5 ms·
> In this light, Woz almost appears as the "idea guy" (where idea includes initial concept + first execution), whereas Jobs is the one who made it a viable prod
by dave_sullivan 10y ago
> In this light, Woz almost appears as the "idea guy" (where idea includes initial concept + first execution), whereas Jobs is the one who made it a viable product and company.
I'm not sure of the exact ratio, but as far as I can tell, if they hadn't teamed up, Woz would have ended up an engineer at HP (or Google if it happened today) and Jobs would have ended up starting a cult or joining Scientology or something.
Maybe there would have been someone else to market Woz's genius, but I doubt they'd have done it better. Maybe Jobs would have found another Woz, but I doubt they'd have built as good of a product; Jobs would have been selling just as relentlessly, but a less compelling product.
They both had an important role to play. What came after? Who could have known.
- antisthenes 10y ago> and Jobs would have ended up starting a cult He sort of did and it ended up being pretty successful.
- jakeva 10y agoI assume you're taking a shot at Apple the company. Not sure what the basis for making the comparison to a cult is and having escaped from an actual cult myself I find the comparison disingenuous and insulting. Apple sells products many people are happy to pay for. Cults sell a lifestyle usually built on lies and manipulation, generally taking much more from their buyers than just the sticker price.
- justinclift 10y agoErrr... just to point out, some people perceive similarities in Apple's approach to what you just described re: "Cults sell ...".
- freyr 10y ago> some people perceive similarities in Apple's approach to what you just described re: "Cults sell [a lifestyle usually based on lies and manipulation]" Marketing involves manipulation. Despite being good at marketing, I don't see evidence that Apple resorts to lying more than other companies. More often, the "cult of Apple" label is directed at avid customers who are particularly enthusiastic about Apple's products, and its used pejoratively by people who don't share or understand their enthusiasm. But it's metaphor, and it doesn't mean Apple or its fans are an actual cult.
- awhitty 10y agoI'd also like to point out that the comparison between Apple and a cult has existed since at least 2004. [1] [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cult_of_Mac_(book) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cult_of_Mac_(book)
- lisper 10y agoNowadays Apple does take more than the sticker price: they take control of your machine. It has become nearly impossible to refuse a software upgrade, and actually impossible to downgrade. They sell this as a "feature", but actual cults also sell taking control of your life as a feature. And people actually find this attractive because it relieves them of the burden of having to think or take responsibility for their actions. There's a reason that both Apple and "real" cults thrive in the marketplace. True, Apple is not as bad as a "real" cult but the analogy is apt, and becoming more so over time.
- GuiA 10y agoThis is true of Windows, any web app that you use, and more and more of any hardware that you buy (Nest, Tesla, etc.). You're just describing the general state of the industry (which I also lament).