Steve Jobs Resigns as Apple CEO

[HotHotHeat]

Two best things I've read online tonight:

He said "point and click" and we all did. He said "pinch to make small," and we did. We did these things not because he told us to, but because he knew that we already wanted to.

He said we will carry our music in one place, and we did. He said we will download our entertainment, and we did. He said we could carry everything we need in the palm of our hands, and we did. He said that our technology should be a hub for all of our information, entertainment, and means of communication, and it should create an environment for us that feels comfortable, intuitive, seductive, and satisfying. He said we would not only desire that, we would not only embrace that, but we would ultimately require it. He said we would do those things and we did.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michae...html?ir=canada

@harrymccracken
Harry McCracken
Still unimaginable: that Jobs was the most important person in personal technology both in 1978 and in 2011.

[Wood]

What he's done for technology is amazing, he has always been a step ahead. This is a big loss for Apple and everyone who likes to have nice things

[Mazrim]

I wonder what Christie Blatchford has to say about all this.

[Russic]

Ah booooo. I imagine they've studied what apple does to succeed to the point that Tim Cook can keep growing Apple.

All the best to him and his family.

[Hack&Lube]

Originally Posted by HotHotHeat

Two best things I've read online tonight:



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michae...html?ir=canada

@harrymccracken
Harry McCracken
Still unimaginable: that Jobs was the most important person in personal technology both in 1978 and in 2011.

Jobs neither invented point and click or pinch to make small. These were concepts other people thought up and implemented as products or technology demonstrations long before they came along in the form of an Apple product. Jobs was just the most successful in bringing them to the mass market.

One area I see him as a visionary in was the development of the current touch paradigm from his comments in interviews and at Macworld in the late 90s where he told the crowd of Apple workers and developers that he though the Newton was a piece of garbage and he tossed his because he didn't want to be tapping around with a stylus.

[fredr123]

Apple and Steve Jobs were instrumental in getting record labels and the industry in general on board with downloading music. Napster shut down in July 2001 and the ITMS opened its doors for the first time in the spring of 2003. It took someone with vision backed by a company with pockets deep enough to underwrite that gumption to make it happen. You might loathe iTunes and the ITMS for all their shortcomings, frustrations and quirks, but without those products pushing ahead through all the resistance, we might not have such cheap and LEGAL access to music as we do today.

In most cases, you can find someone who makes a product technologically superior to the Apple version. Invariably that product does not reach nearly the levels of commercial success as the Apple creation. There were mp3 players before the iPad. There were tablets before the iPad. Steve Jobs is a master at creating products and building a market for them.

[Azure]

Well there is absolutely no other mp3 player on the market that comes close to competing with the iPod.

And until the Galaxy S players launch, I don't think there will be. I've had my iPod Touch for 2 years now, and it does everything I want it to do.

Which is incredible, because how many tech products that we buy are like that? So props to Steve, because he has built something pretty amazing.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by Hack&Lube

Jobs neither invented point and click or pinch to make small. These were concepts other people thought up and implemented as products or technology demonstrations long before they came along in the form of an Apple product. Jobs was just the most successful in bringing them to the mass market.

One area I see him as a visionary in was the development of the current touch paradigm from his comments in interviews and at Macworld in the late 90s where he told the crowd of Apple workers and developers that he though the Newton was a piece of garbage and he tossed his because he didn't want to be tapping around with a stylus.

Oh definitely. He didn't invent these ideas... but he demanded these ideas be in place. They were pretty demanding demands, and they paid off. Kudos to him for that.

Essentially, he's the marketing guy that made all of this happen, not the engineer that made it happen. Not that there's anything wrong with that at all.

[sclitheroe]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

Oh definitely. He didn't invent these ideas... but he demanded these ideas be in place. They were pretty demanding demands, and they paid off. Kudos to him for that.

Essentially, he's the marketing guy that made all of this happen, not the engineer that made it happen. Not that there's anything wrong with that at all.

He has also, throughout his career, given kudos to the engineers and smart people at Apple. I particularly liked the times he asked the engineering teams to stand up and be recognized at the keynotes - I think he did that for the iPhone and iPad, maybe some Mac OS X releases as well. But generally speaking, he's been quick to point out the strengths of the people at Apple.

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by sclitheroe

He has also, throughout his career, given kudos to the engineers and smart people at Apple. I particularly liked the times he asked the engineering teams to stand up and be recognized at the keynotes - I think he did that for the iPhone and iPad, maybe some Mac OS X releases as well. But generally speaking, he's been quick to point out the strengths of the people at Apple.

Yeah, definitely. Not saying he does nothing. He's definitely a great CEO... there are a lot of reasons I don't like Jobs myself, but I respect the job (no pun) he does.

[username]

Originally Posted by Canada 02

pancreatic cancer is one of the most lethal. For about 80% it's a death sentence within a year of diagnosis. 96% don't make it to year 5

Jobs has made it past 7 years, which is quite remarkable

Well that's technically not true. While Steve Jobs did have pancreatic cancer, his was a much less lethal and rare version of the disease. 95% of people are diagnosed with adenocarcinoma cancer and that has a 4% 5 year survival rate. I only know this because a very close family member is currently battleing pancreatic cancer.

Still, to battle any form of cancer and make it 7 years is remarkable.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by sclitheroe

He has also, throughout his career, given kudos to the engineers and smart people at Apple. I particularly liked the times he asked the engineering teams to stand up and be recognized at the keynotes - I think he did that for the iPhone and iPad, maybe some Mac OS X releases as well. But generally speaking, he's been quick to point out the strengths of the people at Apple.

Jobs also insisted that each hardware engineer and programmer who worked on the original Mac have their signatures engraved on the inside of the case. Most customers would never open up the box and see it, but it was another way that Steve treated his employees like artists rather than engineers.

http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py...ning_Party.txt

[FlameOn]

I wonder how much of the cancer was caused by stressed related to his OCD. Take a look at the sample below
http://www.macrumors.com/2011/08/25/...out-this-icon/

[Sr. Mints]

Originally Posted by FlameOn

I wonder how much of the cancer was caused by stressed related to his OCD. Take a look at the sample below
http://www.macrumors.com/2011/08/25/...out-this-icon/

That's a fun anecdote from Vic Gundotra (of Google.)

"I laughed nervously. After all, while it was customary for Steve to call during the week upset about something, it was unusual for him to call me on Sunday and ask me to call his home. I wondered what was so important?

"So Vic, we have an urgent issue, one that I need addressed right away. I've already assigned someone from my team to help you, and I hope you can fix this tomorrow" said Steve. "I've been looking at the Google logo on the iPhone and I'm not happy with the icon. The second O in Google doesn't have the right yellow gradient. It's just wrong and I'm going to have Greg fix it tomorrow. Is that okay with you?"

And I don't think his stress from OCD has anything to do with his cancer.

[Phanuthier]

That defiantly is pretty common throughout Apple, not just Jobs. Probably not to the same OCDness, but every single person I know who works on a project with Apple is always running around with their hair on fire, called in on a Monday morning at 4am or Friday night at 11pm... if they have a demand. They're a demanding company to have as a client, probably one of the reasons their quality is so high.

[Hack&Lube]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

Essentially, he's the marketing guy that made all of this happen, not the engineer that made it happen. Not that there's anything wrong with that at all.

Just like when Atari told Steve Jobs they would pay him $750 plus $100 for each chip he could cut out of the design for Breakout.

Jobs went to Steve Wozniak and told him to do all the work. Wozniak ended up not sleeping for 4 nights straight cutting out so many chips that Atari paid Jobs ~$6000. Jobs told Wozniak that he only got $600 and paid him $375 and pocketed the rest.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by fredr123

Apple and Steve Jobs were instrumental in getting record labels and the industry in general on board with downloading music. Napster shut down in July 2001 and the ITMS opened its doors for the first time in the spring of 2003. It took someone with vision backed by a company with pockets deep enough to underwrite that gumption to make it happen. You might loathe iTunes and the ITMS for all their shortcomings, frustrations and quirks, but without those products pushing ahead through all the resistance, we might not have such cheap and LEGAL access to music as we do today.

Legal, yes... cheap? Not really.

Look at Steam for a distribution platform that has drastically dropped prices through digital downloads. Sure, games cost the same as retail boxes initially, but nowadays you can get stuff like Mass Effect 2 for $5 if you catch a sale. Before digital distribution, it would maybe drop to $30 before you wouldn't find it in a store.

[sclitheroe]

Originally Posted by SebC

Legal, yes... cheap? Not really.

Look at Steam for a distribution platform that has drastically dropped prices through digital downloads. Sure, games cost the same as retail boxes initially, but nowadays you can get stuff like Mass Effect 2 for $5 if you catch a sale. Before digital distribution, it would maybe drop to $30 before you wouldn't find it in a store.

You can't compare the two directly, old software has always depreciated faster than old music (which arguably goes up in price with inflation).

I'd say $10-12 at iTunes is far better than $20-22 at HMV - however there are tons of factors to take into account that are outside the scope of this thread to be sure (physical vs digital, lossy vs exact, etc).

What is almost indisputable though is Apple's role in increasing bitrate and dropping DRM on music - maybe some other company would have accomplished this, but in my opinion, without the overbearing success of the iPods and the iTunes Store as the big stick to beat the music companies with, we'd have had a morass of incompatible DRM schemes and been worse off overall.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by sclitheroe

You can't compare the two directly, old software has always depreciated faster than old music (which arguably goes up in price with inflation).

I don't think they're as different as you're saying. A six month old game is not noticeably inferior to something new today, yet it's typically cheaper.

The music industry, I feel, would have higher profits if they were willing to price discriminate between people who want everything the moment it comes out, and people who just want to have gigs and gigs of music.

[username]

Originally Posted by SebC

I don't think they're as different as you're saying. A six month old game is not noticeably inferior to something new today, yet it's typically cheaper.

The music industry, I feel, would have higher profits if they were willing to price discriminate between people who want everything the moment it comes out, and people who just want to have gigs and gigs of music.

Beatport does this already. 2.49 for a new song & then the price drops after it's been out for a few weeks.