good networking capabilities... done. (well its not exactly bsd sockets.. but it works and offers some interop with protocols) WWW support. What do i mean by this? The FIRST web browser was written on a NeXT machine by TimBL. done. TextEdit is a lot like Wordpad wouldn't you say? Which is a lot like Write. done. The ability to run two apps simultaneously without crashing.. done. (well usually.. if its an engineering app thats another story) I don't feel like going on with this.

All graphical systems have components stolen from others. Apple steals from microsoft and microsoft steals from apple. KDE steals from both and both steal back. Gnome copies everyone else and .. oh wait. Parts of OSX remind me of OS/2 Warp 4 but you don't see me bitching at apple from robbing IBM. I don't even know who stole from who sometimes. Windows Vista is designed to catch MS up to apple's multimedia push from the last 5 years. Bill gates is counting on the new features to curb sales in large markets with apple stores. Apple is gaining customers in those markets. 45 minutes way there is an apple store and a dell both a few stores apart. Can you guess which one is busy? Its not the dell both. Quite a few people compare the machines and then you see them come out with apple bags or iBook boxes. Part of it is the operating system features. Remember when you got your first pc? If you were like me, you bought it on software that it came with. Hell I got a packard bell. The only thing about packard bell machines I can say is 1. they had a good software package, 2. they could run NT4 and OS/2 warp 3 well and 3. it lasted 7 years (gave to my mom). Software sells machines.. and i wanted an apple then but couldn't afford it. The IBM or Nec machines had nothing but windows on them. Microsoft needs this release. Most praised linux distros on slashdot are the bloated ones with 8000 programs that do the same thing. Why? People like software and consider it a feature. Its why ubuntu or redhat are talked about more than gentoo and debian.

If Windows Vista fails, its the beginning to the end of the MS monopoly. Consumers don't care what OS they run, just people like us do. Its like buying a toyota vs a ford. Who cares. Different under the hood, but it still gets to from point a to point b (or website a to website b). This multimedia approach is why that 5% is important because it effected Microsoft and it will effect Linux distros as more multimedia will be required for home and business adoption of the software.

The interesting thing is that windows vista will force people to buy new pcs to get it. No upgrades this time. Unless you're a gamer, you don't have a video card that can run it. Apple's switch to intel hit at a great time. People have to rebuy computers and it could mean a big market share switch for apple, Microsoft, and/or the linux community if everyone plays their cards right.

Re:you're right

[ceoyoyo]

First, I love how people can call OS X resource munching and the processors that run it underpowered, and yet somehow it manages to limp along just fine. Maybe it's because you don't need a virus scanner running in the background. ;)

Anyway, I think with your iPod rant you've hit on what makes the iPod great. Sure, it only plays a couple of formats. But if you use an iPod you don't even notice. Who cares if it plays OGG or MP3 or AAC or XYZ? You just drop your song or cd or music store purchase into iTunes and it takes care of it. The geeks may care whether iTunes preferences is set to use AAC or MP3, but nobody else does, so long as it plays music. The device SHOULDN'T support every codec under the sun. Some nice piece of (upgradeable) software should let you convert things into whatever it is that the hardware understands, and why not do that ONCE on your desktop rather than every time the song is played on your player?

Re:you're right

[ceoyoyo]

It seems like daring the mods to mod you down is a surefire way of getting modded up. They're not even trying to be funny any more!

I tend to take easy dares... how about a (-1, As requested) mod?

Re:you're right

[ceoyoyo]

Good point. Compared to MS, Apple flits from architecture to architecture like a hummingbird on speed. But they make it work, and they take care to make sure their customers have as little difficulty as possible. Look at the switch to Intel: hey guys, we've given all the developers, for free, this nice way to run your apps natively on either architecture. If that doesn't work, we've got some nice, transparent emulation to back it up. Same with the PowerPC switch and OS X.

Apple purges themselves of the legacy stuff every so often. MS... it'd do you good.

Re:you're right

[ceoyoyo]

Forget letting the PC people run OS X, I think Apple should ("accidentally" or officially) let a Cocoa API slip out for Windows. Make it so you can write programs in Cocoa that will run on Windows a la iTunes. Then, when you're using all Cocoa apps you might as well buy a nice OS to go along with it. ;)

Re:you're right

[Overly Critical Guy]

It's rumored they'll be releasing Cocoa APIs for Windows this year, a resurrection of the old Yellow Box project.

Re:you're right

[ceoyoyo]

Fingers crossed. Cocoa would make a beautiful cross platform GUI API. The ones that exist either don't work well on the Mac, are really clunky compared to the native ones, or both. Mostly both.

Re:you're right

[jcr]

NeXT lives on in every OSX machine.

Not to mention the rather inept aping of the NeXTSTEP libraries in the .NET framework. (They're trying, they really are, but MS still doesn't even grasp model-view-controller yet.)

-jcr

Re:you're right

[jcr]

You think anything having to do with Cocoa, OS X, or Apple in general qualifies as a "premiere app development tool"?

Perhaps you have the term "premier" confused with "most popular".

Cocoa is the best development system that exists, with the possible exception of the later Smalltalk environments.

-jcr

Re:you're right

[jcr]

I think Apple should ("accidentally" or officially) let a Cocoa API slip out for Windows.

That "accident" would cost at least 30 or 40 man-years of work to make it happen. I'd love to see SJ take the bull by the horns like that, but as one who lobbied heavily for it, both from the inside and the outside of the company, I place the odds of it happening at slighly less than nil.

-jcr

Re:you're right

[jcr]

The "Yellow Box", better known as "OpenStep Enterprise for Windows", was a shipping product for several years. However, it was 1) based on Display Postscript for 2D drawing, and Adobe has little if any interest in DPS anymore, and 2) it is now about seven years out of date w/r/t the current state of the Cocoa frameworks. Add to that, the fact that it predates Apple's support of OpenGL, and we're talking about a massive undertaking, and for what? To make life better for Windows developers?

Hope for it, but whatever you do, don't bet on it.

-jcr

Re:you're right

[jcr]

Cocoa would make a beautiful cross platform GUI API.

Yes, it did. ;-)

Oh, well...

-jcr

Re:you're right

[jcr]

the iPod is again an overprized gizmo

Nope.

Economics 101: If people are buying them in vast quantities, then they're not overpriced, by definition.

-jcr

Re:you're right

[jcr]

iTunes isn't a Cocoa app. In fact, it's best described as a Quicktime app. (The Quicktime API includes a great deal of the old Mac Toolbox.)

-jcr

Re:you're right

[jcr]

I don't understand why MS just doesn't have the cajones to bring forth a new OS

Umm... They did. Three times. The first time, was Xenix. Nobody went for it. The second time, it was OS/2. Nobody went for it. The third time, it was Windows NT, and people went for it (gradually, over about a decade) because unlike the previous attempts, it let the lusers keep running nearly all of all their legacy shit, without running in an inconvenient penalty box. Every rev since NT was just another round of polishing the turd.

MS is very much a prisoner of their customer's inertia.

-jcr

Re:you're right

[jcr]

Apple purges themselves of the legacy stuff every so often.

Moreso than most companies, but then again, they are still working on Carbon. ;-)

-jcr

Re:you're right

[nomadic]

"Premier" doesn't mean "best" either. Technically it means "first", and I don't think anyone is going to claim that Cocoa was the first development tool of it's type. Another meaning is "influential"; because it's mac-based the vast majority of programmers not only don't use it but most of them probably have never even seen it.

Re:you're right

[mr100percent]

Mac OS X had a 5% market share of NEW COMPUTER SALES. Apple's installed base was like 20% of all PCs (it has to be more, the statistic dates before the iMac became a bestseller), because they seem to last longer (I know people who still routinely use a Mac classic, but I haven't seen any 386's anymore).

Re:you're right

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft needs this release.

Yuck!

To confirm you're not a script,
please type the word in this image: innovate

Re:you're right

[xtracto]

Now that the moderation sheepherd has gone to another story I can reply to you.

If I stated that I did not care to be moded down was because I *knew* I was going to be moded down. I have just replied to another story about Google being evil (one of the taboos in slashdot) and I also moded up a comment defending (in some way) Intelligent Design (something I am against) as interesting.

I mentioned the karma thing because I am tired to see comments that are indeed insighful or interesting being moded at -1 troll just because they do not follow the typical trends (Linux/Apple/Google/OpenSource is good Microsoft/SCO/**AA/Copyrights is bad).

The fact that you do not agree with what other poster is saying does not means that her comment is a troll. In a perfect world moderators wont be biased against an ideal. And that is why moderation does not works, and it does not matter the level of meta-meta-meta moderation slashdot use it will never be allright because the same people that moderates comments is the one that is meta**n-moderating.

If you read my comment again you will see that I was just expressing my opinion (as valid or invalid as anyone elses opinion), and you will find that I stated a fact about the iPod "you can find great portable players which play MORE formats (ogg for example) " but it is because I bashed Apple that I got moded as a troll.

Just take a look at this thread you can see all the "anti-religion" comments moded at +4 at least, and all the "pro-religion" moded +2 at most (which was the initial karma points of the poster).

I salute the brilliance

[dpmccoy]

of Steve Jobs every day when I fire up AmaRok or Juk, and realize I can't listen to the 200+ songs I've purchased through I-Tunes because of his DRM practices. Let's not forget the 800+ songs I ripped from CD using I-Tunes (for Win XP). I appreciate Steve's ability to think outside of the box and innovate (instead of follow), but I seriously think that he is a wanna-be Gates.

Re:I salute the brilliance

[Anonymous Coward]

Why can't you play the tracks you ripped yourself? Did you end up using Apple Lossless? Because that's the only format I can think of that might be incompatible with other such things (if someone doesn't want to support AAC, an open standard, that's their own fault, or yours for not ripping as MP3).

I don't want to imply that you're just trolling, but your second statement seems unqualified. iTunes DRM on purchased songs, though, that's one I'll give you.

Re:I salute the brilliance

[shotfeel]

Hmmm. I always got the impression that Gates was a wannabe Jobs.

Re:I salute the brilliance

[lexarius]

Em, I don't know exactly how the Windows iTunes is set up, but on my mac:
iTunes -> Preferences -> Advanced -> Importing -> Import Using: MP3 Encoder, Setting: Higher Quality (192 kbps)
Stuff from the music store? Burn it to an audio CD. You can probably figure out what to do from there.

Re:I salute the brilliance

[Rational]

It's more likely that Bill Gates wants to be Steve Jobs than the other way around.

Re:I salute the brilliance

[Anonymous Coward]

if he is a wannabe Gates, why is he focused on and responsible for the innovation, direction, quality, and sheer excellence that comes out of Cupertino? Gates is a businessman who realizes that Good Enough is good enough. The two have taken TOTALLY different paths.

Re:I salute the brilliance

[dpmccoy]

I'm definitely not trolling. Am I ignorant to what you referred to? Maybe. I used to be able to pop a CD in I-Tunes, rip it, and be able to play the music in I-Tunes (through WinXP) and in my Linux players. Something happened in one of the updates over the past year or so and, while following the same procedure, my ripped music only plays exclusively to I-Tunes...seems like it's ripped in the same format as purchased music. I will be fair and say this: I did not pay attention to the format I ripped the music in. I never had to change it before, so I never really paid attention to it. I will take a closer look, though.

Re:I salute the brilliance

[Anonymous Coward]

set iTunes to rip songs in MP3 instead of AAC. It can be done, I'm doing it right now.

Re:I salute the brilliance

[Anonymous Coward]

It's possible that something changed, but I haven't had a similar problem recently. Even the AAC's that were generated from iTunes played in Windows Media Player, of all things (with a quick codec update).

It may be possible that with your installation of one of the recent major updates (maybe to 6.x series of iTunes?) that the encoding was set to Apple Lossless by default, rather than MP3 (or AAC). A good way to tell would be to look at the filesizes -- if you're ripping a CD down to ~300 megs total, rather than ~30-40, then it's probably doing everything using ALAC. All you should have to do is switch it back.

Re:I salute the brilliance

[dpmccoy]

You're exactly right on both accounts...I hunted around for the Import setting while on my lunch break. I can't believe I missed it. Ditto for the music store...was just trying to avoid doing that as a last resort.

Re:I salute the brilliance

[Anonymous Coward]

Am I ignorant to what you referred to? Maybe

That should be "yes".

Something happened in one of the updates over the past year or so

Around iTunes 4.0 or so, the default ripping format changed from MP3 to (non-DRM'd) AAC. Just go into the preferences and change it back to MP3. Or, find a player that can play AAC.

Re:I salute the brilliance

[Anonymous Coward]

Even better method:
iTunes -> Preferences -> Advanced -> Importing -> Import Using: MP3 Encoder, Setting: Higher Quality (192 kbps) -> (some other apps) Convert to wav, copy to tape from audio out, copy to 8-track, copy to VHS tape, then copy to CD, then copy to wav, then MP3.......

I just love lossy formats and conversions, the sound quality is superb!

Re:I salute the brilliance

[lexarius]

Oh, and for all that music you ripped, you probably did it in un-DRM'd AAC. You should be able to use the "Convert Selection to MP3" menu item in the Advanced menu on those, which should be more convenient than doing CDs.

not seen in corporate environments?

[iggymanz]

I don't own a Mac, but I've been surprised to see them used in my client's sites, which include manufacturing plants and government (city, state and fed labs). Publishing and graphics design work mainly. And it does run some major pieces of software (anything that runs Microsoft Office can claim to support the most-used business software out there), even popular tax software. I notice my kid's educational video games run on both Windows and MacOS 8.6 & up

At least he's visible

[NickySantoro360]

For as "small" as Apple is portrayed, their CEO, at the very least, is visible to the public, which is more than I can say for many of tech companies larger than Apple (or any corporation for that matter). At least we know a CEO that actually does something (in the eyes of the public) that justifies a high salary.

Like Coach Bowden of the Seminoles, just his image and persona alone is more valuable than all of his other qualities.

-Santoro
monopolion

Re:At least he's visible

[Jearil]

At least we know a CEO that actually does something (in the eyes of the public) that justifies a high salary.

You bet your ass he works hard for that $1 a year salary.

Peons like us can only dream of that sort of thing :)

Re:At least he's visible

[baz1860]

After the spanking Penn State gave Coach Bowden and his boys in the Orange bowl, are you really sure that using him is the best analogy?? I think a better option would have been Charlie Weis at Notre Dame, not a hugely sucessful season by their great standards (but still culminating in a bowl appearance), but all the plaudits have been going their way because of Coach Weis and his effect on what was a poorly performing team until he arrived...

Re:At least he's visible

[NickySantoro360]

If you read the article you cited, he is compensated in MANY other ways. I used "salary" loosely (I was not even taking into account his stock options as well). -Santoro monopolion

Re:At least he's visible

[Anonymous Coward]

He also only owns a single share of stock.

Welcome to the Corporate Meeting industry

[cirby]

I do this sort of stuff for a living, and while most of the shows I do are more on the "hey gang, let's do a meeting" level, when someone's spending a couple of million bucks to fly in a few thousand folks, put them in hotels, and cram them into one ballroom, there's a very high level of expectation.

Sure, a lot of companies have Really Dull Meetings, but some others are much like the "Jobs Model." Slick, professionally-produced presentations, lots of cool videos and music, light shows, several HDTV-level projection screens, 100 kilowatt sound systems, and expensive pro talent to help entertain the crowd between product demos.

You also get stuff like Larry Ellison rappelling down from the ceiling of the ballroom, the head of a soft drink company crashing a golf cart through a frangible projection screen, rotating platforms for the audience (to turn them to different stages) for another soft drink company, or any of a hundred different Big Show stories.

You also get the Big Disasters when they don't prepare right. Like the above-mentioned rotating platforms not turning when the weight of the crowd is actually on them, or a full-sized luxury car on a raft in a lake doing a quick 180 degree roll and ending up suspended under water...

Starting to change?

[mbadolato]

Apple Macintoshes are only rarely seen in corporate environments

I wonder if that is starting to shift at all? I know from my own experience, our company is about 32 people or so, and I can count 10 or 11 Mac users. Not one of them is involved whatsoever in graphics or design. Most are developers, but the Sysadmin, CEO, COO, and VP of Product Development all use Macs, and the VP of Sales is a Mac user at home, but chooses a Win laptop just for compatibility sake when she's onsite @ client's offices.

Roughly 30% of our company is Mac. And barely any support is ever needed for any of them.

Re:Starting to change?

[Anonymous Coward]

I dont think I would call a company of 32 corporate america. Try 3200 or 32,000. that's where mac has never made inroads.

Re:Starting to change?

[Dun Malg]

Apple Macintoshes are only rarely seen in corporate environments

I wonder if that is starting to shift at all? I know from my own experience, our company is about 32 people or so, and I can count 10 or 11 Mac users.

You can't really judge based on one company. I maintain the landlord-provided network backbone in a large 10-story office building. Tenants range in size from one accountant with a secretary, to a large architectural firm with 200+ employees on site. Mac representation roughly reflects Mac marketshare/2. A couple ad agencies use nothing but Macs (they always have) and some of the smaller firms (5 people or less) are Mac-only, but other than a few onesies and twosies for technophobic CxO's and in-house graphics designers and such, the vast majority use cheap commodity PCs (mostly Dells-- blech). Macs showed an initial surge from near-zero representation (on NON-artists' destops) to the current levels right around the iMac/OSX time frame, but It's been relatively static since.

She wouldn't let me try it on.

[sjf]

OK, I gotta bite. M&S is famous for two things: its underwear and not having changing rooms.

It is axiomatic that all middle class British women buy their underwear in M&S.

With regard to not having changing rooms, if you'll indulge me with a further cliche:
"I used to have a girlfriend who worked for M&S, she wouldn't let me try it on."

Re:She wouldn't let me try it on.

[sjf]

Oh, and before the pedants start, yes, I know M&S does have changing rooms now.

Yes

[mrcparker]

I imagine that Jobs knows pretty much where Apple is going to be in 90 days/180 days/a year. I don't think that he has such a unique vision - it is just that he has a vision. From reading the article, it seems like the guy knew exactly what he wanted from the presentation, no matter how unreasonable it seemed.

You know, if a Linux company had half the focus of a Steve Jobs and had a clear vision they would sweep the market (k/ubuntu is getting getting better each day). So many FOSS-based companies seem very passive to me when it comes to defining their product.

Re:Yes

[jcr]

You know, if a Linux company had half the focus of a Steve Jobs and had a clear vision they would sweep the market (k/ubuntu is getting getting better each day).

Dream on. Linux needs a hell of a lot more than better presentations, starting with a decent 2D drawing API. After that, you can try coming up with a GUI environment that isn't just trying to equal Microsoft.

-jcr

At least it wasn't Steve Ballmer being the saleman

[antdude]

Imagine this in every key notes with Steve Ballmer. From AQFL. :)

same size as Nike doesn't suck

[dmh20002]

Anyone building a company would love to have it become the same size as Nike, Cadbury and even that English store thingie. That's not chump change.

Really

[TheSkepticalOptimist]

A Steve Jobs keynote is filled with self serving arrogance. I love Apple products, but can't stand Steve Jobs. His back slapping, self gratifying view of Apple's role in the computer industry as a whole is so laughable considering just how much Steve Job's ignores market trends and consumer needs.

Like in a recent keynote address, he disses Microsoft's Media Center PC remote control because it has 40+ buttons compared to Apple's new media remote that has 6. But what he fails to realize is the Microsoft's Media Center is actually designed to be a Home Theater component, allowing users to view and record television, payback DVD's and video, access media libraries, as well as general naviation of an OS environment.

Apple's solution to the emerging trend of home theater PC integration is a basic application which simply puts big fancy icons on Apple's iLife studio apps like iTunes, iPhoto and iDVD and allows the user a few control features like play, pause, fast forward and reverse, and volume controls. There is NO PVR capabilities, and few Apple products even support 5.1 surround sound or digital music connectivity to a home theater system.

Steve Jobs says that PC and home theater integration is a fad that won't last. So why even bother coming out with a half assed product that claims to do everything Windows Media Center does, only slicker, or so Steve Jobs says.

Its a fad until Steve Jobs says it isn't, a lot like portable video devices which he said were impractical for the average user. Until Steve Jobs added video support to the iPod. Now its the cat's meow.

From the one button mice to any real competition in the PC hardware market (face it, consumers don't want fancy overpriced and overdesigned Apple products, they are happy with low priced beige boxes), I think Apple would be better off without Steve Jobs and his ego and arrogance.

Where Steve Jobs is constantly failing is making Apple a real competitor to gain more then 5% of the computer market. For all his grandstanding and hype around Apple products and ESPECIALLY around OSX, I have yet to see Apple really want to gain more marketshare in the computer hardware market. They continuously sell overpriced hardware, even when the hardware significantly underperforms compared to PC products, its still overpriced. They insist on cutesly all-in-one products instead of more robust modulare components with a wide selection of available hardware and features. When Apple finally came out with a sub $1000 computer, it is so feature lacking and crippled that few PC users were ever convinced that the Mac Mini is a good alternative to a $600 PC. Apple's notebook division has been on vacation for the last 3 years. Apple has been selling only a few million computers a quarter, compared to dozens of millions by Dell, HP, an others. The average Asian OEM PC maker sells more computers then Apple. OBVIOUSLY these companies know what consumers want. Apple ( or rather, Steve Jobs ) does not. Apple firmly wants to remain in a niche market, or at least, Steve Jobs does.

It will be interesting to see how Steve Jobs screws up MacTels, new Intel based Macs, and he will screw up royally. I am sure his FIRST mistake will be to overprice computers which can be directly compared to against' PCs. The first Mactel to hit the market can have the same benchmarks running on it and direct comparisions to Dell, HP, and other PC computers. For the first time in history, a Mac is 99% identical to a PC except for the BIOS and a few hardware/software tweaks. Where Apple used to claim better performance becasue of RISC based architecture (and thus no real comparisons could be justified), now they must contend to offer a computer that has the same components as in the Wintel world. Steve Job's WILL make the mistake of overpricing Mactels, charging customers more for a Mac branded "PC" that contains the same components as a much cheaper PC which performs exactly the same. Dell and HP will be quick to clone Apple's style of Mactels, putting

Re:Really

[Seriocomical]

"The average Asian OEM PC maker sells more computers then Apple. OBVIOUSLY these companies know what consumers want. Apple ( or rather, Steve Jobs ) does not. Apple firmly wants to remain in a niche market, or at least, Steve Jobs does."

It's not necessarily so bad to be a niche player. To draw an analogy to the auto industry, Porsche, Ferrari and BMW could be described as niche players who do not sell nearly as many vehicles as the GMs or Fords but are nevertheless financially successful and famous worldwide for building high quality, exciting and desirable products. The world of cars would be much less interesting if poorly-designed, shoddily-made, mass-market gas-guzzlers were all that was on offer. Similarly, the computer world is better off for having Apple and its products available as a choice, even if they might not alwawys be the cheapest or most widely-used ones on the market.

Re:Really

[ta ma de]

Are you new to /. or have been reading it lately? Though a similar posting was made a day or so ago ... you should be aware of some of the basic rules.

1) Microsoft Sucks ass -- everything and anything is better.
2) *ix is the bomb, not matter what flavor. Especially when used in Beowulf clusters.
3) Everyone wants Linux to have the polish of the OS X interface.
4) We like Apple and Google is godlike.
5) In Soviet Russia things are in reverse.

Re:Really

[revscat]

In the end, I don't know what stranglehold or blackmail Steve Jobs has against other Apple execs, but if the rest of them were smart, they would drop Steve Jobs like a lead balloon. The only problem is, Apple execs have never shown one drop of intelligence in their entire history of the company.

Oh my fucking god, you have GOT to be joking. Apple is having (a) record growth (b) record profits and (c) a stock price that keeps going up and up and up. What in the holy hell are you talking about? They are respected and make excellent products that consumers love and have captured a large amount of mindshare. The executives would be completely RETARDED to get rid of Jobs. He's an excellent CEO. Much better than, I think, you are.

Put down the crack pipe, baby. Or maybe it's a anti-Jobs pipe? Whatevah, you need to think about quitting. :)

Re:Really

[Anonymous Coward]

"In the end, I don't know what stranglehold or blackmail Steve Jobs has against other Apple execs, but if the rest of them were smart, they would drop Steve Jobs like a lead balloon."

Ha! Ha! Ha! Ohhh.. Heee.. Ha! Jeez... stop, you're killing me. Someone get the MBA here a company to run! What a hilarious combination of FUD and disconnection from reality. This is the funniest post I've read in weeks. Thanks!

Re:Really

[bdowne01]

While I don't necessarily disagree with any of your points, I do think you misinterpret Steve Jobs' view of Apple's role in the computer industry.

Along with your Steve Jobs profile, you paint a picture of an elitist, which is presicely where I believe he wants Apple Computer at. I think he perceives an Apple Computer to be an experience worthy of the cost, any cost; better than anything else by leaps and bounds, and worth the time and effort to make it so. He wants an Apple computer to equate to a Bentley automobile or some other ultra-luxurious item.

What you didn't hit upon is that there actually are people in the market that will pay (up the nose) for so-called "ultra-luxury" items. The same folks that pay $10,000 for a platinum-plated bathroom sink may just very well see Apple computers as that type item for their computing need--if only by appearance and price alone. While I have in no way gone out to actually see if higher income brackets prefer Apple computers to others, I do know off-the-cuff that an awful lot of famous people tend to have them (Actors, Musicians, etc)--and probably for the status/fashion appeal as well as the functionality.

Whether that approach it is right or wrong for the Apple Computer, Inc. and its stock holders is up for grabs, but the "image" he has built for his company has no doubt been reinforced by his self-promotion and mangement style. And I think that 5% market is exactly what he intended.

Re:Really

[poot_rootbeer]

But what he fails to realize is the Microsoft's Media Center is actually designed to be a Home Theater component, allowing users to view and record television, payback DVD's and video, access media libraries, as well as general naviation of an OS environment.

That still doesn't explain why you need 200 dedicated-function buttons on the remote, rather than 10 or so multi-function buttons.

Consider DVD playback. At the menu screens, you need navigation buttons to move between menu items, and an enter button to activate the selected item. While playing a video stream, you need the abilities to pause, rewind or fast-forward, and return to a menu.

Those functions don't overlap -- you can't navigate menu items when there aren't any, and you can't fast-forward a menu screen. An intelligently-designed DVD application will use the same remote buttons for different purposes depending on the context.

Re:Really

[poot_rootbeer]

Steve Jobs says that PC and home theater integration is a fad that won't last. So why even bother coming out with a half assed product that claims to do everything Windows Media Center does, only slicker, or so Steve Jobs says.

When did he ever say any of these things? A quick googling didn't turn up any first-hand reports of Jobs quotes calling PC/home theater integration a "fad", nor any feature comparisons between Front Row and WMC apart from the design of the remotes.

Are you trying to FUD us?

Its a fad until Steve Jobs says it isn't, a lot like portable video devices which he said were impractical for the average user. Until Steve Jobs added video support to the iPod. Now its the cat's meow.

Yes. Circumstances change over time. Two years ago, typical consumers weren't willing to pay the premium to add video support to their iPods. Today, costs have come down and now they are. Jobs wasn't going to osborne Apple out of 2 years of iPod sales by announcing that a video iPod was eventually coming out.

Apple has been selling only a few million computers a quarter, compared to dozens of millions by Dell, HP, an others.

And how does Apple's profit margin per unit compare to Dell's? Growth is great, and market share is great, but in the end all that matters is profit.

For the first time in history, a Mac is 99% identical to a PC except for the BIOS and a few hardware/software tweaks.

This is true, if you count "an entirely different operating system and user experience" as a mere software tweak. People who subscribe to the Megahertz Myth may think Win86's and Mac86's can be compared directly, people who actually interact with a computer to determine its value will have other criteria for performance and value.

OSX is FREE to Apple to install on their hardware unlike Dell having to buy a Windows license for every computer they sell.

And Apple hasn't have to spend a cent to create or support OS X, no! It just sprang fully formed from the CVS repository one day.

I think Apple would be better off without Steve Jobs and his ego and arrogance.

We've already seen what Apple is like without Jobs at the helm. It's not a pretty scene, either for the customers or the investors.
Meanwhile, with Jobs in charge Apple is more popular and profitable than they've been since the 8-bit computing era. You'll have to forgive them if the board of directors doesn't take your advice to "drop him like a lead balloon".

Re:Really

[Anonymous Coward]

This is clearly coming from a technology worshipper who believes that more features=better, and ignores any other aspect of the decision. I have news for you - the usability of something is FAR more important to many people than "all the things it can do" or abstract technical specs.

I expect that when you make a purchasing decision, you sit down and compare features vs price, and buy the things that have the most features. For you, that might be fine. For me, and many other people, something irritating to use has NO value at all.

I used to get excited about new technology, until I kept buying it and realized that I never ended up using it nearly as much as I thought I would. I ended up asking myself why, and realized that the reason was that technology for the sake of technology is crap and a waste of money. Technology is about helping PEOPLE accomplish things. For my parents, the 3 remotes with a gazillion buttons is simply complexity to be managed because it obscures what they want to do (watch TV or a DVD). And, even though I'm a software developer and can use any system just fine and dandy, I feel the same way about things. For another example, I had a PDA because on paper, the features looked handy - carrying around lots of information, etc. Now I'm back to a paper organized, because it's more efficient to use (and actually has more features, because I can draw diagrams, etc). I thought I could use it as an MP3 player, but it was irritating for a number of reasons. When I sold it, I used the money to put towards an iPod, which I use all the time. Now, I walk through local electronics stores and think "that's terrible"... "I would use that, if it were designed better"... "how is this supposed to make my life better again?"... I've been wanting Apple to come out with a tablet PDA for a while now, because I have faith I would actually want to use it. Until then, I've pretty much given up on them.

Yup, the hardware specs for Apple machines mean that the PC user's CPU is 10% faster for crunching SETI-at-home data. However, I am able to do much more with my iMac than I ever could on any Windows or Linux box, because it makes the functions easily available to me and I don't have to spend buckets of time learning it. I don't like pissing around with computers after I leave work for the day, but I like to do things that involve computers. Using Windows is an irritating experience. Linux is OK to use, and gets a lot of slack for usability because I appreciate all the work that's gone into it and what it stands for. But they don't come close to using my Mac.

That, by itself, is worth any "premium" to me. And if businesses looked at things holistically and factored in the productivity of people's time, overall job satisfaction, support costs, etc (and actually considered other options besides Windows), I bet a LOT more businesses would be using Macs.

As for your comments about the media center PCs, I believe an appropriate question to ask is whether or not all those features (like general OS navigation) are good features to try and put on a remote? (I haven't actually used either, so I can't comment directly on them).

So, your constant comparison of "the same thing" is not even close to the mark. Also, over the past few years, comparing a comparably equipped Dell PC and an Apple PC, including software, the Apple's were actually a better value, except for the machine's technical speed. At least for my needs, I know the PC world lets you customize things to specific needs a lot better.

And you know what? It's Steve Jobs that makes the difference and makes the company keep the eye on the prize, and build things that are fun to use.

Re:Really

[wootest]

The idea of "The Apple Tax" is prevalent and popular. It's also mostly not true.

As an example, one of the "Mini PC" deals from a local computer company costs ~$680 - it lands performance-wise between the $499 and $599 Mac mini, and comes without an OS and logically also without any software. The Mac mini not only already has an OS, but comes with more software than has been bundled with my latest two PCs (and as far as I can tell, most of the software that comes with the mini doesn't suck).

The above example was a fairly well-equipped box, on par with the Mac mini. If we were to go up to the current PowerBook, for example, it'd have Firewire 800, optical audio, gigabit ethernet, Bluetooth 2.0 and a full-sized DVI. I agree that it performance more or less sucks (with a 167MHz system bus, no wonder they're going Intel), but try to find a comparable port setup on a PC laptop for the same price. (The PowerBook also comes with even more software.)

It's true that you can put together an eMachine for $300 with less features that still does everything you want. At that point, there *will* be an overwhelming Apple tax if you were to look at the alternatives, and unless you want OS X, there's no good reason to buy a Mac. It's also true that you can probably find a technically better laptop than the iBook for the same price. To me, this is the only noticable Apple tax. But most of this is also a general tax - if you were buying a better Dell for $500, would you also call that The Dell Premium? No, you'd recognize that it was a higher-end model than your current one, and get on with your life. The only reason this doesn't happen with Apple is because they don't additionally make low-end models as low as the others.

Another scenario: you're trying to buy a Quad PowerMac G5, and you're complaining about the price - a workstation computer costing $3300. I went to Dell's site and configured a Dell Precision 670 MT64 - also billed as a workstation computer - with two Dual-Core Xeons. It cost $4634. $3300 is heinous, but compared to what the market's low-cost provider has, it's cheap.

At very few points, even today, are you paying a $500 premium for Apple computers. If you're not satisfied by a Mac mini and want an iMac, there's an exact $500 difference between the top mini and the low iMac, so if you're in that position and strapped for cash, I pity you. At even fewer points - none? - do you have one PC and one Mac, both with comparable hardware and the Mac costing $500 more.

Your argument that PC users won't switch may prove to be correct. Really switching to the Mac and actually abandoning your current PC is not something you accomplish over an afternoon, and unless you're a "Student/Teacher"; the Mac version of Office isn't cheap either. Even if we consider the people that will like to have one box booting OS X, Windows and natively, or even just the first two, they're practically a rounding error in comparison to potential switchers.

But where I know that you're absolutely full of crap is the bit about driving loyal Apple customers away. Most loyal Apple customers have already been through either OS 9 to OS X or that AND 68k to PowerPC. This transition promises to be a lot smoother, which is astounding, considering how the emulator this time around is crappier. There's absolutely no evidence that the new Macs will be significantly worse than the current Macs, other than possible manufacturing defects with new rounds of hardware - nothing particularly unique to either this transition or Apple products.

Other people have said it better that Apple is making more money than ever currently. Steve Jobs stood on the WWDC stage seven months ago and proclaimed that by summer 2007, every Mac would be shipping with an Intel processor. Since then, sales of would-be-obsolete machines are going up. It's not exactly your average Osbourne effect. If you cared about your profits, you would be nuts to fire Jobs if you were in the position to do so.

My last point is that of the double-play

Re:Really

[Jesus IS the Devil]

Who are you kidding here? The car industry is completely different from the computer industry.

First of all, a Mac is hardly a Porsche. It doesn't run any faster, turn corners any better, and yet it costs more and underperforms.

Computers are not meant to be fashion statements like cars. They are there to make your life more productive, to get work done. Period. Same can be said for cars, but as you know, that's hardly the case in real life.

Re:Really

[Varkias]

For someone who rants about Steve Jobs being arrogant, it's the first word that comes to my mind when reading your post.

Re:Really

[jen20]

Firstly, I'd love to know why this was modded "+3, Interesting" rather than "-1, Flamebait", or "-infinity, Stupid".

Lets take a few points here...

They continuously sell overpriced hardware

On the contrary, my mac laptop cost me a little over £600, and for a laptop still easily capable of five hours battery life a year later, is the embodiment of value for money.

more robust modulare components with a wide selection of available hardware and features

Proof? More to the point, however, it's simply incorrect. How many people in the target audience for the iMac even know they *can* upgrade their computer, much less how to go about doing it? And this is without mentioning that it comes with pretty much everything you ever need anyway (internal bluetooth and wireless LAN are still not commonplace in machines from other manufacturers). The Power Mac, you must note, is a tower unit and can be upgraded with exceptional ease.

I am sure his FIRST mistake will be to overprice computers which can be directly compared to against' PCs.

Firstly let's define PCs. I always took it to mean "personal computer", which Apples are. Now lets see what *you* mean, which is computers running Windows. And for that precise reason, machines made by Apple are NOT comparable, since they run an operating system based around common sense security models such that they do not get viruses or spyware infections easily, and has not remained static for four years.

Apple should sell computers cheaper then Dell simply because they don't have to charge themselves OS licensing fees. OSX is FREE to Apple to install on their hardware

This shows you to *really* be an idiot. Who exactly do you think pays for the development of OS X?

Apple should sell computers cheaper then PC's if they ever want to gain marketshare.

No, this is the Dell approach. What Apple should continue to do is sell good quality products, not the cheapest.

but if the rest of them were smart, they would drop Steve Jobs like a lead balloon.

John Sculley anybody? Look where that ended up.

The only problem is, Apple execs have never shown one drop of intelligence in their entire history of the company.

Debatable, however what is certain is that you showed no sign of intelligence in your entire post.

Re:Really

[drinkypoo]

Ferrari and Porsche are niche players, BMW is not. In Germany, BMW is just another car manufacturer and the cars are everywhere, likewise Mercedes. In fact Mercedes is sort of the German version of Chevrolet. The only reason all the German cars (except some of the shittiest E-class Mercedes) in the US are so pricy is the broad assortment of import tariffs we levied against Germany after WWII.

Re:Really

[trooz1]

Its a fad until Steve Jobs says it isn't, a lot like portable video devices which he said were impractical for the average user. Until Steve Jobs added video support to the iPod. Now its the cat's meow.

Isn't that a good thing? Think about mp3 players in general. They used to be the type of things that only geeks would buy, a type of geek fad. Then Apple released the iPod, and found a way to successfully market the mp3 player to a much much larger segment of the population. The damn things are everywhere! Does that mean that they are better? Not necessarily, but the success of this "mp3 player fad" is leading to newer, better products from more companies, both in mp3 players and digital multimedia in general. Now tell me how much better off wwe'd be without Jobs. We may have eventually progressed this far, but when I see a frickin' iPod everywhere I turn, the guy's done something right!

Re:Really

[EvilStein]

"When Apple finally came out with a sub $1000 computer, it is so feature lacking and crippled that few PC users were ever convinced that the Mac Mini is a good alternative to a $600 PC"

That's the stupidest fucking comment I've read in years.
For the record (and I don't know why I'm even wasting my time replying to such bullshit) the Mac mini wasn't the first sub-$1000 computer. Goes to show what you know.

No wonder I quit wasting my time around here.

Re:Really

[Anonymous Coward]

In soviet Russia, ... oh wait, you covered that already.

Re:Really

[Anonymous Coward]

Computers are not meant to be fashion statements like cars. They are there to make your life more productive, to get work done. Period. Same can be said for cars, but as you know, that's hardly the case in real life. So first cars are meant to be fashion statements, then they are not? How about this: some people buy cars to make a statement, just as some people buy Macs/iPods/other gizmos to make a statement. People who want a modular system with cheap parts should stick with PCs; people who want simplicity should buy Macs. Not everyone uses their computer as a general purpose machine; this is a sad fact, but it is undeniably true. And how do Macs underperform PCs? My Powerbook runs faster and smoother than most equivalent laptops.

Re:Really

[linuxmop]

"For the first time in history, a Mac is 99% identical to a PC except for the BIOS and a few hardware/software tweaks."

This is true, if you count "an entirely different operating system and user experience" as a mere software tweak. People who subscribe to the Megahertz Myth may think Win86's and Mac86's can be compared directly, people who actually interact with a computer to determine its value will have other criteria for performance and value.

You have missed the point entirely. Take Dell computer A and Apple computer B with similar hardware specifications. We can install Windows on both computers and run benchmarks that demonstrate that both computers have comparable hardware. We can also look at trends to see which hardware is more reliable.

The problem for Apple is that they will no longer be able to make claims that Apple computers run faster; if trends continue, it will always be possible to buy a (hardware) comparable Dell for less money. Therefore, they will have to convince you that you should pay the Apple premium for the shiny case and the operating system (er, user experience), even though the $120 OS can technically run on any modern x86 machine with the proper video card.

Are you willing to pay hundreds of dollars extra to get Mac OS X? Do you think the average user will be?

Re:Really

[J.R. Random]

Actually, Porsche and Ferrari make nothing but gas guzzlers. But they're fun gas guzzlers.

Re:Really

[Anonymous Coward]

Whoever modded the parent as flamebait is obviously another Mac fan boy who can't take any negative criticisms of an obsolete computer maker who overcharges for underperforming products. Whoever metamoderates should shoot that moderator down for being incompetent.

Re:Really

[Anonymous Coward]

If that average user is a cubicle-critter forever playing with Office and working on Solitaire, then no, that average user will not buy a Mac. But if that average user wants to make a home movie and burn it on a DVD effortlesly and elegantly (or just wants to avoid getting a taste of the virus/trojan/spyware de jour), then a couple of hundred bucks might be a small price. It all depends on the value they'd place on their time, their peace of mind ... (or just the value percieved in being with the hip well-heeled crowd).

Despite what the fan boys might claim, not many people used to buy Macs because they were faster (ok, apart from the VaTech BigMac.) Most users wouldn't even know basics of 680x0/PPC/Pentium/Athlon/ etc. And yet people have been buying Macs. All of my Mac using friends (4) have it 'cos of the overall Mac experience. All the folks with PCs (4) have Dell 'cos it was the cheapest (in every sence of the word.)

So as far as the "average user" market is concerned, not much will change with IMacs (IntelMacs)

Re:Really

[Anonymous Coward]

On one side, there is this guy (who by all accounts is a quality-freak perfectionist and stickler for details), who started the personal computer revolution from his garage, got one of the first GUIed PCs to market, as CEO delivered a solid OS and got the company stock price to go up 15x and generally saved the company from oblivion, did wonders for digital music download market and started a world wide consumer iFad, .......

On the other side, is this other guy wanking off on /.

Whose ideas should I listen to? Hmmmm...tough choice.

Re:Really

[Anonymous Coward]

The real point everyone misses with Apple products, once they're out of warranty, Apple won't sell end users replacement parts.

So, if you're a corporate environment using Apple's XServe, make sure you get an extended warranty, or train a few of your staff members to be Apple Certified Desktop/Portable technicians.

Re:Really

[Seriocomical]

As you point out, people often choose cars in order to make a fashion statement or because of their unique design qualities rather than simply for providing a means for getting from A to B. However, I am arguing that this is now also more and more the case for computers, at least in the home-user market, and Apple is one of the few companies that realize this and are capitalizing on it.

Re:Really

[Seriocomical]

Yes, BMW is certainly a bigger player than the other two, however it still sells far fewer vehicles than the big auto companies (e.g., VW sells twice as many, Daimler-Chrysler four times as many, and Ford, GM, Toyota yet more). During recent years, there has often been discussion in the business press about how long BMW, as one of the smaller players, could maintain its existence as an independent company. Indeed, VW wanted to take it over at one point. I hope Apple, too, can continue to survive and provide a choice in the marketplace.

Re:Really

[Seriocomical]

Good point! I can imagine some who might draw an analogy to Macs and their consumption of CPU-cycles... ;-)

Re:Really

[drinkypoo]

I think Apple has a much better chance to survive. BMW's quality has gone in the toilet (probably in an attempt to lower costs, though clearly it is not lowering prices) and they just don't have the prestige of Mercedes. I don't think there's room for two German bit-players in the world market. Also, Mercedes actually makes vehicles that are capable of surviving in the desert and such so they have the world market issue (though Mercedes' quality has taken a sharp dive as well.)

BMW will probably end up being purchased by someone. I hope it's VW/Audi, because they could definitely use some styling improvements.

Re:Really

[hackstraw]

Are you willing to pay hundreds of dollars extra to get Mac OS X?

Yes.

Do you think the average user will be?

Why would they? Do you think that the average driver drives a BMW like I do?

As the late Douglas Adams once said: "The Macintosh may only have 10% of the market, but it is clearly the top 10%."

The average people don't fit into that category. It doesn't come biggie sized.

Now you can super foe me!

Santa Jobs

[AnalystX]

I've got to say it's the Santa Jobs factor. The anticipation of new products always seems to be on the mind of attendees and remote Apple watchers. A MacExpo keynote is like Christmas morning. If you can understand the excitement surrounding the age-old tradition of sneaking a peek at Santa Clause delivering his presents, and wondering ahead of time what you'll get this year, you can understand a Steve Jobs keynote.

Holy shit

[Anonymous Coward]

Give Steve a blowjob, why don't you?

your guys are too funny...

[CDPatten]

"he actually means here we have 5000 or so carefully picked photos ... "

Years ago a story come out about MS doing some careful selections for demo (i think it was for XP) and your guys tooled them. I mean many of you were just vicious; "disingenuous, deceitful, EVIL, liars, etc. etc." That was one of the most hate filled threads I has seen. So we fast forward to today and well I guess I just think it's funny that when Apple does it... it's a stroke of genius.

"Such comparisons come up short in trying to describe Apple's place in the world of business, because they leave out a key factor: Steve Jobs."
LOL. One word, FANBOY. seriously though, we should get him some knee pads. lol.

Anyone following the CES from this site most likely is not having a good week. MS is making out pretty friggen well on allot of fronts. Their stuff certainly is doing a good job of trivializing Apple (less the iPod of course). Go ahead flame, its still pretty funny...

Re:your guys are too funny...

[Strolls]

"he actually means here we have 5000 or so carefully picked photos ... "

Years ago a story come out about MS doing some careful selections for demo (i think it was for XP) and your guys tooled them. I mean many of you were just vicious; "disingenuous, deceitful, EVIL, liars, etc. etc." That was one of the most hate filled threads I has seen. So we fast forward to today and well I guess I just think it's funny that when Apple does it...

Maybe we didn't notice that bit about "5000 or so carefully picked photos" because it's not actually in the article. [1] I don't know where the submitter got that from, but if you'd actually read the article... oh, sorry, this is Slashdot... you'd see that wasn't the case. He was fairly fussy that the video clips picked to be used looked good, but there's no evidence that he manipulated them in any other way. Stroller. [1] Either that or my browser's search function is broken. Keywords: "5000", "5,000" and "carefully".

What Jobs does has nothing to do with

[crovira]

the business market.

He's never been in the same playground that Microsoft's in.

Apple's business has always been more about the consumer market. By design! When Stevev Jobs was (and as he is again,) in charge anyway.

The creation of a platform which supported VisiCalc, which propelled sales of the original Apple][, was a happy accident but it was just that, an accident. Then the creation of the DTP market with Adobe (originally called Aldus) was another happy accident. Their subsequent ability to retain market share in that market is due to the fact that creative people appreciate elegance.

He doesn't want to play in the business arena. He never did. Its too cut-throat to charge the margins he could possibly chage by staying in the home market.

The thing to remember about Apple is 'style.' He wanted a company with some style and which produced products that had style. Style derives from elegance. Elegance derives from two Latin roots, 'e' (meaning 'out') and 'legare' (meaning 'to choose'.) Elegant designs are those which have all the 'cruft' out-chosen from them. Apple hardware designs are definitely elegant and OS X's Aqua GUI interface is also elegant.

The business market doesn't give a crap about style or elegance.

It all about the Benjamins. The one who can deliver the most bang for the buck wins the contracts. Its made Dell what it is today. Its also what has unmade a host of companies, like IBM PC hardware. Not even their line of laptops, which can charge a premium for design, survived.

Dell was possible because Microsoft was never in the hardware market so they were able to commoditize it all without getting hurt. In a kind of symbiotic relationship, Dell exists because they were able to get control of the supply chain and leave the software R&D to Microsoft.

That's just a fact.

Microsoft could have played 'by the rules of law' and still have emerged on top. Now they're tainted by their past and they are no further ahead in the other markets because they have to depend on their hardware makers.

The hardware makers are locked in cut-throat competition and don't have the cash reserves to do any R&D.

They can't even change chassis because it costs money that nobody's willing to pony up. Hence you're stuck with ugly boxes and that's all you can get. That's all you're ever going to get because its not worth it for chassis manufacturers; the two big remaining are Chinese, all too well versed in the costs of change, and NOT about to change how they manufacture chassis. The're making money now and they don't have a culture which responds, swiftly to change.

You're stuck with the same box as ten years ago while in that time Apple came up with three generations of award winning designs for their iMacs, their PowerBooks, their iBooks and their PowerMacs.

The iPod and subsequent entry into audio and video blogs (and the distibution of RSS content,) ARE what Apple is about.

The PC will forever rule the 32-bit business desktop market.

My 2 new AMD64 Athlons are runing crappy 32 bit implementations of WindowsXP and most of the CPU cycles are devoted to keeping viri, worms and other creepy-crawlies at bay. (One of them is actually dual boot; running slackware Linux 99% of the time; then it runs flat out.)

I wouldn't WANT to move the business machines into my living room.

There I've got a wireless network, a 400GB NAS server, an older G4 PowerBook and a G5 iMac taking care of 'business' without 'looking' like business machines. With the addition of a digital tuner, my home entertainment center is my iMac.

And I've got OS X 10.4.2, some A/V components, a podcasting set-up, the software, and iTunes (running on all of them and sharing my library on the NAS server).

And that's the way I LIKE it.

Re:What Jobs does has nothing to do with

[Ohreally_factor]

Adobe aquired Aldus (and Aldus Pagemaker) a looooong time ago (late 80s/early 90s?), but Adobe started as Adobe, not as Aldus.

Ron Popeil is to Ronco ...

[ta ma de]

as Steve is to Apple. They have similar pitches ... and, you just can't stop watching. Both focus on simplicity ... Just set and forget it ... Only six buttons. To match the same functionality with a Dell, feature for feature, you would have to spend a fazillion dollars. But, with a Mac you get all of this, and more. You get iLife with Garage Band, iPhoto, iTunes, and iMovie -- in HD. It only costs $1299 ... and, its available right now!

and Boom.

[catmistake]

He is a study in cult of personality. Speaking as someone who hates crowds, mind you, I am not exactly popular (nor particularly unpopular). I've noticed that I have friends, some I just consider natural born leaders (with all of their ignorace/faults). The one thing I've noticed is that tall people tend to more often get people to listen...er, rather... people naturally listen to them/believe them, even if what they say is really dumb. Sociologically speaking, I really wonder what all of the traits are of the person that is naturally popular, the person that no matter what they do, never seems to do anything to maintain friendships, never calls anyone back, seems to always be busy with something, always has people sort of following them. I think Bill Clinton is another decent example of this. What is it about these people? Napoleon wasn't tall, so its not just height. Could it be a biological/chemical/genetic trait? Or is it something that even the most naturally unpopular person could master?

I know why you're wrong...

[Anonymous Coward]

Jobs doesn't predict the future -- he dictates it!

USB only became popular because Apple stopped selling computers with other ports (serial, ADB, SCSI) AND because Windows computers already had support for it. If Windows machines didn't ship with USB ports, USB peripherals would be no more common than ADB, AAUI, or Mac serial peripherals were 10 years ago.

NextStep only became the basis for MacOS because Jobs decided to use it (there were other options at the time, such as BeOS) and it was pretty much a failure for the 12 or so years until they stopped selling computers that would run earlier versions of MacOS. The NeXT machine didn't herald the future of computing, it merely foretold the future of computers Steve Jobs would sell. It's not like ObjectiveC has taken the computer world by storm, or something.

dom

Re:I know why you're wrong...

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd argue that apple had basically nothing to do with widespread USB adoption. The release of the imac pretty much coincided with USB attaining critical mass on PCs and hardware developers getting comfortable with the new spec and realizing its possibilities.

Re:At least it wasn't Steve Ballmer being the sale

[Archimboldo]

Pretty sad.

A pro-Apple piece in the Guardian?

[Curmudgeonlyoldbloke]

...and it's not even written by Jack Schofield.
Pass the sick bag, Alice.

It's Not "Tiny" Marketshare: Here's why

[mpapet]

The way market share was calculated the last time I looked at the market research numbers a couple of years ago, Apple's market share for desktops and laptops was calculated against the sum total of all other windows OS brands.

At the time Apple was #1 by a good margin in laptops and in the top-5 for desktops. Yet their market share was always referred to as "miniscule."

I still don't understand why no one's bothered to mention this from the media side.

Re:It's Not "Tiny" Marketshare: Here's why

[BlueDjinn]

Yes and no. According to the latest figures available (3rd Quarter 2005), Apple is currently the 6th largest computer maker (after Dell, HP, Lenovo/IBM, Acer, and Fujitsu-Siemens). However, they also do have only a 2.3% market share:

http://www.systemshootouts.org/mac_sales.html

(scroll down past the 2 charts at the top)

Now, when it comes to installed base, I believe Macs are much higher, something like 8-10% or so, though I don't have solid proof of this (I think PC Mag did a study a couple of years ago which determined that Macs usually average a 5-7 year 'usable life' as opposed to 3-5 years for PCs, which would explain the higher installed base numbers)

You should not have any problem with "Apple DRM".

[ChrisA90278]

"can't listen to the 200+ songs I've purchased through I-Tunes because of his DRM practices" What??? Describe the problem you have in some detail. Me or others will tell you what to do about it. There should be no problem with either the purchaced songs or the ones you riped from CD both should play on almost any portable device.

centimillionaire?

[aaronrp]

I think the parent means "hectomillionaire," as being a centimillionaire isn't all that exciting.

See the list of SI prefixes here.

Steve Job's approach not unique???

[Anonymous Coward]

"This isn't to say Steve Jobs doesn't deserve credit for being good at what he does, but I don't think he's particularly unique in his approach or methods."

Oh? Did you see the head Microsoftie's presentation at CES? If not, check it out. Then watch the Apple show next week and see if you still feel the same.

It's all about Steve

[Geoff]

A former Apple employee once told me that everyone there knew what their REAL job was -- making stuff for Steve's next demo.

And it works. Whatever is announced, the Apple Store will be swamped with pre-orders for it, and I will again be amazed at his ability to tempt me to pull my credit card out of my wallet and click on store.apple.com. :)

(Fortunately, I'm poor enough to resist, but I sure feel the tug!)

Geoff

Yes, blame Bill Gates.

[Futurepower(R)]

"When I see MS do something stupid I don't generally blame Bill Gates. I mean, the day to day vulnerabilities, the crappy design, the shoddy interfaces, none of that can really be attributed (in my understanding) to Bill."

In my opinion, Bill Gates is to be blamed. Look at the vulnerabilities and bad design more carefully and you will see that they are a result of planning. They are not accidents. They are the result of Bill making money the center of his whole life. They are the result of his sneaky aggressive behavior.

The vulnerabilities and extremely bad design are the result of not letting Microsoft programmers finish their jobs. The vulnerabilities and extremely bad design make Microsoft more money. For example, most businesses would have been happy to remain with Windows 98, but Windows 98 often corrupted its big central configuration file called the registry. Windows 98 would literally self-destruct.

Windows 98 regularly crashed because operating system resources like something called GDI and others were allowed a maximum of 128K of memory. 128K! That limitation was easily fixable, but it wasn't fixed.

Windows 98 self-destruction made Bill Gates more money because he is exploiting his virtual monopoly. Businesses paid a huge amount to buy another operating system from Microsoft, Windows XP.

Note that Bill Gates suffers from depression. This is exactly what you would expect of a man who has spent his entire adult life acting out sneaky aggression.

The reason Apple does so well under Steve Jobs is because Steve Jobs is idealistic, an unusual characteristic for a CEO. Remember, however, that Steve Jobs is also a monumentally abusive person, and suffers enormously because of that. Mr. Jobs just often doesn't let his abusiveness be in the way of his idealism.

Apple does well partly because Microsoft is not interested in doing well. Microsoft is "maximizing shareholder value" by delaying delivering good products so that customers will always have a reason to buy the next version.

Re:Yes, blame Bill Gates.

[theStorminMormon]

I'm extremely uncomfortable in this akward position of defending Bill Gates - but since I value the method of thinking about any given thought I'm going to do it.

In my opinion, Bill Gates is to be blamed... They are the result of Bill making money the center of his whole life. They are the result of his sneaky aggressive behavior.

Money is clearly not the center of Bill Gates life. If it was, he wouldn't be the biggest philanthropist of all time. This doesn't make him a saint (he may be in it for fame and ego) but it does indicate that money isn't his only idol. You quick assertion that it is indicates to me that you - like many of us - are quick to oversimplify and lay far more blame than can really be laid at the foot of corporate figureheads.

Note that Bill Gates suffers from depression. This is exactly what you would expect of a man who has spent his entire adult life acting out sneaky aggression. It's all fun and games to paint demonic horns and a tail on Bill, but in all seriousness you continue to indicate this desire - universal to humans - to live in a universe that is neat and tidy. Things happen because they are someone's fault, people's actions can be explained by their character - which is itself simple and comprehensible.

The points I'm questioning are bigger than either Bill Gates or Steve Jobs. It has to do with the way that we manufacture celebrity for celebrity's sake - just as we manufacture notoriety for notoriety's sake.

The truth is that sometimes things happen not "just because", but for a variety of reasons that are so complex that there's really no better explanation. A multi-billion dollar business is an incredibly complex structural organization. Of course a CEO can set the tone - it's about leadership. Steve Jobs appears to be a leader. But how much do you think that leadership translates directly into "cool new products?"

I think that there's a ton of luck that goes into it as well. I imagine there are probably many people who could do what Steve is doing, but who will never be in that position (and probably suck in whatever position they are in now because they don't have the temperment for it).

-stormin

Re:Yes, blame Bill Gates.

[Archimboldo]

Note that Bill Gates suffers from depression.

Interesting. Any reference? Not doubting you, just hadn't heard it.

Re:Yes, blame Bill Gates.

[Millenniumman]

Most of your complaints are directed towards Microsoft, not Bill Gates. You complain that it only wants to make money, but that's what should be the case. Microsoft exists to make money for shareholders. So does Apple. And Bill Gates is probably a good person. He's donated a lot to charity. And there is nothing wrong with him trying to make money, although I doubt it's the most important thing to him now considering how much money he already has. Steve Jobs is a much better speaker than Gates, and his company makes much better products than Gate's (In my opinion) but I don't consider him to be a better person. I'm fine with people criticizing Windows (Or any other Microsoft products), but saying Microsoft or Bill Gates is "evil" is stupid. For the record, I am a Mac user and I dislike Windows quite a lot.

Re:Yes, blame Bill Gates.

[beetle496]

> Money is clearly not the center of Bill Gates life.

True, but that is only because the money is incidental to his quest for world domination as opposed to Steve Jobs who is equally driven, but motivated to offer the best product possible.

> If it was, he wouldn't be the biggest philanthropist of all time.

You must be young. Bill Gate's charitable giving was almost nonexistent until he was shamed into action. It was only after his miserly become so infamous that it was interfering with business that he was compelled into action. Not surprisingly, he crafted his donations for maximum PR value. The money does good work, more than you or I can ever hope to accomplish, but is a tiny amount compared to his personal fortune, let alone the wealth he controls.

> I think that there's a ton of luck that goes into it as well.

True, hence the title of the book, Accidental Empires, that I cite above. But that doesn't give due credit to the full positive force of the personalities involved. These people would almost certainly have been successful (perhaps not famously so) in just about any field.

> I imagine there are probably many people who could do what Steve is doing.

That assumption is plainly incorrect. Great leaders are so rare that the U.S. cannot find compelling candidates for president. There are plenty of books about the great leaders in business. The potential for a single individual at the top to influence corporate culture is well documented. Apple's floundering without Steve Jobs, despite talented CEOs, and his demonstrated ability to lead them twice now (not to mention two other companies in the mean time) is a unique story even among these other luminaries.

Re:Yes, blame Bill Gates.

[theStorminMormon]

You state the the assumption that there are many people who could do what Steve is doing is plainly incorrect because the US can not find a compelling candidate for president. That's flawed logic - the problem may be with the system we use for selecting candidates and not with the pool of candidates. I believe that to be the case. I think there are many men and women who could make a very good president - certainly far better than either Bush or Kerry.

I'm also not willing to follow your logic that Steve Jobs is a giant among insects - which seems to be your claim.

Finally if the influence of personality of the CEO on the organization as a whole is well documented than I am generally interesed in reading more about it. I'm not interested in hearing people try to tell me that Bill Gates is a tyrant out for world domination - especially if those same people are telling me that deep down Steve Jobs just wants to deliver quality products. Those are not people - those are caricatures.

In my day to day experience the people I meet are neither angels nor demons - and I could not categorize myself or anyone I know accurately in a short one or two line synopsis. And yet people continue to act as though public personalities - about whom we know the least - are some how fundamentally easier to know and understand than our own neighbors and co-workers.

Lives and people and the world in general are more complex than that.

-stormin

Re:Yes, blame Bill Gates.

[beetle496]

You state the the assumption that there are many people who could do what Steve is doing is plainly incorrect because the US can not find a compelling candidate for president. That's flawed logic.

I cite that example as proof by demonstration that exemplary leaders are rare in general, not just in business. But politics being so corrupt, I understand how you missed my point.

I'm also not willing to follow your logic that Steve Jobs is a giant among insects - which seems to be your claim.

I find the example of Steve Jobs to be compelling even considering that the technology field offers many brilliant, interesting, and influential characters. The CEOs of these businesses are inevitably talented peoples. But even among these, Steve Jobs' track record is remarkable.

Finally if the influence of personality of the CEO on the organization as a whole is well documented than I am generally interested in reading more about it.

How about you start with Jack?

I'm not interested in hearing people try to tell me that Bill Gates is a tyrant out for world domination - especially if those same people are telling me that deep down Steve Jobs just wants to deliver quality products. Those are not people - those are caricatures.

When one reads widely, the same characterizations keep coming up, from disparate and varied source. Your skepticism is understandable, but the facts are dramatic enough to inspire two documentaries!

In my day to day experience the people I meet are neither angels nor demons.

So you extrapolate your mundane experiences to the rest of the world? Your homily is more true than false, but most famous people are notorious for valid reasons.

Re:Yes, blame Bill Gates.

[theStorminMormon]

First off thanks for the great responses. This is an excellent reason for why i like the slashdot discussions. Instead of just getting into pointless bashing all the time - I actually can learn a lot.

You seem to think it strange to extrapolate from my "mundane experiences" to the rest of the world - but I think that it's rationally more sound than the alternative. If we disregard our own experiences doesn't that make us completely credulous?

So I'm still somewhat skeptical. In my experience I've always felt that fundamentally people are people. This means they all operate on some relatively similar principles, but that they are all similarly irreducibly complex. To some extent what you say about great leaders holds true, but on the other hand we will never know how many Alexander the Greats or Napoleons never saw an army, or how many Einsteins spent their lives in manual labor. I'm willing to accept that there are extraordinary people - but at the same time I think that heroes and villians are largely products of the human attempt to impose narrative on our history. We need antagonists and protagonists - they are an essential element of the human experience even if they are not an essential element of objective reality.

But I'm eager to look into your references, and I appreciate them.

-stormin

Re:Yes, blame Bill Gates.

[beetle496]

First off thanks for the great responses. This is an excellent reason for why i like the slashdot discussions. Instead of just getting into pointless bashing all the time - I actually can learn a lot.

Thanks, I appreciate considered discourse as well.

You seem to think it strange to extrapolate from my "mundane experiences" to the rest of the world - but I think that it's rationally more sound than the alternative. If we disregard our own experiences doesn't that make us completely credulous?

All true, but it seems me that you are over-projecting from your first hand knowledge. What prompted me to chime in was your assertion that "there are probably many people who could do what Steve is doing" which I definitely do not find to be credible. (Substitute Bill Gates or Jack Welch or other luminaries in your assertion I quoted, and I will still disagree with you!)

So I'm still somewhat skeptical. In my experience I've always felt that fundamentally people are people. This means they all operate on some relatively similar principles, but that they are all similarly irreducibly complex.

Consider (but just briefly) a history you know well. Would your church exist were it not for the very individual contributions of Joseph Smith and of Brigham Young?

To some extent what you say about great leaders holds true, but on the other hand we will never know how many Alexander the Greats or Napoleons never saw an army,

I believe those two men would have been tremendous leaders in just about any time or place. If around today, they probably would be in business! They probably would not have achieved the same historical recognition of course.

or how many Einsteins spent their lives in manual labor.

I believe that number is probably close to zero. For example, the influence of an Einstein in North America a few millennia ago might leave history only with the myth of Iktomi. Can I prove that? No, of course not, but such supposition is less preposterous than imagining an individual like Einstein living his life in ignominy, merely given different circumstances.

I'm willing to accept that there are extraordinary people - but at the same time I think that heroes and villains are largely products of the human attempt to impose narrative on our history. We need antagonists and protagonists - they are an essential element of the human experience even if they are not an essential element of objective reality.

Ah, but heros and villians clearly exist at some point in time, why not ours? Sure, history magnifies their influenece, just as time makes invisible the work of so many others. There is even a New Testament verse about how difficult it is to recognize a contemporary prophet! Yes, luck counts for a lot (that is the lesson of Accedential Empires, but that hardly diminishes the influence of indivuals.

But I'm eager to look into your references, and I appreciate them.

Okay, Joseph Campbell was one of the most influential authors I read while I was in college.

Re:At least it wasn't Steve Ballmer being the sale

[fak3r]

What's pretty sad is that with humble beginnings like this Microsoft has become so popular/profitable/unstoppable.

Re:you're guise are two phoney...

[dreamer-of-rules]

I sure hope you don't mean to suggest that carefully picking "stock photos for iPhoto" and is comparible to carefully picking "screenshots of a beta product". Because if you are, you need to do yourself a favor and slap yourself silly.

Jeers have been going to software companies for decades for using screenshots that carefully mislead how an application or game really looked, like only picturing the cut scenes for a platform game.

And if you're referring to what I think you are, a few years ago Microsoft submitted a video of web browsing trying to prove that Windows was faster with IE than without IE. That video, submitted as evidence in the trial, was later proved to be edited to appear to be faster.

/ way too tired for this // don't feed the trolls

yeah wow he's great

[Anonymous Coward]

just ask his illegitimate daughter whom he didn't claim for years. Or ask the numerous programers on the receiving end of his temper tantrums. What a guy.

Re:yeah wow he's great

[Jerry Rivers]

I'm sure his daughter really appreciates being called "illegitimate."

Re: only a 2.3% market share

[mpapet]

And this is where I say the figures are spun against Apple.

Roughly 6th is about right and I'd guess they are within a few percentage points of being 4th. So when claims about top-ten PC shipments are made by the media and research firms, Apple should be in the top-ten. They are not because they specifically exclude Apple. Intention is impossible to establish. (Where's my tinfoil hat?)

The picture for Apple is only getting better. Now, with Longwait coming the fanboy hype is going to drown out the good work Apple and OSS is doing for an utterly mediocre product, but so what.

BTW, I don't even own a Mac though personally I quit windows a couple of years ago. Every client I've switched has only been happier for the change. I don't generate more money moonlighting by recommending Macs, but I get plenty of referrals as a result.

Re:you're right - Apple is overpriced

[dreamer-of-rules]

"BMWs are way overpriced! So are Hondas. Really, you can find used cars for just a few hundred dollars that will drive on more roads and take any kind of engine oil."

"BMW and Honda should just fold. Nobody takes them seriously, and their products are way overpriced. Also, hybrids are a waste of your money because at todays prices, you only break even on gas prices after five years. Design, comfort, size, color, leather, safety, and appearance aren't quantifiable and are pointless expenses."

"If you like BMW, you're just a fanboi and have been duped by the vast marketing machine. Sucker."

Insightful article...

[viksit]

I'd never thought I'd say this - but this was one of the most insightful articles into life at Apple. I'm not saying its a positive thing, knowing Jobs' famous tantrums and "getting things his way" attitude to whatever he does.

Nevertheless, It is an important aspect of post 1997 Apple, with all their products being released in this fashion, and I guess its important for them to spend so much time rehearsing things - after all, they can't afford to have Gates' fiasco at the Windows 98 launch (When the printer crashed the system on being plugged in!). But whats interesting is that Jobs comes across as a stickler for personalization and perfection - which in my opinion is commendable, when you're holding a job which can often lead to overlooking the finer aspects of things.

No wonder Apple products set the industry standard in terms of looks, design and most of all, presentations.

Re:Insightful article...

[w0lo]

If I remember correctly it was a scanner

Non-techie running a tech company

[Archimboldo]

Jobs has a reputation of beings hands-on in some things, but he either knows where to delegate on tech features, has great instincts, or has more nuts-and-bolts knowledge than I suspect. I don't quite get how he pulls it off. He must listen to techies at least some, wouldn't you think?

Though I never owned one, by all accounts the NeXT was great. Jobs probably knows a few technical things, but how much input does he make about some of the lower level technical details?

Re:Non-techie running a tech company

[MacDaffy]

The essence of Steve's influence, I think, can be found in the following quotes:

"Ultimately it comes down to taste. It comes down to trying to expose yourself to the best things that humans have done and then try to bring those things in to what you're doing." -- Steve Jobs

"The only problem with Microsoft is they just have no taste, they have absolutely no taste, and what that means is - I don't mean that in a small way I mean that in a big way. In the sense that they they don't think of original ideas and they don't bring much culture into their product...and you say why is that important - well you know proportionally spaced fonts come from type setting and beautiful books, that's where one gets the idea - if it weren't for the Mac they would never have that in their products...so I guess I am saddened, not by Microsoft's success - I have no problem with their success, they've earned their success for the most part. I have a problem with the fact that they just make really third rate products." -- Steve Jobs

Re:Non-techie running a tech company

[Anonymous Coward]

"Ultimately it comes down to taste. It comes down to trying to expose yourself to the best things that humans have done and then try to bring those things in to what you're doing." -- Steve Jobs

"The only problem with Microsoft is they just have no taste, they have absolutely no taste

"Steve-o, I wouldn't talk about taste if I was wearing a black turtleneck." -- Bender Rodriguez

"Bam!" -- Philip Fry

Re: only a 2.3% market share

[BlueDjinn]

"I'd guess they are within a few percentage points of being 4th."

Again, you're technically correct (4th place is Acer, with 4.7% vs. Apple's 2.3%), but in this case "a few percentage points" actually means that Apple would have to double their sales in order to make up that difference. I'm a major Mac advocate, and Apple is certainly kicking ass lately, but their actual market share is only just now starting to rise from it's all-time low (which was actually 2004, believe it or not). Again, however, market share isn't nearly as important as profitability.

"So when claims about top-ten PC shipments are made by the media and research firms, Apple should be in the top-ten. They are not because they specifically exclude Apple."

And again, it depends on what you're measuring. If you include Macs as "PCs", a top ten list should definitely include Apple. If you're distinguishing "Macs" from "PCs" (which most people do, even though they shouldn't in this context), then of course Apple wouldn't be included.

Danger

[DaveCBio]

There is a danger in putting all your eggs in the basket of your CEO. Just read "Good to Great" by Jim Collins and you'll see from objective research that companies that outpace their rivals in every sense NEVER revolve around the CEO. He/she is just part of an organization that is set up to run well on it's own without a figurehead CEO. So, even though Apple is now doing well under Jobs, what happens if something happens to him or he leaves? Then how does Apple continue it's current trend?

You're right

[dpmccoy]

I already replied to a later comment (not by you) concerning the same thing you just mentioned above concerning the default ripping format. I investigated this while on my lunch break and found out the embarrassing (for me) truth. Thanks for the reply. I didn't pay the attention that I should have to the ripping formats in the past because the default had not changed to AAC yet, so that's why I overlooked it.

Don't forget...

[Anonymous Cumshot]

Black turtleneck sweaters!

Re:You should not have any problem with "Apple DRM

[dpmccoy]

More specifically: I cannot get AmaRok, Juk and NoAtun to play my I-Tunes purchased music. Is there a workaround, besides burning the music to an audio disc and then ripping the tracks again into MP3 format? Thanks for any assistance you can provide.

Re: only a 2.3% market share

[Jerry Rivers]

Instead of quoting market share figures that are two years old, how about something a little more recent?

http://www.methodshop.com/2005/12/apple-os-market- share-breaks-4_22.shtml

I have read similar figures elsewhere as well, but please do your own research to find those corroborating numbers.

Re: only a 2.3% market share

[BlueDjinn]

Hate to tell you this, but you're wrong on two points here:

1. My figures are based on ACTUAL SALES FIGURES from 2005. They are not 2 years old, nor are they limited to the United States (which people commonly get confused about--Apple's U.S. market share is higher than it's overall worldwide share).

2. Your figures are based on INTERNET TRAFFIC. That tells you what percentage of people browsing the internet are using a particular operating system, not what percentage of computers sold that quarter were made by a particular company.

Now, your figures would be more closely attuned to Apple's installed base, which is just fine, but that includes all computers currently in use, not new computer sold in a particular time period, which is what market share refers to.

niggling point on BT on OSX

[artifex2004]

BlueTooth is another example--while widely supported on Macs, it just still kinda sucks when trying to find and use a non-Apple BT product.

OSX seemingly only fully supports the BT either built in or one external adapter from D-Link. I have an iogear adapter (GBU311) that OSX won't support fully; I can use it to transfer data to and from my cell phone, but I can't use my headset with it, because it claims that the adapter doesn't support handsfree or headset profiles. Ironically, in Windows, it supports them. :(

I've seen the show live...and in color

[UttBuggly]

I am an actual former NeXT Registered Developer. I was CEO of a software company that developed expert systems for physicians on the NeXT. We were instrumental in getting the MUMPS language ported to the NeXT.

Steve, at the time, had a real hard-on for stuff that WASN'T another spreadsheet, word processor, etc. (although everyone loved the hell out of Lotus Improv and that was definitely Steve's baby) so we were one of the companies selected to show our stuff in San Francisco in Septmember of 1990.

This was the event where the NeXT Dimension color card for the Cubes was introduced, along with the NeXTStation pizza-box, and of course, NeXTStep 2.0.

We were in the building for 3 or 4 days before the big show getting our stuff working on almost hourly new builds of the OS.

So, more than a few of us took breaks and watched Steve rehearse his presentation. Trust me, he leaves nothing to chance...nothing. His air of casualness is the result of lots or preparation and practice.

He absolutely IS a showman, but he's also unquestionably, undeniably brilliant.

People remember the Apple IIe and the first (1984) Mac, but forget the Lisa. That "girl" was one of the greased skids for showing Steve the door. Not because it failed, but because Steve wanted about 500 million to 1 billion to build a better machine like it...the NeXT. No, that wasn't its name...but the idea was already there. The board balked, he got the bum rush from his own company.

NeXTStep was/is Mac OS/X. Avi Tevanian was at NeXT, he's Chief Scientist or something at Apple now. Testified at the Microsoft anti-trust trial, etc.

Steve didn't write the MACH kernel or bolt on BSD primitives and Display PostScript to NeXTStep, but damn sure knew what people to recruit and hire to get it done. And then took them back to Apple.

Considering that the Lisa and the seminal ideas for NeXTStep came about around 1985-86...about the time OS/2 and Windows were being created, I'd say the current state of the Mac OS and Windows shows the man ain't too stupid.

No, I am not a Mac fanatic. I have more PC hardware than NeXT and Mac hardware. I'm pretty much agnostic on this stuff...been doing it too long to be religious about any of it these days.

The point is that there's a whole lot to the guy doing the keynotes at MacWorld.

Steve is cool.

Re:I've seen the show live...and in color

[villy]

Off topic - Still have any of that code? I'm currently doing some medical systems integration - love the M!!! Anything you can point me to or send me?

Thanks!!

Re:I've seen the show live...and in color

[UttBuggly]

Yes...and no. When I folded the company...which ironically cratered due to a bad choice of investment partner...I piecemealed the intellectual property out.

So, technically it belongs to other people.

And remember, all of our code was on the NeXT; the only "Mac stuff" we did was to hack a SCSI driver to get a Mac peripheral to run on a NeXT cube.

MUMPS was ported by Plus Five from Washington University. I don't know if they still exist...we ceased operations and business relationships in late '92.

I wrote a medical transcription front-end for the MUMPS-based expert system...that's basically what we showed at the NeXTWorld deal in '90.

That same week, we did a dog and pony at the ACEP (American College of Emergency Physicians) Conference down the street at Moscone. That nothing blew up horribly still amazes me.

About 2 days before the NeXT show, we were compiling our code on like build 1981 of NeXTStep 2.0 when we noticed that all our voice files...pre-recorded status messages as well as our demo medical transcriptions...sounded like Satanic messages. Everything was running backwards.

Avi Tevanian came over, listened and watched us freak for about a minute at most. He says, "I know what this is!" and ran off down the hall. He's back in an hour with a new OS build that fixed the glitch and we went through both shows without a hitch. We did our last compile 2 hours before the show.

Anyway, I sold the "engine" for the transcription system for cash. It was nothing special but I was real proud of it back then.

The ER expert code, which was absolutely amazing, was written primarily by John Holbrook, M.D. from Mercy Springfield Hospital in Springfield, Mass. He had a company called Medical Horizons that did "ChartChecker", the expert app on other platforms. We did a joint project on the NeXT port but they always retained ownership of the app.

Know that doesn't help much...

"overrated?" how does that work?

[theStorminMormon]

Don't agree with what I say? Fine. Think I'm trolling? Say so. But how do you justify modding an un-rated post as "overrated"?

Someone's reality distortion field is in full force.

-stormin

not suprising really

[Anonymous Coward]

..as one who also has a penchant for doing live tech demos during presentations I can fully
understand the careful preparation required for such dangerous activities.

If anything can go wrong, it will go wrong. That is what you must remember... but balance that alongside the other belief that it will all work. that gives you the confidence to get over the
worries of the first thought...and if you are prepared, then when things do go wrong you can quickly make that switch (sometimes literally a VGA switch on the control console!)

I nevre used to watch the MacExpo shows...just used to digest the pages of reviews and reports. but now i watch the whole show. its broadcast and its fairly entertaining in some geeky way generally...so why not? I take the sales pitch with pinch of salt. the sales figures dont bother me generally. we dont run a high number of Macs but they are ever present...and whilst they generally are looked after by their owners i can foresee one day when they'll really need some high-expert tech support. I also like the Apple products. The powerbooks, the ipod, the G5 iMac and the mini are all good consumer products. I dont use their wireless kit, their mice or their keyboards. but thats preference. they do give you some freedom (their choice? probably)

having watched Jobs on stage I think I've improved my own presentation abilities and stage presence. he's a positive role.

Steve Ballmer is not. developers developers developers was not my cup of tea.

Re:You should not have any problem with "Apple DRM

[ChrisA90278]

The work around you describe is the simplist one. There is software which will disable Apple's DRM too. Look for hymn or jhymn on Google. Also if you use Apple's iMovie to import a song from your iTunes library and then if you save it the song is unprotected. One other tip: When you use ITunes to rip CDs there is a setting in iTunes where you get to specify the file format. It's good to select "MP3" and choose a high bit rate Then your ripped songs are more generally usable. I'm slowly riping a CD collection of about 1,000 Rock, Jazz and clasical CDs. Next come a few hundred vinyl LPs. The encoder in iTunes is quite good. They did not write it they licensed it.

macs aren't losing everywhere

[Anonymous Coward]

In the film and psychology fields, being able to use a mac is almost requirement.

Poor Article

[THLittleton]

I'm sorry, but does anyone else think this article is just plain poorly-written? He offers no real insight into the nature of the keynote addresses (possibly because none is necessary), and it all just seems like a pat-on-the-back "hooray, team!" for all those involved. It comes off about as interesting as a senior's college application essay about why their involvement in the stage crew of the high school production of "South Pacific" helped him prepare for the challenges he may face in his future at Dartmouth.

Re:Poor Article

[Achromatic1978]

It did. It was actually interesting, in an objective sense about preparing for such. But nearly every single sentence contains "Steve". Not "he"... "Steve does this" and "then Steve does that", and "what Steve wants".

It just comes off as a big ego stroke above and beyond any objectivity.

Re: only a 2.3% market share

[Jerry Rivers]

Right you are and interesting. How are those sales numbers obtained?

We've already got seats.

[itomato]

People are watching Steve Jobs from seats they took a long time ago - maybe when he got booted from Apple, or maybe when Ross Perot invested millions in his new company, or maybe when the new company introduced the NeXT Computer, or when they stopped selling hardware to focus on software, or maybe when that software company was purchased for an insane amount of cash, or maybe when they decided that this was the first inverted-buyout/takeover in recent history, or when they saw an iMac for the first time, or...

Get some binoculars or read a little if you can't figure out where the interest comes from.

The only comparison I can draw is that Paris thinks she's the shit, and so does S.P.J. - does that *make* them the shit? According to Steve, it does.

Re:We've already got seats.

[theStorminMormon]

You're missing the point. I'm talking about awareness of him in the general public - not among industry insiders, VCs and other specialists. I'm sure that there are dozens of CEO-types (possibly just as talented as Jobs) that aren't really a part of my general consciousness or the consciusness of the public at large even though they are closely watched by investors who make it their business to track such minutia. Jobs is different because now he's mainstream - a lot of non-business people know who he is.

-stormin

Re:We've already got seats.

[itomato]

The point is, I'm the general public. As much as I'd like to consider myself an insider, I'm just a gawker.

Like I said, get some binoculars.

There's buzz, and there's needless buzz. The latter being the case with Paris Hilton, to your point..

Re: only a 2.3% market share

[BlueDjinn]

Most of the quarterly numbers come from IDC and/or Gartner Group, research companies which specializes in compiling such figures.

For instance, here's the 3rd quarter 2005 figures:

http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,123213,0 0.asp

Note that the figures quoted may be a bit off from the numbers in the charts I linked to, because of error corrections which were made after the article posted, rounding errors, etc.

Apple's own official figures can be found in the Investor Relations section of their website:

http://www.apple.com/investor/

The Power to Warp Space

[camperslo]

The Reality Distortion Field is widely misunderstood.

Steve doesn't simply change perception of reality, he changes reality.

Yes, Really

[theolein]

The average Asian OEM PC maker sells more computers then Apple. The average Asian OEM maker also makes and sells more computers than Dell, HP, IBM, Gateway and your mother, assclown, because they are also the ones that make the computers for dell, HP, Gateway and your mother.

Dumbass.

Obligatory Alan Kay quote...

[EricTheGreen]

"The best way to predict the future is to invent it"

Three things are required:

[Anonymous Coward]

Confidence, empathy, and what Arthur Miller called "the ability to make them want /your/ approval".

Confidence you get from knowing what you are about. Empathy comes from knowing what other people are about, which means not focusing on useless thoughts like "I hate crowds". The third is more nuanced. If you watch closely, you'll see that great actors and leaders alternately project competence, compassion... and a vauge menace that is politely called 'drive'. Keeps folk on their toes and generates trust in a way below concious thought. While you can fake one or two of these traits you can't fake all of them without having some measure of genuine ability.

Steve Jobs

[Galston]

He has golden ipods coming out of his ass all day long.

So we should just bend over now ?

[planetfinder]

Considering the alternatives I'm grateful for his presence
and will take advantage of it as long as it lasts. Maybe someone
else will notice so that successful behavior begets successful
behavior. The bottom line is I won't bend over until I have to.

A typical Bill Gates Keynote

[planetfinder]

Purty soon everbody will be connectin dere cornputer to
dere phone and dere toilet and, hyuk hyuk hyuk, you won't be able
to have a decent phone bone on the throne without
a reboot and and an M$ upgrade, hyuk hyuk hyuk.
Ain't technology wondermous.

Moderators: I stand by what I said.

[Futurepower(R)]

Moderators: "Troll" originally meant someone in a discussion who is intentionally causing trouble. Now it has come to mean "If you disagree with me, you must be a troublemaker."

I stand by what I said in my parent comment.

I sold computers that came with Microsoft's first product, Microsoft Basic, which Bill Gates had a hand in writing. The sloppiness of Windows XP is identical to the sloppiness in Microsoft Basic. Both are, in my opinion, products in which the level of sloppiness is finely tuned so that it doesn't interfere too much with sales. Bill Gates set the tone for Microsoft products: They are not really finished when they are released.

It amazes me how weak-minded people are concerning public relations. Bill Gates makes billions of dollars making products so sloppy that they waste the time of millions of people worldwide. Then he gives back a little of that money, and instantly the abuses are forgotten.

Super-rich people like philanthropy because it helps them feel superior. They can spend a lot of time with people who are very happy with what they are doing, and who never voice disagreement. Giving away their husband's money is the pasttime of the wives of super-rich men everywhere.

Yes, it is good that there is money available to solve major world problems. But we should not stop realizing that Microsoft has cost tens of billions of dollars just in viruses for vulnerabilities of kinds that don't exist anywhere else in the world of software.

This week's vulnerability is an example. Graphics in Windows MetaFile format (WMF) are allowed to execute code!!! Yes, graphics files. You should be safe with other formats? No. Windows operating systems check .GIF and .JPG files to see if they are really WMF files, and, if they are, will execute any code in them!!! It's amazing.

Jobs must die

[Anonymous Coward]

Jobs is such an elitist prick.

I'm so glad he's much older than me so I can celebrate the day of his death.

the demos work

[drjzzz]

Bill Gates' intoductions of Win95 and later versions stumbled when the OS crashed during the demonstration. Yahoo Go suffered a similar fate today.

Jobs' introductions work and they work impressively. Whether this is because the products are simply better or because Jobs makes sure everything works, I don't know. But it's most assuredly the product of hard work and dedication. Jobs' "reality distortion field" is just the fun part.

It should be Spindler

[R3d M3rcury]

"No, if you want to blame Apple's problems on anyone, it should be Spindler and Sculley."

Actually, I always growl when I hear the "It's Sculley's fault" argument.

Sculley was CEO for 8 years, from 1985 to 1993. Consider what Apple came out with during that time:

• Macs with Slots
• Color QuickDraw (32-bit color)
• QuickTime
• Newton
• HyperCard
• Transition to PowerPC (At least starting it)
• PowerBooks
• ADB

(Aside about the PowerBook: I've seen comments about how Apple has to drop the moniker "PowerBook" because there will no longer be a PowerPC chip. The original PowerBooks had a Motorola 68K chip inside. The "Power" in PowerBook referred to Apple's marketing slogan, "The Power To Be Your Best.")

While people state that Apple "declined" during Sculley's tenure at Apple, Apple saw it's largest Macintosh market-share while Sculley was in charge.

Re:It should be Spindler

[jcr]

Ok, in order:

Macs with slots, Color Quickdraw, Quicktime: thank Gasee and other technical management, not Sculley.
Newton: never came close to making back its development costs.
Hypercard: developed single-handedly by Atkinson. Presented to Sculley as a fait accompli, shipping it was a no-brainer.
PPC, powerbook, ADB: Again, thank the technical management that was left at Apple, not Sculley.

Here's an example of John Sculley's technical acumen.

What Sculley inherited at Apple was a commanding technical lead, which he managed to piss away over the following five years. Add to that his astronomical fuck-up with licensing the Mac UI to Microsoft, and you have the cause of Apple's near-death experience in the late 90's.

Sculley may have done allright as a minory functionary in Apple's marketing department. As CEO, he nearly caused the company's demise. By the time Spindler took over, the company was a basket case.

-jcr

Re:It should be Spindler

[R3d M3rcury]

"Macs with slots, Color Quickdraw, Quicktime: thank Gasee and other technical management, not Sculley."

Yup. And who do you think moved Gassee from Apple France? That's right--Sculley.

"Newton: never came close to making back its development costs."

Agreed. Technical marvel too ahead of it's time.

"What Sculley inherited at Apple was a commanding technical lead, which he managed to piss away over the following five years."

Rubbish. Take a look at history. What Sculley inherited was a company with problems. Apple was being supported by the dwindling legacy of the Apple II. The Lisa and the Apple III had faired poorly. Macs were selling less than Apple had expected. Apple's bottom line was already being hurt by IBM. Jobs refused to open up the Mac, insisting that a 1Mb/sec "external serial bus" was more than fast enough. If Apple didn't invent it, he wasn't interested.

I'll grant Sculley wasn't the technical whiz, agreed. But he was smart enough to hire people who were (ie Gassee). After Jobs left, that's when you got the Macintosh II using a bus standard not invented at Apple (NuBus). That's when you got the Mac Plus where--GASP--you could actually upgrade the memory.

If anything, where he blundered was in not organizing around one vision. Instead, you had many different people doing some great things. This dilluted efforts (how many "next generation operating system" projects was Apple running?) and made it impossible to compete with a far more focused Microsoft.

Here's a real blaspheme--If anything, Steve Jobs is picking over the bones of Apple. Spotlight? Apple's V-Twin from the mid-90s. FireWire? Again, developed by Apple in the mid-90s. Much of the cool stuff in Mac OS X had been developed at Apple (and was being dropped in Mac OS X)--QuickDraw 3D? OpenGL. QuickDraw GX? Quartz. I remember seeing some of the demos for Mac OS X in '98 and thinking, "I saw this two years ago."

Re:It should be Spindler

[jcr]

What Sculley inherited was a company with problems.

Which magnified, and went completely out of control on his watch, while he was trying to get appointed to a cabinet post in the Carter administration.

If anything, where he blundered was in not organizing around one vision.

Which is precisely the CEO's job, and which he utterly failed to do.

Here's a real blaspheme--If anything, Steve Jobs is picking over the bones of Apple.

That's not blasphemy, it's ignorance. SJ didn't pick over the bones of Apple, he rescued it from a near-death experience.

  Spotlight? Apple's V-Twin from the mid-90s.

Your comparison makes about as much sense as describing an RDMBS as equivalent to strcmp(). V-twin's code lives on in Spotlight's plain text importer, and that's about it.

V-twin is an index-building engine. Spotlight is the full integration of indexing into the filesystem. Not the same thing by a long shot, and if you simply compare the SearchKit API with the functionality of Spotlight, you might understand the difference. V-twin could only build lists of strings and their locations in files. Spotlight importers let an app developer decide what's significant to index.

Much of the cool stuff in Mac OS X had been developed at Apple (and was being dropped in Mac OS X)--QuickDraw 3D? OpenGL.

What's your next guess? OpenGL came from SGI, and Apple adopted it because it was the best choice. QD3D is a toy.

QuickDraw GX? Quartz.

Ok, that one's actually hilarious, and it happens to be one of my specialties. Quartz was Peter Graffignino's clean-sheet implementation of a replacement for Display Postscript. All that got into Quartz from GX were some of the typography ideas, and none of the code, which was hopelessly broken.

-jcr

More on Jobs' style.

[dr.badass]

Gates, Jobs, and the Zen Aesthetic looks at what makes Jobs' presentations so effective, contrasting with the dismal style that comes out of Microsoft.

Regardless of what you think of the products they are selling, or the cult of personality around Steve Jobs, I would recommend this article to anyone that ever has or ever will sit in front of PowerPoint or Keynote or Impress or who will give any presentation of any kind. The contrast is so sharp that I think everyone can learn something from it.

Good point

[dafing]

You have summed up /. in five points. Congrats to you

Correction

[Anonymous Coward]

In Soviet Russia, things reverse YOU!

Average Asian OEM assumption is wrong

[snowwrestler]

First, Apple computers are in fact manufactured by Asian OEM companies, under contract with Apple. Apple is essentially a design firm; all manufacturing is outsourced. So your basis of comparison is flawed from the start.

Second, Apple is one of the top 10 largest computer companies in the world by sales volume. IDC reports that Apple's worldwide desktop market share in Q4 2005 was 1.75%. This ranks them in 9th, after:

Acer - 2.17%
NEC - 2.19%
Lenovo - 2.74%
Gateway - 3.00%
Fujitsu - 3.12%
IBM - 4.18%
HP - 15.28%
Dell - 17.30%

Note that this list only adds up just over 50%--almost half of all computer sales worldwide are from companies with a smaller market share (and therefore sales volume) than Apple.

Market share comparison - basis is needed

[snowwrestler]

However, they also do have only a 2.3% market share.

Knowing absolute market share of a company is useless for competitive analysis unless you also know the equivalent numbers for its competitors. Here are the rest of the numbers from your link.

#1 - Dell - 18%
#2 - HP - 16%
#3 - Lenovo/IBM - 7.7%
#4 - Acer - 4.7%
#5 - Fujitsu - 3.8%

I think a lot of people would be surprised to learn that the market share leader, Dell, has only 18% market share.

The common assumption is that Apple's 2.3% market share is terrible because of Window's dominating market share. But this is a false comparison, because Windows is software and Apple sells computers (software + hardware). When comparing computer companies, the relative size of Apple is put into proper perspective...the factor between Apple and the leader of their industry (Dell) is less than 8x, not the 43x that is commonly assumed.

Apple is a very competitive computer company.

Steve Jobs SNL sketch

[Orlando]

I saw this recently and thought how well it summed up Jobs' presentations, very funny:

http://vpwpartners.blogs.com/SNLJOBSIPOD/JOBSSNLIP OD.mov

and ADB was so much better than PS/2

[beetle496]

> Many of us will be very sad to see Firewire disappear though; very sad.

I am already morning the passing of ADC.

Please give credit were it is due!

[beetle496]

> I imagine that Jobs knows pretty much where Apple is going to be in 90 days/180 days/a year. I don't think that he has such a unique vision - it is just that he has a vision.

Well, overlooking that any vision at all is quite rare, the shift to Intel (and that the project has been underway for years) evidences that Jobs vision extends at least that far out. Personally, I would love to know where he thinks we (not just Apple) will be in ten or twenty years -- because I suspect his vision is unique.

Other comments about dismissing Jobs ability to predict the future because Apple gets to influence the market are just silly. Jobs is not a random pundant in some non-profit think tank, he is running a commercial enterprise accountable to stock holders. Jobs didn't make consumers love the the iPod, he caused Apple to offer a product that people loved. He was able to do that because he predicted where technology was going and has the vision to see the potential for demand. Apple was (and remains) a couple of years ahead of the competition. That is long term business vision.

Sadly...

[FredFnord]

Sadly, most engineers don't know the difference between crap and actual good HID. Many programmers still use CLIs with bizarre, incomprehensible commands, which is fine if you want to put in the considerable effort required to figure out how a computer works and then learn all the commands and such. And many of them still, after how many years, think that that's perfectly reasonable and that a CLI is a perfectly good way to make a program that people who don't do that sort of thing for a living would use.

Engineers suck at usability, unless they're trained in it. Even then, most of them can't be relied upon to produce something that is better than adequate. And even the few who can, can't be relied upon to produce something that is similar in usage and theme to a related set of products. If you don't have a unifying mind behind it all, you end up with a collection of widgets that don't look like they came from the same company.

I recall hearing that the iPod went back to the drawing board four or five times before they came out with the first generation model. I wonder what the first four or five of them looked like? Perhaps they really were just as good as the model that was eventually picked, and they were just rejected because of some obscure phobias on the part of Jobs.

Wouldn't bet on it, though.

-fred