3 ms·

You seem to be getting confused about the relationship here. No, I'm not. Getting a payment from someone is very different to trying to get something for free

by jgg 16y ago

You seem to be getting confused about the relationship here. No, I'm not. Getting a payment from someone is very different to trying to get something for free from a company, or trying to get acquired. You promise the company payment. The guy in the e-mail was promised continued discussion at a specific point in time. The point I'm making is that if you shortchange a company, they have more power to punish you than if they shortchange you. Thus, I don't understand this casual attitude with companies, where if you don't get a response you just "give up". I don't understand why everybody is emailing Steve Jobs all of a sudden, and I certainly wouldn't just start sending email to CEOs of companies. What's wrong with sending an e-mail to a CEO? I genuinely don't understand this. We saw the same thing with that prick from AT&T. Why is it so taboo to jerk the chain of the person in charge? Is their time just so valuable that they shouldn't even have to bother with the lowly proles?

pyre 16y ago
Emailing the CEO because some engineer isn't responding promptly enough to your emails isn't a good way to get him on your side. From your perspective, he promised you something and you are trying to get him to deliver. From his perspective, you've just alerted the CEO of the company (multiple times) that maybe he's not being productive enough. In general, it's not a good way to get this guy to give you a green light on getting hired/acquired.
- dcx 16y ago
  That's so true! In fact I can sort of see the corporate pattern: 1. Steve -> Engineer: Whats with the delay? At this point, almost nothing the engineer could say shows him in a good light - "sick" doesn't cut it at the power difference here. You only talk to the CEO once in a decade, and his experience of you is "doesn't deliver"? 2. Engineer -> Steve: I evaluated it. It sucks. I haven't written back yet as it's not a high priority. 3. Email from Steve -> Unfortunate dude: No interest.
  - danudey 16y ago
    Alternately: 1. Steve -> Manager: This guy e-mailed me again, does this need to be dealt with? 2. Manager -> Steve: It's a good algorithm, but the guy's been demanding and impatient, and with everyone prepping iOS/iPhone 4 for WWDC, Engineer just hasn't had time to look into it. 3. Steve -> Dude: No interest. Specifically, I highly doubt that Steve Jobs would speak directly with an engineer about a potential acquisition of a potentially useful algorithm. I doubt it was ever really on his radar at all after the first 30 seconds where he read it and forwarded it off. That's the entire reason managers exist.

by jgg 16y ago

pyre 16y ago

Emailing the CEO because some engineer isn't responding promptly enough to your emails isn't a good way to get him on your side. From your perspective, he promised you something and you are trying to get him to deliver. From his perspective, you've just alerted the CEO of the company (multiple times) that maybe he's not being productive enough. In general, it's not a good way to get this guy to give you a green light on getting hired/acquired.

dcx 16y ago
That's so true! In fact I can sort of see the corporate pattern: 1. Steve -> Engineer: Whats with the delay? At this point, almost nothing the engineer could say shows him in a good light - "sick" doesn't cut it at the power difference here. You only talk to the CEO once in a decade, and his experience of you is "doesn't deliver"? 2. Engineer -> Steve: I evaluated it. It sucks. I haven't written back yet as it's not a high priority. 3. Email from Steve -> Unfortunate dude: No interest.
- danudey 16y ago
  Alternately: 1. Steve -> Manager: This guy e-mailed me again, does this need to be dealt with? 2. Manager -> Steve: It's a good algorithm, but the guy's been demanding and impatient, and with everyone prepping iOS/iPhone 4 for WWDC, Engineer just hasn't had time to look into it. 3. Steve -> Dude: No interest. Specifically, I highly doubt that Steve Jobs would speak directly with an engineer about a potential acquisition of a potentially useful algorithm. I doubt it was ever really on his radar at all after the first 30 seconds where he read it and forwarded it off. That's the entire reason managers exist.