The Unexpected Patents of Steve Jobs

Harry writes "It's no surprise that Steve Jobs' name is among those credited in Apple's patents for MacBooks, iPods, and other iconic gadgets galore. But the man holds patents for packaging, a staircase, iPod cases, and several intriguing products that Apple hasn't built to date. They all add up to an interesting portrait of the world's most famous tech CEO."

Comments

Don't Forget the Lanyard

[eldavojohn]

His name is also on a patent for the earphones/iPod lanyard and that patent references 47 other patents.

You can find a complete list of Steve's patents here. For what it's worth, I find Jobs listed on 100 patents or patent applications and Bill Gates listed on two as the inventor.

Probably a fair indication of what kind of leader you have on your hands ... definitely marketing/business for Gates.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[Actually, I do RTFA]

Probably a fair indication of what kind of leader you have on your hands ... definitely marketing/business for Gates.

Wait, what? Did I miss the irony?

You think Jobs contributed in any technical way to any Apple product? Heritic! May the Woz have mercy on your soul.

And a patent that references 47 other patents is far less impressive than vice-versa.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

Or gives an impression of said leaders' relative enthusiasm for putting their names on patents...

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[JCSoRocks]

Meh, you're never going to hear about the products because they're all like this... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGJuD9hVtTI

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[0xdeadbeef]

Probably a fair indication of what kind of leader you have on your hands

Aye, he is someone who understands technology well enough to admit what he doesn't know, as opposed to a fashionable dandy who takes credit for other people's work and expertise.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[Colonel Korn]

His name is also on a patent for the earphones/iPod lanyard and that patent references 47 other patents.

You can find a complete list of Steve's patents here. For what it's worth, I find Jobs listed on 100 patents or patent applications and Bill Gates listed on two as the inventor.

Probably a fair indication of what kind of leader you have on your hands ... definitely marketing/business for Gates.

I'm not sure about that. I don't know a lot about Gates' role, but Jobs had absolutely nothing to do with almost all of those patents other than being CEO at the time they were submitted, and in most cases having the opportunity to torpedo the invention but choosing not to do so.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[Anonymous Coward]

Bill Gates isn't taking credit anymore. He's done his part, and now he leads. When he actually worked, he worked, he didn't steal shit.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[jonbryce]

Pretty much all Microsoft's products come from buying up small companies that have the technologies he wants.

Marketing certainly plays a part, but finding the right companies to buy up in the first place is also a very important skill.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[falcon5768]

While Jobs is certainly not technical minded, in terms of design he HAS been the main patent holder, and main developer on a lot of items. The iMac g4 in particular that the article cites was almost ALL Jobs, it was well known in the company he spend months working on the arm before handing it off to Ives and the Engineers to test and finalize.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[Anonymous Monkey]

Yes, it seems like Jobs wants to have his name on stuff for the cool factor. 'Look what I did.' Even when he didn't do all that much.

Reminds me of a boss I once had that would openly take credit for anything and everything he gave advice on. We could spend weeks on a project, he would swoop in at the last second and say something like 'it should be blue' and then next week he would tell every one that he designed and built the whole thing from scratch with every one sitting cross legged on the floor in awe and worshiping him. I quit after not too long. The man is a jerk.

The thing is he was very charming, and the people who he could charm were very talented and were always doing amazing things. In the end they were so enamored of him that they just let him take credit.

I think that might be the secret of The Jobs in the end. People love him enough that they WANT him to take their ideas. Once he has a few super smart people like that (aka The Woz) and a few major stunningly great products on the market you can pick up more super smart people and the cycle repeats it self.

Don't get me wrong, Jobs is a brilliant engender and programmer, but I think he is not as brilliant as his patent portfolio suggests.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[Anonymous Coward]

The guy was talking about Jobs. Who would describe Gates as a fashionable dandy?

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[Anonymous Coward]

Is a "Lanyard" a gay black turtleneck?

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[Anonymous Coward]

"You think Jobs contributed in any technical way to any Apple product?"

Actually, yes.

Jobs is nowhere near technically competent as Woz, but can hold his own. Probably better than most coders here. Woz would probably agree if asked.

I know in the project that ended up being OS X, he was one of five engineers developing the product and while his role was more along the lines of project manager, he would get his hands dirty occasionally and contribute code or fix others foul ups.

I know this goes against the heavily manicured image he likes to maintain...he wants to be seen as the inspiration and not the source, but he still has a lot of geek pride. Those that work closely with him know that he is as willing to tear a piece of hardware apart as look at it...or ask to see the source. Occasionally his 'revisions' are more zenlike reductions of the code (which goes along with the infamous ordering of the engineers to align resistors on the back of the iMac circuit board to be more aesthetic). Those not within his inner circle only get to see the superficial side of all of this.

Left anonymous for obvious reasons.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[amicusNYCL]

Probably a fair indication of what kind of leader you have on your hands ... definitely marketing/business for Gates.

I don't understand how you can come to a conclusion like that. All that shows is that Steve Jobs thinks that it's important to get his name on patents, and Bill Gates doesn't. I can't find definite numbers, but Apple has at least 2000 patents, and Microsoft had at least 5000 three years ago. Frankly, I think the fact that Steve Jobs is more interested in getting his name on patents means that he is the more business and marketing-oriented of the two, not Gates. Gates could have his name on several thousand patents, but apparently he didn't think that was important.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[zonker]

You aren't sure about that? But you are of your own opinion? I guess I'm not sure about that.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[Anonymous Coward]

... Jobs is a brilliant engender and programmer ...

Psst!
What be ye smoking ye anon monkey genius?

SJobs is as good at programming as a Kangaroo is at walking.

Geez!

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not sure about that. I don't know a lot about Gates' role, but Jobs had absolutely nothing to do with almost all of those patents other than being CEO at the time they were submitted, and in most cases having the opportunity to torpedo the invention but choosing not to do so.

And just how do you know this? Or are you just making assumptions?

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[0xdeadbeef]

Don't get me wrong, Jobs is a brilliant engender and programmer

He thinks Objective-C is the perfect language. All he engenders is mockery.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[kpainter]

Bill Gates isn't taking credit anymore. He's done his part, and now he leads. When he actually worked, he worked, he didn't steal shit.

Ok Bill, we know it's you. You aren't fooling anybody by posting AC. Debatable on that stealing business though.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[je ne sais quoi]

Yes, it seems like Jobs wants to have his name on stuff for the cool factor. 'Look what I did.' Even when he didn't do all that much.

Okaaayyy.... all those who were founding partners of a computer company that has captured 10% usage share, please raise their hands. Those people are allowed to make snarky comments about how little Steve Jobs knows. Everyone else, STFU. Unless you have worked with the man personally or have a reasonable assurance that he acts this way, what you've asserted is completely unfounded. The same goes for Ballmer and Gates (even though Ballmer didn't get in until 1980).

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[geekoid]

Jobs isn't as technical minded as the Woz, he is smart.
However If I had the money and a team of lawyers I'd easily ahve 100 patents by now.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[dtml-try MyNick]

Frankly, I think the fact that Steve Jobs is more interested in getting his name on patents means that he is the more business and marketing-oriented of the two, not Gates. Gates could have his name on several thousand patents, but apparently he didn't think that was important.

Personally I think it's more of a ego thing.

Steve Jobs is a excellent businessman, no doubt, but he's also a showman with a huge ego.. Apple == Steve Jobs == Apple. If there is a apple product, he wants his name attached to it somehow. Therefore all the patents apple claims should be in his name.

On the contrary to Bill Gates who doesnt care about his ego that much. (and why should he after all....) Bill Gates wanted the name Microsoft attached to everything, not his personal name. Everything he does is "Microsoft" not "GatesSoft" and therefore the patents belong to the company, not the person. He simply doesnt care about it.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[jo42]

Well that certainly explains why there is no SD slot on the iPhone or iPod touch. Nor USB or SD slot on the side of recent generations of iMacs.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[Anonymous Monkey]

I'm not being 'snarkey', the 'charm smart people to work for you' is normal for the good CEO. The founder of Kinko's was famous for saying he was just smart enough to higher the A+ students and make them like him. I think it was Rockefeller who said you hire smart people who arn't millionaires and make them millionaires and they will do anything for you. I'm just pointing out that Job's is a CEO and his job is to take credit and be a figure head. He's brilliant, but he doesn't have visions of the future in the middle of the night and then spend months without food or sleep building the first iPod all by him self...Your right, I'm being snarkey. But about fanboys, not Jobs.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[je ne sais quoi]

And just how do you know this? Or are you just making assumptions?

He doesn't. He's just trolling (otherwise, he would show us the proof, or at least back up his statements some sort of evidence). Unfortunately these days on slashdot it's fashionable to make totally unfounded deragatory assertions about Apple, but if you say one word about Vista or the Office ribbons really aren't all that great, you get modded flamebait or troll.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[Anonymous Coward]

But Gates has stolen computer time to build is "proprietary" work before.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[rm999]

Yeah, in the business world that is referred to as "strategy", not "business".

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[Anonymous Coward]

You're just jealous b/c you're not a FLUORESCENT monkey!

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[Jeremy Erwin]

The vast majority of Steve Jobs's patents are design patents. Bill Gates's patents are both utility patents. So, it's pretty much a tie.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[LKM]

You think Jobs contributed in any technical way to any Apple product?

He probably did. He did work as a technician at Atari before starting Apple. Clearly, Woz did most of the work, but Jobs has at least some basic knowledge of these things and probably has contributed something. The bigger picture is that he's very much involved in product development at Apple. The patents in question aren't very technical, they're more along the lines of user interaction design.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[noidentity]

Left anonymous for obvious reasons.

Yeah, I hear letting out the secrets behind the RDF can result in some serious consequences, like being forced to buy Dell for the rest of your life. Your leak is appreciated!

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[dwiget001]

"Bill Gates isn't taking credit anymore. He's done his part, and now he leads. When he actually worked, he worked, he didn't steal shit."

O.K., so when Bill was not working, only then did he steal shit?

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[Sandbags]

He is that good. Every design, even in it;s most basic form, comes before him (or starts with him). He has very critical input, changes the direction of the deisgn, adds aesthetic charm to it, and has it redesigned at his orders to meet those specifications.

One of his programmers wrote a personal application for streamlining video editing. After seeing it, jobs gave him dozens of ideas how to make the app flow better, designed a more aesthetic interface, and commissioned a team to further the application based on his specs and ideas using the programmers initial work as a starting point. Although the idea was not his, the final product was very much shaped by him, and he was credited in the design of the current iMovie app.

jobs is not a coder, he's not a system engineer, but he's a design genious, and one of the singular most powerful infuencers of overall system design at Apple. Ideas like the lamp iMac, the apple remote design, how the apple store is staffed, software interface look and feel, and more all come from his mind.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[Anonymous Coward]

You're no snarky. You're just the commie Borg ... who is lonely.

And ...

The founder of Kinko's was famous for saying he was just smart enough to higher the A+ students and make them like him.

We now know what be ye smoking ye anon monkey genius.

There you go ...

The founder of Kinko's was famous for saying he was just smart enough to hire the A+ students and make them like him.

Fixed it for ye.

Now go have a Steve Candybar.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[Anonymous Coward]

Ahhh..the G4 and the G5. Thanks to those duds, we now have intel inside of MACs. The G4'd and 5 were terrible.
did he also invent the puck mouse?
Thnxs Steve..

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[kelzer]

Jobs is nowhere near technically competent as Woz, but can hold his own. Probably better than most coders here. Woz would probably agree if asked.

But the more important question is "is Jobs the ballroom dancer that Woz is?"

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[networkBoy]

As to balmer I present the following evidence towards open mockery:
Monkey Dance:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nc4MzqBFxZE
Windows 1.0 sales pitch:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGvHNNOLnCk
Developers:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_AP3SGMxxM
on google:

"At some point in the conversation, Mr. Ballmer said: 'Just tell me it's not Google,'' Lucovosky said in his statement. Lucovosky replied that he was joining Google. 'At that point, Mr. Ballmer picked up a chair and threw it across the room hitting a table in his office,' Lucovosky recounted, adding that Ballmer then launched into a tirade about Google CEO Eric Schmidt. 'I'm going to f***ing bury that guy, I have done it before, and I will do it again. I'm going to f***ing kill Google.' Schmidt previously worked for Sun Microsystems and was the CEO of Novell."

I rest my case...

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[Anonymous Coward]

Also remember it was Jobs that took Apple down the road away from Intel due to childish feeling of being shunned by Intel President Andy Grove...The industry has benefitted having Job's but he also takes credit for shite (Pixar?!) that he had very little to do with.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[Have Brain Will Rent]

Hmmm so my two patents on fire and the wheel aren't as impressive as your 47 patents on lanyards? OK, good to know. ;)

BTW speaking as someone whose work has received more than one patent I can tell you that someone's name being on a patent doesn't necessarily mean they contributed in any intellectual way. They may simply have provided money. I'm not dismissing the importance of money to a design coming into existence but I'm not so sure that anyone should be listed as an inventor if they didn't make an intellectual contribution to the design.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[drinkypoo]

Ideas like the lamp iMac, the apple remote design, how the apple store is staffed, software interface look and feel, and more all come from his mind.

The lamp iMac? Wasn't that a widely-mocked flop? At least the flat iMacs (and the original ones, actually) had a reason to exist.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[Mister Whirly]

He should have paid more attention when he worked at Atari. Atari's computer line was superior and cheaper than Apple's offerings at the time.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[E IS mC(Square)]

>> Probably a fair indication of what kind of leader you have on your hands ... definitely marketing/business for Gates.

Not sure about that, but your comment is a 100% accurate indication of what kind of fanboi you are. FFS, just because Steve Wonderful Jobs' name is on all those patent does not mean he actually deserves it/invented it - its more like my boss few years back who was first in the queue to get awards and last whenever shit hit the fan.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[harlows_monkeys]

I don't know a lot about Gates' role, but Jobs had absolutely nothing to do with almost all of those patents other than being CEO at the time they were submitted, and in most cases having the opportunity to torpedo the invention but choosing not to do so.

You are almost certainly wrong, as the patent attorneys who drew up the patents would not have put Jobs on them unless he in fact made a significant inventive contribution. Patent law requires that a patent list all of the actual inventors, and only the actual inventors. List someone who wasn't a real inventor, or leave a real inventor out, and your patent is invalid.

If Apple ever has to sue someone over one of those patents, the defendant will get to depose Jobs, and will ask him under oath exactly what his contribution was, and if all he can say was "I was CEO", that suit will go nowhere.

He may not be the main inventory, or contributed to all the things claimed on the patents, but you can be sure there will be something in that patent that really was contributed by him.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[je ne sais quoi]

According to this, Jobs does more than just act as cheerleader, at least while he was at NeXT:

Just as with the Macintosh, Jobs devoted most of his attention to the user interface and physical design of the case, probably because he wasn't a trained engineer. Jobs designed the Macintosh as a personal information appliance.

If you look at those patents in TFA, they're mostly related to design. It is not stretch of the imagination that Jobs actually designed the cases for those patents while working at Apple the second time.

Jobs might charm smart people, etc., but there is substantial evidence that Jobs does more than that. Yes, it actually looks like he works for a living sometimes.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[Colonel Korn]

And just how do you know this? Or are you just making assumptions?

He doesn't. He's just trolling (otherwise, he would show us the proof, or at least back up his statements some sort of evidence). Unfortunately these days on slashdot it's fashionable to make totally unfounded deragatory assertions about Apple, but if you say one word about Vista or the Office ribbons really aren't all that great, you get modded flamebait or troll.

I know Jobs, and to a much larger extent I know a lot of the people who have been a step or two down the ladder from Jobs over the last 20ish years. I know people on some of those patents, and in the cases I know, Jobs wasn't involved. He sets up the corporate vision under which the patents are produced. That's a valid reason for him to stamp his name onto them. The point of my post was to state that the difference between Gates and Jobs in this case is likely one of personal preferences. Jobs likes to stamp his name, Gates apparently doesn't.

Also, I didn't say anything negative about Apple. If you think that everyone (or anyone) at Apple likes Jobs on a personal note, you're quite out of touch.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[Anonymous Coward]

Left anonymous for obvious reasons.

Steve? Is that you again?

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[jcr]

When he actually worked, he worked, he didn't steal shit.

Tell it to Gary Kildall.

-jcr

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[Lars T.]

He should have paid more attention when he worked at Atari. Atari's computer line was superior and cheaper than Apple's offerings at the time.

You mean after Jack Tramiel bought the name and brought in engineers (and even that is debatable)? Or do you actually think the 400 was better than the Apple II?

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[Lars T.]

I'm not sure about that. I don't know a lot about Gates' role, but Jobs had absolutely nothing to do with almost all of those patents other than being CEO at the time they were submitted, and in most cases having the opportunity to torpedo the invention but choosing not to do so.

So why isn't his name on all Apple patents since he became CEO?

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[Ihmhi]

I gotta say, that's one of the things I respect about Apple. You don't see guys that make other operating systems (Linux, for example) contributing to their own project these days.

.

.

.

.

.

wbxvat.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[Satanboy]

if you read the article, you would know that the answer is yes, he does hold the patent on the hockeypuck mouse

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[edward2020]

wow - note the extent of my enthusiasm

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[Trahloc]

Just read his wikipedia entry which of course has to be taken with a grain of salt... but still sounds like he choose a bad time to leave his company rather than meet IBM representatives.

"Gary left licensing negotiations to Dorothy, as he usually did, while he and colleague Tom Rolander used Gary's private airplane to deliver software to manufacturer Bill Godbout"

Gates could be blamed for what happened later but considering he's the reason Kildall got the shot to talk to IBM that'd be unfair to him.

"IBM approached Digital Research in 1980, at Bill Gates' suggestion, to license a forthcoming version of CP/M called CP/M-86 for the IBM PC."

Doesn't sound like you can have sour grapes when someone hands you a deal and you fubar it. Not saying that Gates didn't destroy a thousand n one companies but this wasn't one of them.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[mattack2]

The book (and PBS documentary series) "They Made America" apparently debunk the flying story.
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/04_43/b3905112_mz063.htm

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[Anonymous Coward]

Jobs is nowhere near technically competent as Woz, but can hold his own. Probably better than most coders here. Woz would probably agree if asked.

There is no way that Steve Jobs has written a single line of code of Mac OS X or any other Apple application, nor has he had any input in IC design. His patents are in product design, not in implementation.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[Anonymous Coward]

It's because the Atari chipset was designed by none other than Jay Miner.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[4D6963]

I heard an anecdote about the development of the original Mac OS calculator program in the 1980s. Some kid made it all, but everytime he'd show the result to Jobs, Jobs would tell him to change something about the design. This went back and forth until the programmer made a sort of parameters editor so that Jobs himself could fine tune the design of the calculator. I kind of suck at telling anecdotes but I can't be arsed to google for it.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[SlashWombat]

And anyone who has tried to use CPM86 noted that it had the same flaw as CPM ... BDOS ERROR ON DRIVE A/B/C/D when you flipped open the wrong floppy drive. There goes another days work!

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[aristotle-dude]

Well that certainly explains why there is no SD slot on the iPhone or iPod touch. Nor USB or SD slot on the side of recent generations of iMacs.

SD cards were designed for point and shoot cameras. Why would the iPhone or iPod touch need an SD card when they connect to computers/printers and have 8GB or more of internal storage? How would the database of songs available be maintained if part of the storage was removable?

Devices that have SD cards usually come with limited onboard storage so they have to use SD cards to supplement their capacity with those cards. Tell me something, did you really like swapping floppies back in the day when running games? I would get tired pretty quickly of having to hunt through multiple SD cards for the image, video or song that I wanted. I don't consider it to be a feature that I'd actually want.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[Mister Whirly]

The 800 was far superior - the only difference between that and the 400 was amount of memory and a real keyboard. The first 800 I used was about 1/2 of what the equivalent Apple II cost. Plus it was full color and awesome sound. And they had a ton of games available right away. You weren't forced to buy a 12" crappy green or amber screen monitor - the Atari's hooked up to any color television. I don't care who wants to take credit or who designed what - those things don't interest me. All I know was that Atari was putting out better computers for a lot less than Apple was. I think if Apple hadn't been wise enough to give educational discounts back in the day, they would have really struggled to compete. Having an Apple in a good portion of schools helped keep them viable.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[vakuona]

Also remember it was Jobs that took Apple down the road away from Intel due to childish feeling of being shunned by Intel President Andy Grove...The industry has benefitted having Job's but he also takes credit for shite (Pixar?!) that he had very little to do with.

Well, very little except to
- Fund it with his own money
- Negotiate with Disney
- Stay out of the way of the real talent (Which is something many studio owners would find difficult)

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[Gilmoure]

Do not criticize how well the bear dances but be amazed the bear can dance at all.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[Sandbags]

You must be kidding. It was one of the most successful single launches in apple history, and one of the most desired apple products at the time. Yes, the flat panel has outsold it now, but the market share today is 3 times what it was in early 2000 when tha "lamp" was introduced.

I sold one on ebay about 2 years ago, 768MB RAM 1.0GHz processor 17", got $740 for it (polus shipping), it was 4 YEARS OLD!

Things that are not popular don't hold 50% of their purchase value after 4 years... especially computers.

Apple dumped the design because they needed to add a GPU to the iMac line, and it simply wasn't going to fit in the 10" wide dome base. The iMac was great for everyday computing, but Apple was taking a lot of heat for not having a machine under $2K that could play video games, and 20" and larger screens also worked poorly with the screen support.

Re:Don't Forget the Lanyard

[Raenex]

Bill Gates wanted the name Microsoft attached to everything, not his personal name.

Except for his charity work. Of course the wife had to be attached too.

Really? The *infamous*?

[BadAnalogyGuy]

Steve Jobs is not the world's most famous tech CEO.

Bill Gates has better name recognition than Jobs, if only because his philanthropy reaches so many more people than Jobs' work does.

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[alexborges]

"Bill Gates has better name recognition than Jobs, if only because his personal PR department turned into another MS sales branch reaches so many more people than Jobs' work does."

There, fixed it for ya.

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[Red Flayer]

Bill Gates has better name recognition than Jobs, if only because his philanthropy reaches so many more people than Jobs' work does.

And yet Bill Gates is no longer a tech CEO, so he is removed from consideration.

Jobs' status is currently "in limbo" AFAIK, but he is technically still CEO of Apple per their regulatory filings.

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[apodyopsis]

His philanthropic accomplishments are certainly praiseworthy, but it's worth remembering that his vast wealth was mainly accumulated with some really unpleasent business tactics.

See "A History of Anticompetitive Behavior and Consumer Harm"
http://www.ecis.eu/documents/Finalversion_Consumerchoicepaper.pdf

Whilst I congratulate the man for subsidising research and giving to worthy causes I have to wonder if he would do so much if he was not one of the worlds richest man.

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[harryandthehenderson]

Bill Gates has better name recognition than Jobs, if only because his philanthropy reaches so many more people than Jobs' work does.

Of what tech company is Bill Gates a CEO of? I'm pretty sure he stopped being the CEO of Microsoft back in 2000 when Steve Ballmer took over.

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[TheRealMindChild]

So spending money to save lives is a PR stunt? Maybe. Regardless, he is still saving lives. Give the man some bloody credit.

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[Colonel Korn]

His philanthropic accomplishments are certainly praiseworthy, but it's worth remembering that his vast wealth was mainly accumulated with some really unpleasent business tactics.

See "A History of Anticompetitive Behavior and Consumer Harm"

http://www.ecis.eu/documents/Finalversion_Consumerchoicepaper.pdf
 

Jobs has led his company through fewer, but still not close to zero, unpleasant business tactics. On a personal note, he goes out of his way to make his employees unhappy. He's also fabulously wealthy, and he doesn't give significant money to charity, where Gates has so far given half of his wealth away. Gates seems like the rather bad for some other businesses and good for the people he's affected, where Jobs is moderately bad for other businesses (or perhaps much worse, considering the inability of other companies to produce make clones) and terrible for the people he directly affects.

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[Philip K Dickhead]

Praiseworthy? You been watchin' too much Oprah, Willis!

Look, his "philanthropy" is just more oligarchal, social and economic control for an elite agenda.

"They need to be independent of government agencies, which are unable to head off the disaster we all see looming."

Why all the secrecy? "They wanted to speak rich to rich without worrying anything they said would end up in the newspapers, painting them as an alternative world government,"
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6350303.ece

He's also a Bilderberger. He wants to turn mosquitoes into flying syringes - to inject folks with agents that serve the "Overpopulation" agenda.

Overpopulation? That's your children, mate. The world can sustain 10,000 ordinary mortals for the same resources that support Gate's own two children.

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Story?id=7628545&page=1

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30851839/

http://www.nypost.com/seven/05202009/news/regionalnews/worlds_richest_hold_secret_meeting_170193.htm

Watch Goodman on the agenda of the BMGF
http://www.snapbuzz.com/view/video/6051/

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[The End Of Days]

Never! He is evil - for extremely watered down definitions of evil.

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[Speck'sBacon]

Whilst I congratulate the man for subsidising research and giving to worthy causes I have to wonder if he would do so much if he was not one of the worlds richest man [sic].

This is some twisted logic.. Of course he wouldn't do so much if he weren't so rich! He would be incapable of doing so. While Microsoft's business practices are deserving of scrutiny, I fear most of the vitriol aimed at Microsoft and Gates is motivated by envy, or "tall poppy syndrome," or some variant. In the final analysis, the man is a successful business person who's earned his money, and can do with it as he pleases.

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[Anonymous Coward]

Philanthropy? HAH! More like eugenics and population reduction.

He just met with other billionaires, like Ted Turner who has called for a 95% reduction in population and for 1 child policies (while he has 5).

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6350303.ece

Don't forget that Gates' father was the President of Planned Parenthood which was created by Margaret Sanger who was a proud eugenicist and racist.

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[zonker]

Again you make claims about his personality that you can't back up. He may have done things in the past (which are well documented) but people change. Gates wasn't exactly a fun person to be with in board meetings (so says a few books about MS days gone by) and could be quite a dick.

I don't know what either of them are like today and I don't know either BG or SJ. Do you? Did Steve kick your dog and Bill buy you ice cream?

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[Hatta]

I'm sure Bill Gates has excellent credit already.

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[LandDolphin]

Why is he removed from consideration? He was a CEO. Lee Iacocca is still remembered as a great CEO, even thought he's dead now. The phrase, "most famous tech CEO" does not limit itself to current CEO's. If you were to have a lsit of most Famous X's, you'd expect to see some retired/dead people on that list, no?

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[Anonymous Coward]

What a funny post. Translated into other language => "Water may be essential to life, but what the water lobby doesn't want you to know is that it was also used to keep Hitler alive"

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[LandDolphin]

More Companies make money because of Microsoft then Apple. If Apple had Microsofts market share with their current business model, how many other companies would not exsist?

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[LandDolphin]

Who's the most famous baseball player? Is there anything in that sentence that restricts me from answering Babe Ruth? Did Babe Ruth become and invalid answer when he stopped playing?

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[Anonymous Coward]

And what does any of that have to do with name recognition?

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[harryandthehenderson]

Who's the most famous baseball player?

Define the time context we are talking about. If you are talking about both past and present players one would ask, and in most such polls that cover topics like this it is asked this way, "Who is the most famous baseball player of all time?" or "Who is the most famous baseball player ever?". But hey, you can win this stupid little nitpick game when as anyone who wasn't trying to be overly pedantic knows that the article was clearly only talking about current CEOs.

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't forget that Gates' father was the President of Planned Parenthood which was created by Margaret Sanger who was a proud eugenicist and racist.

This clearly proves that Gates is a racist. Wait, what?

Barack Obama is President of the USA, a country which was created by George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, etc who were proud racists and slaveowners. Ergo, Obama supoorts slavery. QED.

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[Anonymous Coward]

He's not quite dead yet

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[NatasRevol]

That's because it costs a shitload more to support MS infrastructure. Thus there are a lot of consulting/support businesses, and they do make money because of MS. Money that could be spent on growing the company's business.

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[drinkypoo]

His philanthropic accomplishments are certainly praiseworthy

O RLY?

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[LandDolphin]

I didn't start the nit picking. Someone mentioned that they beleive that Bill Gates should get the title and then others said he is not eligable. The original framework of the statement did not elude to whether or not they are including both current and former, or just current. People choose to read it as inclusive or exclusive based off their own personality.

At the end of the day, it does not matter what some yahoo writing an article thinks/says or the others that reply in the thread about it. It's jsut a way for me to waste time at work :-)

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[LandDolphin]

Companies that make PCs, like HP, Compaq, Asus, Dell and many others would be out of business if Apple and Microsoft reversed market share (Or at least out of that section of their business which may be small or large depending o nthe company).

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[Vancorps]

What is this based on? It sounds to me like it's not based on reality as OS X server was a farce until about a year ago and it's still lacking significant enterprise features that have been present in Windows for 10 years and present in Netware for 15 years.

Sorry, that's complete BS, I'll consider OS X friendly when it doesn't litter file shares with hidden files and starts closing file locks that it open which isn't a problem on the Linux platform. Combined with speed issues of file-sharing and I'd say that MS infrastructure is far more friendly. Gotta love reconfiguring samba on OS X to make it perform like I expect a Linux box and then having the config wiped due to a software update.

That said, any company that rises to the level of Microsoft in marketshare will have plenty of consulting/support business crop up around it. There is no such thing as an idiot proof interface and OS X is by far no exception.

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[ggvaidya]

1) 'e's just restin'.
2) Of course he's dead! Didn't you see the "The Watchmen" movie? I'm glad the Americans voted out Nixon to make way for Obama though.

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[NatasRevol]

So what?

They (and most jobs) would probably be replaced by:
Apple Enterprise
Apple Education
Apple Consumer
What's your point?

And you still miss the point that people are paying these companies & MS too much for the infrastructure, instead of directly back into their business.

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[LandDolphin]

The point is, MS makes software that Hardware Vendors install on their hardware and sell to consumers. Apple sells both the Hardware & the Software. People pay these companies & MS too much? Look at a personal PC. I can get one that does everything a college student needs for $400. Can you get that cheaper from Apple? No. So, how is Apple cheaper? Then moving to etnerprise software & hardware, I fail to see how Apple would make any of that cheaper then MS.

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[Anonymous Coward]

More Companies make money because of Microsoft then Apple. If Apple had Microsofts market share with their current business model, how many other companies would not exsist?

Yes, if company A weren't there digging lots of unnecessary holes, companies B-Z wouldn't be able to survive by filling them.

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[crunchy666]

Business is unpleasant. Anyone who thinks otherwise should not go into business for themselves.

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[Abreu]

Didn't he get killed in the Watchmen movie?

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, Bill Gates' father did run the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation for the first few years until Bill retired from Microsoft. William H. Gates, Sr. is still co-chair. So the background of Bill's father has been and is still quite relevant to the foundation's activities.

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[NatasRevol]

Then you're talking out your ass, and have never deal with paying for CALs.

Here's a test for you.

Price out hardware & software MS solution for an email server to host 500 accounts.
Do the same for an Apple solution.

Then add on AD, and SUS.

The licensing for MS software alone will cost more than EVERYTHING from Apple. times 3 when you add the AD & SUS.

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[NatasRevol]

You're seriously bitching about hidden files & different configurations for different OSes?

And why don't you have copies of your important config files? And when have you ever had an update reset your config? I run a bunch of OSX servers and have never had that happen, on any service I run.

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[kalel666]

Lee Iacocca isn't dead. He may wish he was, seeing what has happened to Chrysler, just so he could spin in his grave, but he ain't dead.

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[LandDolphin]

Hmm, guess I should look things liek that up before talking about them. Somehow I just assumed he was with being old and what not in the 70's. Ohh well, the point still stands.

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[Vancorps]

I was suggesting there are a multitude of issues and was not suggesting that updates reset server configurations although I have had OS X server accept a write to a share even though it was out of disk space resulting in someone losing all of their work for the previous two weeks.

I will grant that it was one of the first versions of OS X that was released but it still sorely lacks a lot of enterprise class features to this day especially in the field of centralized deployment, change, and event management. SYSLOG support has helped dramatically but there are a lot of black boxes inside OS X that hinder troubleshooting. It's not that different from Windows in philosophy.

I've had OS X updates overwrite Samba configs for clients connecting to Linux or Windows file shares. The added hidden files resulted in over 500gigs of storage on my server which I now run scripts to remove periodically. Given that I'm dealing with 90 terabytes that's not the end of the world but it was quite annoying when I didn't have a proper SAN to back me up and was running out space on my old file-server for no reason.

No, I'm not bitching about different configurations for different OSes, I'm talking about the creation of hundreds of thousands of files that serve no purpose especially when you're looking in directories with thousands of files in them.

Of course you haven't refuted anything I said and assumed I don't have important config files backed up which is complete absurdity so I'll leave it at that and add that deploying hundreds of config files after software updates is impractical. Thank god I don't have that many Macs in my company so I can handle changing the acknowledgement settings for Samba when the OS X users complain about performance when everyone else has no issue.

Sorry, Apple doesn't play well with others, they never have, they are making progress towards changing that but they have the same goals as Microsoft towards achieving lock-in so any migration will be towards a Linux distro where I can just drop in a replacement and it will work as expected.

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[NatasRevol]

You're still bitching about small(10k) hidden files. And since you didn't bother to look it up, they're .DS_Store files. They keep a record of the view of the folder when looking at it from a client. Your users might want to keep the directory in list column for those thousands of files. This is not a server issue, it's a client issue.

Also, you can turn off the ability of the client to create them, but I'll leave that an exercise for you.

As for centralized deployment, etc, there are lots of tools - NetRestore, Deploy Studio, Radmind, Centrify, Casper, FileWave
Here's some ideas from Apple:
http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/features/client.html
Just because you don't know the tools exist, doesn't make the platform not have enterprise tools.
Here's a detailed how to if you're actually interested:
http://images.apple.com/server/macosx/docs/System_Imaging_and_SW_Update_Admin_v10.5.pdf

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[Vancorps]

You again make a lot of assumptions and still don't refute the OS X server lacks these features as you have to go third party. Both Microsoft and Novell have offered complete solutions for years and only recently has OS X become anything short of a farce as I said to begin with.

Of course you also don't seem to understand the complete absurdity involved in storing client views on the server which conflict with one another as one Mac user will have one preference while another will have a different preference.

Of course why should I have to modify the default config for samba to speed up transfer performance and disable the creation of files that no other platform seems to think are necessary. What other settings do I need to change for the client to stop being retarded? How about random disconnects? I'm sure there's a setting in there somewhere. This behavior is counterproductive and Apple could do better if it wanted.

I'll also add that the hidden files are not just DS_store files as there is one for each file and they are not 10k, they are thumbnails and contain metadata for the file with which they are associated. As I said, they all added up to an extra 500gigs of content that I had to be able to store before I scripted their removal. There's no getting around it, that's completely unacceptable.

I also did not say that enterprise tools didn't exist for OS X, only that they are still very limited when you compare their features with similar products from Sun, Oracle, Novell, Microsoft, IBM, and HP, and those are just the big players with KASE also offering solutions among a great many smaller players.

OS X has made a lot of progress as I said in the beginning but they have a long way to go before I would even remotely consider it cheaper to support.

As for the tools you mention, NetRestore is EOL, Deploy Studio is a joke for any company of size, Radmind is extremely limited to mainly file-system monitoring, and Centrify runs on Windows, not OS X, it just supports OS X as a client much like SCCM from Microsoft does.

Most of the tools you have listed are not enterprise tools, a lot of applications can be deployed in small numbers, when you start getting to larger numbers of workstations there become a lot of problems with maintaining compliance and enforcing policies.

While I'll freely admit there are a lot of tools out there that I'm not aware of, but I don't see anyone seriously considering running OS X as the core of their business if they are of any size. Maybe it's the culture here in Phoenix I'm not sure but you don't even hear about it here. OS X and X-store are rarely ever seen around here because they require a whole new suite of products to manage and few people are willing to invest in something completely different than their existing infrastructure when they can just scale with current hardware and software providers.

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[Anonymous Coward]

If he manages to substantially eradicate Malaria, something a massive UN and International donor effort has failed to achieve despite 40 years of effort, does anyone really care how he got the money? Especially since the answer is "By reducing competition amongst Operating Systems"?

Oh yeah, this is slashdot.

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[DNS-and-BIND]

Just an attempt to repair his terrible reputation by giving away money he can never spend anyway. It worked for Carnegie and Rockefeller, men who were truly evil in amassing their fortunes. Gates is just more self-centered, he wants to get all of the benefit now instead of founding a dynasty like other robber barons.

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[4D6963]

Bill Gates has better name recognition because a) he was the richest man in the world for 10 years straight and b) he was the co-founder and CEO of the company that made the operating system that everybody and their momma used on pretty much any computer they got to use.

He's not famous because he's a philanthropist, he's a philanthropist because he's astronomically rich and famous.

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow and that document doesn't even mention one of MS's low points, the Stac fiasco. This was one of their common tactics: court a company for a buyout, get a good look at their tech, then go off and build it themselves and give it away (illegal monopoly "dumping" abuse), thus putting the little guy out of business. It's a miracle Stac managed to win that suit, but good for them. Too bad the market for their product dried up, but in the end we're all better off for not having to using those kinds of programs anymore.

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[Anonymous Coward]

If you say he saves lives I can say he takes lives too or have you ignored the funding he and his wife give to Planned Parenthood International for abortion on demand in "developing" nations.

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[NatasRevol]

Wait, you're deleting thumbnails & metadata?

If you were my server admin, I'd punch you in the face for deleting those.

Ever think they might be useful and/or necessary for your users? If nothing else, so they don't have to recreate them every time they access the data.

And again you show ignorance of the tools - these tools are used at shops that have tens of thousands of client machines -large newspapers, Disney & Pixar studios, large ad firms. They don't worry about compliance or policies any more than an AD installation does.

And back to my original point - if you use MS's tools, they still cost a shitload more than any of the tools I mentioned. You HAVE to buy AD, you HAVE to buy CALs, you HAVE to buy SUS, you HAVE to buy AV, and it costs, and costs, and costs.

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[Anonymous Coward]

Spending money to save human lives in a ecosystem collapsing under the strain of supporting a fast growing population of 5, sorry 6, sorry almost 7 billion humans might just cost rather more lives.

http://www.optimumpopulation.org/index.html

Would it not be wiser to not follow the Easter Islanders into poverty, by ignoring the wider picture, and spend his money promoting the notion that humans cannot be rich if they are not prepared to share this planet with more than just cattle and soya?

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[hkmwbz]

In the final analysis, the man is a successful business person who's earned his money, and can do with it as he pleases.

Actually, it turns out that he violated several laws, both in the US, EU, Korea and other places. He earned his money by breaking the law. Can he still do with it as he pleases?

Re:Really? The *infamous*?

[Anonymous Coward]

...which may be the primary motivation for his philanthropy. He could have named it the "Happy Helping People Foundation" or even the "Microsoft Charitable Foundation" but somehow decided on the "Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation".

Now that I've gotten that rant off my chest, I wish the foundation great success in helping people around the world. As a wise friend once said, even if the money has a checkered past, it's a good thing if it can be directed towards a good end.

Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

I am Steve Jobs and I am here to ask you a question:
Is a man not entitled to his own computer?

No, says the man in Washington; it belongs to the poor.
No, says the man in the Vatican; it belongs to God.
No, says the man in Moscow; it belongs to everyone.

I rejected those answers. Instead, I chose something
different. I chose the impossible. I chose ... Apple.

Re:Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

So, if im entitled to my own computer, why can't I edit my iTunes source code? I chose Linux.

Re:Apple

[Anonymous Coward]

Edit the source code? You can't even install a different music player on your iPhone.

Re:Apple

[perryizgr8]

eh? what? oh, fuck you jobs!

Re:Apple

[GerardAtJob]

Same here.... He must have incorporated a brainwasher in every iPod to make so many people praise him... Praising him because he have patents... we're supposed to HATE PATENTS HERE!!! lol (I bet my karma will return to the dark side)

His patent on packaging should be invalid

[Anonymous Coward]

The black turtleneck has a long history that should count as prior art.

I read that as...

[ciderVisor]

"unexpected parents".

I thought TFA was surprised to find that he wasn't a product of the immaculate conception.

Re:I read that as...

[bennomatic]

Well, SJ *was* adopted, you insensitive clod.

*cough*

[C_Kode]

They all add up to an interesting portrait of the world's most famous tech CEO."

*cough* Bill Gates*cough*

Re:*cough*

[Anonymous Coward]

You're thinking of the world's most famous tech criminal mastermind.

Re:*cough*

[harryandthehenderson]

I'm pretty sure they were referring to only those people who are currently CEOs. Not people who haven't held the position of CEO of a company for 9 years.

Re:*cough*

[Andr T.]

Bill Gates is not a CEO anymore.

Re:*cough*

[Anonymous Coward]

That doesn't actually make any difference - BG is still the worlds most famous tech CEO, just not the worlds most famous CURRENT tech CEO. If you were talking about (for instance) the USAs most famous President, you would consider those who are no longer President, surely?

Re:*cough*

[LandDolphin]

Does a baseball player stop being refered to as a baseball player after they retire? If I asked you "what baseball player has the best batting average?", would that exclude anyone who had previously retired? no, of course not. I'd have to ask "What current baseball player".

Re:*cough*

[harryandthehenderson]

Does a baseball player stop being refered to as a baseball player after they retire?

Yes, they are usually referred to as being a "former baseball player".

Re:*cough*

[LandDolphin]

So, if someone asked the question "Who is the most famous baseball player", you believe it would be incorrect to name someone who is not currently playing the sport?

Apple Staircase

[ardor]

Hmm ..

A shiny staircase with Carrara marble steps and sides covered with quartz glass, but one needs special apple iShoes to use it.

Re:Apple Staircase

[gubers33]

That would be the iStaircase, not the Apple Staircase.

Re:Apple Staircase

[SchizoStatic]

Don't give them more ideas. I am waiting for the official iBed which lets me plug all apple products into to control my dreams and tell me to buy more apple products.

Re:Apple Staircase

[maxume]

If you are already waiting for it, it doesn't sound like they need to actually make it.

iStairs!

[AioKits]

Finally, a sectioned inclined surface for ascent and descent, for the rest of us!

Re:iStairs!

[gubers33]

It is the staircase for the rebels.

Re:iStairs!

[FatdogHaiku]

Great, I have to buy another pair of shoes because the ones I have won't work with the new stairs... and I want my old DOS flip flops back too!

Clarity for you

[SuperKendall]

*cough* Bill Gates*cough*

He said famous, not infamous.

Steve Jobs has been patented??

[eclectro]

So they must be able to clone him now? That's good news for apple. I wonder if he hatches from a pod.

Re:Steve Jobs has been patented??

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, he's been dead now for 2 years and
they've really done amazing things with
iCloning.

Re:Steve Jobs has been patented??

[maxume]

The clone springs, fully grown, from a pouch sown into the thigh of an existing Steve Jobs.

Gosh, I almost misread that...

[idontgno]

"The Unexpected Pants of Steve Jobs"

Like he inadvertently wore Hawaiian-print Bermuda shorts with his mock turtleneck.

The weird thing is that we'd probably never notice, with the RDF making us see what we expect.

Re:Gosh, I almost misread that...

[beetle496]

I misread the heading as the Unexpected patience of Steve Jobs. I read the heading a second time, since I knew that couldn't be right!

That made no sense

[SuperKendall]

So, if im entitled to my own computer, why can't I edit my iTunes source code? I chose Linux.

Neverwinter Nights runs on Linux and I can't edit that source either... you probably should not have chosen an application for your example.

Re:That made no sense

[Anonymous Coward]

I guess you've gotten pretty used to that whooshing sound just above your head by now, haven't you?

Re:That made no sense

[SuperKendall]

It's the sound of points that have gone right over your head and into my catch-all net. Why would I want to catch points with my head?

Continuing the epic display of AC stupidity I see.

So, the question is...

[DesScorp]

... how many of these did he steal from Woz?

Re:So, the question is...

[Anonymous Coward]

Good point. It's true. Steve Wozniak is the epitome of the innovation of this company. It wouldn't be the same without him. Kudos to him.

What about Dave?

[Zashi]

What about Dave Thomas? Arguably a much more famous CEO considering how many commercials he starred in.

And that Bill Gates guy might be a tad more famous, though I worry about mentioning this since it seems like flamebait. Also, he's not a CEO anymore.

Re:What about Dave?

[Anonymous Coward]

Even non-geeks and non-Apple fanboys know who Gates is. Just about everyone knows who he is.

You mention Steve Jobs to Joe Sixpack and he'll scratch his crotch, then his head.

Re:What about Dave?

[Red Flayer]

What about Dave Thomas? Arguably a much more famous CEO considering how many commercials he starred in.

Wait, what? It's the "most famous tech CEO" (emphasis mine).

Or you must know something about Wendy's products that the rest of us don't... can Frosties and Wendy's baked potatoes be used as wi-fi receivers or something?

Re:What about Dave?

[ciderVisor]

Why would Joe Sixpack scratch Steve Jobs's crotch and head ?

Re:What about Dave?

[Anonymous Coward]

Last I checked, Wendy's was not a tech company... regardless of how many people in IT eat there. Also, Dave Thomas is dead, and thus probably not a CEO anymore, either.

Re:What about Dave?

[LandDolphin]

Wendy's potatoes can be used as a battery to power your router!

Re:What about Dave?

[geekoid]

Sou you think to people who are not CEOs are the most recognized CEO's? wha?

I chose ... Apple.

[Anonymous Coward]

Which I, Steve Jobs, own.

So that Apple computer you think is yours - is really mine.

if you're a hammer

[Lexible]

everything looks like a nail: steve runs a company that does its business by patenting. it's no surprise that he thinks of things in his life in terms of patents.

Not unexpected

[Taibhsear]

Steve Jobs sure is pants but it's about as unexpected as this pun on slashdot.

So ...

[nitroyogi]

All of a sudden patents are all cool and nice and nicer!
Just because Steve has few!?

Re:So ...

[morgan_greywolf]

I don't think anybody around here ever said patents were bad. And if they did, they certainly don't represent the majority opinion. Most of feel that software patents are bad, and that the patent system, particularly in the U.S., is just really screwed up because the USPTO awards patents for ideas that are clearly either non-novel (prior art exists) or are obvious to those in the field(s) of study in question. Many of us also feel that patents are granted for too long a period of time, especially in the realms of IT and consumer electronics.

On the contrary, I think that patents are a useful way to encourage inventors to invent things by enabling them to reap benefits for their inventions, both monetary and non-monetary.

Re:So ...

[geekoid]

Almost everyone here doesn't understand what novel means regarding patents.

They generally think it's the idea, it is not. It's how it works; which is why business method and software patents make no sense.

I dont' think anyone who actually understands the industry thinks patents are too long.

Re:So ...

[nitroyogi]

... both monetary and non-monetary.

I understand monetary benefits. What are those other things?

Hopefully, pandering to the bureaucracy of USPTO isn't one of them for the passionate inventor.

Re:So ...

[drinkypoo]

I dont' think anyone who actually understands the industry thinks patents are too long.

I don't think that you can really build a good argument for the statement that pharmaceutical patents should run as long as they do, especially given that the alleged research before most drugs go on the market is a bunch of bullshit. It's easier to get a new version of an old drug on the market in the USA than it is to get a new version of an old turbo kit on the market in California.

Re:So ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, no, he seems to have stopped a while back. However, someone did inexplicably bitch-slap an entire thread I posted in. I suspect it was one of the editors -- for what reason, I don't know.

I fully realize that Slashdot isn't what it used to be, but it just pisses me off that there are now at least two, possibly 3 oligarchies on Slashdot that have rendered it "not what it used to be".

I agree that the S/N ratio has gone way downhill, but when some prick accuses me of being part of it, it just pisses me off.

But, you're right, I really should just not even care, because there's almost no point anymore.

--MG

Pardon me, but...

[denzacar]

How do you "almost misread" something?

P..P-a... (OMG! PANTS!)...P-a-t... (OMG! SOMEONE MISSPELLED PANTS!)...P-a-t-e... P-a-t-e-n... (OMG! SOMEONE HAS NO CLUE HOW TO SPELL PANTS!)... P-a-t-e-n-t... (OH! Not really pants... OMG! I ALMOST MISREAD IT AS PANTS!)... P-a-t-e-n-t-S... Patents...

Re:Pardon me, but...

[Inda]

It's 5:45 in the afternoon and you have no appointments.

Re:Pardon me, but...

[yascha]

It's 5:45 in the afternoon and you have no appointments.

I almost misread that as a-pants-ments.

Absolute Bullshit

[somethingwicked]

Ok, I looked at the patent on this before posting this because I initially thought, was "BULLSHIT, you can't patent a fucking staircase. There has to be something being left out."

But, I was wrong wrong wrong.

About the only descriptive text in the patent.

"We claim the ornamental design for a staircase, substantially as shown and described."

I know he has made some cool tech contributions, but this is absurd!!!
 

Re:Absolute Bullshit

[haystor]

it's all white

Re:Absolute Bullshit

[Anonymous Coward]

it's all white

The black model is on the way, and 6 more colors are being rumored.

Re:Absolute Bullshit

[tkohler]

It's called a design patent and they are almost worthless except for stopping exact knock-offs. Design claims have no bearing on function so he didn't "patent a staircase", he patented "that particular look of a staircase".

Re:Absolute Bullshit

[Lars T.]

Actually its made of glass. Go ahead, make a staircase out of glass - then we'll talk.

Re:Absolute Bullshit

[supervillainsf]

While not made by me, how about this one. Or maybe all of these. Glass staircases have been around for a while and really aren't all that impressive.

Re:Absolute Bullshit

[haystor]

Or, I can just put my name on someone else's invention because I own the company.

Getting On Patent App == Easy

[cotu]

Getting your name on a patent app is pretty damn easy... at the Large Silly Valley company
that I worked for, it was a matter of just putting somebody's name on the app and having them
sign the various forms.

Given that Jobs is CEO, there's probably a "coolness" factor for anybody at Apple to have him
on as a co-inventor. It certainly doesn't say anything about how involved (or not) he was in
coming up with the idea. It's not like there's a quiz at the patent office to see if you are
worthy of being a co-inventor, after all.

Re:Getting On Patent App == Easy

[SteeldrivingJon]

"Given that Jobs is CEO, there's probably a "coolness" factor for anybody at Apple to have him
on as a co-inventor. It certainly doesn't say anything about how involved (or not) he was in
coming up with the idea."

It should be easy enough to search for all recent Apple Computer patents. If he's not on all of them, his name probably only appears on things he was involved in.

His name isn't on the patent for the design of the NeXT pizzabox computer case. That's credited to the guy from frogdesign who created it.

I thought you said "PANTS"

[Philip K Dickhead]

And I just about Rolfed soup through my nose!

The World's most famous tech CEO

[GPLDAN]

Is John Chambers. Just pick up a copy of his trade rag... er... the respected publication Business 2.0. He's sure to be on the cover, and he will tell you just how famous he is.

Fashinable Dandies?

[Philip K Dickhead]

They take credit for nothing!
Acheivements, like other forms of industry, are beneath them.

Reliable

[Anonymous Coward]

Death, taxes and the daily slashdot Apple/MS flame war.

All Contributors Need Credit on Patent

[Webcommando]

Not a patent lawyer and haven't RTFM

... but it is expected that contributors to an invention appear on the patent. A contributor could be someone who offered suggestions or other ideas that are material to the invention.

With Steve's penchant for hands-on review of product designs, he could very easily have contributed ideas (even not the one implementing them) that were material to the invention.

Suprise

[geekoid]

The most surprising patent is the one for the Woz.

Re:Suprise

[ggvaidya]

Hahahaha, nice one! I hope somebody with modpoints finds you.

if i read this right

[Anonymous Coward]

the unexpected parents of steve jobs did get married but only after he was adopted out. quite a story. /yawn

Apple DID build those stairs...

[Anonymous Coward]

This is the third time Slashdot has posted about the Apple patented stairs. For correction, Apple HAS build those stairs. It is in two of their stores that I know of.

One is...

http://www.apple.com/retail/thegrove/

See the stairs in the middle. I've been there, and this is the EXACT stairs they have described in the patent.

Please correct this news story, and people, get your stories right. Seriously...

crapping cable

[BattleApple]

I used to include Apple's power adapters-which are unusually compact and sport magnetic connectors, an optional extension cord, and little wings you can crap the cable around-as a point in Macs' favor, until I got sick of Windows fans snickering.

If mac users are actually shitting power cables, I think the windows fans have every right to snicker.

Well, Jobs thinks differnetly...

[grikdog]

He thinks if you work for him, your stuff is his.

Re:Well, Jobs thinks differnetly...

[drinkypoo]

He thinks if you work for him, your stuff is his.

More or less true. Jobs' name is on Apple, your stuff belongs to Apple, it stands to reason that his name should be on it. Or at least that you haven't actually lost anything if it is. Don't like it? Work for yourself or a co-op.

Re:Well, Jobs thinks differnetly...

[grikdog]

Yeah, pretty gratuitous. Musta slipped on a Nuka-Cola bottlecap getting out the shower this morning. Sorry, Steve!

You are bullshit...

[Anonymous Coward]

What do you know? I have seen a wall-size poster of Steve Jobs climbing down that very staircase with white wings on his back and halo on his head. And that staircase was not just another staircase, it was all white, descending straight from heaven. He looked wicket awesome!

Now do you need anther proof that he is Jesus himself, you microsoft/bill g suckers?

Megalomania

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds more like a megalomaniac who forced his engineers to include him on the patent, or else they got fired...

Lee Iacocca the Zombie Ceo

[linzeal]

Lee Iaccoca ain't dead.

Re:Lee Iacocca the Zombie Ceo

[LandDolphin]

Thanks, I didn't see it when the other people posted the same information earlier today.

:-)

Some are better followers than leaders

[get_your_guns]

Having lived through the early Apple, Atari, Amiga, TRS80 and various other early Personal Computer formats, only MS was able to get the combination correct to be in the leader spot now. I am not saying anything about the methods for getting there, but MS made the right decisions to get there. The Atari and Amiga and TRS80s all fell down either trying to be the leader or doing a bad job of following. At least Apple has been able to come back from some bad decisions in their past to garnish the market share they currently have.

Glass Staircase? Thats unpossible!!!1! GENIUS!

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually its made of glass. Go ahead, make a staircase out of glass - then we'll talk

Oh WOW! Glass? What a GENIUS! I mean - how did he make the glass solid enough to walk on?

It seems like such an insurmountable problem doesn't it? Mere mortals like you or I do not have the vision, daring and courage to solve such an amazing engineering conundrum!

Kudos where Kudos is due. You & I agree 100% sir. Glass staircases were an impossible challenge before Steve Jobs put his mind to it.

Staircase?

[seanellis]

I thought that that was discovered and patented by Gogrilla Mincefriend.