4 ms·

Afaik he did know programming at a basic level, which back in those days meant that he knew enough to get something working without all of the tools, etc that w

Afaik he did know programming at a basic level, which back in those days meant that he knew enough to get something working without all of the tools, etc that we have today. But it was Woz who was the true hardware/software talent; he spent his childhood designing processors that he didn't have the money to build. He was fascinated with circuits & electronics & processors. Steve worked at Atari but got Woz in to do the circuit for breakout, Steve had no idea how it worked and couldn't have done it himself. When Atari paid for the work he shafted Woz by giving him a _much_ smaller amount than half of what he received. Steve's skills mostly seem to have settled in the management/figurehead role. People say that he had excellent vision for design but realistically I think he had skills in none of the areas that he hired people to do and that his major skill was as company head, tying everything and everyone together into a cohesive unit. He was very demanding and threw tantrums, but that's still human; however episodes like when Woz left Apple to go and invent the universal remote, he sent a prototype to Jobs and Jobs smashed it against the wall in a rage. Dude had power trip/anger issues to the max. We can't forget that Microsoft/Bill Gates bailed Apple out at one point, too. I'd say this is likely a failing of their market at the time; Apple's market of doe eyed "it just works" fans didn't exist/wasn't large enough at that point in time. Nowadays, they don't have anything to worry about. I, Woz; Steve Wozniak's autobiography is a great read for a bit more info into Jobs. He tells it like it was, though maybe slightly muted due to the fact that the two were still friends. The official Jobs bio is just revisionist prose.

rr3932 4y ago
I think Steve's most important skill was the ability to say no. But even more important, was his ability to say no and that the person he said no to listened, agreed he said no, and then stopped working on the thing and tried to do something better. If you've ever worked in a large company you know how rare that is and how critical that is.
- joelthelion 4y ago
  Saying no is overrated. I mean, of course, it's a good thing to know when to say no, if used parsimoniously. The problem is that we now have zillions of wannabee Steve Jobs who believe saying no to everything automatically makes them brilliant visionaries.
  - hnfong 4y ago
    It just means saying "yes" to the right things, and nothing more, is crucial. Which is a just very roundabout way of saying success comes from consistently making good choices...
  - rr3932 4y ago
    It's easy to say no. The hard part is getting people to listen and that's what Steve Jobs did especially well. That was the point I was trying to make. I've been on a ton of teams where everyone agreed we were not going to do a feature. Only to have that person go back to working on that feature because it was important to them and the work they were supposed to be doing, which the team depended on, didn't get done. In my experience, this is a serious issue in large corporations and it happens at the individual, group and even division level. Apple, under Steve Jobs, didn't seem to have this problem and they seemed to get a ton done, with comparatively quite small teams, because of it.
scarface74 4y ago
This is a myth that Microsoft “bailed Apple out”. At the time of the MS deal, Apple had 4 Billion in the bank because of a loan that Amelia had already secured. Microsoft invested $250 Million in Apple and a month later, Apple spent $100 million to buy out PowerComputing’s Mac license. It also took 4 years before Apple was profitable after the deal The other myth is that Microsoft “agreed to port Office to the Mac” in 1997. By 1997, Word and Excel had been on the Mac since the mid 80s. MS agreed to keep supporting Office on the Mac.
- dlivingston 4y ago
  It’s also rips the context out of the deal: Microsoft “bailed Apple out” because MS was deep in an antitrust lawsuit, and giving a cash infusion to your main competitor was a way to signal to legislators - “we’re not trying to be a monopoly!”
  - scarface74 4y ago
    And while the look and feel lawsuit wasn’t going Apple’s way, indications are that the QuickTime lawsuit where it was clear that MS was using Apple’s Quicktime code that was licensed to a third party had legs. Also MS was much more concerned about snuffing out Netscape than Apple. Apple agreed to make IE the default browser on Macs. Besides, at the time, MS made more on each Mac sold than Apple because of Office.
Gordonjcp 4y ago
> Dude had power trip/anger issues to the max. Well yeah, of course, he was a vegan. He lived in a state of perpetual malnourishment that left him unable to maintain a calm and rational state. That's almost certainly why, on finding out he had the only curable form of pancreatic cancer, he decided that the answer was to stick coffee up his bum.
daniel-cussen 4y ago
I read SJ's biography...and know a bit about Wozniak...through his father, my grandfather's peer in Lockheed Martin. So yeah Jobs cheated Woz, the one time--and Jobs admits it--but come on, I know guys who cheat like that every uh time period thing according to the uh Gregorian Calendar. Week month something. But only Stephen Jobs started Apple, they didn't. And Steve gave Steve the money he promised, it was just less than half what he was offered. Still a good deal for Wozniak, just Wozniak had access to military CMOS for much longer than Steve J. Steve Jobs gotta say does an amazing job of looking bad at tech while knowing everything, just everything. Like yes he couldn't do Breakout but he actually tried, trial and error for a while. Master at steps 1 and 3, ignorant but not completely and could have gotten a bad Breakout for his step 2 for he himself to pull it off. So that's why he teamed up.

rr3932 4y ago

I think Steve's most important skill was the ability to say no. But even more important, was his ability to say no and that the person he said no to listened, agreed he said no, and then stopped working on the thing and tried to do something better. If you've ever worked in a large company you know how rare that is and how critical that is.

joelthelion 4y ago
Saying no is overrated. I mean, of course, it's a good thing to know when to say no, if used parsimoniously. The problem is that we now have zillions of wannabee Steve Jobs who believe saying no to everything automatically makes them brilliant visionaries.
- hnfong 4y ago
  It just means saying "yes" to the right things, and nothing more, is crucial. Which is a just very roundabout way of saying success comes from consistently making good choices...
- rr3932 4y ago
  It's easy to say no. The hard part is getting people to listen and that's what Steve Jobs did especially well. That was the point I was trying to make. I've been on a ton of teams where everyone agreed we were not going to do a feature. Only to have that person go back to working on that feature because it was important to them and the work they were supposed to be doing, which the team depended on, didn't get done. In my experience, this is a serious issue in large corporations and it happens at the individual, group and even division level. Apple, under Steve Jobs, didn't seem to have this problem and they seemed to get a ton done, with comparatively quite small teams, because of it.

scarface74 4y ago

This is a myth that Microsoft “bailed Apple out”. At the time of the MS deal, Apple had 4 Billion in the bank because of a loan that Amelia had already secured. Microsoft invested $250 Million in Apple and a month later, Apple spent $100 million to buy out PowerComputing’s Mac license. It also took 4 years before Apple was profitable after the deal The other myth is that Microsoft “agreed to port Office to the Mac” in 1997. By 1997, Word and Excel had been on the Mac since the mid 80s. MS agreed to keep supporting Office on the Mac.

dlivingston 4y ago
It’s also rips the context out of the deal: Microsoft “bailed Apple out” because MS was deep in an antitrust lawsuit, and giving a cash infusion to your main competitor was a way to signal to legislators - “we’re not trying to be a monopoly!”
- scarface74 4y ago
  And while the look and feel lawsuit wasn’t going Apple’s way, indications are that the QuickTime lawsuit where it was clear that MS was using Apple’s Quicktime code that was licensed to a third party had legs. Also MS was much more concerned about snuffing out Netscape than Apple. Apple agreed to make IE the default browser on Macs. Besides, at the time, MS made more on each Mac sold than Apple because of Office.

Gordonjcp 4y ago

> Dude had power trip/anger issues to the max. Well yeah, of course, he was a vegan. He lived in a state of perpetual malnourishment that left him unable to maintain a calm and rational state. That's almost certainly why, on finding out he had the only curable form of pancreatic cancer, he decided that the answer was to stick coffee up his bum.

daniel-cussen 4y ago

I read SJ's biography...and know a bit about Wozniak...through his father, my grandfather's peer in Lockheed Martin. So yeah Jobs cheated Woz, the one time--and Jobs admits it--but come on, I know guys who cheat like that every uh time period thing according to the uh Gregorian Calendar. Week month something. But only Stephen Jobs started Apple, they didn't. And Steve gave Steve the money he promised, it was just less than half what he was offered. Still a good deal for Wozniak, just Wozniak had access to military CMOS for much longer than Steve J. Steve Jobs gotta say does an amazing job of looking bad at tech while knowing everything, just everything. Like yes he couldn't do Breakout but he actually tried, trial and error for a while. Master at steps 1 and 3, ignorant but not completely and could have gotten a bad Breakout for his step 2 for he himself to pull it off. So that's why he teamed up.