Jobs vs. Gates: Who's the Star?

[Jamie_B]

[url="http://www.wired.com/news/columns/0,70072-0.html?tw=wn_tophead_3"]http://www.wired.com/news/columns/0,70072-...tw=wn_tophead_3[/url]

[quote]Until recently, Bill Gates has been viewed as the villain of the tech world, while his archrival, Steve Jobs, enjoys an almost saintly reputation.

Gates is the cutthroat capitalist. A genius maybe, but one more interested in maximizing profits than perfecting technology. He's the ultimate vengeful nerd. Ostracized at school, he gets the last laugh by bleeding us all dry.

Cult of MacOn the other hand, Jobs has never seemed much concerned with business, though he's been very successful at it of late. Instead, Jobs has been portrayed as a man of art and culture. He's an aesthete, an artist; driven to make a dent in the universe.

But these perceptions are wrong. In fact, the reality is reversed. It's Gates who's making a dent in the universe, and Jobs who's taking on the role of single-minded capitalist, seemingly oblivious to the broader needs of society.

Gates is giving away his fortune with the same gusto he spent acquiring it, throwing billions of dollars at solving global health problems. He has also spoken out on major policy issues, for example, by opposing proposals to cut back the inheritance tax.

In contrast, Jobs does not appear on any charitable contribution lists of note. And Jobs has said nary a word on behalf of important social issues, reserving his talents of persuasion for selling Apple products.

According to Forbes, Jobs was recently worth $3.3 billion which puts him among the 194th richest in the world, and makes him the 67th richest American. But the standings were shuffled on Tuesday with Disney's $7.4 billion acquisition of Pixar Animation -- a deal that makes Jobs' Pixar holdings alone worth some $3.7 billion.

But great wealth does not make a great man.

Giving USA Foundation, a philanthropy research group which publishes an annual charity survey, said Jobs does not appear on lists of gifts of $5 million or more over the last four years. Nor is his name on a list of gifts of $1 million or more compiled by Indiana University's Center on Philanthropy.

Jobs' wife is also absent from these philanthropic lists, although she has made dozens of political donations totaling tens of thousands of dollars to the Democrats, according to the Open Secrets database.

Of course, Jobs and his wife may be giving enormous sums of money to charity anonymously. If they are funneling cash to various causes in private, their names wouldn't show up on any lists, regardless of the size of their gifts.

For a person as private as Jobs, who shuns any publicity about his family life, this seems credible. If so, however, this would make Jobs virtually unique among moguls. Richard Jolly, chairman of Giving USA Foundation, said not all billionaires give their money away, but a lot do, and most do not do it quietly.

"We see it over and over again," he said. "Very wealthy individuals do support the organizations and institutions they believe in."

That's certainly true of Gates, who not only gives vast sums away, but also speaks up in support of the organizations and institutions he believes in.

This is not the case for Jobs. To the best of my knowledge, in the last decade or more, Jobs has not spoken up on any social or political issue he believes in -- with the exception of admitting he's a big Bob Dylan fan.

Rather, he uses social issues to support his own selfish business goals. In the Think Different campaign, Jobs used cultural figures he admired to sell computers -- figures who stuck their necks out to fight racism, poverty, inequality or war.

Jobs once offered to be an advisor to Sen. John Kerry during the 2004 presidential election, and he invited President Clinton over for dinner when Bubba visited Silicon Valley in 1996 -- hardly evidence of deep political convictions.

Jobs can't even get behind causes that would seem to carry deep personal meaning, let alone lasting social importance. Like Lance Armstrong, he is a cancer survivor. But unlike Armstrong, Jobs has so far done little publicly to raise money or awareness for the disease.

Given Jobs' social detachment, I'm confused by the adulation he enjoys. Yes, he has great charisma and his presentations are good theater. But his absence from public discourse makes him a cipher. People project their values onto him, and he skates away from the responsibilities that come with great wealth and power.

On the evidence, he's nothing more than a greedy capitalist who's amassed an obscene fortune. It's shameful. In almost every way, Gates is much more deserving of Jobs' rock star exaltation.

In the same way, I admire Bono over Mick Jagger, and John Lennon over Elvis, because they spoke up about things bigger than their own celebrity.

It's time for Jobs to do the same.[/quote]

[Nati Ice]

im looking forward to watching jobs go bankrupt, again

[The_Joker]

Here is my take.

As a business man Gates (hereafter known as the Anti Christ), is by far supperior but Jobs has positioned himself well as far as the entertainment sector goes. (iTunes, Pixar, etc)

Here is my problem with the Antichrist. When such company's as Intel, Compaq and IBM started loading software onto their hardware MS stopped providing them with code and and threatened to stop providing them with Windows. This has been the basis for the Anti-trust suits that MS really don't mind fighting. They clearly hold all the cards.
Ethically speaking, MS has crossed the line. A corporate bully. Literally MS takes an "Its us against the world mentality." When in fact they are the world.
Sure the Antichrist give to charity but on the scale of his bank account...I mean goddamn. What's he supposed to do burn it. He'll never spend it all.

Now as far as Apple and Mr. Jobs, I have never read to much on his charity work, but then again maybe he is a little lower on Maslow's Heiarchy of needs pyramid. He may be close after this latest deal though.

I think the new intel processors in the Mac's will improve their position in the Computer world. Although it will always be a Windows world, the strategy of iPods, iTunes and the entertainment media that is available is a great oppotunity for them to target new (possible) Mac buyers. They tend to be younger and more acceptable to change.
PC's=
Mac's=

[Jamie_B]

Perhaps you should do some research into Apple's practices and why Best Buy doesnt sell Macs anymore.

Jobs is just as much a "Bully" if not more than Gates is.

[The_Joker]

[quote name='Jamie_B' post='208584' date='Jan 25 2006, 03:08 PM']Perhaps you should do some researd into Apple's practices and why Best Buy doesnt sell Macs anymore.

Jobs is just as much a "Bully" if not more than Gates is.[/quote]
Has there been Anti-trust suits vs Apple?

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='The_Joker' post='208586' date='Jan 25 2006, 03:11 PM'][quote name='Jamie_B' post='208584' date='Jan 25 2006, 03:08 PM']
Perhaps you should do some researd into Apple's practices and why Best Buy doesnt sell Macs anymore.

Jobs is just as much a "Bully" if not more than Gates is.[/quote]
Has there been Anti-trust suits vs Apple?
[/quote]


Bogus lawsuit perpatrated by individuals outside the industry who dont understand the industry.

Has Gates ever pulled books from an entire publisher off the shelves?

[url="http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1040_22-5686487.html"]http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1040_22-5686487.html[/url]

[The_Joker]

[url="http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp;jsessionid=O1VLKZK1JBBXPKC4D3KFAFI?id=cat12085&type=page&sc=ALL&qs=apple&cp=1&sp=Relevance&mipp=25&uq=apple&_requestid=59048"]Best Buy[/url]
They still sell them there. Right now they are in negotiations to extend the pilot program started last year.

I think Apple wants full time employees that can sell the Macs. You can go to any Comp USA and the minimum wage sales clerk will say why do you want a Mac...you can't get software.

[The_Joker]

[quote name='Jamie_B' post='208588' date='Jan 25 2006, 03:18 PM'][quote name='The_Joker' post='208586' date='Jan 25 2006, 03:11 PM']
[quote name='Jamie_B' post='208584' date='Jan 25 2006, 03:08 PM']
Perhaps you should do some researd into Apple's practices and why Best Buy doesnt sell Macs anymore.

Jobs is just as much a "Bully" if not more than Gates is.[/quote]
Has there been Anti-trust suits vs Apple?
[/quote]


Bogus lawsuit perpatrated by individuals outside the industry who dont understand the industry.

Has Gates ever pulled books from an entire publisher off the shelves?

[url="http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1040_22-5686487.html"]http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1040_22-5686487.html[/url]
[/quote]
Who know's why they pulled it...big deal. It could have had some trade secrets in it or something who gives a shit about a book. I'll bet books get pulled more often than you think.

[Jamie_B]

Looks as if they lightend up on their "You have to make a Apple only section" policy. When the Imac 1st came out they were telling retailers they had to have a Mac section and use their design in doing it, much like CompUSA does. .... Bully the people selling your product...makes all the sence in the world.

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='The_Joker' post='208593' date='Jan 25 2006, 03:27 PM'][quote name='Jamie_B' post='208588' date='Jan 25 2006, 03:18 PM']
[quote name='The_Joker' post='208586' date='Jan 25 2006, 03:11 PM']
[quote name='Jamie_B' post='208584' date='Jan 25 2006, 03:08 PM']
Perhaps you should do some researd into Apple's practices and why Best Buy doesnt sell Macs anymore.

Jobs is just as much a "Bully" if not more than Gates is.[/quote]
Has there been Anti-trust suits vs Apple?
[/quote]


Bogus lawsuit perpatrated by individuals outside the industry who dont understand the industry.

Has Gates ever pulled books from an entire publisher off the shelves?

[url="http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1040_22-5686487.html"]http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1040_22-5686487.html[/url]
[/quote]
Who know's why they pulled it...big deal. It could have had some trade secrets in it or something who gives a shit about a book. I'll bet books get pulled more often than you think.
[/quote]

I would completely understand if Apple decided not to sell Young’s book in its stores. But applying economic pressure on the publisher in an effort to get them to suppress the book or censor its content is reprehensible and shows a complete lack of respect for its customers. Apple has a completely undeserved reputation as an icon of the counter-culture. Through the years, their actions have been downright Stalinist.

[The_Joker]

[quote name='Jamie_B' post='208595' date='Jan 25 2006, 03:27 PM']Looks as if they lightend up on their "You have to make a Apple only section" policy. When the Imac 1st came out they were telling retailers they had to have a Mac section and use their design in doing it, much like CompUSA does. .... Bully the people selling your product...makes all the sence in the world.[/quote]
Any supplier with market power will make demands to the retailer..its called product placement. Some even pay a premium for it, e.g. Pepsi, Frito Lay and many others.

As far as a market bully really there is none bigger than Wal-Mart but that won't stop you from going there for those Every Day Low Prices ..will it?

I mean I hate Wal Mart as much as the next guy but they always have what you need and at a good price.

[Guest steggyD]

Who cares. Macs are overpriced pieces of crap. I can't even build a Mac. Isn't that a monopoly? Fuck 'em; PC's rule. Bill Gates is my idol.

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='The_Joker' post='208853' date='Jan 26 2006, 12:37 PM'][quote name='Jamie_B' post='208595' date='Jan 25 2006, 03:27 PM']
Looks as if they lightend up on their "You have to make a Apple only section" policy. When the Imac 1st came out they were telling retailers they had to have a Mac section and use their design in doing it, much like CompUSA does. .... Bully the people selling your product...makes all the sence in the world.[/quote]
Any supplier with market power will make demands to the retailer..its called product placement. Some even pay a premium for it, e.g. Pepsi, Frito Lay and many others.

As far as a market bully really there is none bigger than Wal-Mart but that won't stop you from going there for those Every Day Low Prices ..will it?

I mean I hate Wal Mart as much as the next guy but they always have what you need and at a good price.
[/quote]


4% is market power?
And I shop at Target before wal-mart... they have serious issues at the top.

[The_Joker]

[quote name='steggyD' post='209009' date='Jan 26 2006, 05:50 PM']Who cares. Macs are overpriced pieces of crap. I can't even build a Mac. Isn't that a monopoly? Fuck 'em; PC's rule. Bill Gates is my idol.[/quote]
You can build if you know where to go or know what you are doing. But stay in your "Pirated, corrupted worlds...I don't care. Thats less problems I have to worry about.

We mock what we don't understand.

[Ben]

[quote name='The_Joker' post='209053' date='Jan 26 2006, 07:59 PM']But stay in your "Pirated, corrupted worlds...I don't care.[/quote]
huh?

btw... I was reading one of the security mags, books,i cant remember( i have to read a lot of shit).... I was suprised how much is turned on and how many ports are open in osX by default. Kinda scary....

The old Mac OS was pretty dumbed down and just did what it was supposed to do.....Run photoshop and send e-mail.

[The_Joker]

[quote name='Jamie_B' post='209035' date='Jan 26 2006, 06:39 PM'][quote name='The_Joker' post='208853' date='Jan 26 2006, 12:37 PM']
[quote name='Jamie_B' post='208595' date='Jan 25 2006, 03:27 PM']
Looks as if they lightend up on their "You have to make a Apple only section" policy. When the Imac 1st came out they were telling retailers they had to have a Mac section and use their design in doing it, much like CompUSA does. .... Bully the people selling your product...makes all the sence in the world.[/quote]
Any supplier with market power will make demands to the retailer..its called product placement. Some even pay a premium for it, e.g. Pepsi, Frito Lay and many others.

As far as a market bully really there is none bigger than Wal-Mart but that won't stop you from going there for those Every Day Low Prices ..will it?

I mean I hate Wal Mart as much as the next guy but they always have what you need and at a good price.
[/quote]


4% is market power?
And I shop at Target before wal-mart... they have serious issues at the top.
[/quote]
[url="http://www.tuaw.com/2005/10/11/apples-marketshare-climbs-to-6-6/"]http://www.tuaw.com/2005/10/11/apples-mark...-climbs-to-6-6/[/url]

6.6% but I won't split hairs with you...lol

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='The_Joker' post='209058' date='Jan 26 2006, 07:02 PM'][quote name='Jamie_B' post='209035' date='Jan 26 2006, 06:39 PM']
[quote name='The_Joker' post='208853' date='Jan 26 2006, 12:37 PM']
[quote name='Jamie_B' post='208595' date='Jan 25 2006, 03:27 PM']
Looks as if they lightend up on their "You have to make a Apple only section" policy. When the Imac 1st came out they were telling retailers they had to have a Mac section and use their design in doing it, much like CompUSA does. .... Bully the people selling your product...makes all the sence in the world.[/quote]
Any supplier with market power will make demands to the retailer..its called product placement. Some even pay a premium for it, e.g. Pepsi, Frito Lay and many others.

As far as a market bully really there is none bigger than Wal-Mart but that won't stop you from going there for those Every Day Low Prices ..will it?

I mean I hate Wal Mart as much as the next guy but they always have what you need and at a good price.
[/quote]


4% is market power?
And I shop at Target before wal-mart... they have serious issues at the top.
[/quote]
[url="http://www.tuaw.com/2005/10/11/apples-marketshare-climbs-to-6-6/"]http://www.tuaw.com/2005/10/11/apples-mark...-climbs-to-6-6/[/url]

6.6% but I won't split hairs with you...lol
[/quote]




6.6

[Guest steggyD]

[quote name='The_Joker' post='209053' date='Jan 26 2006, 06:59 PM'][quote name='steggyD' post='209009' date='Jan 26 2006, 05:50 PM']
Who cares. Macs are overpriced pieces of crap. I can't even build a Mac. Isn't that a monopoly? Fuck 'em; PC's rule. Bill Gates is my idol.[/quote]
You can build if you know where to go or know what you are doing. But stay in your "Pirated, corrupted worlds...I don't care. Thats less problems I have to worry about.

We mock what we don't understand.
[/quote]
Yeah, build me an SLI dual core processor 4gig computer on a Mac. I'll take corruption any day if I get to use a sweet sexy machine like that.

Oh yeah, and corruption only comes to those who leave themselves exposed. Firewalls and anti-virus keeps the corruption down for me. Never had a virus once that actually did any harm to my PC. I've had to wipe a couple out, but it's never hurt my PC's. Never lost data, nothing.

[Ben]

[quote name='steggyD' post='209065' date='Jan 26 2006, 08:35 PM'][quote name='The_Joker' post='209053' date='Jan 26 2006, 06:59 PM']
[quote name='steggyD' post='209009' date='Jan 26 2006, 05:50 PM']
Who cares. Macs are overpriced pieces of crap. I can't even build a Mac. Isn't that a monopoly? Fuck 'em; PC's rule. Bill Gates is my idol.[/quote]
You can build if you know where to go or know what you are doing. But stay in your "Pirated, corrupted worlds...I don't care. Thats less problems I have to worry about.

We mock what we don't understand.
[/quote]
Yeah, build me an SLI dual core processor 4gig computer on a Mac. I'll take corruption any day if I get to use a sweet sexy machine like that.

Oh yeah, and corruption only comes to those who leave themselves exposed. Firewalls and anti-virus keeps the corruption down for me. Never had a virus once that actually did any harm to my PC. I've had to wipe a couple out, but it's never hurt my PC's. Never lost data, nothing.
[/quote]

I'm not retarded and have never had to rebuild any of my pc's because of virus/spyware.. Of course i also know that popup that says i have spyware and to click to clean it is bad news

[-Dan_Bengals_FL-]

This thread is for geeks.

[img]http://www.cmukgb.org/images/activities/mystery/geeks.jpg[/img]


[img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//26.gif[/img]

[Jamie_B]

[url="http://netscape.businessweek.com/technology/content/jan2006/tc20060109_432937.htm"]http://netscape.businessweek.com/technolog...0109_432937.htm[/url]

[quote]How Apple Could Mess Up, Again
The Innovator's Dilemma author Clayton Christensen outlines his case for why Apple's proprietary strategy will soon fail, just as it did before

These days it's hard to find a pundit willing to question Apple Computer's (AAPL) long-term prospects or the calls of its famous CEO, Steve Jobs. After all, Apple's fortunes have been on the rise for nearly a half-decade now, and they seem to be only gaining steam. Advertisement

That has caused even some of the most devoted skeptics of years past to stop fretting over Apple's future. For years, many felt that Apple's past mistakes were bound to come back to haunt the Cupertino (Calif.) company -- the refusal to license the Mac OS in the 1980s; the stale products, bloated expenses, and management turmoil that hobbled it in the mid-1990s; the software availability and falling market share that plagued it right into the 21st century. These days, with Apple's stock price the talk of Wall St. and its products once again defining techno-chic, all that's a distant memory.

That is, unless you're Clayton M. Christensen, the Harvard professor and author of the seminal 1997 book The Innovator's Dilemma. Christensen, who more recently wrote Seeing What's Next: Using Theories of Innovation to Predict Industry Change, isn't willing to jump on the Apple bandwagon just yet. As well as Jobs & Co. is performing now, Christensen fears that success is built on a strategy that won't stand the test of time. Christensen spoke with BusinessWeek Computer Editor Peter Burrows on Jan. 5. Edited excerpts follow:

Apple is doing phenomenally well these days. It seems it's doing a textbook job of maintaining huge market share in digital music players, long after most experts thought that share would erode. And it's doing so with the same proprietary strategy that many thought would never stand up to an onslaught from the likes of Microsoft (MSFT), Wal-Mart (WMT), and Yahoo! (YHOO). Can Apple keep it up?
I don't think so. Look at any industry -- not just computers and MP3 players. You also see it in aircrafts and software, and medical devices, and over and over. During the early stages of an industry, when the functionality and reliability of a product isn't yet adequate to meet customer's needs, a proprietary solution is almost always the right solution -- because it allows you to knit all the pieces together in an optimized way.

But once the technology matures and becomes good enough, industry standards emerge. That leads to the standardization of interfaces, which lets companies specialize on pieces of the overall system, and the product becomes modular. At that point, the competitive advantage of the early leader dissipates, and the ability to make money migrates to whoever controls the performance-defining subsystem.

In the modular PC world, that meant Microsoft and Intel (INTC), and the same thing will happen in the iPod world as well. Apple may think the proprietary iPod is their competitive advantage, but it's temporary. In the future, what will matter will be the software inside that lets users find exactly the kind of music they want to listen to, when and where they want to, with minimal effort.

But Apple has that software. It can be the one to provide that to everyone else, if it chose to, right?
I'm concerned that they'll miss it. It's the fork in the road -- and it's comparable to the fork they faced when they chose not to open up the Mac in the 1980s, when they let Microsoft become Microsoft.

How long will Apple have to make this change?
I'd be very surprised if three years from now, the proprietary architecture is as dominant as it is now. Think about the PC. Apple dominated the market in 1983, but by 1987, the industry-standard companies, such as IBM (IBM) and Compaq, had begun to take over.

But let's assume Apple has learned its lesson, and that it's intent to not repeat history.
The trick is to manage the transition. [As standards take over], the products always become much lower in cost and much more broadly available [from more suppliers]. So if you're the incumbent, it appears you're facing a huge threat, even though you're really at the cusp of a great new opportunity. But it's usually new companies that grab that opportunity.

So it really is a fork in the road for Apple. If they don't open up the architecture and begin trying to be the iTunes inside all MP3 players, they're going to have to keep coming up with the next cool thing.

What about in the PC business today? Apple has been gaining share for the first time in years, and most people think that will continue, given the delay of Microsoft's Vista software, widespread malware problems with Windows, and Apple's move to the Intel platform. Don't you think that will enable Apple to gain some significant share in PCs?
I don't. I think it will allow them to survive for a bit longer. I think most people are satisfied with their current PCs (using Windows and based on Intel chips) and find that the performance of their systems is good enough. Sure, there are people at the bleeding edge who want to do more. But a good Dell PC can be had for $500, and it has performance that's well beyond what most of us need.

Seems to me, given your comments, that Apple has another strategic option: to focus on continuing to develop new markets with its proprietary, innovation-heavy approach, harvest them, and move on.
We have a case about this at Harvard [Business School], about when John Sculley was the CEO of Apple in the early 1990s. He actually had remarkably clear vision about where the industry was heading. He had three priorities. First, he felt the company needed to get its price down to $1,000, from $3,000 or $4,000 at the time. The second thing was to open up the architecture, by selling the OS. And the third was that handheld devices were going to be big. He was right on all three, but the culture of Apple was just so strong that Sculley just couldn't change the direction of the ship.

So I always ask the students, "What would you do if you were on Apple's board?" And they always say the same thing: "Crucify him, and bring in a good manager."

"So who would you bring in?" I ask. And they say: "Bring in someone really strong, who can make those decisions." So what did Apple do? They brought in Michael Spindler -- a strong general manager type who was known for his operations ability. Well, that didn't work out.

So I ask, "What would you do next?" And they say: "Bring in a good manager -- someone who can turn the company around." Well, they brought in Gil Amelio, who had turned around National Semiconductor. But he only lasted 18 months or so.

So then they bring Jobs back. And why did the company prosper under Jobs? The students' instinct is to say, because he's a good manager. I think the reason is that he stopped trying to change the company. He wanted them to do what they had always wanted to do: make cool products, based on proprietary architectures.

One last question. It's clear that for Apple, and for Jobs, the product comes first. Rather than try to enter many new markets to achieve the revenue growth Wall Street expects, maybe Apple should just stay true to its focused approach -- in essence, tell shareholders that it's not going to try to achieve more than it can, stock price be damned.
I've been thinking about this a lot -- about whether managers ought even to think about what Wall Street says. In the 1960s, the average investor held shares for over six years. In that world, it made sense to frame the job of the manager as maximizing shareholder value. But today, 10% of all shares are owned by hedge funds, and do you know what their average holding period is? It's just 60 days! And another 85% of the equities are owned by mutual funds and pension funds, and the average tenure there is 10 months.

Their time horizon is shorter than even that of even the shortest-term managers. So I don't think it's right to think of [these investors] as shareholders of your company. They're investors who temporarily own securities in your company at a particular point in time. They're responsible for maximizing the stock value of their investments. You as the CEO are responsible for maximizing the long-term health of your company.[/quote]