Quote:
Originally Posted by Prestidigitweeze
It's important to differentiate between Jobs' talents and successes, his failings and limitations, and his moral ambiguity. All three aspects are not interchangeably bad or good.
Hans' point is merely logical: Jobs would have found other creative people to galvanize, bully, steal from and improve upon. Those same creative people would likely not have found another Jobs. To say so is no more a trivialization of those people's talents than it is a justification for Jobs' tendency toward mystification, hype and dictatorial self-assertion. Despite all that, he was good at some important things.
The man was a gifted organizer, salesman and conceptual simplifier. He might be dead, but (even if he annoyed you beyond patience) to discount his gifts is to fail to recognize and possibly absorb the strengths of a former rival. It's easy to see how Guy Kawasaki might have learned from Jobs but eventually decided to work for Google.
|
My point is that as Jobs took ideas from people working for other companies, it is quite clear that without Jobs (and by extension Apple) the devices would have still existed. It is the creative people that are indispensable, not Jobs.
Jobs is the reason why during his life the iPhone didn't get a bigger screen. That definitely simplified concepts, and it might have been the best idea for the company, but it wasn't the best idea for consumers.