4 ms·

I actually had dinner with a well-known hedge fund manager a few months ago and while talking about Blackberries and iPhones, he mentioned "that nobody has eve

I actually had dinner with a well-known hedge fund manager a few months ago and while talking about Blackberries and iPhones, he mentioned "that nobody has ever got rich betting against Steve Jobs" Sums it up for me pretty well.

NickPollard 16y ago
Bill Gates rather puts the lie to that.
- chadmalik 16y ago
  ...but of course Gates is an ubercritic too and only "appropriated" from the best (Zerox PARC), just like Jobs.
- wrs 16y ago
  Well, it's a little more subtle than that. Microsoft produced some of the earliest and most important applications for Macintosh (and still does). Bill sent a famous letter advising Jobs to license the Mac OS widely (which was honest advice, based on Bill's later actions). A lot of Microsoft's success relative to Apple is where Apple refused to participate in a market (e.g., OSes for commodity hardware) rather than a pure competitive "bet against".
  - rbanffy 16y ago
    > which was honest advice Not really. Gates already had a "Microsoft tax" in place for generic x86 computers, so, any sale of an x86 box running a generic Apple OS would also imply in a sale of an OEM license of DOS. At that time, Gates was developing Windows (perhaps doubting they could pull it off, thus, misleading Apple into spending money on something they regarded as very difficult or impossible) to compete with Apple's proprietary hardware/software stack. Without hardware differentiation, Apple would quickly fail. So, no, I don't think that was honest advice and, much to his credit, neither did Jobs.
    - wrs 16y ago
      If you read the letter (http://www.vectronicsappleworld.com/macintosh/memo.html http://www.vectronicsappleworld.com/macintosh/memo.html), Gates's advice was to license Mac hardware technology to OEMs, enabling a "Mac-compatible" hardware market in which licensing the Mac OS would be feasible. It is easy to forget that in 1985, the modern assumption that all computers are identical Intel-specified x86 boxes was not yet in place.
- btilly 16y ago
  He does? How? Microsoft was happy to place bets on every system they could. Bill Gates didn't bet against anyone. He placed lots of bets on lots of systems, knowing that one would work out. The IBM PC is what made their fortune. But the bets they placed on other systems were already doing very well for them. Including on Apple. The Microsoft-Apple relationship began in 1977 with Microsoft introducing Applesoft BASIC and later licensing it to Apple. Microsoft SoftCard followed in 1980, enabling Apple machines to run to programs designed for the CP/M. Sure, there was the infamous MS-DOS deal with IBM. But in the same time period Steve Jobs visited Microsoft to demo early prototypes of the Macintosh, and Microsoft was the first major company to develop programs for the Mac. In the end Microsoft BASIC and Microsoft Multiplan were shipped simultaneously with the introduction of the Macintosh, and Microsoft announced at the launch that Word, Chart, and File would ship soon. When I look back at the history, I see no sign that Bill Gates was betting against Steve Jobs. His most successful bet was not on Steve Jobs. But he had lots of bets on Jobs as well. For more on the history, see http://www.thocp.net/companies/microsoft/microsoft_company.htm http://www.thocp.net/companies/microsoft/microsoft_company.h...
  - ericb 16y ago
    Early on, before a leader in the PC market was established, investors had the choice of betting which horse would win--Bill Gates at Microsoft or Steve Jobs at Apple. Many people did get rich betting on Gates, so indirectly, yes, Bill Gates does show that people have gotten rich betting against Jobs. The hyperbole is nice, but only that--hyperbole.
    - cromulent 16y ago
      Isn't that choice a false dichotomy? A bet on Gates is not a bet against Jobs. An investor who could only envisage one winner may be a little naive. It's not a horse race.
      - dasil003 16y ago
        Actually it pretty much was a horse race. How many PC manufacturers were there in the 80s? How many in the 90s?
- RuadhanMc 16y ago
  Wait a minute... Bill Gates was on top when he retried. Jobs hasn't retired yet. This game ain't over...
- jonhendry 16y ago
  Gates mostly bet against John Sculley, Mike Spindler, etc.
modmajgen 16y ago
I dislike these kinds of statements because, although they might have a kernel of truth, they tend to deflect useful criticism and inspection of a company's operation. The kernel of truth in this case is that Steve Jobs has a very good intuition of what people want and what they find to be aesthetically pleasing. However, I'm sure that the closed, proprietary nature of the various iOS platforms and their general hostility towards free software aren't exactly benefits that other companies should emulate. Besides that, I will say that even if Jobs wasn't involved in the actual designing of Apple products, he's a very charismatic director and has a good intuition on what really excites people. Such qualities are generally rare to find in the human population.

NickPollard 16y ago

Bill Gates rather puts the lie to that.

chadmalik 16y ago
...but of course Gates is an ubercritic too and only "appropriated" from the best (Zerox PARC), just like Jobs.
wrs 16y ago
Well, it's a little more subtle than that. Microsoft produced some of the earliest and most important applications for Macintosh (and still does). Bill sent a famous letter advising Jobs to license the Mac OS widely (which was honest advice, based on Bill's later actions). A lot of Microsoft's success relative to Apple is where Apple refused to participate in a market (e.g., OSes for commodity hardware) rather than a pure competitive "bet against".
- rbanffy 16y ago
  > which was honest advice Not really. Gates already had a "Microsoft tax" in place for generic x86 computers, so, any sale of an x86 box running a generic Apple OS would also imply in a sale of an OEM license of DOS. At that time, Gates was developing Windows (perhaps doubting they could pull it off, thus, misleading Apple into spending money on something they regarded as very difficult or impossible) to compete with Apple's proprietary hardware/software stack. Without hardware differentiation, Apple would quickly fail. So, no, I don't think that was honest advice and, much to his credit, neither did Jobs.
  - wrs 16y ago
    If you read the letter (http://www.vectronicsappleworld.com/macintosh/memo.html http://www.vectronicsappleworld.com/macintosh/memo.html), Gates's advice was to license Mac hardware technology to OEMs, enabling a "Mac-compatible" hardware market in which licensing the Mac OS would be feasible. It is easy to forget that in 1985, the modern assumption that all computers are identical Intel-specified x86 boxes was not yet in place.
btilly 16y ago
He does? How? Microsoft was happy to place bets on every system they could. Bill Gates didn't bet against anyone. He placed lots of bets on lots of systems, knowing that one would work out. The IBM PC is what made their fortune. But the bets they placed on other systems were already doing very well for them. Including on Apple. The Microsoft-Apple relationship began in 1977 with Microsoft introducing Applesoft BASIC and later licensing it to Apple. Microsoft SoftCard followed in 1980, enabling Apple machines to run to programs designed for the CP/M. Sure, there was the infamous MS-DOS deal with IBM. But in the same time period Steve Jobs visited Microsoft to demo early prototypes of the Macintosh, and Microsoft was the first major company to develop programs for the Mac. In the end Microsoft BASIC and Microsoft Multiplan were shipped simultaneously with the introduction of the Macintosh, and Microsoft announced at the launch that Word, Chart, and File would ship soon. When I look back at the history, I see no sign that Bill Gates was betting against Steve Jobs. His most successful bet was not on Steve Jobs. But he had lots of bets on Jobs as well. For more on the history, see http://www.thocp.net/companies/microsoft/microsoft_company.htm http://www.thocp.net/companies/microsoft/microsoft_company.h...
- ericb 16y ago
  Early on, before a leader in the PC market was established, investors had the choice of betting which horse would win--Bill Gates at Microsoft or Steve Jobs at Apple. Many people did get rich betting on Gates, so indirectly, yes, Bill Gates does show that people have gotten rich betting against Jobs. The hyperbole is nice, but only that--hyperbole.
  - cromulent 16y ago
    Isn't that choice a false dichotomy? A bet on Gates is not a bet against Jobs. An investor who could only envisage one winner may be a little naive. It's not a horse race.
    - dasil003 16y ago
      Actually it pretty much was a horse race. How many PC manufacturers were there in the 80s? How many in the 90s?
RuadhanMc 16y ago
Wait a minute... Bill Gates was on top when he retried. Jobs hasn't retired yet. This game ain't over...
jonhendry 16y ago
Gates mostly bet against John Sculley, Mike Spindler, etc.

modmajgen 16y ago

I dislike these kinds of statements because, although they might have a kernel of truth, they tend to deflect useful criticism and inspection of a company's operation. The kernel of truth in this case is that Steve Jobs has a very good intuition of what people want and what they find to be aesthetically pleasing. However, I'm sure that the closed, proprietary nature of the various iOS platforms and their general hostility towards free software aren't exactly benefits that other companies should emulate. Besides that, I will say that even if Jobs wasn't involved in the actual designing of Apple products, he's a very charismatic director and has a good intuition on what really excites people. Such qualities are generally rare to find in the human population.