7 ms·

Jobs was not a good person but we wouldn't be talking about Woz today if they had not paired up. He was a visionary and "got" tech -- Apple's success with him

Jobs was not a good person but we wouldn't be talking about Woz today if they had not paired up. He was a visionary and "got" tech -- Apple's success with him (both times) and the floundering in between demonstrate his value to their story. Again, not a nice man and not worthy of worship but definitely of respect for what he delivered.

ivape 1y ago
Why do we have to keep saying Jobs was not a good person?
- FergusArgyll 1y ago
  A lot of people have PTSD from ~2021 and are still looking over their shoulder
- cm2012 1y ago
  He really was an asshole in his life in ways that are considered notably anti-social.
- bee_rider 1y ago
  It is helpful to at least push back a little bit on the pass that rich/famous people typically get.
- soganess 1y ago
  From the wiki on his daughter: "After Lisa was born, Jobs publicly denied paternity, which led to a legal case. Even after a DNA paternity test established him as her father, he maintained his position. The resolution of the legal case required him to provide Brennan with $385 per month and to reimburse the state for the money she had received from welfare. After Apple went public and Jobs became a multimillionaire, he increased the payment to $500 a month." "Despite the reconciliation between Jobs and Lisa their relationship remained difficult. In her autobiography, Lisa recounted many episodes of Jobs failing to be an appropriate parent. He remained mostly distant, cold and made her feel unwanted, and initially refused to pay her college fees." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisa_Brennan-Jobs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisa_Brennan-Jobs
  - t-3 1y ago
    Is being a neglectful or unloving parent equal to being a bad person? Maybe he was a bad parent, maybe he was an overly demanding and overbearing boss, but it's not like he was killing people or selling weapons. He sold phones and mp3 players and computers. He almost certainly contributed to making the world a better place by many objective criteria. I don't know why he's labeled as a "bad person" when there are hordes of people who foment and profit from war and killing and don't contribute at all to human productivity, creativity, or wellbeing but are lauded.
    - teachrdan 1y ago
      > it's not like he was killing people or selling weapons. Well, if your standard is that no one is a bad person until they are literally murdering people or selling war machines, then no, of course not. But as a parent myself, I think it's fair to say that if you, as a multimillionaire, stoop to doing the bare legal minimum to support the child you created, who was at one point living in poverty because you failed to support her before, then yes: you are a bad person. There are obviously many other ways in which Steve Jobs was a bad person! He kept obtaining temporary license plates because he wanted to park in handicapped spots without getting tickets. He orchestrated a salary-fixing cartel that artificially depressed wages for many thousands of engineers in Silicon Valley, all so that he and his other obscenely rich friends could get even richer. And he had his devices manufactured in China under horrendously exploitative conditions again, so that he and his shareholders could make an extra buck. (on top of the billions they already had) But if your standard of being a "bad person" (not even evil!) is murder or complicity in it, then you could make a strong case that Steve Jobs was not a bad person, altogether.
    - soganess 1y ago
      I see your point. Speaking only for myself, when I call someone a "bad" person (I am wary of calling anyone "bad," but that is the language used in this conversation), I mean that they treat others poorly. They may contribute immensely to the world (as Steve Jobs did), but that is orthogonal to whether they are a good or bad person. I know others have a different calculus, and I am not trying to convince anyone. Still, being a bad parent, especially after you have asked to reconcile, is... well... a person I would be hesitant to associate with regardless of how much I loved my iPhone 2G, or how cool the Lisa looked in the early 1980s.
- nimbius 1y ago
  the guy who tried to use fruit juice to cure cancer and routinely refused to register his automobile? the guy who never acknowledged his kid until a court forced him to pay child support? He outright lied to Wozniak over payments and shares. https://www.businessinsider.com/steve-wozniak-gave-early-apple-employees-10-million-in-stock-2014-9?IR=T https://www.businessinsider.com/steve-wozniak-gave-early-app... He put himself on the organ waiting list in multiple states when it became apparent that his quack medicine wasn't working to cure his actually perfectly treatable (compared to most) Pancreatic Cancer. He took a liver from someone out of state and died with it. They changed the law to prevent this happening again.
  - kulahan 1y ago
    The guy lied and didn't register his car and handled his own sickness in a way you don't like? The horror! Sure, complain about him forcing his way onto lists if we're willing to accept that all humans are truly equal (I'm fine with this concept), or being mean to others, but who CARES about the other stuff?
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
    - antonvs 1y ago
      He died early because of his own stubbornness and irrationality. It's a reflection on his judgement. People like Jobs get attention because they're obnoxious. If they never existed, the world would be no worse off.
      - kulahan 1y ago
        So? Who cares why he died? Is it wrong to die for a reason you disagree with? If the world is no worse off without him, then wasn't his judgement neutral at worst, and good at best? It's weird how much he gets under the skin of people so desperate to pretend they're at the top of the moral totem pole, or at least definitely above the one guy they've ever seen a tell-all story on. edit: it's almost like, in the current social meta of "doing no wrong is more important than doing good", there is a need to denigrate any approach that doesn't feel extra cozy and warm and loving. But I dunno - he headed up some of the most iconic products in history. He had a helluva team and made things work. I gotta be honest, I don't really care if he said scary and mean things.
- _aavaa_ 1y ago
  Let’s start with: https://www.iheart.com/podcast/105-behind-the-bastards-29236323/episode/part-one-the-terrible-secret-of-156343561/ https://www.iheart.com/podcast/105-behind-the-bastards-29236...
- perching_aix 1y ago
  Why do you think people feel pressured into saying that, rather than e.g. just generally plain agreeing? And why is this a binary? The sheer amount of conspiratorial, loaded questions on HN these days is absolutely staggering. No, you don't have to keep saying Jobs was not a good person.
- gooseus 1y ago
  Because if the future household names don't want to be referred to as "not good" people forever, they ought not sacrifice being a good person for their fame and success.
- kulahan 1y ago
  There was a Walter Isaacson-authored biography which was extremely open and honest. Jobs wanted everything fully exposed, to include how terrible he was to his children, how intimidating he was to his employees, and how overpowering he was in business meetings. It regularly referred to a "distortion effect" he could create, by essentially "gaslighting" (to use a common turn-of-phrase) people into doing things they thought they couldn't - often at great emotional expense. Essentially, he was somehow able to become a target of hatred, causing his employees to team up together "against him". It was extremely effective, but created a lot of copycats who just ended up abusing the hell out of their employees without getting the desired effect. Realistically, he's just the only person we're getting a truly honest tell-all from. I'm not sure he's really that much worse than most people, I think we're just all judging him much more surgically.
  - brandall10 1y ago
    I encourage anyone who is fascinated by Jobs to study the life of the architect Frank Lloyd Wright. There's a good argument that FLW was a supercharged version of Jobs - wildly charismatic, visionary, uncompromisingly obsessive about the most minute of details, and could be manipulative and cruel. What we see w/ Jobs and Lisa, FLW was even worse as in 1909 he just up and abandoned his family of 7, seemingly out of the blue, to travel through Europe w/ his mistress. This was a national scandal at the time. In his houses, he did all decorations (including providing art from his large personal stash) and built all the furniture and would go on tirades against his clients if he found out if they moved or replaced anything after they moved in, usually cutting off all further ties if they did not give into his demands. Also a fun fact is FLW had an obsession w/ Japanese woodblocking, similar in a way to Job's thing w/ calligraphy. On top of that, their life took a similar arc where each had incredible success early in life that eventually crumbled under their own ambition, spent a time out in the wilderness, then went through a resurgence toward the end that greatly eclipsed their early success. Regardless, throughout his lifetime he maintained he was the best architect in the world, perhaps in history. FLW actually wrote an autobiography during his time in the 'wilderness' (basically running an architecture cult in the desert) in the early 30s, and much of it is fanciful bluster, a bunch of half truths and exaggerations, almost as a means to save his legacy. You read it and kinda feel sorry for the guy. Yet, five years later as he turned 70, he created Fallingwater which led to so much work, that the last 20 years of his life he produced over twice as many commissions than he had done to that point. In fact when he died he was in the middle of actively working on 60 projects, most notably overseeing the construction of the Guggenheim.
- kube-system 1y ago
  His flaws were probably significant contributors to some of the traits that made him successful. He held some extreme opinions and was neither afraid to nor was unsuccessful in steamrolling others. This brought revolutionary ideas to market at a time when consensus was stacked against those ideas.
- Der_Einzige 1y ago
  For the same reason people dislike Elon Musk and really like Jensen Huang.
- pyrale 1y ago
  You don't have to say it, what do you mean by we? Others may say it, but there's a difference between being annoyed that other people say something, and turning your comment in such a way that others saying it looks like you're being prevented from saying what you want.
- insane_dreamer 1y ago
  Because so many people worship him like he's God
1234letshaveatw 1y ago
He was flawed, like all of humanity. We just aren't allowed to acknowledge his accomplishments anymore because he didn't personally engineer every Apple product or similar stupidity that is also used eg to diminish Musk.
- jraph 1y ago
  both are criticized for similar things and it's not because they didn't do all by themselves. Nobody is perfect but this doesn't excuse everything. > We just aren't allowed to acknowledge his accomplishments Nobody prevents you from acknowledging anything.
  - 1234letshaveatw 1y ago
    I am specifically referring to their accomplishments, inane takes like "Musk isn't an engineer, he doesn't have anything to do with the success of SpaceX" or "Jobs doesn't deserve any of the credit for Apple's products" are common. Don't be obtuse, while you aren't "prevented" you are certainly shouted down/shamed on social media
    - jraph 1y ago
      > inane takes like "Musk isn't an engineer, he doesn't have anything to do with the success of SpaceX" or "Jobs doesn't deserve any of the credit for Apple's products" are common I haven't seen these things said, but apart from HN I don't do social media. I'll believe you that these claims are stated. They are of course shallow. I bet it depends on how you present stuff. How you "sound". Or when you choose to present facts. Here, for instance, it looked like you dismissed the criticisms towards those guys. You stated that these guys have their flaws like everybody. You diminish their issues and that's exactly what will make people strongly disagree with you. In many people's heads, those guys are huge assholes, really not comparable to your random person. You'll need to have this in mind when discussing this stuff. If you do it like this, people might not listen because you may sound like a guy who is a fan of two huge assholes at the same time to many of us (even if it's false). Even if what you state is true, if it sounds like you take the defense of these billionaires whenever they are criticized for other things, I can certainly believe you will be shut down. They have / had a lot of power, it can seem way off to defend them, they really don't need your help. There are good and bad timings, and effective ways to state facts and others, not. You'll need to read the room. Of course. And toxic places also can't be saved. Just flee.
rurp 1y ago
Eh, there's no way to know for sure but I would bet that there are a lot more people who could have been swapped out for Jobs with similar success than the reverse. It's generally thought to be harder to find a brilliant innovative technical person for a startup than a business one. I also see a lot more passable Jobs imitators around the industry than I do Woz imitators.
- threetonesun 1y ago
  If you think there is anyone in tech today who is a passable Jobs imitator I'd suggest going back to watch some of his talks and Apple keynotes. He was not perfect (no one is), but he understood why we as humans use technology better than any one of his stature today.
- microtherion 1y ago
  Empirically, every Apple product you're using today was designed without Woz' involvement, and nearly every one of them still shows traces of Jobs' involvement. Conversely, Woz started numerous companies after parting ways with Jobs, and I can't think of a single one that had a lasting impact.
  - bigstrat2003 1y ago
    It's not really a level playing field to compare Jobs running an established company with a devoted fan base, to Woz starting companies from nothing. One is much easier than the other.
    - cma 1y ago
      When Jobs was fired by Apple, he started NeXT (platform where the web was developed) and Pixar. The Apple desktop platform, one of the existing products referenced, still has a lot of heritage from NeXT. I think Jobs was an asshole too but he did start outside companies that did well and still have a major lasting contribution today.
lazyeye 1y ago
What's actually "nice"? Is it creating an industry and livelihoods for millions of people (directly or indirectly)? Or is it smiling and making people in the room feel comfortable?
bigstrat2003 1y ago
> we wouldn't be talking about Woz today if they had not paired up. The exact same thing is true in reverse. Jobs was a phenomenal salesman, one of the greatest to ever live. But without someone to actually make the products (and Woz was phenomenal at that), he would've had nothing to sell. You need both the business guy and the product guy to have a successful partnership.
- pstuart 1y ago
  Absolutely -- without Woz apple never would have been a glimmer in Jobs' eye.
- Aunche 1y ago
  > The exact same thing is true in reverse. This is an odd thing to say when Steve Jobs achieved most of his success after parting ways with Woz. Jobs was the product guy at Apple. He laser focused on every detail to make sure that the experience was perfect. Jobs wasn't an engineer, but there were plenty of talented engineers at Microsoft working for years on Windows Mobile (before Windows Phone) because it was so unintuitive. By contrast, the original iPhone was a decade ahead of it's time in terms of design. It had pinch-to-zoom, a proximity sensor to prevent accidental touches during calls, a light sensor that adjusted brightness, and an accelerometer for landscape and portrait mode. These features were originally considered gimmicks, but it turned out to be indispensable.
  - MengerSponge 1y ago
    It's not enough to have great engineers. Imagine a world where Bret Victor gets hired by MS and spends five years in Redmond. [O]rganizations which design systems (in the broad sense used here) are constrained to produce designs which are copies of the communication structures of these organizations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway%27s_law
  - dchftcs 1y ago
    Wozniak was indispensible in the early days. They had to survive first, and then Jobs could have a chance to thrive, and having someone like Wozniak greatly increased his chance of survival - it's not easy to find someone like that. That he continued to add much more value than Wozniak could to the business is another matter. There maybe many Jobs who died without being known because they could not find a strong partner.

ivape 1y ago

Why do we have to keep saying Jobs was not a good person?

FergusArgyll 1y ago
A lot of people have PTSD from ~2021 and are still looking over their shoulder
cm2012 1y ago
He really was an asshole in his life in ways that are considered notably anti-social.
bee_rider 1y ago
It is helpful to at least push back a little bit on the pass that rich/famous people typically get.
soganess 1y ago
From the wiki on his daughter: "After Lisa was born, Jobs publicly denied paternity, which led to a legal case. Even after a DNA paternity test established him as her father, he maintained his position. The resolution of the legal case required him to provide Brennan with $385 per month and to reimburse the state for the money she had received from welfare. After Apple went public and Jobs became a multimillionaire, he increased the payment to $500 a month." "Despite the reconciliation between Jobs and Lisa their relationship remained difficult. In her autobiography, Lisa recounted many episodes of Jobs failing to be an appropriate parent. He remained mostly distant, cold and made her feel unwanted, and initially refused to pay her college fees." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisa_Brennan-Jobs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisa_Brennan-Jobs
- t-3 1y ago
  Is being a neglectful or unloving parent equal to being a bad person? Maybe he was a bad parent, maybe he was an overly demanding and overbearing boss, but it's not like he was killing people or selling weapons. He sold phones and mp3 players and computers. He almost certainly contributed to making the world a better place by many objective criteria. I don't know why he's labeled as a "bad person" when there are hordes of people who foment and profit from war and killing and don't contribute at all to human productivity, creativity, or wellbeing but are lauded.
  - teachrdan 1y ago
    > it's not like he was killing people or selling weapons. Well, if your standard is that no one is a bad person until they are literally murdering people or selling war machines, then no, of course not. But as a parent myself, I think it's fair to say that if you, as a multimillionaire, stoop to doing the bare legal minimum to support the child you created, who was at one point living in poverty because you failed to support her before, then yes: you are a bad person. There are obviously many other ways in which Steve Jobs was a bad person! He kept obtaining temporary license plates because he wanted to park in handicapped spots without getting tickets. He orchestrated a salary-fixing cartel that artificially depressed wages for many thousands of engineers in Silicon Valley, all so that he and his other obscenely rich friends could get even richer. And he had his devices manufactured in China under horrendously exploitative conditions again, so that he and his shareholders could make an extra buck. (on top of the billions they already had) But if your standard of being a "bad person" (not even evil!) is murder or complicity in it, then you could make a strong case that Steve Jobs was not a bad person, altogether.
  - soganess 1y ago
    I see your point. Speaking only for myself, when I call someone a "bad" person (I am wary of calling anyone "bad," but that is the language used in this conversation), I mean that they treat others poorly. They may contribute immensely to the world (as Steve Jobs did), but that is orthogonal to whether they are a good or bad person. I know others have a different calculus, and I am not trying to convince anyone. Still, being a bad parent, especially after you have asked to reconcile, is... well... a person I would be hesitant to associate with regardless of how much I loved my iPhone 2G, or how cool the Lisa looked in the early 1980s.
nimbius 1y ago
the guy who tried to use fruit juice to cure cancer and routinely refused to register his automobile? the guy who never acknowledged his kid until a court forced him to pay child support? He outright lied to Wozniak over payments and shares. https://www.businessinsider.com/steve-wozniak-gave-early-apple-employees-10-million-in-stock-2014-9?IR=T https://www.businessinsider.com/steve-wozniak-gave-early-app... He put himself on the organ waiting list in multiple states when it became apparent that his quack medicine wasn't working to cure his actually perfectly treatable (compared to most) Pancreatic Cancer. He took a liver from someone out of state and died with it. They changed the law to prevent this happening again.
- kulahan 1y ago
  The guy lied and didn't register his car and handled his own sickness in a way you don't like? The horror! Sure, complain about him forcing his way onto lists if we're willing to accept that all humans are truly equal (I'm fine with this concept), or being mean to others, but who CARES about the other stuff?
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - antonvs 1y ago
    He died early because of his own stubbornness and irrationality. It's a reflection on his judgement. People like Jobs get attention because they're obnoxious. If they never existed, the world would be no worse off.
    - kulahan 1y ago
      So? Who cares why he died? Is it wrong to die for a reason you disagree with? If the world is no worse off without him, then wasn't his judgement neutral at worst, and good at best? It's weird how much he gets under the skin of people so desperate to pretend they're at the top of the moral totem pole, or at least definitely above the one guy they've ever seen a tell-all story on. edit: it's almost like, in the current social meta of "doing no wrong is more important than doing good", there is a need to denigrate any approach that doesn't feel extra cozy and warm and loving. But I dunno - he headed up some of the most iconic products in history. He had a helluva team and made things work. I gotta be honest, I don't really care if he said scary and mean things.
_aavaa_ 1y ago
Let’s start with: https://www.iheart.com/podcast/105-behind-the-bastards-29236323/episode/part-one-the-terrible-secret-of-156343561/ https://www.iheart.com/podcast/105-behind-the-bastards-29236...
perching_aix 1y ago
Why do you think people feel pressured into saying that, rather than e.g. just generally plain agreeing? And why is this a binary? The sheer amount of conspiratorial, loaded questions on HN these days is absolutely staggering. No, you don't have to keep saying Jobs was not a good person.
gooseus 1y ago
Because if the future household names don't want to be referred to as "not good" people forever, they ought not sacrifice being a good person for their fame and success.
kulahan 1y ago
There was a Walter Isaacson-authored biography which was extremely open and honest. Jobs wanted everything fully exposed, to include how terrible he was to his children, how intimidating he was to his employees, and how overpowering he was in business meetings. It regularly referred to a "distortion effect" he could create, by essentially "gaslighting" (to use a common turn-of-phrase) people into doing things they thought they couldn't - often at great emotional expense. Essentially, he was somehow able to become a target of hatred, causing his employees to team up together "against him". It was extremely effective, but created a lot of copycats who just ended up abusing the hell out of their employees without getting the desired effect. Realistically, he's just the only person we're getting a truly honest tell-all from. I'm not sure he's really that much worse than most people, I think we're just all judging him much more surgically.
- brandall10 1y ago
  I encourage anyone who is fascinated by Jobs to study the life of the architect Frank Lloyd Wright. There's a good argument that FLW was a supercharged version of Jobs - wildly charismatic, visionary, uncompromisingly obsessive about the most minute of details, and could be manipulative and cruel. What we see w/ Jobs and Lisa, FLW was even worse as in 1909 he just up and abandoned his family of 7, seemingly out of the blue, to travel through Europe w/ his mistress. This was a national scandal at the time. In his houses, he did all decorations (including providing art from his large personal stash) and built all the furniture and would go on tirades against his clients if he found out if they moved or replaced anything after they moved in, usually cutting off all further ties if they did not give into his demands. Also a fun fact is FLW had an obsession w/ Japanese woodblocking, similar in a way to Job's thing w/ calligraphy. On top of that, their life took a similar arc where each had incredible success early in life that eventually crumbled under their own ambition, spent a time out in the wilderness, then went through a resurgence toward the end that greatly eclipsed their early success. Regardless, throughout his lifetime he maintained he was the best architect in the world, perhaps in history. FLW actually wrote an autobiography during his time in the 'wilderness' (basically running an architecture cult in the desert) in the early 30s, and much of it is fanciful bluster, a bunch of half truths and exaggerations, almost as a means to save his legacy. You read it and kinda feel sorry for the guy. Yet, five years later as he turned 70, he created Fallingwater which led to so much work, that the last 20 years of his life he produced over twice as many commissions than he had done to that point. In fact when he died he was in the middle of actively working on 60 projects, most notably overseeing the construction of the Guggenheim.
kube-system 1y ago
His flaws were probably significant contributors to some of the traits that made him successful. He held some extreme opinions and was neither afraid to nor was unsuccessful in steamrolling others. This brought revolutionary ideas to market at a time when consensus was stacked against those ideas.
Der_Einzige 1y ago
For the same reason people dislike Elon Musk and really like Jensen Huang.
pyrale 1y ago
You don't have to say it, what do you mean by we? Others may say it, but there's a difference between being annoyed that other people say something, and turning your comment in such a way that others saying it looks like you're being prevented from saying what you want.
insane_dreamer 1y ago
Because so many people worship him like he's God

1234letshaveatw 1y ago

He was flawed, like all of humanity. We just aren't allowed to acknowledge his accomplishments anymore because he didn't personally engineer every Apple product or similar stupidity that is also used eg to diminish Musk.

jraph 1y ago
both are criticized for similar things and it's not because they didn't do all by themselves. Nobody is perfect but this doesn't excuse everything. > We just aren't allowed to acknowledge his accomplishments Nobody prevents you from acknowledging anything.
- 1234letshaveatw 1y ago
  I am specifically referring to their accomplishments, inane takes like "Musk isn't an engineer, he doesn't have anything to do with the success of SpaceX" or "Jobs doesn't deserve any of the credit for Apple's products" are common. Don't be obtuse, while you aren't "prevented" you are certainly shouted down/shamed on social media
  - jraph 1y ago
    > inane takes like "Musk isn't an engineer, he doesn't have anything to do with the success of SpaceX" or "Jobs doesn't deserve any of the credit for Apple's products" are common I haven't seen these things said, but apart from HN I don't do social media. I'll believe you that these claims are stated. They are of course shallow. I bet it depends on how you present stuff. How you "sound". Or when you choose to present facts. Here, for instance, it looked like you dismissed the criticisms towards those guys. You stated that these guys have their flaws like everybody. You diminish their issues and that's exactly what will make people strongly disagree with you. In many people's heads, those guys are huge assholes, really not comparable to your random person. You'll need to have this in mind when discussing this stuff. If you do it like this, people might not listen because you may sound like a guy who is a fan of two huge assholes at the same time to many of us (even if it's false). Even if what you state is true, if it sounds like you take the defense of these billionaires whenever they are criticized for other things, I can certainly believe you will be shut down. They have / had a lot of power, it can seem way off to defend them, they really don't need your help. There are good and bad timings, and effective ways to state facts and others, not. You'll need to read the room. Of course. And toxic places also can't be saved. Just flee.

rurp 1y ago

Eh, there's no way to know for sure but I would bet that there are a lot more people who could have been swapped out for Jobs with similar success than the reverse. It's generally thought to be harder to find a brilliant innovative technical person for a startup than a business one. I also see a lot more passable Jobs imitators around the industry than I do Woz imitators.

threetonesun 1y ago
If you think there is anyone in tech today who is a passable Jobs imitator I'd suggest going back to watch some of his talks and Apple keynotes. He was not perfect (no one is), but he understood why we as humans use technology better than any one of his stature today.
microtherion 1y ago
Empirically, every Apple product you're using today was designed without Woz' involvement, and nearly every one of them still shows traces of Jobs' involvement. Conversely, Woz started numerous companies after parting ways with Jobs, and I can't think of a single one that had a lasting impact.
- bigstrat2003 1y ago
  It's not really a level playing field to compare Jobs running an established company with a devoted fan base, to Woz starting companies from nothing. One is much easier than the other.
  - cma 1y ago
    When Jobs was fired by Apple, he started NeXT (platform where the web was developed) and Pixar. The Apple desktop platform, one of the existing products referenced, still has a lot of heritage from NeXT. I think Jobs was an asshole too but he did start outside companies that did well and still have a major lasting contribution today.

lazyeye 1y ago

What's actually "nice"? Is it creating an industry and livelihoods for millions of people (directly or indirectly)? Or is it smiling and making people in the room feel comfortable?

bigstrat2003 1y ago

> we wouldn't be talking about Woz today if they had not paired up. The exact same thing is true in reverse. Jobs was a phenomenal salesman, one of the greatest to ever live. But without someone to actually make the products (and Woz was phenomenal at that), he would've had nothing to sell. You need both the business guy and the product guy to have a successful partnership.

pstuart 1y ago
Absolutely -- without Woz apple never would have been a glimmer in Jobs' eye.
Aunche 1y ago
> The exact same thing is true in reverse. This is an odd thing to say when Steve Jobs achieved most of his success after parting ways with Woz. Jobs was the product guy at Apple. He laser focused on every detail to make sure that the experience was perfect. Jobs wasn't an engineer, but there were plenty of talented engineers at Microsoft working for years on Windows Mobile (before Windows Phone) because it was so unintuitive. By contrast, the original iPhone was a decade ahead of it's time in terms of design. It had pinch-to-zoom, a proximity sensor to prevent accidental touches during calls, a light sensor that adjusted brightness, and an accelerometer for landscape and portrait mode. These features were originally considered gimmicks, but it turned out to be indispensable.
- MengerSponge 1y ago
  It's not enough to have great engineers. Imagine a world where Bret Victor gets hired by MS and spends five years in Redmond. [O]rganizations which design systems (in the broad sense used here) are constrained to produce designs which are copies of the communication structures of these organizations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway%27s_law
- dchftcs 1y ago
  Wozniak was indispensible in the early days. They had to survive first, and then Jobs could have a chance to thrive, and having someone like Wozniak greatly increased his chance of survival - it's not easy to find someone like that. That he continued to add much more value than Wozniak could to the business is another matter. There maybe many Jobs who died without being known because they could not find a strong partner.