The people disagreeing with the guy who prefers the truth to conjecture are. And one of them happens to be the person with whom I'm arguing.
So you didn't bother to read the post I quoted. Why even reply to me, then?
You fight to be seen as winning for the sake of being able to say "I won". Save that stuff for the trolls, it's very helpful when you employ it then. But it gives you this bitter I'm always right attitude that bleeds into what otherwise might be an interesting discussion. Like right now, I'm not really sure what youre point actually is but I do know you're right.
Different but related - An ad agency creative director working on the Tylenol account has been attached to the account longer than anyone at McNeil (the makers of Tylenol).
So just to add to the conversation: it is possible for an ad man to be more of an insider than someone who works for the company.
So, if Apple Insider wrote that Steve Jobs didn't die and was living out his days as an Elvis Impersonator in Las Vegas, that would prove it was true?
Of course not. You asserted that this guy doesn't know. You need to prove it. The word choice of someone else is irrelevant to the discussion. You need to prove that Lee Chow doesn't know. You need to prove that Steve Jobs didn't tell him.
Frankly, you're being quite silly. These statements by Chow are consistent with the stories about Apple's naming, told by others, including Wozniak and Steve Jobs himself to his biographer.
So, prove it. Or admit you're wrong.
Last chance before I decide you're just trying to derail discussion here.
Now that they had decided to start a business, they needed a name. Jobs had gone for another visit to the All One Farm, where he had been pruning the Gravenstein apple trees, and Wozniak picked him up at the airport. On the ride down to Los Altos, they bandied around options. They considered some typical tech words, such as Matrix, and some neologisms, such as Executek, and some straightforward boring names, like Personal Computers Inc. The deadline for deciding was the next day, when Jobs wanted to start filing the papers. Finally Jobs proposed Apple Computer. “I was on one of my fruitarian diets,” he explained. “I had just come back from the apple farm. It sounded fun, spirited, and not intimidating. Apple took the edge off the word ‘computer.’ Plus, it would get us ahead of Atari in the phone book.” He told Wozniak that if a better name did not hit them by the next afternoon, they would just stick with Apple. And they did. Apple. It was a smart choice. The word instantly signaled friendliness and simplicity. It managed to be both slightly off-beat and as normal as a slice of pie. There was a whiff of counterculture, back-to-nature earthiness to it, yet nothing could be more American. And the two words together—Apple Computer—provided an amusing disjuncture. “It doesn’t quite make sense,” said Mike Markkula, who soon thereafter became the first chairman of the new company. “So it forces your brain to dwell on it. Apple and computers, that doesn’t go together! So it helped us grow brand awareness.”
Wozniak was not yet ready to commit full-time. He was an HP company man at heart, or so he thought, and he wanted to keep his day job there. Jobs realized he needed an ally to help corral Wozniak and adjudicate if there was a disagreement. So he enlisted his friend Ron Wayne, the middle-aged engineer at Atari who had once started a slot machine company. Wayne knew that it would not be easy to make Wozniak quit HP, nor was it necessary right away. Instead the key was to convince him that his computer designs would be owned by the Apple partnership. “Woz had a parental attitude toward the circuits he developed, and he wanted to be able to use them in other applications or let HP use them,” Wayne said. “Jobs and I realized that these circuits would be the core of Apple. We spent two hours in a roundtable discussion at my apartment, and I was able to get Woz to accept this.” His argument was that a great engineer would be remembered only if he teamed with a great marketer, and this required him to commit his designs to the partnership. Jobs was so impressed and grateful that he offered Wayne a 10% stake in the new partnership, turning him into a tie-breaker if Jobs and Wozniak disagreed over an issue.
“They were very different, but they made a powerful team,” said Wayne. Jobs at times seemed to be driven by demons, while Woz seemed a naïf who was toyed with by angels. Jobs had a bravado that helped him get things done, occasionally by manipulating people. He could be charismatic, even mesmerizing, but also cold and brutal. Wozniak, in contrast, was shy and socially awkward, which made him seem childishly sweet. “Woz is very bright in some areas, but he’s almost like a savant, since he was so stunted when it came to dealing with people he didn’t know,” said Jobs. “We were a good pair.” It helped that Jobs was awed by Wozniak’s engineering wizardry, and Wozniak was awed by Jobs’s business drive. “I never wanted to deal with people and step on toes, but Steve could call up people he didn’t know and make them do things,” Wozniak recalled. “He could be rough on people he didn’t think were smart, but he never treated me rudely, even in later years when maybe I couldn’t answer a question as well as he wanted.”
Even after Wozniak became convinced that his new computer design should become the property of the Apple partnership, he felt that he had to offer it first to HP, since he was working there. “I believed it was my duty to tell HP about what I had designed while working for them. That was the right thing and the ethical thing.” So he demonstrated it to his managers in the spring of 1976. The senior executive at the meeting was impressed, and seemed torn, but he finally said it was not something that HP could develop. It was a hobbyist product, at least for now, and didn’t fit into the company’s high-quality market segments. “I was disappointed,” Wozniak recalled, “but now I was free to enter into the Apple partnership.”
On April 1, 1976, Jobs and Wozniak went to Wayne’s apartment in Mountain View to draw up the partnership agreement. Wayne said he had some experience “writing in legalese,” so he composed the three-page document himself. His “legalese” got the better of him. Paragraphs began with various flourishes: “Be it noted herewith . . . Be it further noted herewith . . . Now the refore [sic], in consideration of the respective assignments of interests . . .” But the division of shares and profits was clear—45%-45%-10%—and it was stipulated that any expenditures of more than $100 would require agreement of at least two of the partners. Also, the responsibilities were spelled out. “Wozniak shall assume both general and major responsibility for the conduct of Electrical Engineering; Jobs shall assume general responsibility for Electrical Engineering and Marketing, and Wayne shall assume major responsibility for Mechanical Engineering and Documentation.” Jobs signed in lowercase script, Wozniak in careful cursive, and Wayne in an illegible squiggle.
Wayne then got cold feet. As Jobs started planning to borrow and spend more money, he recalled the failure of his own company. He didn’t want to go through that again. Jobs and Wozniak had no personal assets, but Wayne (who worried about a global financial Armageddon) kept gold coins hidden in his mattress. Because they had structured Apple as a simple partnership rather than a corporation, the partners would be personally liable for the debts, and Wayne was afraid potential creditors would go after him. So he returned to the Santa Clara County office just eleven days later with a “statement of withdrawal” and an amendment to the partnership agreement. “By virtue of a re-assessment of understandings by and between all parties,” it began, “Wayne shall hereinafter cease to function in the status of ‘Partner.’” It noted that in payment for his 10% of the company, he received $800, and shortly afterward $1,500 more. Had he stayed on and kept his 10% stake, at the end of 2010 it would have been worth approximately $2.6 billion. Instead he was then living alone in a small home in Pahrump, Nevada, where he played the penny slot machines and lived off his social security check. He later claimed he had no regrets. “I made the best decision for me at the time. Both of them were real whirlwinds, and I knew my stomach and it wasn’t ready for such a ride.”
Jobs and Wozniak took the stage together for a presentation to the Homebrew Computer Club shortly after they signed Apple into existence. Wozniak held up one of their newly produced circuit boards and described the microprocessor, the eight kilobytes of memory, and the version of BASIC he had written. He also emphasized what he called the main thing: “a human-typable keyboard instead of a stupid, cryptic front panel with a bunch of lights and switches.” Then it was Jobs’s turn. He pointed out that the Apple, unlike the Altair, had all the essential components built in. Then he challenged them with a question: How much would people be willing to pay for such a wonderful machine? He was trying to get them to see the amazing value of the Apple. It was a rhetorical flourish he would use at product presentations over the ensuing decades. The audience was not very impressed. The Apple had a cut-rate microprocessor, not the Intel 8080. But one important person stayed behind to hear more. His name was Paul Terrell, and in 1975 he had opened a computer store, which he dubbed the Byte Shop, on Camino Real in Menlo Park. Now, a year later, he had three stores and visions of building a national chain. Jobs was thrilled to give him a private demo. “Take a look at this,” he said. “You’re going to like what you see.” Terrell was impressed enough to hand Jobs and Woz his card. “Keep in touch,” he said.
“I’m keeping in touch,” Jobs announced the next day when he walked barefoot into the Byte Shop. He made the sale. Terrell agreed to order fifty computers. But there was a condition: He didn’t want just $50 printed circuit boards, for which customers would then have to buy all the chips and do the assembly. That might appeal to a few hard-core hobbyists, but not to most customers. Instead he wanted the boards to be fully assembled. For that he was willing to pay about $500 apiece, cash on delivery.
Jobs immediately called Wozniak at HP. “Are you sitting down?” he asked. Wozniak said he wasn’t. Jobs nevertheless proceeded to give him the news. “I was shocked, just completely shocked,” Wozniak recalled. “I will never forget that moment.”
To fill the order, they needed about $15,000 worth of parts. Allen Baum, the third prankster from Homestead High, and his father agreed to loan them $5,000. Jobs tried to borrow more from a bank in Los Altos, but the manager looked at him and, not surprisingly, declined. He went to Haltek Supply and offered an equity stake in Apple in return for the parts, but the owner decided they were “a couple of young, scruffy-looking guys,” and declined. Alcorn at Atari would sell them chips only if they paid cash up front. Finally, Jobs was able to convince the manager of Cramer Electronics to call Paul Terrell to confirm that he had really committed to a $25,000 order. Terrell was at a conference when he heard over a loudspeaker that he had an emergency call (Jobs had been persistent). The Cramer manager told him that two scruffy kids had just walked in waving an order from the Byte Shop. Was it real? Terrell confirmed that it was, and the store agreed to front Jobs the parts on thirty-day credit.
So, if Apple Insider wrote that Steve Jobs didn't die and was living out his days as an Elvis Impersonator in Las Vegas, that would prove it was true?
Uh…
You asserted that this guy doesn't know. You need to prove it. The word choice of someone else is irrelevant to the discussion. You need to prove that Lee Chow doesn't know. You need to prove that Steve Jobs didn't tell him.
Uh… he. himself. said. so. What's so difficult to comprehend about this?
“I was on one of my fruitarian diets,” he explained. “I had just come back from the apple farm. It sounded fun, spirited, and not intimidating. Apple took the edge off the word ‘computer.’ Plus, it would get us ahead of Atari in the phone book.” He told Wozniak that if a better name did not hit them by the next afternoon, they would just stick with Apple. And they did.
<sarcasm>
There's no possible way Steve Jobs could have told Lee Chow this story in their presumably numerous branding discussions over their 30 years of working together. In fact, there's no proof they ever talked about branding, just what Lee Chows "believes" as related in this video. Obviously, Lee Chow doesn't know what he's talking about and you should just take my word for it, despite offering no reason to believe otherwise, because, after all, I post on the internet! In fact, Walter Isaacson made this story up, and then Lee Chow read it and he's just telling us what he "believes" from the book! Lee Chow never even MET Steve Jobs!
</sarcasm>
Frankly, I'm just astounded. I mean, what's the point of trying to refute Chow's story, anyway? I could understand if someone else had said something that contradicted it, or if there were any sort of facts, logic, or reason to doubt it.
Interesting that we had article on Bill Gates Interview talking about Jobs and he stated that his strongest quality (not the only quality) was marketing and many people thought, Gates was being insulting, but Clow states quite clearly that he though that Jobs was a genius in marketing and advertising..interesting!
Hey Tallest Skil are you here to make a Guinness Book record to put the most post out on this blog? Get a life! Yes it is personal insult - what are you going to do? Add one more post!
Then why waste your time doing something so pointless? His reason is 'a' potential reason, not the reason. It is a valid request to desire the truth rather than supposition. It is also nonsense to assume "it worked out in the end; don't worry about how".
I think the key take away points of this video are Lee's obvious love of Steve and of Apple--and, implicitly, of Lee's ability to help Steve and Apple over those thirty years through his own creative contributions.
Interesting that we had article on Bill Gates Interview talking about Jobs and he stated that his strongest quality (not the only quality) was marketing and many people thought, Gates was being insulting, but Clow states quite clearly that he though that Jobs was a genius in marketing and advertising..interesting!
I'd say its because Gates (and many people) use that term as a back handed compliment about Jobs. That's clearly not the case with Clow. I keep thinking about that Gates quote back when Jobs came back to Apple in the 90's, I believe it was "I can't figure out why he's trying". Now that Microsoft is in Apples rear view mirror I bet he can figure it out. Anyway, the exact same words coming from 2 different people can have 2 distinct meanings.
I'd say its because Gates (and many people) use that term as a back handed compliment about Jobs. That's clearly not the case with Clow. I keep thinking about that Gates quote back when Jobs came back to Apple in the 90's, I believe it was "I can't figure out why he's trying". Now that Microsoft is in Apples rear view mirror I bet he can figure it out. Anyway, the exact same words coming from 2 different people can have 2 distinct meanings.
Yes, but the emotion Gates was trying to hide in that interview, tells me he was beng sincere. I think we so bend on disliking MS/Bill Gates, whatever we hear, we will take it as negative.
Everyone needs to take a chill pill. You all sound like you are closer to Jobs than people who worked with him for decades, or like you're part of his immediate family. You're not.
Everyone needs to take a chill pill. You all sound like you are closer to Jobs than people who worked with him for decades, or like you're part of his immediate family. You're not.
Now that they had decided to start a business, they needed a name. Jobs had gone for another visit to the All One Farm, where he had been pruning the Gravenstein apple trees, and Wozniak picked him up at the airport. On the ride down to Los Altos, they bandied around options. They considered some typical tech words, such as Matrix, and some neologisms, such as Executek, and some straightforward boring names, like Personal Computers Inc. The deadline for deciding was the next day, when Jobs wanted to start filing the papers. Finally Jobs proposed Apple Computer. “I was on one of my fruitarian diets,” he explained. “I had just come back from the apple farm. It sounded fun, spirited, and not intimidating. Apple took the edge off the word ‘computer.’ Plus, it would get us ahead of Atari in the phone book.” He told Wozniak that if a better name did not hit them by the next afternoon, they would just stick with Apple. And they did.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie
Piece from the bio:
Advertising
Jobs was not happy with the original ads for the iPad. As usual, he threw himself into the marketing, working with James Vincent and Duncan Milner at the ad agency (now called TBWA/Media Arts Lab), with Lee Clow advising from a semiretired perch. The commercial they first produced was a gentle scene of a guy in faded jeans and sweatshirt reclining in a chair, looking at email, a photo album, the New York Times, books, and video on an iPad propped on his lap. There were no words, just the background beat of “There Goes My Love” by the Blue Van. “After he approved it, Steve decided he hated it,” Vincent recalled. “He thought it looked like a Pottery Barn commercial.” Jobs later told me:
It had been easy to explain what the iPod was—a thousand songs in your pocket—which allowed us to move quickly to the iconic silhouette ads. But it was hard to explain what an iPad was. We didn’t want to show it as a computer, and yet we didn’t want to make it so soft that it looked like a cute TV. The first set of ads showed we didn’t know what we were doing. They had a cashmere and Hush Puppies feel to them.
I (and others, I am sure) appreciate that you're trying to bring a credible source into the discussion. But I have a problem with Isaacson's bio - It has some fundamental errors and inaccuracies that make it hard for me to accept it as an authoritative source. Furthermore, I believe Isaacson's motive was not to provide an accurate bio. Instead, he intended to paint his own portrait of the man, even if facts and details are sacrificed in the process. This has always been his modus operandi.
Everyone needs to take a chill pill. You all sound like you are closer to Jobs than people who worked with him for decades, or like you're part of his immediate family. You're not.
No different than other types of groupies. Let them be.
Comments
I'm sure.
Originally Posted by Doctor David
No one is saying they know for a fact why Apple has its name.
The people disagreeing with the guy who prefers the truth to conjecture are. And one of them happens to be the person with whom I'm arguing.
Originally Posted by Ireland
I'm sure.
So you didn't bother to read the post I quoted. Why even reply to me, then?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Call me when you know for a fact that he knows why Apple has its name. He doesn't.
He doesn't? Prove it.
Originally Posted by Jessi
He doesn't? Prove it.
Clow believes
Article already did.
Different but related - An ad agency creative director working on the Tylenol account has been attached to the account longer than anyone at McNeil (the makers of Tylenol).
So just to add to the conversation: it is possible for an ad man to be more of an insider than someone who works for the company.
FWIW
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Article already did.
So, if Apple Insider wrote that Steve Jobs didn't die and was living out his days as an Elvis Impersonator in Las Vegas, that would prove it was true?
Of course not. You asserted that this guy doesn't know. You need to prove it. The word choice of someone else is irrelevant to the discussion. You need to prove that Lee Chow doesn't know. You need to prove that Steve Jobs didn't tell him.
Frankly, you're being quite silly. These statements by Chow are consistent with the stories about Apple's naming, told by others, including Wozniak and Steve Jobs himself to his biographer.
So, prove it. Or admit you're wrong.
Last chance before I decide you're just trying to derail discussion here.
Now that they had decided to start a business, they needed a name. Jobs had gone for another visit to the All One Farm, where he had been pruning the Gravenstein apple trees, and Wozniak picked him up at the airport. On the ride down to Los Altos, they bandied around options. They considered some typical tech words, such as Matrix, and some neologisms, such as Executek, and some straightforward boring names, like Personal Computers Inc. The deadline for deciding was the next day, when Jobs wanted to start filing the papers. Finally Jobs proposed Apple Computer. “I was on one of my fruitarian diets,” he explained. “I had just come back from the apple farm. It sounded fun, spirited, and not intimidating. Apple took the edge off the word ‘computer.’ Plus, it would get us ahead of Atari in the phone book.” He told Wozniak that if a better name did not hit them by the next afternoon, they would just stick with Apple. And they did.
Apple. It was a smart choice. The word instantly signaled friendliness and simplicity. It managed to be both slightly off-beat and as normal as a slice of pie. There was a whiff of counterculture, back-to-nature earthiness to it, yet nothing could be more American. And the two words together—Apple Computer—provided an amusing disjuncture. “It doesn’t quite make sense,” said Mike Markkula, who soon thereafter became the first chairman of the new company. “So it forces your brain to dwell on it. Apple and computers, that doesn’t go together! So it helped us grow brand awareness.”
Wozniak was not yet ready to commit full-time. He was an HP company man at heart, or so he thought, and he wanted to keep his day job there. Jobs realized he needed an ally to help corral Wozniak and adjudicate if there was a disagreement. So he enlisted his friend Ron Wayne, the middle-aged engineer at Atari who had once started a slot machine company.
Wayne knew that it would not be easy to make Wozniak quit HP, nor was it necessary right away. Instead the key was to convince him that his computer designs would be owned by the Apple partnership. “Woz had a parental attitude toward the circuits he developed, and he wanted to be able to use them in other applications or let HP use them,” Wayne said. “Jobs and I realized that these circuits would be the core of Apple. We spent two hours in a roundtable discussion at my apartment, and I was able to get Woz to accept this.” His argument was that a great engineer would be remembered only if he teamed with a great marketer, and this required him to commit his designs to the partnership. Jobs was so impressed and grateful that he offered Wayne a 10% stake in the new partnership, turning him into a tie-breaker if Jobs and Wozniak disagreed over an issue.
“They were very different, but they made a powerful team,” said Wayne. Jobs at times seemed to be driven by demons, while Woz seemed a naïf who was toyed with by angels. Jobs had a bravado that helped him get things done, occasionally by manipulating people. He could be charismatic, even mesmerizing, but also cold and brutal. Wozniak, in contrast, was shy and socially awkward, which made him seem childishly sweet. “Woz is very bright in some areas, but he’s almost like a savant, since he was so stunted when it came to dealing with people he didn’t know,” said Jobs. “We were a good pair.” It helped that Jobs was awed by Wozniak’s engineering wizardry, and Wozniak was awed by Jobs’s business drive. “I never wanted to deal with people and step on toes, but Steve could call up people he didn’t know and make them do things,” Wozniak recalled. “He could be rough on people he didn’t think were smart, but he never treated me rudely, even in later years when maybe I couldn’t answer a question as well as he wanted.”
Even after Wozniak became convinced that his new computer design should become the property of the Apple partnership, he felt that he had to offer it first to HP, since he was working there. “I believed it was my duty to tell HP about what I had designed while working for them. That was the right thing and the ethical thing.” So he demonstrated it to his managers in the spring of 1976. The senior executive at the meeting was impressed, and seemed torn, but he finally said it was not something that HP could develop. It was a hobbyist product, at least for now, and didn’t fit into the company’s high-quality market segments. “I was disappointed,” Wozniak recalled, “but now I was free to enter into the Apple partnership.”
On April 1, 1976, Jobs and Wozniak went to Wayne’s apartment in Mountain View to draw up the partnership agreement. Wayne said he had some experience “writing in legalese,” so he composed the three-page document himself. His “legalese” got the better of him. Paragraphs began with various flourishes: “Be it noted herewith . . . Be it further noted herewith . . . Now the refore [sic], in consideration of the respective assignments of interests . . .” But the division of shares and profits was clear—45%-45%-10%—and it was stipulated that any expenditures of more than $100 would require agreement of at least two of the partners. Also, the responsibilities were spelled out. “Wozniak shall assume both general and major responsibility for the conduct of Electrical Engineering; Jobs shall assume general responsibility for Electrical Engineering and Marketing, and Wayne shall assume major responsibility for Mechanical Engineering and Documentation.” Jobs signed in lowercase script, Wozniak in careful cursive, and Wayne in an illegible squiggle.
Wayne then got cold feet. As Jobs started planning to borrow and spend more money, he recalled the failure of his own company. He didn’t want to go through that again. Jobs and Wozniak had no personal assets, but Wayne (who worried about a global financial Armageddon) kept gold coins hidden in his mattress. Because they had structured Apple as a simple partnership rather than a corporation, the partners would be personally liable for the debts, and Wayne was afraid potential creditors would go after him. So he returned to the Santa Clara County office just eleven days later with a “statement of withdrawal” and an amendment to the partnership agreement. “By virtue of a re-assessment of understandings by and between all parties,” it began, “Wayne shall hereinafter cease to function in the status of ‘Partner.’” It noted that in payment for his 10% of the company, he received $800, and shortly afterward $1,500 more.
Had he stayed on and kept his 10% stake, at the end of 2010 it would have been worth approximately $2.6 billion. Instead he was then living alone in a small home in Pahrump, Nevada, where he played the penny slot machines and lived off his social security check. He later claimed he had no regrets. “I made the best decision for me at the time. Both of them were real whirlwinds, and I knew my stomach and it wasn’t ready for such a ride.”
Jobs and Wozniak took the stage together for a presentation to the Homebrew Computer Club shortly after they signed Apple into existence. Wozniak held up one of their newly produced circuit boards and described the microprocessor, the eight kilobytes of memory, and the version of BASIC he had written. He also emphasized what he called the main thing: “a human-typable keyboard instead of a stupid, cryptic front panel with a bunch of lights and switches.” Then it was Jobs’s turn. He pointed out that the Apple, unlike the Altair, had all the essential components built in. Then he challenged them with a question: How much would people be willing to pay for such a wonderful machine? He was trying to get them to see the amazing value of the Apple. It was a rhetorical flourish he would use at product presentations over the ensuing decades.
The audience was not very impressed. The Apple had a cut-rate microprocessor, not the Intel 8080. But one important person stayed behind to hear more. His name was Paul Terrell, and in 1975 he had opened a computer store, which he dubbed the Byte Shop, on Camino Real in Menlo Park. Now, a year later, he had three stores and visions of building a national chain. Jobs was thrilled to give him a private demo. “Take a look at this,” he said. “You’re going to like what you see.” Terrell was impressed enough to hand Jobs and Woz his card. “Keep in touch,” he said.
“I’m keeping in touch,” Jobs announced the next day when he walked barefoot into the Byte Shop. He made the sale. Terrell agreed to order fifty computers. But there was a condition: He didn’t want just $50 printed circuit boards, for which customers would then have to buy all the chips and do the assembly. That might appeal to a few hard-core hobbyists, but not to most customers. Instead he wanted the boards to be fully assembled. For that he was willing to pay about $500 apiece, cash on delivery.
Jobs immediately called Wozniak at HP. “Are you sitting down?” he asked. Wozniak said he wasn’t. Jobs nevertheless proceeded to give him the news. “I was shocked, just completely shocked,” Wozniak recalled. “I will never forget that moment.”
To fill the order, they needed about $15,000 worth of parts. Allen Baum, the third prankster from Homestead High, and his father agreed to loan them $5,000. Jobs tried to borrow more from a bank in Los Altos, but the manager looked at him and, not surprisingly, declined. He went to Haltek Supply and offered an equity stake in Apple in return for the parts, but the owner decided they were “a couple of young, scruffy-looking guys,” and declined. Alcorn at Atari would sell them chips only if they paid cash up front. Finally, Jobs was able to convince the manager of Cramer Electronics to call Paul Terrell to confirm that he had really committed to a $25,000 order. Terrell was at a conference when he heard over a loudspeaker that he had an emergency call (Jobs had been persistent). The Cramer manager told him that two scruffy kids had just walked in waving an order from the Byte Shop. Was it real? Terrell confirmed that it was, and the store agreed to front Jobs the parts on thirty-day credit.
Originally Posted by Jessi
So, if Apple Insider wrote that Steve Jobs didn't die and was living out his days as an Elvis Impersonator in Las Vegas, that would prove it was true?
Uh…
You asserted that this guy doesn't know. You need to prove it. The word choice of someone else is irrelevant to the discussion. You need to prove that Lee Chow doesn't know. You need to prove that Steve Jobs didn't tell him.
Uh… he. himself. said. so. What's so difficult to comprehend about this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie
Another (tl;dr) from the bio:
“I was on one of my fruitarian diets,” he explained. “I had just come back from the apple farm. It sounded fun, spirited, and not intimidating. Apple took the edge off the word ‘computer.’ Plus, it would get us ahead of Atari in the phone book.” He told Wozniak that if a better name did not hit them by the next afternoon, they would just stick with Apple. And they did.
<sarcasm>
There's no possible way Steve Jobs could have told Lee Chow this story in their presumably numerous branding discussions over their 30 years of working together. In fact, there's no proof they ever talked about branding, just what Lee Chows "believes" as related in this video. Obviously, Lee Chow doesn't know what he's talking about and you should just take my word for it, despite offering no reason to believe otherwise, because, after all, I post on the internet! In fact, Walter Isaacson made this story up, and then Lee Chow read it and he's just telling us what he "believes" from the book! Lee Chow never even MET Steve Jobs!
</sarcasm>
Frankly, I'm just astounded. I mean, what's the point of trying to refute Chow's story, anyway? I could understand if someone else had said something that contradicted it, or if there were any sort of facts, logic, or reason to doubt it.
Interesting that we had article on Bill Gates Interview talking about Jobs and he stated that his strongest quality (not the only quality) was marketing and many people thought, Gates was being insulting, but Clow states quite clearly that he though that Jobs was a genius in marketing and advertising..interesting!
Oh shut up, you pompous ass!
I'd say its because Gates (and many people) use that term as a back handed compliment about Jobs. That's clearly not the case with Clow. I keep thinking about that Gates quote back when Jobs came back to Apple in the 90's, I believe it was "I can't figure out why he's trying". Now that Microsoft is in Apples rear view mirror I bet he can figure it out. Anyway, the exact same words coming from 2 different people can have 2 distinct meanings.
Yes, but the emotion Gates was trying to hide in that interview, tells me he was beng sincere. I think we so bend on disliking MS/Bill Gates, whatever we hear, we will take it as negative.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie
Another (tl;dr) from the bio:
Now that they had decided to start a business, they needed a name. Jobs had gone for another visit to the All One Farm, where he had been pruning the Gravenstein apple trees, and Wozniak picked him up at the airport. On the ride down to Los Altos, they bandied around options. They considered some typical tech words, such as Matrix, and some neologisms, such as Executek, and some straightforward boring names, like Personal Computers Inc. The deadline for deciding was the next day, when Jobs wanted to start filing the papers. Finally Jobs proposed Apple Computer. “I was on one of my fruitarian diets,” he explained. “I had just come back from the apple farm. It sounded fun, spirited, and not intimidating. Apple took the edge off the word ‘computer.’ Plus, it would get us ahead of Atari in the phone book.” He told Wozniak that if a better name did not hit them by the next afternoon, they would just stick with Apple. And they did.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie
Piece from the bio:
Advertising
Jobs was not happy with the original ads for the iPad. As usual, he threw himself into the marketing, working with James Vincent and Duncan Milner at the ad agency (now called TBWA/Media Arts Lab), with Lee Clow advising from a semiretired perch. The commercial they first produced was a gentle scene of a guy in faded jeans and sweatshirt reclining in a chair, looking at email, a photo album, the New York Times, books, and video on an iPad propped on his lap. There were no words, just the background beat of “There Goes My Love” by the Blue Van. “After he approved it, Steve decided he hated it,” Vincent recalled. “He thought it looked like a Pottery Barn commercial.” Jobs later told me:
It had been easy to explain what the iPod was—a thousand songs in your pocket—which allowed us to move quickly to the iconic silhouette ads. But it was hard to explain what an iPad was. We didn’t want to show it as a computer, and yet we didn’t want to make it so soft that it looked like a cute TV. The first set of ads showed we didn’t know what we were doing. They had a cashmere and Hush Puppies feel to them.
I (and others, I am sure) appreciate that you're trying to bring a credible source into the discussion. But I have a problem with Isaacson's bio - It has some fundamental errors and inaccuracies that make it hard for me to accept it as an authoritative source. Furthermore, I believe Isaacson's motive was not to provide an accurate bio. Instead, he intended to paint his own portrait of the man, even if facts and details are sacrificed in the process. This has always been his modus operandi.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ankleskater
Everyone needs to take a chill pill. You all sound like you are closer to Jobs than people who worked with him for decades, or like you're part of his immediate family. You're not.
No different than other types of groupies. Let them be.