While this is fascinating stuff, I'm not liking this whole 'every first week of October we'll milk a dead guy for page hits' business
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dickprinter
But this is only the first week of the first October that the dead guy is dead....so.....what brings you to this conclusion?
Jobs was connected to (and connected with) the public in a way Edison, Ford, Westinghouse, Tesla, Thomas Watson, Gates and a raft of others never have approached, even with his intense privacy. (In the purely scientific realm, Einstein, abstract as he was, actually did speak to something in many on the other hand, and Carl Sagan was, of course, a masterful communicator of the current state of science, if not prominent for research himself). And as we all know, the outpouring at SJ's death was amazing and launched a massive best seller and two (or more down the road) movies. And he'll still be in the business school curriculum a century from now.
Also having followed Apple since its prospective founding and having been on these forums for years, it's plain to see there is a tendency to almost deify him in some respects, or at least make him Saint Jobs of the first Church of Apple - many of the in-thread debates have a near-religious fervor, or at least equal to what you'll find on political forums.
And especially in the last year we've seen so many (way too many) "Steve would never have..." and "Steve is rolling in his grave about...." posts. And to those (well-meaning) people I say go buy a WWSHD [What would Steve have done?] tee-shirt to walk around in and pipe down already, please. Apple is now a giant corporation run by Tim Cook and Co., and what Steve would or wouldn't have done personally becomes an increasingly hypothetical and hollow rhetorical point, especially after the next strategic project cycle or two, because he's not around to tell us and the situations and market forces will be new.
That is, there are two sides, as Apple was founded and inspired by Jobs, and I'm sure the corporate culture is trying to follow the blueprint and spirit of his leadership, but progressively it's going to be more and more about the current (and evolving) team are handling the challenges of 2013, 14, 20, etc., even though the history he left and the course he set before passing away will echo for decades in some ways. (That's still true of Watson's IBM, btw and I believe TJW, Sr. retired in the 1940's give or take. IBM is still the "THINK" company - the signs with that motto were omnipresent all over the corporation - and it was paid homage in the ThinkPad line decades later, and, similarly, Apple will still be the "Think Different" company 20 years from now - unless management totally blows it.)
However, back to the man himself (whom I was freshly and hugely re-impressed by in this audio) I think there will be a cult of personality around him for the foreseeable future and maybe longer, and the anniversary of his death will be a well-media visited event for years to come. And he was (to me) at least the main thing that made Apple of such singularly compelling interest.
Which is why, personally, I find the corporation, while still an amazing cultural as well as business phenomenon, to be inherently (and increasingly) less interesting and iconic since he's passed. An excellent businessman with preternatural skills at "supply chain management" (now there's something that'll keep hearts pumping), a knighted designer and the rest, who've so far simply iterated on Jobsian-era innovations are, taken all together, less a tenth as moving as their late, lamented, brilliant, quirky, volatile, visionary leader.
So all I want from Apple itself now is to prove they can truly innovate and at the pace that he established. Do that and I'm around for the long run, because it's a company that continues to extend the boundaries of what it's possible for me to do with tech in an intuitive way, free of malware. Don't, i.e., demonstrate that without Steven P. Jobs, that for all their thousands of highly talented staff, they simply don't have that mojo any longer, and I'm going to become much more product agnostic in my technology-buying decisions and wider-ranging in my tech surfing time.
Here are some consideration for the appleHaters and plain sarcastic people:
1- A composer who plays no instrument still is a visionary of sound.
2- An architect who needs a structural engineer still is a visionary of form/space relationship.
3- Galileo, Da Vinci, Charles Darwin, Isaac Newton, Picasso are all geniuses! They ALL borrowed from others, their work would have been not theirs without others people input.
You forgot Michelangelo, Einstein, ...
I know lots of other people had similar predictions at the time.
And its like the weather forecast, you read sanity into it after the fact.
It makes me think about a certain soccer player in The Netherlands, the greatest player ever according to the fans.
But that wasn't enough, they seriously thought he was the greatest Dutchman ever in history, pure genius.
I don't buy into the scriptures you so cleverly eluded to. Don't buy the scriptures just buy his products. The products are at least feasible. Perhaps he is your new messiah...
You forgot Michelangelo, Einstein, ...
I know lots of other people had similar predictions at the time.
And its like the weather forecast, you read sanity into it after the fact.
It makes me think about a certain soccer player in The Netherlands, the greatest player ever according to the fans.
But that wasn't enough, they seriously thought he was the greatest Dutchman ever in history, pure genius.
Really embarrassing.
J.
Yeah, then there was the other fella that developed Greek Fire... No need to get into a debate...
HA! This awesome tape reveals (starting at the 11 minute mark) that people (Apple included) will fall back into 'old media habits' and demand TV on their computers.
That's not what he meant by 'old media habits'. He clearly describes trying to apply old habits to new media technologies and goes on to give the example of the transition from radio to television. When television first came out, they basically pointed a camera at was basically a radio broadcast. It took a long time before people began learning how to use the media in new ways by designing unique production methods that made better use of visuals.
Computers as a form of communication medium didn't take off until the late 80's when bulletin board systems really began taking off; first smaller independent boards, then major ones such as, Prodigy, AOL, Delphi, etc.
The fact that Steve mentioned in the speech that M.I.T. took street-level pictures throughout the streets of Aspen and created a video disk which allowed a virtual walk through town. I added that it sounds like Google StreetView....25 years before Google StreetView.
That's not what he meant by 'old media habits'. He clearly describes trying to apply old habits to new media technologies and goes on to give the example of the transition from radio to television. When television first came out, they basically pointed a camera at was basically a radio broadcast. It took a long time before people began learning how to use the media in new ways by designing unique production methods that made better use of visuals.
Computers as a form of communication medium didn't take off until the late 80's when bulletin board systems really began taking off; first smaller independent boards, then major ones such as, Prodigy, AOL, Delphi, etc.
I agree with most of what you said, but my point is still valid that an Internet connected computer can do so much more than just being reduced to a glorified TV. The fact that so many people get so excited when there is some new App that allows a person to consume even more tv/video is just evidence of 'old media habits' are hard to kill. The truth is that average American already consumes nearly 150 hours a month of tv/video and that type of 'media bias' needs to be reduced not increased.
A terrible job was done cleaning up the audio, when it could be a whole lot better. The result is almost unintelligible. People think that just by using Audacity they're a pro--hence the name, I guess! Yup, the tape hiss was removed... along with a lot of information. Better equalization of what's been posted can help but it would be best to start with the original rip.
Certainly, it could have been digitized a lot better with the right equipment and know-how. I did the best I could with the equipment I had. I've been offered by a few people to do a better quality digitization from the original tape. Once things settle down a bit, I will entertain those offers. Thanks!
He says Apple?s strategy is to ?put an incredibly great computer in a book that you can carry around with you that you can learn how to use in 20 minutes?. Does that sound like anything we are familiar with today? And they wanted to do it with a ?radio link? so that people wouldn?t need to hook it up to anything to communicate with ?larger databases? and other computers. Hmmm ?.
Interestingly, in that Q&A response, Jobs says that the easy-to-learn computer they wanted to put into a book form already existed, and it was the Lisa.
He said the difficulty was in getting the Lisa's size and price down from large and $10,000, to book size and under $1,000. He said Apple was working on it and figured it would be ready a bit over five years from then.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
While this is fascinating stuff, I'm not liking this whole 'every first week of October we'll milk a dead guy for page hits' business
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dickprinter
But this is only the first week of the first October that the dead guy is dead....so.....what brings you to this conclusion?
Jobs was connected to (and connected with) the public in a way Edison, Ford, Westinghouse, Tesla, Thomas Watson, Gates and a raft of others never have approached, even with his intense privacy. (In the purely scientific realm, Einstein, abstract as he was, actually did speak to something in many on the other hand, and Carl Sagan was, of course, a masterful communicator of the current state of science, if not prominent for research himself). And as we all know, the outpouring at SJ's death was amazing and launched a massive best seller and two (or more down the road) movies. And he'll still be in the business school curriculum a century from now.
Also having followed Apple since its prospective founding and having been on these forums for years, it's plain to see there is a tendency to almost deify him in some respects, or at least make him Saint Jobs of the first Church of Apple - many of the in-thread debates have a near-religious fervor, or at least equal to what you'll find on political forums.
And especially in the last year we've seen so many (way too many) "Steve would never have..." and "Steve is rolling in his grave about...." posts. And to those (well-meaning) people I say go buy a WWSHD [What would Steve have done?] tee-shirt to walk around in and pipe down already, please. Apple is now a giant corporation run by Tim Cook and Co., and what Steve would or wouldn't have done personally becomes an increasingly hypothetical and hollow rhetorical point, especially after the next strategic project cycle or two, because he's not around to tell us and the situations and market forces will be new.
That is, there are two sides, as Apple was founded and inspired by Jobs, and I'm sure the corporate culture is trying to follow the blueprint and spirit of his leadership, but progressively it's going to be more and more about the current (and evolving) team are handling the challenges of 2013, 14, 20, etc., even though the history he left and the course he set before passing away will echo for decades in some ways. (That's still true of Watson's IBM, btw and I believe TJW, Sr. retired in the 1940's give or take. IBM is still the "THINK" company - the signs with that motto were omnipresent all over the corporation - and it was paid homage in the ThinkPad line decades later, and, similarly, Apple will still be the "Think Different" company 20 years from now - unless management totally blows it.)
However, back to the man himself (whom I was freshly and hugely re-impressed by in this audio) I think there will be a cult of personality around him for the foreseeable future and maybe longer, and the anniversary of his death will be a well-media visited event for years to come. And he was (to me) at least the main thing that made Apple of such singularly compelling interest.
Which is why, personally, I find the corporation, while still an amazing cultural as well as business phenomenon, to be inherently (and increasingly) less interesting and iconic since he's passed. An excellent businessman with preternatural skills at "supply chain management" (now there's something that'll keep hearts pumping), a knighted designer and the rest, who've so far simply iterated on Jobsian-era innovations are, taken all together, less a tenth as moving as their late, lamented, brilliant, quirky, volatile, visionary leader.
So all I want from Apple itself now is to prove they can truly innovate and at the pace that he established. Do that and I'm around for the long run, because it's a company that continues to extend the boundaries of what it's possible for me to do with tech in an intuitive way, free of malware. Don't, i.e., demonstrate that without Steven P. Jobs, that for all their thousands of highly talented staff, they simply don't have that mojo any longer, and I'm going to become much more product agnostic in my technology-buying decisions and wider-ranging in my tech surfing time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ochyming
Here are some consideration for the appleHaters and plain sarcastic people:
1- A composer who plays no instrument still is a visionary of sound.
2- An architect who needs a structural engineer still is a visionary of form/space relationship.
3- Galileo, Da Vinci, Charles Darwin, Isaac Newton, Picasso are all geniuses! They ALL borrowed from others, their work would have been not theirs without others people input.
You forgot Michelangelo, Einstein, ...
I know lots of other people had similar predictions at the time.
And its like the weather forecast, you read sanity into it after the fact.
It makes me think about a certain soccer player in The Netherlands, the greatest player ever according to the fans.
But that wasn't enough, they seriously thought he was the greatest Dutchman ever in history, pure genius.
Really embarrassing.
J.
I don't buy into the scriptures you so cleverly eluded to. Don't buy the scriptures just buy his products. The products are at least feasible. Perhaps he is your new messiah...
Yeah, then there was the other fella that developed Greek Fire... No need to get into a debate...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Commodification
HA! This awesome tape reveals (starting at the 11 minute mark) that people (Apple included) will fall back into 'old media habits' and demand TV on their computers.
That's not what he meant by 'old media habits'. He clearly describes trying to apply old habits to new media technologies and goes on to give the example of the transition from radio to television. When television first came out, they basically pointed a camera at was basically a radio broadcast. It took a long time before people began learning how to use the media in new ways by designing unique production methods that made better use of visuals.
Computers as a form of communication medium didn't take off until the late 80's when bulletin board systems really began taking off; first smaller independent boards, then major ones such as, Prodigy, AOL, Delphi, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vadania
What does this have to do with M.I.T. exactly?
The fact that Steve mentioned in the speech that M.I.T. took street-level pictures throughout the streets of Aspen and created a video disk which allowed a virtual walk through town. I added that it sounds like Google StreetView....25 years before Google StreetView.
Did you even listen to the audio?
I agree with most of what you said, but my point is still valid that an Internet connected computer can do so much more than just being reduced to a glorified TV. The fact that so many people get so excited when there is some new App that allows a person to consume even more tv/video is just evidence of 'old media habits' are hard to kill. The truth is that average American already consumes nearly 150 hours a month of tv/video and that type of 'media bias' needs to be reduced not increased.
Originally Posted by Dickprinter
Did you even listen to the audio?
Do you really think he has an argument before starting an argument?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpsro
A terrible job was done cleaning up the audio, when it could be a whole lot better. The result is almost unintelligible. People think that just by using Audacity they're a pro--hence the name, I guess! Yup, the tape hiss was removed... along with a lot of information. Better equalization of what's been posted can help but it would be best to start with the original rip.
Certainly, it could have been digitized a lot better with the right equipment and know-how. I did the best I could with the equipment I had. I've been offered by a few people to do a better quality digitization from the original tape. Once things settle down a bit, I will entertain those offers. Thanks!
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
He says Apple?s strategy is to ?put an incredibly great computer in a book that you can carry around with you that you can learn how to use in 20 minutes?. Does that sound like anything we are familiar with today? And they wanted to do it with a ?radio link? so that people wouldn?t need to hook it up to anything to communicate with ?larger databases? and other computers. Hmmm ?.
Interestingly, in that Q&A response, Jobs says that the easy-to-learn computer they wanted to put into a book form already existed, and it was the Lisa.
He said the difficulty was in getting the Lisa's size and price down from large and $10,000, to book size and under $1,000. He said Apple was working on it and figured it would be ready a bit over five years from then.