3 ms·
I found this interesting too: "he saw Apple staffers turn into "bizarro people" by the riches the Apple stock offering created. Isaacson says Jobs vowed never t
by MichaelApproved 15y ago
I found this interesting too: "he saw Apple staffers turn into "bizarro people" by the riches the Apple stock offering created. Isaacson says Jobs vowed never to let his wealth change him."
I wonder what he'll consider to be bizarro.
- alanfalcon 15y agoI've always wondered about Steve's decision to severely limit stock distribution at Pixar when it had its IPO. What he did was apparently legal, but many staffers there felt like they were treated unfairly. A theory I've been considering is that Steve did it to avoid changing the people who made Pixar what it was[1]. I mean, Steve certainly didn't seem like he cared about having the money, except maybe to say "told you so" to all those who doubted him after his removal from Apple. Just something that seems to fit with the facts that I'm aware of. [1] Of course, John Lasseter, for one, ended up with a load of money and nobody could argue that he changed. He just went from collecting toy train sets to having actual train sets installed in his backyard.
- 0x12 15y agoWhen you work with people you could at least respect their right to make their own mistakes and to give them the benefit of the doubt.
- gamble 15y agoDidn't he do the same thing during Apple's IPO? I was under the impression that Apple employees only received stock because Woz voluntarily gave up some of his own to form an employee pool. It's this tight-fisted aspect of Jobs that makes it difficult for me to appreciate him on a non-professional level.
- adamjernst 15y agoI also wonder if that's Apple the first time (IPO) or the second time (when the stock surged so much).
- MichaelApproved 15y agoIt's probably the first time since, by the second time, he would've already been very rich and, by then, money would've changed him, if it was going to at all.
- lawnchair_larry 15y agoI found the previous sentence more interesting. "Another aspect of Jobs' character revealed was his disdain for conspicuous consumption." I definitely see some incongruency there!
- forensic 15y agoWhy? Did jobs show off his Ferrari, did he wear $10,000 bespoke suits? Did he buy anything at all that demonstrates status and wealth? Jobs was NOT a conspicuous consumer. At all. All of his purchases were justified based on utility - albeit as someone who appreciates art, he considered beauty to be a utility. Psychologists like Maslow would agree with that. Beauty leads to good feelings as surely as food and shelter do. He bought stuff for himself, not to show off.
- daleharvey 15y agoim guessing the OP was referring to the fact that apple products could be considered as a conspicuous consumer item
- wlievens 15y agoA statement that may have some degree of truth to it (disclaimer: I own at least 4 of these products and indirectly worked on them), but strange to rant about it on HN of all places.
- hugh3 15y agoIf Apple products were a conspicuous consumption item, they'd have diamonds embedded, and gold plating. And they'd cost enough in order to not be owned by practically everybody, because conspicuous consumption loses its appeal when you have the same phone as the fourteen-year-old ghetto kid on the bus.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- mattgreenrocks 15y ago