"who cares!nothing that man does or says has any effect on any aspect of my life."i call bulls**t there! even if you don't use a mac ( would be funny if you did ), thank apple for your little Duck picture on the XP Login screen! HA!
I think the article (blog?) is pretty poor. Clearly the guy didn't have a very good understanding of many tech issues. ADB for instance. The Apple Desktop bus allowed multiple devices for great flexibility. Now the same is possible with USB, which replaced it, but there was nothing else as capable then. It was effortless to plug in multiple input devices. At one time I had a drawing tablet, two keyboards, and a multi-button trackball all in use at once. Two keyboards? Yes.... At one point I ran 4 monitors, and having another keyboard in front of another was handy for multi-player games. ADB supported other devices too. I used an interface to sample multiple analog voltages, as well as accept and originate contact closures for control.Even in 1990, it was possible to run 6 monitors on a Mac, being able to drag off of one screen onto the next, or span multiple screens. No special software needed. Just plug in the video cards and they work. Even ancient Mac programs made for the monochrome Macs of the 80's could use any amount of screen area. Mac keyboards cost more. Partly because of ADB. They also were much higher quality, having individual replaceable switches. PC keyboards were one big membrane on a circuit board being pressed by one huge plastic module - if any key acts up then throw it away.Even Apple's buggiest products have been far less trouble to use and maintain than the average PC. Since Macs have had CDs, one could boot from them and install the OS to a new hard drive. For years, PCs couldn't boot from a CD without loading a driver from a floppy.Less upgradable? The low end pretty much comes with all of the standard ports and features. Normal users can use external drives and devices, and one can upgrade internal RAM/drives.Apple has had some very upgradable machines. Alongside newer machines I still use a 9600. From 1997, that machine has 12 DIMM slots. It can hold 1.5 gig of RAM. The CPU has been changed from a 604e to a G3 to a G4. I added an ultra-160 SCSI interface with 10k rpm disks, Firewire, USB, faster ethernet, and an ATA-100+ interface. There are four hard drives in it, and two optical drives. It burns DVDs at 16x and CDs at 52x. Its got a modern video card that gets used as a coprocessor speeding system graphics routines (Quartz extreme). It's running OS X (with the help of XPostFacto) and feels very fast. It doesn't compete with newer machines for things like video compression, but its still a great workhorse. It's VERY stable.The author liked the circa 1999/2000 Pismo G3 Powerbook more than the iBook. Those are great machines, but are also bigger, heavier, and more expensive. Newer tiny devices are harder to work on. No lies there.I think the blogger is way off base. Steve has shown incredible insight and attention to detail. I don't feel I've been mislead by him. It isn't Steve's fault that IBM wasn't able to bump up the G5 speeds as they had predicted.If the author is down on Steve Jobs, I'd like to see him point out ANYONE in the industry that's done better. Isn't Steve Ballmer charming? While every company has some great people, I've never seen anyone get teams so focused and coordinated on creating great products. Look at Gateway, Dell, HP, even Sony. Where are the exciting products? Dell was good at cranking out dull boxes efficiently. Oh boy.I find it interesting that Sony has picked up the former leader of the Apple Quicktime team to turn them around. For a huge company that's never been shy about doing a complete redesign for every product (huge resources), they sure have done poorly. Getting a great overall experience requires well designed and integrated software and hardware. No one but Apple seems to be doing that. It sure doesn't happen throwing Windows on some generic PC.People argue that because of higher margins Apple can do more R&D than Dell, Gateway, HP etc. But Apple only spends 5% of revenue on R&D. The industry average is 7.5%These other guys just don't get it. None of them have the balls to even try and create products built around great software. Any of them could have built a good OS built on Linux/Unix and found a way to provide compatibility for legacy programs. Maybe Google will seize that opportunity. Steve isn't afraid to change and innovate. Dropping the iPod Mini when it was their most popular player and replacing it with the Nano shows that. So does going to OS X. And so does a radical change of CPUs.Steve had had some product that weren't commercial successes,
Wow! Amazingly humorous... Look at them go.. Apple Fanboi Revolt! I admire Steve Jobs, the turn-around and recovery of Apple is impressive, but falls short of legendary. He has also made some incredibly stupid decisions as well. (i.e. Hire John Sculley as CEO only to have him fire Steve Jobs from his own company - despite warnings and pressure from the board against the decision).Fact remains, most influential innovators on our time are usually either arrogant and/or over-zealous. Partially making them great leaders and visionaries, and certainly making them vunerable to being human.
Amazing ... i finally got to this discussion ... I didn't know it had been dugg. For anyone wondering ... I am NOT Jack Campbell ... in fact the website was formed to expose Jack Campbell.All the constructive criticism was appreciated ... most every website disagreed with all the critique that is found here though ... and the article actually made it into SEVERAL "How to write a blog tutorials"
thenativeraverFeb 1, 2006
who cares!nothing that man does or says has any effect on any aspect of my life.
thurloatFeb 2, 2006
"who cares!nothing that man does or says has any effect on any aspect of my life."i call bulls**t there! even if you don't use a mac ( would be funny if you did ), thank apple for your little Duck picture on the XP Login screen! HA!
jens__Feb 2, 2006
"Friday, February 03, 20065 Things Steve Jobs Has Misled Us About In The Last 30 Years."isn't something wrong here.
thyratronFeb 2, 2006
I think the article (blog?) is pretty poor. Clearly the guy didn't have a very good understanding of many tech issues. ADB for instance. The Apple Desktop bus allowed multiple devices for great flexibility. Now the same is possible with USB, which replaced it, but there was nothing else as capable then. It was effortless to plug in multiple input devices. At one time I had a drawing tablet, two keyboards, and a multi-button trackball all in use at once. Two keyboards? Yes.... At one point I ran 4 monitors, and having another keyboard in front of another was handy for multi-player games. ADB supported other devices too. I used an interface to sample multiple analog voltages, as well as accept and originate contact closures for control.Even in 1990, it was possible to run 6 monitors on a Mac, being able to drag off of one screen onto the next, or span multiple screens. No special software needed. Just plug in the video cards and they work. Even ancient Mac programs made for the monochrome Macs of the 80's could use any amount of screen area. Mac keyboards cost more. Partly because of ADB. They also were much higher quality, having individual replaceable switches. PC keyboards were one big membrane on a circuit board being pressed by one huge plastic module - if any key acts up then throw it away.Even Apple's buggiest products have been far less trouble to use and maintain than the average PC. Since Macs have had CDs, one could boot from them and install the OS to a new hard drive. For years, PCs couldn't boot from a CD without loading a driver from a floppy.Less upgradable? The low end pretty much comes with all of the standard ports and features. Normal users can use external drives and devices, and one can upgrade internal RAM/drives.Apple has had some very upgradable machines. Alongside newer machines I still use a 9600. From 1997, that machine has 12 DIMM slots. It can hold 1.5 gig of RAM. The CPU has been changed from a 604e to a G3 to a G4. I added an ultra-160 SCSI interface with 10k rpm disks, Firewire, USB, faster ethernet, and an ATA-100+ interface. There are four hard drives in it, and two optical drives. It burns DVDs at 16x and CDs at 52x. Its got a modern video card that gets used as a coprocessor speeding system graphics routines (Quartz extreme). It's running OS X (with the help of XPostFacto) and feels very fast. It doesn't compete with newer machines for things like video compression, but its still a great workhorse. It's VERY stable.The author liked the circa 1999/2000 Pismo G3 Powerbook more than the iBook. Those are great machines, but are also bigger, heavier, and more expensive. Newer tiny devices are harder to work on. No lies there.I think the blogger is way off base. Steve has shown incredible insight and attention to detail. I don't feel I've been mislead by him. It isn't Steve's fault that IBM wasn't able to bump up the G5 speeds as they had predicted.If the author is down on Steve Jobs, I'd like to see him point out ANYONE in the industry that's done better. Isn't Steve Ballmer charming? While every company has some great people, I've never seen anyone get teams so focused and coordinated on creating great products. Look at Gateway, Dell, HP, even Sony. Where are the exciting products? Dell was good at cranking out dull boxes efficiently. Oh boy.I find it interesting that Sony has picked up the former leader of the Apple Quicktime team to turn them around. For a huge company that's never been shy about doing a complete redesign for every product (huge resources), they sure have done poorly. Getting a great overall experience requires well designed and integrated software and hardware. No one but Apple seems to be doing that. It sure doesn't happen throwing Windows on some generic PC.People argue that because of higher margins Apple can do more R&D than Dell, Gateway, HP etc. But Apple only spends 5% of revenue on R&D. The industry average is 7.5%These other guys just don't get it. None of them have the balls to even try and create products built around great software. Any of them could have built a good OS built on Linux/Unix and found a way to provide compatibility for legacy programs. Maybe Google will seize that opportunity. Steve isn't afraid to change and innovate. Dropping the iPod Mini when it was their most popular player and replacing it with the Nano shows that. So does going to OS X. And so does a radical change of CPUs.Steve had had some product that weren't commercial successes,
hayden_evansFeb 2, 2006
dont link to ur f**king blog you f**king idiot! spam
metmanFeb 3, 2006
Wow! Amazingly humorous... Look at them go.. Apple Fanboi Revolt! I admire Steve Jobs, the turn-around and recovery of Apple is impressive, but falls short of legendary. He has also made some incredibly stupid decisions as well. (i.e. Hire John Sculley as CEO only to have him fire Steve Jobs from his own company - despite warnings and pressure from the board against the decision).Fact remains, most influential innovators on our time are usually either arrogant and/or over-zealous. Partially making them great leaders and visionaries, and certainly making them vunerable to being human.
fixyourthinkingMay 17, 2006
Amazing ... i finally got to this discussion ... I didn't know it had been dugg. For anyone wondering ... I am NOT Jack Campbell ... in fact the website was formed to expose Jack Campbell.All the constructive criticism was appreciated ... most every website disagreed with all the critique that is found here though ... and the article actually made it into SEVERAL "How to write a blog tutorials"