I didn't say the dying angle was the entire reason for Apple's success, just a notable part of it. Most of his (known) Apple brush-ups with legal issues appear to come after he knew he was dying.
They filled up the Dark X meme, so now are switching to the Negative X meme to explain oddities. We'll get Negative Matter, Negative Energy, Negative Gravity, Negative Particles (prior art?), Negative Universes, and probably Negative Feedback.
I don't even get where he would be considered "genius"
He had a "nose" for what consumers wanted. He sensed in the late 70's that the future was in GUI's even though they would be tricky to implement on the desktop hardware of the time.
He started the general translucent craze with the iMac, a look that spread to irons and electric toothbrushes. The "Daisy" iMac was a true piece of industrial art.
He was involved in early Pixar, which sparked the whole 3D animation revolution with Toy Story.
The iPod found a convenient UI where others had tried before with mixed results, and the iPhone which made everything go through a touchscreen and changed the look and feel of cell-phones forever. It may seem obvious now, but that's because Jobs had a nose for what "should be" obvious but wasn't yet around.
He was the Forrest Gump of consumer technology in that he always seemed to be involved in the formation of trends.
What are the mechanics of that exactly? Unless they include oral, I don't see anything working as intended. An erection is probably evidence of consent, at least enough to inject doubt into the case (no pun intended). If Bush's mom, for instance, tried to get wanky up, it would do the opposite and become a 2nd belly button.
Isaacson did not paint a rosy picture of Jobs. Isaacson's indirect conclusion was that Jobs was a complex personality that a displayed wide range of traits and emotions.
As far as him allegedly firing employees because he didn't like the way they looked, perhaps Isaacson couldn't substantiate the rumor and that's why he didn't included it (IIRC). But, there are plenty of OTHER stories of him being a jerk, including parking in the handicap zone with a bogus/missing license plate. (A joker employee put up a sign in that spot saying, "Park Different".)
And his storied relationship with his daughter could be for a lot of reasons, not just money. Based on interviews with friends and family, speculation was given that Jobs felt abandoned by his genetic parents and this somehow left a deep psychological scar on him which he may have projected onto his daughter. Some suggest that this feeling of abandonment is partly what drove Jobs to "prove to the world" that he was worthy of "real parents".
He was not materially externally flashy most of the time (relative to his wealth), although he was interested in custom designing a big-ass yacht when he found out he was dying. He was quoted as saying he picked that big personal project partly to distract him from his pain and approaching death, if I remember correctly. He needed goals to keep his mind off stuff he didn't want to think about; another clue to his drive.
But yes, he was cheap at times. But being cheap is not "greedy" in the usual sense, except maybe as a symptom of greed. Some say it was a game with him to test the limits of what he could get a way with. Thus, it wasn't the money itself, but the pleasure of successfully manipulating using money. He did seem to get pleasure in toying with people, which his pranks with Woz fed in to.
From a personal level, yes, most would consider him a "big jerk". But genius is not measured in personal popularity.
I read the Isaacson biography, and it was pretty clear that money was NOT Job's main motivator; it was a means to an end to him. He really wanted to build "insanely great" things and see his ideas transform the future.
He almost went broke in some cases by funneling his own money into projects. Somebody who values money wouldn't part with it that long for a gamble.
He was driven to see his concepts turn into products people wanted badly. In his mind, the future was his orchestra to conduct his way.
One can arguably compare him to great movie directors who drive those around them insane trying to put their vision on screen in careful detail. It gave us masterpieces like 'Odyssey 2001, but many of the project "minions" used up their Excedrin (or 60's equiv).
"Greed" is not quite the right word. "Obsession" is more like it. Maybe there is a word or phrase that means "obsession to the point of harming others"?
Perhaps in his mind, progress is more important than comfort, a kind of social darwinism where struggle for survival is a "necessary evil" to be a viable species. Or it may merely be narcissism, or a combo: those who don't aggressively scrape to be at the very top spot "deserve" to be stepped on: A+ or death.
It appears that one key to Apple's rocketing "success" under Jobs was that he knew he was dying soon and burned bridges left and right in order to grab as much early-mover market-share as possible to gain leveraging power for Apple.
People couldn't blame his bad moves on Apple itself because the dude behind it would be worm-bait when it all came out such that the reputation of the company wouldn't take such a huge hit. He was a voluntary shock-absorber.
We also have the employee "poaching" situation in addition to this Ebook move. I bet more will come out someday.
One has to give Jobs credit for using every weapon at his disposal, including death. His slimebaggery was masterful chess (except maybe for ignoring doctors).
counter-arguments typically are that charity and compassion will kick in...
What often happens is that during deep recessions, charity and compassion dry up because most are in tough or uncertain circumstances. Thus, charity and compassion are lowest when they are most needed.
Part of this is due to the rise of companies like Uber and Tesla Motors, blazing-hot start-ups that have been opposed at every turn by protectionist regulators and trade unions
Which are often backed or put in place by big traditional companies trying to keep out competition.
This will not only trigger Global Drying, but Republicans will deny it's happening, making it hard to do anything about it, and Koch bro's will buy up moisturizer lotion companies to profit from it.
But the laws of physics are the same Timbuktu such that you can be replaced by inexpensive overseas engineers.
I honestly don't know what's future-proof. Even manual "creative" labor can be done by remoted-controlled robots when bandwidth gets cheap enough.
Perhaps tell her to stop trying to second-guess the future and just pick what she likes and learn a variety of related skills surrounding that topic, including technical, physical, business, and sales.
Slashdot Mirror
Eeeewwwww
1. Don't make stupid software
2. Profit!
Beethoven would probably likewise bop me in the face if I visited him, but I'd still jump at the chance to meet him and see him work.
I didn't say the dying angle was the entire reason for Apple's success, just a notable part of it. Most of his (known) Apple brush-ups with legal issues appear to come after he knew he was dying.
Typo Waves
They filled up the Dark X meme, so now are switching to the Negative X meme to explain oddities. We'll get Negative Matter, Negative Energy, Negative Gravity, Negative Particles (prior art?), Negative Universes, and probably Negative Feedback.
-5
He had a "nose" for what consumers wanted. He sensed in the late 70's that the future was in GUI's even though they would be tricky to implement on the desktop hardware of the time.
He started the general translucent craze with the iMac, a look that spread to irons and electric toothbrushes. The "Daisy" iMac was a true piece of industrial art.
He was involved in early Pixar, which sparked the whole 3D animation revolution with Toy Story.
The iPod found a convenient UI where others had tried before with mixed results, and the iPhone which made everything go through a touchscreen and changed the look and feel of cell-phones forever. It may seem obvious now, but that's because Jobs had a nose for what "should be" obvious but wasn't yet around.
He was the Forrest Gump of consumer technology in that he always seemed to be involved in the formation of trends.
What are the mechanics of that exactly? Unless they include oral, I don't see anything working as intended. An erection is probably evidence of consent, at least enough to inject doubt into the case (no pun intended). If Bush's mom, for instance, tried to get wanky up, it would do the opposite and become a 2nd belly button.
Isaacson did not paint a rosy picture of Jobs. Isaacson's indirect conclusion was that Jobs was a complex personality that a displayed wide range of traits and emotions.
As far as him allegedly firing employees because he didn't like the way they looked, perhaps Isaacson couldn't substantiate the rumor and that's why he didn't included it (IIRC). But, there are plenty of OTHER stories of him being a jerk, including parking in the handicap zone with a bogus/missing license plate. (A joker employee put up a sign in that spot saying, "Park Different".)
And his storied relationship with his daughter could be for a lot of reasons, not just money. Based on interviews with friends and family, speculation was given that Jobs felt abandoned by his genetic parents and this somehow left a deep psychological scar on him which he may have projected onto his daughter. Some suggest that this feeling of abandonment is partly what drove Jobs to "prove to the world" that he was worthy of "real parents".
He was not materially externally flashy most of the time (relative to his wealth), although he was interested in custom designing a big-ass yacht when he found out he was dying. He was quoted as saying he picked that big personal project partly to distract him from his pain and approaching death, if I remember correctly. He needed goals to keep his mind off stuff he didn't want to think about; another clue to his drive.
But yes, he was cheap at times. But being cheap is not "greedy" in the usual sense, except maybe as a symptom of greed. Some say it was a game with him to test the limits of what he could get a way with. Thus, it wasn't the money itself, but the pleasure of successfully manipulating using money. He did seem to get pleasure in toying with people, which his pranks with Woz fed in to.
From a personal level, yes, most would consider him a "big jerk". But genius is not measured in personal popularity.
I read the Isaacson biography, and it was pretty clear that money was NOT Job's main motivator; it was a means to an end to him. He really wanted to build "insanely great" things and see his ideas transform the future.
He almost went broke in some cases by funneling his own money into projects. Somebody who values money wouldn't part with it that long for a gamble.
He was driven to see his concepts turn into products people wanted badly. In his mind, the future was his orchestra to conduct his way.
One can arguably compare him to great movie directors who drive those around them insane trying to put their vision on screen in careful detail. It gave us masterpieces like 'Odyssey 2001, but many of the project "minions" used up their Excedrin (or 60's equiv).
"Greed" is not quite the right word. "Obsession" is more like it. Maybe there is a word or phrase that means "obsession to the point of harming others"?
Perhaps in his mind, progress is more important than comfort, a kind of social darwinism where struggle for survival is a "necessary evil" to be a viable species. Or it may merely be narcissism, or a combo: those who don't aggressively scrape to be at the very top spot "deserve" to be stepped on: A+ or death.
but, but, she blinded me with science!
It appears that one key to Apple's rocketing "success" under Jobs was that he knew he was dying soon and burned bridges left and right in order to grab as much early-mover market-share as possible to gain leveraging power for Apple.
People couldn't blame his bad moves on Apple itself because the dude behind it would be worm-bait when it all came out such that the reputation of the company wouldn't take such a huge hit. He was a voluntary shock-absorber.
We also have the employee "poaching" situation in addition to this Ebook move. I bet more will come out someday.
One has to give Jobs credit for using every weapon at his disposal, including death. His slimebaggery was masterful chess (except maybe for ignoring doctors).
and even more in Blackburn Lancashire.
They are invisible, haven't you read Adam Smith?
I for one welcome the rise of the Recursion Party.
What often happens is that during deep recessions, charity and compassion dry up because most are in tough or uncertain circumstances. Thus, charity and compassion are lowest when they are most needed.
Who do you sue if the company that polluted has long gone out of business?
Which are often backed or put in place by big traditional companies trying to keep out competition.
Try rebooting it.
'cuz the data renaissance is also ending
Then vote to have it released
This will not only trigger Global Drying, but Republicans will deny it's happening, making it hard to do anything about it, and Koch bro's will buy up moisturizer lotion companies to profit from it.
But the laws of physics are the same Timbuktu such that you can be replaced by inexpensive overseas engineers.
I honestly don't know what's future-proof. Even manual "creative" labor can be done by remoted-controlled robots when bandwidth gets cheap enough.
Perhaps tell her to stop trying to second-guess the future and just pick what she likes and learn a variety of related skills surrounding that topic, including technical, physical, business, and sales.
WonderMan prior art:
http://img3.wikia.nocookie.net...
Play Yoko Ono in the background to drown out the clicks. Even if it can't drown them out, it will drive the tap listeners insane.