5 ms·

Was Steve Jobs a genius? Is this granted? I feel like he was a great salesman, and knew how to identify and manipulate smart people in order to attain a goal (w

Was Steve Jobs a genius? Is this granted? I feel like he was a great salesman, and knew how to identify and manipulate smart people in order to attain a goal (with the intention of cashing in on it himself). He also had a strong vision of what he wanted, was willing to be bullheaded about it, and managed to accumulate the credibility from early successes to keep people working on his vision and not deviating (although I feel like often his vision happens to be something he liked that someone else came up with, but the origin of the idea is not the point here). His cultural interests probably made it easier for some people to think he had some special insight. But... genius? Unless we're talking genius manipulator (the best con men are almost magical in their abilities), for me the jury is still out. EDIT: Actually, the comments on the site itself bring up a lot of great points along the lines of what I wrote. EDIT2: Thanks for interesting discussions, was certainly worth the karma-risk.

georgemcbay 15y ago
I've never been a huge fan of Jobs, but I don't doubt he was a genius. His genius may have been sales/showmanship/leadership as opposed to traditional technical genius, but it was genius just the same.
- afterburner 15y ago
  Showmanship, yes. His presentations were memorable, when computer tech presentations are usually quite forgettable.
danilocampos 15y ago
Ignoring the silly con man remark, "but apart from better sanitation and medicine and education and irrigation and public health and roads and a freshwater system and baths and public order... what have the Romans done for us?"
- afterburner 15y ago
  I didn't mean to imply Jobs was a con man. But I don't get why your comment applies, especially since it credit a large group which I would be entirely willing to accept contained numerous geniuses. It would be equivalent to praising Apple as a whole, which I would definitely be fine with. Lots of excellent work from very talented people going on there no doubt.
  - danilocampos 15y ago
    > It would be equivalent to praising Apple as a whole, which I would definitely be fine with Okay. Well, the thing about that is, Apple as a whole almost burned to the ground once upon a time. A man's singular vision turned that around. A company on the brink of death turns into one of the most valuable in all the world. If the guy who can do that isn't a genius, we might as well give up on using the word.
    - afterburner 15y ago
      Is good leadership always genius? Was his good leadership all the way up there at genius level? Is working hard to bring out the ideas of your staff worthy of genius-level praise? If he was more humble no-one might have called him a genius, although he would still be respected. I think there is plenty of room for praising people for quite astonishing accomplishments, but I don't necessarily equate accomplishment with genius. It's not a knock on someone if they really pull something off but they don't get called genius. Genius is in the mind.
      - danilocampos 15y ago
        > Genius is in the mind. Agree completely. Steve didn't accomplish all he did using his fists.
    - pabloPXL 15y ago
      Genius is not somebody that makes you believe that you 'need' something that you actually don't, those are mere leaders of the consumerism religion. Geniuses were people like Pitagoras, Newton, Gödel... you know, people that opened whole new science fields just with the power of their minds. Please don't insult them with your first world cheap heros.
- pabloPXL 15y ago
  You point out the 'silly' con remark but you do much worst, actually comparing a mere successful business guy with a whole civilization.
  - danilocampos 15y ago
    ...It's a Monty Python reference. The point is that someone has enumerated a list of fairly substantial things and then, quite absurdly, discards them. http://www.epicure.demon.co.uk/whattheromans.html http://www.epicure.demon.co.uk/whattheromans.html
    - pabloPXL 15y ago
      I know perfectly where it comes from, I have access to google too, and the quotes remarked perfectly that the quote was not yours. I was replying to your intention, not to the literal text. EDIT: this reply actually looks more personal than I wanted it to be, and given your clarification, have my apologies...
      - danilocampos 15y ago
        So it's your thinking that my intention was to compare Steve Jobs to the Roman Empire (an apple to an elephant), and it was not my intention to compare OP's remark to absurdist writing in The Life of Brian (a piece of writing to a piece of writing)? Well. Okay then.
- zerostar07 15y ago
  While i find Apple products really well made, they have only given us minor technical innovations (unibody construction, 3d desktop graphics, sensible touch-based apps, etc?). In fact, you could remove apple products from the world, and we wouldn't be missing anything essential technology-wise. Yes they did match the technologies right to make amazingly desirable products, just like expensive cars match technologies without introducing major innovations. I would rephrase the pythonesque quotation "But apart from the polish in sanitation pipes, better scrubs for doctors, yellow paint on roads, cleaner baths and lighter shields for soldiers, what have the Romans done for us?"
  - specialist 15y ago
    Unibody minor? Please. I'm on my 3rd MBP. I destroyed my 4 yr old model (last before unibody). The latest is model is wicked tough. I also have recent Dell and HP laptops. Pieces of shit. No comparison.
    - zerostar07 15y ago
      in terms of big-picture technology, it's 2011 and we have personal 3d printing. unibody is not that novel.
      - specialist 15y ago
        substractive vs additive. As far as I know, there's no 3D printing technology nearly as strong as aluminum. Yet.
    - tallanvor 15y ago
      I've never understood how people manage to mess up cases so badly - especially other (supposedly) technical people. I have never replaced a computer because of physical failure. --Even my first laptop, which lasted me 5 years, was replaced because I was moving overseas and didn't want to have to worry about paying higher prices for a laptop in the UK.
      - 15y ago
bitwize 15y ago
Jobs was a genius in the way P.T. Barnum was, not in the way that Woz or even Bill Gates are.
- afterburner 15y ago
  I agree his talents did not lie in the technical areas. But given how much he stole credit for ideas, I'm naturally suspicious about the source of the brilliance attached to him. And I'm not willing to concede that a combination of stubbornness, single-minded vision, and eccentricity can necessarily be called genius. What if those are simply personality traits that happen to drive other people to work hard to achieve something or fork over money? Genius implies a true insight. So did he truly understand people enough to manipulate them like he did (both business partners and customers)? I guess that's the question I ask myself. Or was it a happy accident of his style, desire, and stubbornness that just happened to work.
  - MrScruff 15y ago
    I think you're being very presumptuous about what his role was at Apple. You're portraying him as nothing more than an exacting editor, yet there's plenty of evidence to suggest he contributed ideas and direction to Apple's products. And as others have said, as CEO he was more responsible than anyone else for one of the most remarkable turnarounds in business history. Oh, and I don't think any manipulation of customers was required. Just a focus on making great products.
    - gujk 15y ago
      Don't go overboard there. Jobs had no compunction getting up on stage and making untrue or exaggerated claims to a gullible public. Maybe no more than the average CEO, but no saint. The term "Reality Distortion Field" was invented for Jobs
      - MrScruff 15y ago
        As you say, no more so than the average CEO. In fact, you could argue that for a while now his product unveilings were relatively spin free, since when he'd say "Isn't this great?" he actually believed it.
JanezStupar 15y ago
Why do you even need to classify genius? Have you even met any? The reason I'm asking is that to know genius one has to see one in person. And the work of a genius cannot even come to be without the persona. It is always the personality that fascinates and then as if trying to find the essence for themselves, people go around looking at the work and life of a genius, pondering what it is that makes them so. And its passion. Pure single minded passion. The dark side of the force, all the way. Thats what genius is. Another thing they have in common is that they simply cannot be classified in concise terms without calling them genius.
- afterburner 15y ago
  You might be right that certain undefinable qualities taken together are what genius amounts to. But I guess I feel it means having a special insight in some area(s). Thing about Jobs is he so carefully tried to cultivate the sense that he had a special insight, and I feel like he desperately wanted to believe he did, and was superior to others because of it. I have met geniuses, but I haven't met Jobs, and second hand evidence is unreliable to me here given his abilities (ironic since they may be the crux of his genius).
  - rimantas 15y ago
    Do you say he has no insight? iPod introduced: analysis say it will fail. iPhone introduced: analysis say it will fail. iPad introduced: analysis say it will fail. WWDC 1997 video shows that Jobs clearly had a vision for many many years into the future.
    - afterburner 15y ago
      I thought the iPod and iPhone would do great. So did many others. As I'm sure is the guy who actually came up with the ideas that were present in the iPod, which may or may not have been Steve Jobs himself. My point is, he may have had the insight to design the iPod in its glorious form, or maybe he just recognized it in someone else's work (Apple engineers/designers/whatever), just as millions did when it went on sale. So who's the genius(es)?
Tycho 15y ago
I think Jobs was a risk taker. And, crucially, he commanded the respect necessary for others to follow his lead. I think plenty of other companies probably had a chance to launch something like the iPod, but shied away thinking the strategy too risky. Or maybe the CEO wanted to go for it, but couldn't convince the rest of the board to trust his judgment. Jobs greatest achievement was bringing all this talent and financing and creativity and vision together and using it to take risks (in the market/domain of consumer electronic and personal computing). With Jobs gone, will Apple still be able to function the same way? I don't know.
- afterburner 15y ago
  I definitely agree. At Apple with Jobs in control, products didn't get watered down or ruined by committee.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
ctl 15y ago
Steve Jobs was integral to four spectacular business success stories: early Apple, Pixar, NeXT, and modern Apple. You don't have to call it genius but the man certainly had something.
badclient 15y ago
"Great salesman" are folks you see doing informercials. That phrase is reserved for people like Billy Mays(big fan!). Anyone who wants to paint Steve Jobs as mostly a salesman is showing utter ignorance. Salesmen mostly sell stuff made by a product guy. They don't work on building a product that is perfect to their vision. Steve Jobs believed in perfecting products as much as selling.

georgemcbay 15y ago

I've never been a huge fan of Jobs, but I don't doubt he was a genius. His genius may have been sales/showmanship/leadership as opposed to traditional technical genius, but it was genius just the same.

afterburner 15y ago
Showmanship, yes. His presentations were memorable, when computer tech presentations are usually quite forgettable.

danilocampos 15y ago

Ignoring the silly con man remark, "but apart from better sanitation and medicine and education and irrigation and public health and roads and a freshwater system and baths and public order... what have the Romans done for us?"

afterburner 15y ago
I didn't mean to imply Jobs was a con man. But I don't get why your comment applies, especially since it credit a large group which I would be entirely willing to accept contained numerous geniuses. It would be equivalent to praising Apple as a whole, which I would definitely be fine with. Lots of excellent work from very talented people going on there no doubt.
- danilocampos 15y ago
  > It would be equivalent to praising Apple as a whole, which I would definitely be fine with Okay. Well, the thing about that is, Apple as a whole almost burned to the ground once upon a time. A man's singular vision turned that around. A company on the brink of death turns into one of the most valuable in all the world. If the guy who can do that isn't a genius, we might as well give up on using the word.
  - afterburner 15y ago
    Is good leadership always genius? Was his good leadership all the way up there at genius level? Is working hard to bring out the ideas of your staff worthy of genius-level praise? If he was more humble no-one might have called him a genius, although he would still be respected. I think there is plenty of room for praising people for quite astonishing accomplishments, but I don't necessarily equate accomplishment with genius. It's not a knock on someone if they really pull something off but they don't get called genius. Genius is in the mind.
    - danilocampos 15y ago
      > Genius is in the mind. Agree completely. Steve didn't accomplish all he did using his fists.
  - pabloPXL 15y ago
    Genius is not somebody that makes you believe that you 'need' something that you actually don't, those are mere leaders of the consumerism religion. Geniuses were people like Pitagoras, Newton, Gödel... you know, people that opened whole new science fields just with the power of their minds. Please don't insult them with your first world cheap heros.
pabloPXL 15y ago
You point out the 'silly' con remark but you do much worst, actually comparing a mere successful business guy with a whole civilization.
- danilocampos 15y ago
  ...It's a Monty Python reference. The point is that someone has enumerated a list of fairly substantial things and then, quite absurdly, discards them. http://www.epicure.demon.co.uk/whattheromans.html http://www.epicure.demon.co.uk/whattheromans.html
  - pabloPXL 15y ago
    I know perfectly where it comes from, I have access to google too, and the quotes remarked perfectly that the quote was not yours. I was replying to your intention, not to the literal text. EDIT: this reply actually looks more personal than I wanted it to be, and given your clarification, have my apologies...
    - danilocampos 15y ago
      So it's your thinking that my intention was to compare Steve Jobs to the Roman Empire (an apple to an elephant), and it was not my intention to compare OP's remark to absurdist writing in The Life of Brian (a piece of writing to a piece of writing)? Well. Okay then.
zerostar07 15y ago
While i find Apple products really well made, they have only given us minor technical innovations (unibody construction, 3d desktop graphics, sensible touch-based apps, etc?). In fact, you could remove apple products from the world, and we wouldn't be missing anything essential technology-wise. Yes they did match the technologies right to make amazingly desirable products, just like expensive cars match technologies without introducing major innovations. I would rephrase the pythonesque quotation "But apart from the polish in sanitation pipes, better scrubs for doctors, yellow paint on roads, cleaner baths and lighter shields for soldiers, what have the Romans done for us?"
- specialist 15y ago
  Unibody minor? Please. I'm on my 3rd MBP. I destroyed my 4 yr old model (last before unibody). The latest is model is wicked tough. I also have recent Dell and HP laptops. Pieces of shit. No comparison.
  - zerostar07 15y ago
    in terms of big-picture technology, it's 2011 and we have personal 3d printing. unibody is not that novel.
    - specialist 15y ago
      substractive vs additive. As far as I know, there's no 3D printing technology nearly as strong as aluminum. Yet.
  - tallanvor 15y ago
    I've never understood how people manage to mess up cases so badly - especially other (supposedly) technical people. I have never replaced a computer because of physical failure. --Even my first laptop, which lasted me 5 years, was replaced because I was moving overseas and didn't want to have to worry about paying higher prices for a laptop in the UK.
    - 15y ago

bitwize 15y ago

Jobs was a genius in the way P.T. Barnum was, not in the way that Woz or even Bill Gates are.

afterburner 15y ago
I agree his talents did not lie in the technical areas. But given how much he stole credit for ideas, I'm naturally suspicious about the source of the brilliance attached to him. And I'm not willing to concede that a combination of stubbornness, single-minded vision, and eccentricity can necessarily be called genius. What if those are simply personality traits that happen to drive other people to work hard to achieve something or fork over money? Genius implies a true insight. So did he truly understand people enough to manipulate them like he did (both business partners and customers)? I guess that's the question I ask myself. Or was it a happy accident of his style, desire, and stubbornness that just happened to work.
- MrScruff 15y ago
  I think you're being very presumptuous about what his role was at Apple. You're portraying him as nothing more than an exacting editor, yet there's plenty of evidence to suggest he contributed ideas and direction to Apple's products. And as others have said, as CEO he was more responsible than anyone else for one of the most remarkable turnarounds in business history. Oh, and I don't think any manipulation of customers was required. Just a focus on making great products.
  - gujk 15y ago
    Don't go overboard there. Jobs had no compunction getting up on stage and making untrue or exaggerated claims to a gullible public. Maybe no more than the average CEO, but no saint. The term "Reality Distortion Field" was invented for Jobs
    - MrScruff 15y ago
      As you say, no more so than the average CEO. In fact, you could argue that for a while now his product unveilings were relatively spin free, since when he'd say "Isn't this great?" he actually believed it.

JanezStupar 15y ago

Why do you even need to classify genius? Have you even met any? The reason I'm asking is that to know genius one has to see one in person. And the work of a genius cannot even come to be without the persona. It is always the personality that fascinates and then as if trying to find the essence for themselves, people go around looking at the work and life of a genius, pondering what it is that makes them so. And its passion. Pure single minded passion. The dark side of the force, all the way. Thats what genius is. Another thing they have in common is that they simply cannot be classified in concise terms without calling them genius.

afterburner 15y ago
You might be right that certain undefinable qualities taken together are what genius amounts to. But I guess I feel it means having a special insight in some area(s). Thing about Jobs is he so carefully tried to cultivate the sense that he had a special insight, and I feel like he desperately wanted to believe he did, and was superior to others because of it. I have met geniuses, but I haven't met Jobs, and second hand evidence is unreliable to me here given his abilities (ironic since they may be the crux of his genius).
- rimantas 15y ago
  Do you say he has no insight? iPod introduced: analysis say it will fail. iPhone introduced: analysis say it will fail. iPad introduced: analysis say it will fail. WWDC 1997 video shows that Jobs clearly had a vision for many many years into the future.
  - afterburner 15y ago
    I thought the iPod and iPhone would do great. So did many others. As I'm sure is the guy who actually came up with the ideas that were present in the iPod, which may or may not have been Steve Jobs himself. My point is, he may have had the insight to design the iPod in its glorious form, or maybe he just recognized it in someone else's work (Apple engineers/designers/whatever), just as millions did when it went on sale. So who's the genius(es)?

Tycho 15y ago

I think Jobs was a risk taker. And, crucially, he commanded the respect necessary for others to follow his lead. I think plenty of other companies probably had a chance to launch something like the iPod, but shied away thinking the strategy too risky. Or maybe the CEO wanted to go for it, but couldn't convince the rest of the board to trust his judgment. Jobs greatest achievement was bringing all this talent and financing and creativity and vision together and using it to take risks (in the market/domain of consumer electronic and personal computing). With Jobs gone, will Apple still be able to function the same way? I don't know.

afterburner 15y ago
I definitely agree. At Apple with Jobs in control, products didn't get watered down or ruined by committee.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

ctl 15y ago

Steve Jobs was integral to four spectacular business success stories: early Apple, Pixar, NeXT, and modern Apple. You don't have to call it genius but the man certainly had something.

badclient 15y ago

"Great salesman" are folks you see doing informercials. That phrase is reserved for people like Billy Mays(big fan!). Anyone who wants to paint Steve Jobs as mostly a salesman is showing utter ignorance. Salesmen mostly sell stuff made by a product guy. They don't work on building a product that is perfect to their vision. Steve Jobs believed in perfecting products as much as selling.