4 ms·

Steve Jobs was one of the greatest marketers in recent history, and from that perspective he really was "totally dependent on them for [his] life and well-being

Steve Jobs was one of the greatest marketers in recent history, and from that perspective he really was "totally dependent on them for [his] life and well-being". Others did the work going from zero to one, he did the work of going from one to a hundred.

oblio 4y ago
The first ones put in an infinity units of effort and received maybe N units of recognition for it. Jobs put in 100 units of effort and received N billion units of recognition for it.
- earthscienceman 4y ago
  While I do agree with you on the effort assessment, or certainly the "trailblazing" factor... (to me, writing a kernel and operating system that could be used by the entire world before there existed a notion of what that kernel and operating system might look do that is infinitely more impressive than being a salesman) .. I do think it's a red herring. To me it's not so much about effort than it is impact. If every person to ever write code was trying to sell a product, progress would have halted as it started. It's both the effort, the philosophy, and the philanthropy of it. Which is also what has made it thankless-ish.
- gordian-mind 4y ago
  Popular recognition is usually balanced out by resentment and envy.
  - oblio 4y ago
    For Jobs? No way, that ratio is 100:1. The worst part is that he was a horrible human being. Much worse than Wozniak and probably even slightly worse than Gates.
- wwweston 4y ago
  Jobs figured out how to collect and amplify the efforts of talented people into a industrial organization with products that have had a world-changing impact. I don't know how much of that is his talents and efforts and how much of that is luck of being with teams that succeeded at a time when industries he chose were rising. I wouldn't discount either the possibility that he was distinctly good and industrious... or that dozens/hundreds/thousands of people of equal distinctiveness didn't make it for arbitrary reasons. And anybody who isn't sure the rewards are equitably distributed is probably correct. But I do recognize that functioning in such a way that you can effectively collect and amplify the efforts of talented people is a non-trivial feat.

oblio 4y ago

The first ones put in an infinity units of effort and received maybe N units of recognition for it. Jobs put in 100 units of effort and received N billion units of recognition for it.

earthscienceman 4y ago
While I do agree with you on the effort assessment, or certainly the "trailblazing" factor... (to me, writing a kernel and operating system that could be used by the entire world before there existed a notion of what that kernel and operating system might look do that is infinitely more impressive than being a salesman) .. I do think it's a red herring. To me it's not so much about effort than it is impact. If every person to ever write code was trying to sell a product, progress would have halted as it started. It's both the effort, the philosophy, and the philanthropy of it. Which is also what has made it thankless-ish.
gordian-mind 4y ago
Popular recognition is usually balanced out by resentment and envy.
- oblio 4y ago
  For Jobs? No way, that ratio is 100:1. The worst part is that he was a horrible human being. Much worse than Wozniak and probably even slightly worse than Gates.
wwweston 4y ago
Jobs figured out how to collect and amplify the efforts of talented people into a industrial organization with products that have had a world-changing impact. I don't know how much of that is his talents and efforts and how much of that is luck of being with teams that succeeded at a time when industries he chose were rising. I wouldn't discount either the possibility that he was distinctly good and industrious... or that dozens/hundreds/thousands of people of equal distinctiveness didn't make it for arbitrary reasons. And anybody who isn't sure the rewards are equitably distributed is probably correct. But I do recognize that functioning in such a way that you can effectively collect and amplify the efforts of talented people is a non-trivial feat.