Slashdot Mirror
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."
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.
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.
https://www.speakservers.com/
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.
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.
We are the Borg...
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?
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.
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
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.
My blog
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.
I love the sound of distortion in the morning -- webcommando
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).
Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the war room!
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.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
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.
Life starts at the end of your comfort zone.
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.
Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the war room!
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.
"But this one goes to 11!"
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?
Lars T.
To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck