9 ms·

Steve Jobs was a big role model of mine, yet Bill Gates never came close. I'm starting to realize that is due to the dramatic nature of Job's life, which is ver

Steve Jobs was a big role model of mine, yet Bill Gates never came close. I'm starting to realize that is due to the dramatic nature of Job's life, which is very different from what we know about Bill Gates. Yet, when things like this comes out, and stories about Jobs emerge, I start to question whether my choice of a role model was really all that well placed. Do you admire the guy with the entrancing personality, or the one that is about to cure polio?

melvinram 15y ago
You don't have to pick between Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant. Take the best about each and apply to your life as they are appropriate to your goals and strategy. With that said, if I had to choose, I'd choose Gates... and I do wish there was more about Bill Gates's approach available to learn from.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
  - danieldk 15y ago
    You have to give Jobs credit for be a successful serial entrepreneur: Apple, Pixar, NeXT (debatable, but it sold for $429 million), and again Apple.
    - jonhendry 15y ago
      And NeXT's software is pretty much driving Apple's product lines now. Which is a pretty good result for a 'failed company': Get paid $429 million to take over a larger company, and watch the technology you developed blossom to its full potential that was never possible as a tiny fringe player in the market, contributing to massive, overwhelming, record-smashing success.
    - philwelch 15y ago
      NeXT soaked up over $1 billion in investment about a decade before selling to Apple. If it's a success now, it's only because if you traded your NeXT stock for equivalent Apple stock in 1997, it would probably represent a significant return on the money invested in NeXT in the 1980's. But you'd have gotten an even better return by having that money in federal bonds between 1985 and 1997 (and then investing it in Apple) rather than having it in NeXT.
- yogrish 15y ago
  very well said. No one is Perfect in everything. From those kind of poeple, we need to pick good things that really stand out in them and for which they became iCons now.
- jc123 15y ago
  One shouldn't let the notion of Jobs and Gates being "competitors" from being able to admire both of them. I admire each for different reasons. I think that has to be the case since they are pretty different characters: a closer analogy could be between a great batter and a great pitcher. For some info, Gates wrote this yesterday http://www.gatesfoundation.org/annual-letter http://www.gatesfoundation.org/annual-letter (Was posted on HN but the crowd here seems to prefer something more controversial when it comes to Gates.)
acabal 15y ago
One guy made an easy to use computer, some cool movies, and then some expensive first-world gadgets while hanging on to his massive fortune and reputation as a jerk. The other made "PC" a household word, now runs the largest charity in history, and is working to eradicate malaria, among other things. Both were around the same age at the time of Jobs' death. I don't understand why people look up to Jobs so much when Gates seems to be the better human being by far.
- danieldk 15y ago
  What's wrong with admiring one for taste, and the other for (post-Microsoft) ethics? Why should we compare people to pick the 'best human'?
  - rbanffy 15y ago
    Had his ethics really changed he would acknowledge what he did before, at the helm of Microsoft, was wrong and pressure his successors not to repeat his past misdeeds. I think the only thing he apologized for was the plan to seize Allen's part of MS while he was dying (luckily, he recovered). And he did so after Allen found out about it. Have you ever heard something like an apology for all the rest? Me neither.
    - shingen 15y ago
      He didn't do anything particularly offensive while running Microsoft. He shouldn't apologize. Competition on that big of a scale for that big of a prize should be very competitive, it should be painful and brutal. Gates didn't use a gun, he didn't use TNT to kill his competition, he didn't use the government to do it either. Oh no, the big company competed very much so harshly. And much like IBM before Microsoft, a new big nasty company came along and made them barely relevant. Now we have Google, Apple, Facebook, all giants that are nasty in their own ways. Who gives a shit. In another ten years, the world will be turned upside down again. You should be thanking Gates for stepping up to the plate and competing as he did. It's no different than the way Apple or Google or anybody else competes, and it's a good thing.
- 15y ago
the_tubes 15y ago
no one thinks of the Woz. Woz is the one who should be admired! He was nice, he did charity, wanted the world to get together like the US and Russia during the last days of the cold war, and he was even teaching elementary school in his spare time.
tjogin 15y ago
I think Bill Gates was every bit as ruthless as Jobs was. But Bill had his enormous success earlier in life, stepped down from his company earlier, and was thus ahead. Despite being the same age, they were in very different stages of life, career, and success. Who's to say that Jobs wouldn't have gone into philanthropy once he had stepped down from Apple, had he not been a (relatively) late bloomer and died at a (relatively) young age? Then again, maybe he wouldn't have. But I think it's unfair to lambast Jobs for not living long enough to reach that stage of his life.
- fpgeek 15y ago
  There is one possible signal that Jobs wouldn't have chosen to go into philanthropy: He never reinstated Apple's charitable gift-matching program after terminating it during Apple's darkest days. Instead, that turned out to be one of the first things Tim Cook did. Obviously this is a very limited data point. We know very little about the context around those decisions (e.g. were there external factors that took some time to sort out? did they decide to do it and then deliberately hold back until Tim Cook took over?, etc.). Nevertheless, it is one of the few data points we have on this question.
  - vidarh 15y ago
    Gates' parents apparently thought he did not do enough philanthropy earlier on, and Gates was also facing mounting calls from people about it in public long before he started his efforts. While I don't have much love for either of them, people can and often do change with age. Gates appears to have changed a lot - perhaps Jobs would've eventually too.
dave_sullivan 15y ago
Most people seem to go for the charismatic figure. It's interesting how much of a backlash there is when it turns out that they were just human after all, people feel betrayed and manipulated for having placed that figure on a pedestal. The stories about Steve jobs were always there (the most telling of which I thought was when he ripped off Wozniak with the Atari situation, but Lisa said a lot too), and gates was a dick in his time too. Interesting people tend to have a few sides, and some of those sides can be pretty ugly.
vijayr 15y ago
Is it necessary to just pick one role model? or admire just one guy? Instead of admiring people as a whole, can't we just admire (and pick, emulate etc) habits/principles from many people (and ignore the 'jerk' behavior etc)? For example, Jobs had excellent taste, believed in creating simple/beautiful products etc. Gates is doing amazing work with his enormous wealth and so on.
zmonkeyz 15y ago
He probably didn't want to go down as a monopolist that enjoyed crushing others companies. Humans are flawed and neither is better than the other.

melvinram 15y ago

You don't have to pick between Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant. Take the best about each and apply to your life as they are appropriate to your goals and strategy. With that said, if I had to choose, I'd choose Gates... and I do wish there was more about Bill Gates's approach available to learn from.

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
- danieldk 15y ago
  You have to give Jobs credit for be a successful serial entrepreneur: Apple, Pixar, NeXT (debatable, but it sold for $429 million), and again Apple.
  - jonhendry 15y ago
    And NeXT's software is pretty much driving Apple's product lines now. Which is a pretty good result for a 'failed company': Get paid $429 million to take over a larger company, and watch the technology you developed blossom to its full potential that was never possible as a tiny fringe player in the market, contributing to massive, overwhelming, record-smashing success.
  - philwelch 15y ago
    NeXT soaked up over $1 billion in investment about a decade before selling to Apple. If it's a success now, it's only because if you traded your NeXT stock for equivalent Apple stock in 1997, it would probably represent a significant return on the money invested in NeXT in the 1980's. But you'd have gotten an even better return by having that money in federal bonds between 1985 and 1997 (and then investing it in Apple) rather than having it in NeXT.
yogrish 15y ago
very well said. No one is Perfect in everything. From those kind of poeple, we need to pick good things that really stand out in them and for which they became iCons now.
jc123 15y ago
One shouldn't let the notion of Jobs and Gates being "competitors" from being able to admire both of them. I admire each for different reasons. I think that has to be the case since they are pretty different characters: a closer analogy could be between a great batter and a great pitcher. For some info, Gates wrote this yesterday http://www.gatesfoundation.org/annual-letter http://www.gatesfoundation.org/annual-letter (Was posted on HN but the crowd here seems to prefer something more controversial when it comes to Gates.)

acabal 15y ago

One guy made an easy to use computer, some cool movies, and then some expensive first-world gadgets while hanging on to his massive fortune and reputation as a jerk. The other made "PC" a household word, now runs the largest charity in history, and is working to eradicate malaria, among other things. Both were around the same age at the time of Jobs' death. I don't understand why people look up to Jobs so much when Gates seems to be the better human being by far.

danieldk 15y ago
What's wrong with admiring one for taste, and the other for (post-Microsoft) ethics? Why should we compare people to pick the 'best human'?
- rbanffy 15y ago
  Had his ethics really changed he would acknowledge what he did before, at the helm of Microsoft, was wrong and pressure his successors not to repeat his past misdeeds. I think the only thing he apologized for was the plan to seize Allen's part of MS while he was dying (luckily, he recovered). And he did so after Allen found out about it. Have you ever heard something like an apology for all the rest? Me neither.
  - shingen 15y ago
    He didn't do anything particularly offensive while running Microsoft. He shouldn't apologize. Competition on that big of a scale for that big of a prize should be very competitive, it should be painful and brutal. Gates didn't use a gun, he didn't use TNT to kill his competition, he didn't use the government to do it either. Oh no, the big company competed very much so harshly. And much like IBM before Microsoft, a new big nasty company came along and made them barely relevant. Now we have Google, Apple, Facebook, all giants that are nasty in their own ways. Who gives a shit. In another ten years, the world will be turned upside down again. You should be thanking Gates for stepping up to the plate and competing as he did. It's no different than the way Apple or Google or anybody else competes, and it's a good thing.
15y ago

the_tubes 15y ago

no one thinks of the Woz. Woz is the one who should be admired! He was nice, he did charity, wanted the world to get together like the US and Russia during the last days of the cold war, and he was even teaching elementary school in his spare time.

tjogin 15y ago

I think Bill Gates was every bit as ruthless as Jobs was. But Bill had his enormous success earlier in life, stepped down from his company earlier, and was thus ahead. Despite being the same age, they were in very different stages of life, career, and success. Who's to say that Jobs wouldn't have gone into philanthropy once he had stepped down from Apple, had he not been a (relatively) late bloomer and died at a (relatively) young age? Then again, maybe he wouldn't have. But I think it's unfair to lambast Jobs for not living long enough to reach that stage of his life.

fpgeek 15y ago
There is one possible signal that Jobs wouldn't have chosen to go into philanthropy: He never reinstated Apple's charitable gift-matching program after terminating it during Apple's darkest days. Instead, that turned out to be one of the first things Tim Cook did. Obviously this is a very limited data point. We know very little about the context around those decisions (e.g. were there external factors that took some time to sort out? did they decide to do it and then deliberately hold back until Tim Cook took over?, etc.). Nevertheless, it is one of the few data points we have on this question.
- vidarh 15y ago
  Gates' parents apparently thought he did not do enough philanthropy earlier on, and Gates was also facing mounting calls from people about it in public long before he started his efforts. While I don't have much love for either of them, people can and often do change with age. Gates appears to have changed a lot - perhaps Jobs would've eventually too.

dave_sullivan 15y ago

Most people seem to go for the charismatic figure. It's interesting how much of a backlash there is when it turns out that they were just human after all, people feel betrayed and manipulated for having placed that figure on a pedestal. The stories about Steve jobs were always there (the most telling of which I thought was when he ripped off Wozniak with the Atari situation, but Lisa said a lot too), and gates was a dick in his time too. Interesting people tend to have a few sides, and some of those sides can be pretty ugly.

vijayr 15y ago

Is it necessary to just pick one role model? or admire just one guy? Instead of admiring people as a whole, can't we just admire (and pick, emulate etc) habits/principles from many people (and ignore the 'jerk' behavior etc)? For example, Jobs had excellent taste, believed in creating simple/beautiful products etc. Gates is doing amazing work with his enormous wealth and so on.

zmonkeyz 15y ago

He probably didn't want to go down as a monopolist that enjoyed crushing others companies. Humans are flawed and neither is better than the other.