DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - Steve Jobs Dead: Apple Co-Founder Dies At 56

**Klavalala** · 10-11-2011, 03:43 AM

History is littered by claims to inventions by others; some being credible others less so. Yet what has Steve Jobs innovated? His claim to fame should be reflected by his role as a CEO, and having a team that extracted exceptional returns for shareholders; there is nothing innovative in doing that.

Steve's skill was in taking concepts that already existed. He had the skill to polish and refine them and make them usable and accessible to everyone.

No one else in the consumer electronics industry has his eye for aethictic design and usability.

As mentioned previously, the true powerhouses behind the emergence of Apple as one of the world's most successful corporate entities is principally down to individuals such as Schiller, Ive, Forstall and Mansfield. Indeed, many employees of Apple have made contributions that we may never know about. Of course he did not do it all by himself. The point is that all of these people worked to create what was ultimately Steve's vision.

I think once the dust has settled, I think Apple can achieve even more without the borderline masochistic managerial approach of Jobs. Apple did not have Steve Jobs for about 13 years (1985-1998). Over that time Apple almost went out of business. Becasue the people who ran Apple, ran it much like how every other computer company is run.

During Steve's absense he went on to found a company called Next Step and another comapny called Pixar.

At Next he created an entirely new graphical user interface that was so advanced that in 1989 it required a nearly $10,000 computer to run it.

Later when Steve Jobs returned to Apple the Next OS he developed became the basis of OS X. Literally what Jobs envisioned in 1989 is the basis of what powers today's Mac's, iPhone, and iPad.

I believe that a true innovative genius not only makes innovative/new products, processes or services but does so in the process of being a good person. Jobs was neither of those. Swearing at employees, public humiliation, and generally being a tool to family and close friends is not what I would call being a good person.
That is your opinion. I think the people who were closest to him and knew him best would be of better authority to say.

The general consensus is that Jobs was a hard task master. He pushed everyone beyond their limits. In his younger years it can be argued that his ego and attitude were out of control and is the reason he was fired from Apple.

After his return to Apple. He went on a slash and burn to trim Apple down and get it back to the company he envisioned. That slashing and burning pissed a lot of people off. Was this the right thing to do? We see the results.

The principle reason we know he wasn't a philanthropist over the last few years (anomalous or otherwise) is that there hasn't been a deterioration of his net worth as you would expect, as has been the case with Buffett and Gates. Hopefully posthumously the case will change, but then he did try to claim in court that he was sterile to avoid contributing for the upbringing of his own daughter so who knows. I don't think that is an inidicator of anything other than Jobs didn't give the majority of his money away.

Jobs personal fortune has never approached anywhere near that of Bill Gates or Warren Buffett.

He hasn't taken a direct salary from Apple since the mid 80's.

I posted that article because Bono has been very adament on imploring the rich to help the less fortunate.He praised Jobs efforts.

Simply because we don't fully understand what he may have done, does not automatically mean he did nothing.

10-11-2011, 03:43 AM	#44
Klavalala Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 378 Senior Member	History is littered by claims to inventions by others; some being credible others less so. Yet what has Steve Jobs innovated? His claim to fame should be reflected by his role as a CEO, and having a team that extracted exceptional returns for shareholders; there is nothing innovative in doing that. Steve's skill was in taking concepts that already existed. He had the skill to polish and refine them and make them usable and accessible to everyone. No one else in the consumer electronics industry has his eye for aethictic design and usability. As mentioned previously, the true powerhouses behind the emergence of Apple as one of the world's most successful corporate entities is principally down to individuals such as Schiller, Ive, Forstall and Mansfield. Indeed, many employees of Apple have made contributions that we may never know about. Of course he did not do it all by himself. The point is that all of these people worked to create what was ultimately Steve's vision. I think once the dust has settled, I think Apple can achieve even more without the borderline masochistic managerial approach of Jobs. Apple did not have Steve Jobs for about 13 years (1985-1998). Over that time Apple almost went out of business. Becasue the people who ran Apple, ran it much like how every other computer company is run. During Steve's absense he went on to found a company called Next Step and another comapny called Pixar. At Next he created an entirely new graphical user interface that was so advanced that in 1989 it required a nearly $10,000 computer to run it. Later when Steve Jobs returned to Apple the Next OS he developed became the basis of OS X. Literally what Jobs envisioned in 1989 is the basis of what powers today's Mac's, iPhone, and iPad. I believe that a true innovative genius not only makes innovative/new products, processes or services but does so in the process of being a good person. Jobs was neither of those. Swearing at employees, public humiliation, and generally being a tool to family and close friends is not what I would call being a good person. That is your opinion. I think the people who were closest to him and knew him best would be of better authority to say. The general consensus is that Jobs was a hard task master. He pushed everyone beyond their limits. In his younger years it can be argued that his ego and attitude were out of control and is the reason he was fired from Apple. After his return to Apple. He went on a slash and burn to trim Apple down and get it back to the company he envisioned. That slashing and burning pissed a lot of people off. Was this the right thing to do? We see the results. The principle reason we know he wasn't a philanthropist over the last few years (anomalous or otherwise) is that there hasn't been a deterioration of his net worth as you would expect, as has been the case with Buffett and Gates. Hopefully posthumously the case will change, but then he did try to claim in court that he was sterile to avoid contributing for the upbringing of his own daughter so who knows. I don't think that is an inidicator of anything other than Jobs didn't give the majority of his money away. Jobs personal fortune has never approached anywhere near that of Bill Gates or Warren Buffett. He hasn't taken a direct salary from Apple since the mid 80's. I posted that article because Bono has been very adament on imploring the rich to help the less fortunate.He praised Jobs efforts. Simply because we don't fully understand what he may have done, does not automatically mean he did nothing.
	Quote