Since we have been discussing CES and Macworld quite a bit this week, take a look at this piece that examines the differences between Bill Gates and Steve Jobs.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Gates vs. Jobs
- Thread starter Rich Tate
- Start date
I would actually say that Steve Jobs is a mix of bad things and a horrible person to boot.
And while Apple has come up with some good products I would hardly call them a revolutionary company. There were MP3 players before the iPod and the iPhone is hardly revolutionary. If anything the iPhone seems just like several Sony products but of course will not be hated nearly as much.....since for some reason people see Apple as a god send company.
Not to take anything away from Jobs, he has proven to be a good business man. And Apple has that glow around it where releasing a product not revolutionary like the iPhone gets the market in a stir for no real reason. It will probably be the only phone able to get your iTunes stuff...just like the iPod is the only device that can get the content you paid for and should be allowed to do whatever you want with.
Since that article kissed Jobs and Apples as like no other I thought I would do the opposite Cheers
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2001
- Messages
- 15,814
they should do a "behind the music" on steve jobs... cause he really is the tech rock star... complete witth good times and bad...
Mike Clements
Gone but not Forgotten
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2006
- Messages
- 2,049
I saw an interesting signature recently and I cannot give credit as I forgot what the guys name is or even in what forum I saw it.
"There is nothing inherently evil about Bill Gates and there is nothing good about Steve Jobs".
"There is nothing inherently evil about Bill Gates and there is nothing good about Steve Jobs".
CyberDeus-RagDoll
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2006
- Messages
- 1,223
Nowadays, this sounds like JOBSarticle said:
This is DEFINATELY gates, nowadays.article said:
CyberDeus-RagDoll
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2006
- Messages
- 1,223
There are easily half a dozen phones out nowadays with iTUNES on them.
Motorola Slvr L7 being one of the more popular ones.
the ROKR also has it.
Razr V3i
Just to name a few.
I would actually say that Steve Jobs is a mix of bad things and a horrible person to boot.
QFT.
Yeah well he is slowly transistioning on giving the company to Steve Ballmer. I think I read in July 2008 the transition will be complete.
Night Black
Gawd
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2006
- Messages
- 699
And a lot of those phones have issues. Wasn't one phone locked out of itunes 7?
Yeah. And most of them suck ass, since Apple is pretty harsh about licensing and nowhere with testing.
Night Black
Gawd
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2006
- Messages
- 699
You mean, this "piece" that isn't even two sentences long, which links to an actual article?Rich Tate said:
By the way, why can't I edit my posts in this subforum?
You would, huh? Have you ever caught him passing personal judgement on someone he's never met -- or even talked to -- on a public forum?CopyCat said:
w1retap
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2006
- Messages
- 13,712
I urge you all to watch the movie "Pirates of Silicon Valley".
I still see Jobs as a nutjob. He 'creates' some good products, but they definetly don't beat out microsoft products, and that is obvious by market share. He has does know how to create trendy products such as the iPod, and sterile/sleek looking computers. They are good at some tasks, but people are often forced to still use PC stuff because macs are still very proprietary on their software/hardware end of things. I have firsthand knowledge of this by the way we couldn't use Mac non-linear editors because they didn't have any capture cards to hook up to our studio equipment unless we wanted to spend over 10 grand for something that half worked. Same goes for my engineering software that works horrible and crashes non-stop under a mac environment.
I really don't care if people call microsoft 'evil' because they have so much of the market. Gates had fricking amazing ideas that were way ahead of everyone else, capitalized, and took the market. He donates 1 billion dollars of his own money per year to schools, and I think thats great. In a capitalist society, these people are rewarded, and its well deserved for their efforts and what they bring to the country. If you don't like it, move to a socialist or communist society.
I still see Jobs as a nutjob. He 'creates' some good products, but they definetly don't beat out microsoft products, and that is obvious by market share. He has does know how to create trendy products such as the iPod, and sterile/sleek looking computers. They are good at some tasks, but people are often forced to still use PC stuff because macs are still very proprietary on their software/hardware end of things. I have firsthand knowledge of this by the way we couldn't use Mac non-linear editors because they didn't have any capture cards to hook up to our studio equipment unless we wanted to spend over 10 grand for something that half worked. Same goes for my engineering software that works horrible and crashes non-stop under a mac environment.
I really don't care if people call microsoft 'evil' because they have so much of the market. Gates had fricking amazing ideas that were way ahead of everyone else, capitalized, and took the market. He donates 1 billion dollars of his own money per year to schools, and I think thats great. In a capitalist society, these people are rewarded, and its well deserved for their efforts and what they bring to the country. If you don't like it, move to a socialist or communist society.
I most certainly would. Seeing as I have personally met the man sat in on 2 interviews and have spoken with several writers and publishers one of which is the publisher of my magazine who has spoken with Steve jobs in private on 2 occasions all of which see him as a arrogant prick who is horrible to talk to and looks down and everyone he does not believe to be on his level.
Now I may be making a gross generalization of him based on my information but I have only read information about him which supports my findings and he has not proven himself to be anything other than what I have heard and found.
Like I said, he has proven to be a good businessman...but I don't like him as a person at all.
You should be careful with your remarks before knowing who you are responding to.
Well, excuse me, Mister Judge Of Executives, your honor!
Why not fill us in? Tell us who you are, what magazine you work at, who publishes it, and who told you these things about Jobs! I'd just love to know who I'm responding to.
Why not fill us in? Tell us who you are, what magazine you work at, who publishes it, and who told you these things about Jobs! I'd just love to know who I'm responding to.
I can't say Microsoft or Gates is "evil" either. He is not just sitting on his chair in his mansion swivling brandy while staring into his fireplace. Rather, he gets out into the world and tries to make a difference. He taught others how to innovate and create, to move ahead and create a business. When Gates leaves Microsoft, the innovation and ingeniuty will still be there. Which brings me to Jobs where I cannot see Apple doing as well as they currently are without Jobs. He is charismatic and innovative but beyond that, there is no clear defining good objectives or images of him.
Gates is a man of logic and sees the end goal. Jobs is a man of emotion and tries to control the will of man. I can see Gates being remembered as a great man and Jobs as another CEO.
Gates is a man of logic and sees the end goal. Jobs is a man of emotion and tries to control the will of man. I can see Gates being remembered as a great man and Jobs as another CEO.
salvationpcs
Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2006
- Messages
- 707
By reading the article it sounds like Jobs sure did pay the writer off.....little does Jobs know the writer is using a PC
MrGuvernment
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2004
- Messages
- 21,819
I think is shows obviously the type of person Jobs is with his constant personal attacks on PC / Windows in commercials...... always stooping down to directly attacking others.
CyberDeus-RagDoll
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2006
- Messages
- 1,223
What's your point?
It's been said time and time again, that the non-edit function is so people can't ninja edit their posts, and so that the moderation work can be reduced.
As is shown to you a few posts below your post which I am quoting, you shouldn't assume who people have, or have not, met.
I personally have met (in the tech field)
Michael dell, he was my boss for 2 years.
Bill gates (4 times .. and I gotta say, he's either really a genuinely nice guy, or he's VERY good at faking it. He does NOT have an air of superiority, and he seems truly interested in talking to people, listening, and actually HEARING what they have to say. On the 4th time I met him, he even called me by name, ahead of time, so, as famous as he is, and as many people as he meets, he actually remembers peoples names. This meetings were not arranged, and all happenstance, over the course of 5 years, so that's pretty impressive.)
steve ballmer (he is a very strange man - he seemed 'nervous' and 'anxious' all the time)
steve jobs once (and he was an ass)
carly fiorina twice (first time she was nice to me, second time, she was short with me, but I think she was uhm.. under more pressure at the time, because 3 months later she was out)
I've met some lesser known tech gurus (sergey brin for example - If they ever made a movie about his life, zach braff could play him) or Justin Frankel (he is truly one of "us" geeks) and many "entertainment" celebrities, and political celebs as well.
Does Jobs write the commercials?
Isn't it pretty common for advertising to expose (or, at least, suggest) problems in the competing products? Should we conclude that all of the involved executives are "a mix of bad things and a horrible people to boot"?
How can one execute a "personal attack" against a product, anyway? I thought personal attacks were against people.
Isn't it pretty common for advertising to expose (or, at least, suggest) problems in the competing products? Should we conclude that all of the involved executives are "a mix of bad things and a horrible people to boot"?
How can one execute a "personal attack" against a product, anyway? I thought personal attacks were against people.
I wasn't really personally attacking the product. I don't find the iPhone to be innovative or anything new and pretty much just hype.
What I said about Jobs is from going to several shows, speaking with friends and so on and was simply a response to how the article saw him in a very nice light. I am not trying to tell you to not like him...I was simply stating my opinion of the man.
What I said about Jobs is from going to several shows, speaking with friends and so on and was simply a response to how the article saw him in a very nice light. I am not trying to tell you to not like him...I was simply stating my opinion of the man.
Mike Clements
Gone but not Forgotten
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2006
- Messages
- 2,049
Well, I don't think any of us could say we really "know" very much about either of these guys outside of what the media feeds us. Put yourslle and either Jobs and/or Gates in a car and drive from Seattle to Miami with no cameras around, then tell me what you think.
My point is that calling that link holder a "piece that examines" something is a mistake. Derivative journalism is really popular these days, but a link to the direct source here in the forums would seem more honest.CyberDeus-RagDoll said:
Thanks! Do you have link to that FAQ? What's a "ninja edit"?CyerDeus-RagDoll said:
Keep reading; CopyCat has repeatedly admitted that his opinion was formed by superficial contact with Jobs, one-to-many (and one-to-audience, apparently) interactions, and heresay.CyberDeus-RagDoll said:
So what -- CopyCat watched someone else interview Jobs a couple of times. From that impression, declaring Jobs as a "mix of bad things and a horrible person to boot" sounds irresponsible and irrational. Jobs has a family and friends and feels love and loss just like the rest of us. How does it help someone to post something like that?
I think it's really silly when a person describes someone they don't know with statements as strong as his.
If you think it's okay to do that kind of thing, then by all means: carry on!
That's_Corporate
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2006
- Messages
- 1,738
Gates FTW
Jobs FTL
Jobs FTL
Personality-wise (judging from interviews and speeches) I agree. Gates just seems to be an overall good fellow who's really trying to promote technology, wherever it comes from. I remember watching an interview where he talked about the iPod. There was no bashing, no hard feelings, just a solid, "yep, they got it down. +60% of the market kinda shows that they got it right, but we feel that some things were left out and it could be improved upon." For some reason if it was reversed, Jobs would have been much more criticizing.
I think that sums it up right there.
There's an article floating around out there about the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation charities and where their money is going, and comparing that to the overseas third world investments that Bill gates has made personally. As it turns out, Bill is investing in some of the companies that are responsible for the economic oppression in the countries that his Foundation is working to help.
That sounds like a conflict of interest, confusion about the markets at best, well thought out evil money game at worst. But hey, it gets points for an innovative idea.
Jobs, as we all know, being hip and chic, is well within the trend of stock options so many other executives are in to. I'm just waiting to see the iPod commercial with allt he other executives caught in stock options scandals getting off with a slap on the wrist, and their silhouettes jamming out to their iPod.
Point is, both Steve Jobs and Bill Gates are CEO types (though Bill is not actually a CEO anymore) and it seems to me that both have developed in to the run of the mill executive, displaced fro the real customers and the people, out of touch with the reality of the world in general, and living in a porcelain castle where everything is clean and perfect, regardless of the people they might be hurting outside their castle walls. I don't think there's much need to compare either of them, as they made their personal, meaningful contributions years ago, and anythign recent can be marked as incidental.
That sounds like a conflict of interest, confusion about the markets at best, well thought out evil money game at worst. But hey, it gets points for an innovative idea.
Jobs, as we all know, being hip and chic, is well within the trend of stock options so many other executives are in to. I'm just waiting to see the iPod commercial with allt he other executives caught in stock options scandals getting off with a slap on the wrist, and their silhouettes jamming out to their iPod.
Point is, both Steve Jobs and Bill Gates are CEO types (though Bill is not actually a CEO anymore) and it seems to me that both have developed in to the run of the mill executive, displaced fro the real customers and the people, out of touch with the reality of the world in general, and living in a porcelain castle where everything is clean and perfect, regardless of the people they might be hurting outside their castle walls. I don't think there's much need to compare either of them, as they made their personal, meaningful contributions years ago, and anythign recent can be marked as incidental.
CyberDeus-RagDoll
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2006
- Messages
- 1,223
Do you mean this post Which has a LINK
which goes to THIS PAGE which then links to THIS ARTICLE?
Is that what you are talking about?
No.
It's not been "FAQ'd"
But if you've read more than say.. 5 threads, you'll see people complaining about that, and someone else answering it
Saying something, and editing it before someone has finished their reply. That's why you'll see, sometimes, something quoted from someone but the quotee and the quote don't matchmikeblas said:
i.e.
And you do not think that meeting someone in a group setting is enough to decide if they are an ass or not?mikeblas said:
I mean, if copycat was the ONLY person in a group who thought that.... but if the group consensus is such that he's an ass then he's probably an ass
Impression. Interesting word. Might bring to mind the concept of OPINION.mikeblas said:
I don't agree. Irresponsible and irrational would saying "Steve Jobs, Leader of Apple Computer, is a Pedophile" , FOR EXAMPLE ( I am not calling jobs a pedophile ) without proof. Stating his OPINION of someone, is not irresponsible or irrational.mikeblas said:
Your point (where you try to appeal to our 'heartstrings') is irrelevant. Hitler had a friends & family too. So does Bin Laden, So does george bush. Are we to exempt them from being brought up to public scrutiny because they happen to have procreated, or not been created from immaculate conception? Part of being in the public eye is being in the public eye!mikeblas said:
I think it's even sillier to defend someone you've never met against the opinions of someone who HAS met him, even if it was in mixed company.mikeblas said:
Are you saying that, when you meet someone at a party, you can't get a vibe from them, and must squirrel them away for a tete-a-tete to have ANY idea what they are like?
mikeblas said:
Examples of me carrying on with judging people I've never met.
Have you ever met hitler? [no]
Was he a jerk? [yes]
Have you met donald trump? [no]
Is he conceited [yes]
Have you met britney spears [no]
Is she a stupid ho redneck ? [yes]
You can assess people without meeting them in person.
CyberDeus-RagDoll
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2006
- Messages
- 1,223
You do realize that a foundation is usually not actually 100% run by the people for which it is named, right? Bill & Melinda give money to a group that they set up, and that group is supposed to do things that would be in the best interests of the CHARTER of the group. However, people are fallible, and the people who ACTUALLY run the B&M Gates foundation might have to answer to "the boss" for screwing up! That's why there is also an article calld "Gates Foundation to review investments"
It's much like how our politicians are supposed to represent the ideals that we set forward, yet, I doubt there is a single person in here who wants taxation on the internet.
Only if bill & melinda PERSONALLY said "Hey, we know this company opresses people, but lets invest anyway!"thedude42 said:
However, it seems that his foundation, for which he doesn't make every single last decision, may have invested in a mortgage company that has predatory practices, and an oil company that caused some pollution.
This is not "Bills" fault, however. I am also sure that if the allegations are proven to be true about these organizations in which he invested, he will pull funding to them.
Bill is not using the foundation to MAKE MONEY, he is using it to HELP SOCIETY, (and, I am sure, for a damn good tax write-off) like only someone of his wealth can.
Yep.
Funny; I've participated in more than five threads, and I've asked about it twice. Yours is the first response I've received, and the first answer I've seen.
I don't think I've said anything about meeting people at parties.
Of course. But such assessments are rarely accurate, and sharing an inaccurate assessment doesn't do anyone any good.
MrGuvernment
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2004
- Messages
- 21,819
I am sure he doesnt sit down and write them but i am sure he has the say in what is said about advertising his company and has approval of them.
Should have used a better word the personal, you are right, but directed at only windows.
I dont see windows adverts saying things like " we have more games then OSX, we have more market share then OSX, our OS works on almost ANY hardware YOU want to buy - you not stuck only buying what we tell you you can buy!"
What makes you sure of that?
its an advertising campaign he would probably be spending millions on it of course he's gonna see the ad and give the advertisers feedback on how they can improve it.
So Apple doesn't have a vice president of marketing? Or a few advertising directors? In a large company, the president/CEO doesn't make all of the decisions. And not even all of the big ones. They can't: it doesn't scale.
That's rare.
I heard that Gates almost succumbed to any number of virii, but Vista will greatly improve his health.
IMO the iPod revolutionized portable music in some ways. The most impressive to me was $0.99 per song when everyone else was pushing $1.99-3.99 per song downloaded. If for nothing else, thanks for that.
But thanks for nothing for putting PowerPC out of business--then again Jobs wasn't at Apple at the time...
MrGuvernment
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2004
- Messages
- 21,819
Yes, and at some point he see's them, so you cant tell me they made all of the Apple vs PC commercials all at once and they slowly release a new one, Jobs has seen them and didnt say to stop them, so i think it is safe to say he must approve of them.. ?
Apparently you do, because right after berating someone for acting as if they know Steve Jobs, you turn right around and do the very same thing.
At the very least, do you really think someone "just like the rest of us" could really run Apple in the fashion he has, with the results he's obtained?
If you think it's wrong to berate the man based on the knowledge CopyCat claims, then it's equally wrong to try to positively characterize him on even less knowledge.
This isn't a decision about whether to use OfficeMax or Staples for desk supplies, though. This is the core marketing campaign for the company at this time. For a nationwide marketing campaign, yeah, I can see a CEO directly involved.