[debate] throwing a few ideas out there

[Alan Light]

The multi-thread commentary continues.


Brian Loe wrote:


>Jobs was the idea guy, without him Steve is still just a garage geek.
>I know lots of these guys, but I'm no Jobs. I don't really like Jobs,
>I don't think, and I've yet to meet a Mac I couldn't crash.

To some extent I agree.  On the other hand, there are plenty of cutthroat business types as well, and Woz might have teamed up with any of them.  Perhaps there were others like Woz who didn't find a good partner for the business end, but there were certainly others like Jobs who didn't pick good partners for the engineering end.

About two years ago I read Wozniak's autobiography, "iWoz", which I much enjoyed.  From reading the book, it is quite obvious that Jobs and Wozniak both have major personality flaws . . . yet I am pretty sure I would enjoy knowing Woz personally, and wouldn't enjoy knowing Jobs.  This book also gave me some perspective on their respective roles at Apple, and Apple's role in the birth of the computer industry.  The key to remember is that it was the Apple II that made Apple and revolutionized the computer industry.  There were many hobbyist computers available at the time, but the Apple II was the breakout hit.  It may be self-serving hype, but Wozniak claimed that what set the Apple II apart was the fact that it could be easily expanded and that this allowed other companies to offer peripherals - to the point that Apple was able to cut back on advertising, because every computer mag had dozens of ads for peripherals that prominently mentioned the
 Apple II.

Woz also noted that he had played a pivotal role in the development of the Apple II, and had specifically fought Jobs and other business types to spend the few extra cents per computer that allowed them to be expanded.  This story checks out, because we know that his influence at Apple diminished afterwards, that Apple pursued an all-proprietary business model, and that this all-proprietary model drove them to the brink of bankruptcy despite having an excellent product.  The fact that the IBM/Microsoft duo prevailed with a much inferior operating system but open hardware suggests that Wozniak's assessment is fair.

This all suggests that it was Wozniak, not Jobs, who can claim primary credit.


>> Whether the Kindle will replace paper -

>No. Might limit its use eventually but there are far more people out
>there who print every thing the get in email to read than care to
>spend 400 bucks on an electronic reader. Perhaps after a couple of
>generations move through with cheaper, more widely accessible readers
>available you will see a serious decline in the printed book. However,
>I think the move will be to print-on-demand technologies. Something
>I'm looking forward to.

I have to disagree.  Except for specialty items and possibly receipts, I expect paper to disappear.  We are now seeing only the beginning of the end of paper.  Until the Kindle, there was no screen technology available that was as easy to read or as portable as a book.  Now there is, and I expect the changes will gradually occur.  However, it may require some better backup programs and more open standards.  The current combination of kludgy backup programs, digital rights management, and unsophisticated users result in lots of unnecessary printing.  I expect this to change at some time in the future as more knowledgeable users demand full access to their own property and fast, easy-to-use backup programs.  Trends are already heading that way.

>Sad though, the end of the 1st edition collector...

What I said about "specialty products". . .  ;-)



Alan


      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://whitestar.linuxbox.org/pipermail/debate/attachments/20090516/e4f9601a/attachment.htm>