5 ms·

This was clearly a not-too veiled slam at Apple. Joe Nocera really needs to get over it. Yes, Steve Jobs lied to him about his health. Yes, he was made to lo

This was clearly a not-too veiled slam at Apple. Joe Nocera really needs to get over it. Yes, Steve Jobs lied to him about his health. Yes, he was made to look like and idiot for repeating those lies. Yes, that was a shitty thing for Steve to do (Steve Jobs acting like an asshole to someone - woah, shocker). But seriously, at this point you can't read anything that Joe Nocera writes without wondering what axe he is going to grind against Apple this time. He even wrote a glowing review of the universally panned "Haunted Empire", he's become so blinded by his dislike of Apple. He really needs to find a new schtick or at least present some more sophisticated nuance. Also note, Apple isn't suing Samsung over all Tablets/SmartPhones, or all general methods of building tablets/smartPhones, but very specific elements that Samsung just ripped off, rather than inventing their own approach. Microsoft has certainly been able to develop their own Tablets and Phone OS elements without having to blindly copy the iPhone/iPad - so it's certainly possible.

joe_the_user 13y ago
Please, I found the article fascinating in it's own right. The theme of greed and patents goes back a long way while Jobs' name is unmentioned in the article from reading and text-search. Jobs is kind of exception to the pattern in that he both innovated and sued, sometimes successfully, sometimes less-so. And the lying about health issue thing is bother irrelevant in this context and one of the smaller issue in any weighing of Jobs' sins and achievements.
- ghshephard 13y ago
  I actually really liked the article standing by itself. But, the article is without question a commentary on Apple's recent litigious behavior, and, indeed, coming from other writer's might have been insightful. But I couldn't help but read it as another in a long thread of articles by Joe Nocera trying to slam Apple. Nocera's treatment by Job, including his statements about his health is the source of Nocera's ongoing diatribe's against Apple. The context is useful when reading essays knocking Apple by Nocera. I might have a little more patience if Nocera was a random blogger/pundit, but, I expect more out of the NYT. Yes, opinion, but balance and nuance is also important.
amirmc 13y ago
It's sufficiently well-veiled that I don't see the link to Apple at all. I don't know the detailed history you're referring to but if you're determined to see things through this lens then everything this author writes can be taken as a snipe at Apple (no matter how stretched). In other words, he'll never be able to redeem himself in your eyes. Is that reasonable?
- ghshephard 13y ago
  "But if innovators such as Glenn Curtiss cannot build on the progress of others without paying exorbitantly for the privilege, the incentive to continue to experiment and create is similarly inhibited.” Thus, in the story of the Wright brothers and Glenn Curtiss, is a lesson for our age as well." That's the link to Apple. And certainly, partisans can either be blinded by their dislike, or they can introduce nuance. A good example would be comparing a couple Apple Partisans, Jim Dalrymple and John Gruber. Dalrymple is like a broken record - He brings almost zero insight into assessing companies like Blackberry, Android, etc... Just rants against them. Gruber has had phases like this, but in the last couple years he's done some worthwhile reviews of the Windows Phone product line, and has had good things to say about the Lumina. He's even been more open minded about Microsoft's web services, and went so far as to appear in a promotional video for Windows/Microsoft Azure. Gruber is regaining my trust. Perhaps the critiquing with insight is someone like Siracusa - There is a writer who can rant against Apple's every conceivable product, decision, and technology - yet he does so with an overriding rationality that you can appreciate. I don't see that rationality any more in Joe Nocera's writing.
anewcolor 13y ago
this was my reaction after reading this article as well.

joe_the_user 13y ago

Please, I found the article fascinating in it's own right. The theme of greed and patents goes back a long way while Jobs' name is unmentioned in the article from reading and text-search. Jobs is kind of exception to the pattern in that he both innovated and sued, sometimes successfully, sometimes less-so. And the lying about health issue thing is bother irrelevant in this context and one of the smaller issue in any weighing of Jobs' sins and achievements.

ghshephard 13y ago
I actually really liked the article standing by itself. But, the article is without question a commentary on Apple's recent litigious behavior, and, indeed, coming from other writer's might have been insightful. But I couldn't help but read it as another in a long thread of articles by Joe Nocera trying to slam Apple. Nocera's treatment by Job, including his statements about his health is the source of Nocera's ongoing diatribe's against Apple. The context is useful when reading essays knocking Apple by Nocera. I might have a little more patience if Nocera was a random blogger/pundit, but, I expect more out of the NYT. Yes, opinion, but balance and nuance is also important.

amirmc 13y ago

It's sufficiently well-veiled that I don't see the link to Apple at all. I don't know the detailed history you're referring to but if you're determined to see things through this lens then everything this author writes can be taken as a snipe at Apple (no matter how stretched). In other words, he'll never be able to redeem himself in your eyes. Is that reasonable?

ghshephard 13y ago
"But if innovators such as Glenn Curtiss cannot build on the progress of others without paying exorbitantly for the privilege, the incentive to continue to experiment and create is similarly inhibited.” Thus, in the story of the Wright brothers and Glenn Curtiss, is a lesson for our age as well." That's the link to Apple. And certainly, partisans can either be blinded by their dislike, or they can introduce nuance. A good example would be comparing a couple Apple Partisans, Jim Dalrymple and John Gruber. Dalrymple is like a broken record - He brings almost zero insight into assessing companies like Blackberry, Android, etc... Just rants against them. Gruber has had phases like this, but in the last couple years he's done some worthwhile reviews of the Windows Phone product line, and has had good things to say about the Lumina. He's even been more open minded about Microsoft's web services, and went so far as to appear in a promotional video for Windows/Microsoft Azure. Gruber is regaining my trust. Perhaps the critiquing with insight is someone like Siracusa - There is a writer who can rant against Apple's every conceivable product, decision, and technology - yet he does so with an overriding rationality that you can appreciate. I don't see that rationality any more in Joe Nocera's writing.

anewcolor 13y ago

this was my reaction after reading this article as well.