2 ms·
NeXT itself, as a company, was absolutely a failure. That Apple came along and bought them and stripped them for parts is certainly convenient for Jobs, but doe
by unknownfuture 2mo ago
NeXT itself, as a company, was absolutely a failure. That Apple came along and bought them and stripped them for parts is certainly convenient for Jobs, but doesn't change that, had they continued on their own, it would've ended up in the dustbin of history.
TBH I'm surprised you're arguing. NeXT is generally accepted as a commercial failure. Hell the NeXT cube, alone, was a famously collosal flop. This isn't even a little bit controversial.
- hollerith 2mo agoI don't see any mention of shareholder value or financial performance upstream (unless we count your latest comment). I do see, "their managers are not capable of leading innovation," and, "I don't see a reason to believe any CEO, past or present, has had the ability to accurately predict the future". Jobs cared more about changing the world and advancing civilization than he cared about providing good value for investors. NeXT was a very solid success when measured by the yardstick of what Jobs set out to do. Trying to make money by creating a new general-purpose operating system is inherently a very risky enterprise. NeXT's investors knew that.
- deleted 2mo ago[deleted]