3 ms·

Well, it can be looked at in more ways than one. Maybe he was just a jerk, or perhaps he was giving an object lesson. Details matter and the boss was paying a

Well, it can be looked at in more ways than one. Maybe he was just a jerk, or perhaps he was giving an object lesson. Details matter and the boss was paying attention. You decide.

mbesto 4y ago
> You decide. I did. Steve Jobs is survivorship bias at its finest. I've met and interviewed plenty of "detail orientated" bosses and not all of them create trillion dollar entities. > Maybe he was just a jerk, or perhaps he was giving an object lesson. 1. There is no legitimate reason to make a server rack a different color. 2. Making people work until 3am isn't a lesson. It ignores all studies that suggest that depriving people of sleep makes them less productive. Moving an icon 10 pixels...okay maybe I get it. There is some practical utility in that for an end-user and it teaches development teams the importance of why the details matter. However this is probably my biggest gripes with the stories about Jobs. My interpretation is that he was inconsistently diligent and was only detail orientated for "details matter" sake, but not always the right details.
- dev_tty01 4y ago
  Well, moving an icon a few pixels is also a purely aesthetic choice, just like changing the color of your house, the thickness of a header bar on a web page, the color of your office walls, or the color of a server rack. As with all aesthetic choices, there is someone who will think there is "no legitimate reason" to make those changes. There is someone else who will disagree. And yes, many detail oriented bosses are not successful, but Jobs actually did create a trillion dollar entity so I think this is more than just a survivorship bias. But he's controversial, so I get it if you disagree.
  - mbesto 4y ago
    > moving an icon a few pixels is also a purely aesthetic choice It's not. Aesthetics are actually a design principle: "Beautiful products/objects are perceived as easier to use and more valuable than ugly ones. Even if it is not true!" Since no one is actively looking at server racks there is no opportunity for the color to even play a factor. > And yes, many detail oriented bosses are not successful, but Jobs actually did create a trillion dollar entity so I think this is more than just a survivorship bias. Huh? You literally just defined survivorship bias. If only one party (Jobs) survives a large party ("many detailed oriented bosses"), then that's a survivor, and you're bias to thinking that would led that party to success is because of the same characteristics as the others that didn't. [0] - https://uxdesign.cc/design-principle-aesthetics-af926f8f86fe https://uxdesign.cc/design-principle-aesthetics-af926f8f86fe

Well, it can be looked at in more ways than one. Maybe he was just a jerk, or perhaps he was giving an object lesson. Details matter and the boss was paying attention. You decide.

mbesto 4y ago

> You decide. I did. Steve Jobs is survivorship bias at its finest. I've met and interviewed plenty of "detail orientated" bosses and not all of them create trillion dollar entities. > Maybe he was just a jerk, or perhaps he was giving an object lesson. 1. There is no legitimate reason to make a server rack a different color. 2. Making people work until 3am isn't a lesson. It ignores all studies that suggest that depriving people of sleep makes them less productive. Moving an icon 10 pixels...okay maybe I get it. There is some practical utility in that for an end-user and it teaches development teams the importance of why the details matter. However this is probably my biggest gripes with the stories about Jobs. My interpretation is that he was inconsistently diligent and was only detail orientated for "details matter" sake, but not always the right details.

dev_tty01 4y ago
Well, moving an icon a few pixels is also a purely aesthetic choice, just like changing the color of your house, the thickness of a header bar on a web page, the color of your office walls, or the color of a server rack. As with all aesthetic choices, there is someone who will think there is "no legitimate reason" to make those changes. There is someone else who will disagree. And yes, many detail oriented bosses are not successful, but Jobs actually did create a trillion dollar entity so I think this is more than just a survivorship bias. But he's controversial, so I get it if you disagree.
- mbesto 4y ago
  > moving an icon a few pixels is also a purely aesthetic choice It's not. Aesthetics are actually a design principle: "Beautiful products/objects are perceived as easier to use and more valuable than ugly ones. Even if it is not true!" Since no one is actively looking at server racks there is no opportunity for the color to even play a factor. > And yes, many detail oriented bosses are not successful, but Jobs actually did create a trillion dollar entity so I think this is more than just a survivorship bias. Huh? You literally just defined survivorship bias. If only one party (Jobs) survives a large party ("many detailed oriented bosses"), then that's a survivor, and you're bias to thinking that would led that party to success is because of the same characteristics as the others that didn't. [0] - https://uxdesign.cc/design-principle-aesthetics-af926f8f86fe https://uxdesign.cc/design-principle-aesthetics-af926f8f86fe