跳至主要内容

Steve Jobs reflected on what he hoped his legacy would be.

 

My passion has been to build an enduring company where people were motivated to make great products. Everything else was secondary. Sure, it was great to make a profit, because that was what allowed you to make great products. But the products, not the profits, were the motivation. Sculley flipped these priorities to where the goal was to make money. It’s a subtle difference, but it ends up meaning everything: the people you hire, who gets promoted, what you discuss in meetings.

Some people say, “Give the customers what they want.” But that’s not my approach. Our job is to figure out what they’re going to want before they do. I think Henry Ford once said, “If I’d asked customers what they wanted, they would have told me, ‘A faster horse!’” People don’t know what they want until you show it to them. That’s why I never rely on market research. Our task is to read things that are not yet on the page.

Edwin Land of Polaroid talked about the intersection of the humanities and science. I like that intersection. There’s something magical about that place. There are a lot of people innovating, and that’s not the main distinction of my career. The reason Apple resonates with people is that there’s a deep current of humanity in our innovation. I think great artists and great engineers are similar, in that they both have a desire to express themselves. In fact some of the best people working on the original Mac were poets and musicians on the side. In the seventies computers became a way for people to express their creativity. Great artists like Leonardo da Vinci and Michelangelo were also great at science. Michelangelo knew a lot about how to quarry stone, not just how to be a sculptor.

People pay us to integrate things for them, because they don’t have the time to think about this stuff 24/7. If you have an extreme passion for producing great products, it pushes you to be integrated, to connect your hardware and your software and content management. You want to break new ground, so you have to do it yourself. If you want to allow your products to be open to other hardware or software, you have to give up some of your vision.

At different times in the past, there were companies that exemplified Silicon Valley. It was Hewlett-Packard for a long time. Then, in the semiconductor era, it was Fairchild and Intel. I think that it was Apple for a while, and then that faded. And then today, I think it’s Apple and Google—and a little more so Apple. I think Apple has stood the test of time. It’s been around for a while, but it’s still at the cutting edge of what’s going on.

It’s easy to throw stones at Microsoft. They’ve clearly fallen from their dominance. They’ve become mostly irrelevant. And yet I appreciate what they did and how hard it was. They were very good at the business side of things. They were never as ambitious product-wise as they should have been. Bill likes to portray himself as a man of the product, but he’s really not. He’s a businessperson. Winning business was more important than making great products. He ended up the wealthiest guy around, and if that was his goal, then he achieved it. But it’s never been my goal, and I wonder, in the end, if it was his goal. I admire him for the company he built—it’s impressive—and I enjoyed working with him. He’s bright and actually has a good sense of humor. But Microsoft never had the humanities and liberal arts in its DNA. Even when they saw the Mac, they couldn’t copy it well. They totally didn’t get it.

I have my own theory about why decline happens at companies like IBM or Microsoft. The company does a great job, innovates and becomes a monopoly or close to it in some field, and then the quality of the product becomes less important. The company starts valuing the great salesmen, because they’re the ones who can move the needle on revenues, not the product engineers and designers. So the salespeople end up running the company. John Akers at IBM was a smart, eloquent, fantastic salesperson, but he didn’t know anything about product. The same thing happened at Xerox. When the sales guys run the company, the product guys don’t matter so much, and a lot of them just turn off. It happened at Apple when Sculley came in, which was my fault, and it happened when Ballmer took over at Microsoft. Apple was lucky and it rebounded, but I don’t think anything will change at Microsoft as long as Ballmer is running it.

I hate it when people call themselves “entrepreneurs” when what they’re really trying to do is launch a startup and then sell or go public, so they can cash in and move on. They’re unwilling to do the work it takes to build a real company, which is the hardest work in business. That’s how you really make a contribution and add to the legacy of those who went before. You build a company that will still stand for something a generation or two from now. That’s what Walt Disney did, and Hewlett and Packard, and the people who built Intel. They created a company to last, not just to make money. That’s what I want Apple to be.

I don’t think I run roughshod over people, but if something sucks, I tell people to their face. It’s my job to be honest. I know what I’m talking about, and I usually turn out to be right. That’s the culture I tried to create. We are brutally honest with each other, and anyone can tell me they think I am full of shit and I can tell them the same. And we’ve had some rip-roaring arguments, where we are yelling at each other, and it’s some of the best times I’ve ever had. I feel totally comfortable saying “Ron, that store looks like shit” in front of everyone else. Or I might say “God, we really fucked up the engineering on this” in front of the person that’s responsible. That’s the ante for being in the room: You’ve got to be able to be super honest. Maybe there’s a better way, a gentlemen’s club where we all wear ties and speak in this Brahmin language and velvet code-words, but I don’t know that way, because I am middle class from California.

I was hard on people sometimes, probably harder than I needed to be. I remember the time when Reed was six years old, coming home, and I had just fired somebody that day, and I imagined what it was like for that person to tell his family and his young son that he had lost his job. It was hard. But somebody’s got to do it. I figured that it was always my job to make sure that the team was excellent, and if I didn’t do it, nobody was going to do it.

You always have to keep pushing to innovate. Dylan could have sung protest songs forever and probably made a lot of money, but he didn’t. He had to move on, and when he did, by going electric in 1965, he alienated a lot of people. His 1966 Europe tour was his greatest. He would come on and do a set of acoustic guitar, and the audiences loved him. Then he brought out what became The Band, and they would all do an electric set, and the audience sometimes booed. There was one point where he was about to sing “Like a Rolling Stone” and someone from the audience yells “Judas!” And Dylan then says, “Play it fucking loud!” And they did. The Beatles were the same way. They kept evolving, moving, refining their art. That’s what I’ve always tried to do—keep moving. Otherwise, as Dylan says, if you’re not busy being born, you’re busy dying.

What drove me? I think most creative people want to express appreciation for being able to take advantage of the work that’s been done by others before us. I didn’t invent the language or mathematics I use. I make little of my own food, none of my own clothes. Everything I do depends on other members of our species and the shoulders that we stand on. And a lot of us want to contribute something back to our species and to add something to the flow. It’s about trying to express something in the only way that most of us know how—because we can’t write Bob Dylan songs or Tom Stoppard plays. We try to use the talents we do have to express our deep feelings, to show our appreciation of all the contributions that came before us, and to add something to that flow. That’s what has driven me.

Popular posts from 产品随想的博客

The Three Faces Of Steve Jobs, Brent Schlender, 1998 Fortune

(FORTUNE Magazine) – Well into the conversation with FORTUNE that you're about to read, Steve Jobs, the once and interim CEO of Apple Computer, professes to feel, at the wizened age of 43, no different from when he was a frisky 17-year-old. True to form, he contradicts himself a little later, confessing to be "an old man now." Those comments reveal as much about why Jobs has been able to pull off his prestidigital revival of Apple--his first and still greatest creation--as do his observations on his business strategies and actions of the past year. Here's why. Jobs is most effective as a businessman and leader when he invokes the pathos and gestalt of his generation. He is, after all, a child of the 1960s--you're still likely to find him barefoot in the office, and for breakfast he eats granola doused in apple juice. Yet Jobs is also a mature baby-boomer, with an impressive if offbeat store of business experience, plus the typical worries that go with...

Rhino_GH从入门到精通听课笔记_二

一. 基础操作   1. Rhino F6精确更改相机视野   2. 中键和左菜单栏弹出时间都是可以自己设置缩短的 二. 软件技巧   1. GH搭配生成楼梯,柱子,栏杆   2. SU\3DS\OBJ 均可被Rhino识别   3. 已命名工作位置很有用,和和已命名是图标是不一样的   4. Rhino等轴测做法          显示——投影——改为平行          旋转改为0/360          视图——等角视图 三. 奇技淫巧   1. 善用微信搜索,比如“地形制作”,第三讲前半部分讲解利用高程点制作地形   2. Rhino转折剖制作方法,用面split模型,即模型被切成两个,类似于佐罗刀   3. 转折剖模型制作时间很久,工作量比较大 四. Rhino命令   1. worksession  链接文件进来,以一个图层显示,类似于SU里面的另存再载入的操作,可       以节省运算量,比ctrl+c ctrl+v快   2. ctrl+w  局部放大   3. hatch  嵌面

CAD 天正与 AI 工作流

基本步骤   1. 天正导出 T3 .dwg 文件,尽量在2007版本   2. AI 打开,打开时候可以选择比例,因为 AI 画布是基于真实尺度   3. AI 打开 .dwg 后,更改画布到所需要的大小   4. 之后用 PS 打开 AI 文件,可以维持想要的大小和比例   5. 而且 AI 可以读取天正的图层 课外了解   1. ETH 风格平面图   2. 日本创新性的停车方式   3. AI中的实时上色功能去了解

进入双拼的世界

──小鹤双拼官方记忆口诀诗一首 Kuai ing Liang uang Ruan Cao Zou , T ue Qiu Yun Wei Jan Mian 快 迎 两 王 软 草 走 ,特 约 秋 云 为 见 面 Xia ua Song iong ShU ChI ZhVi , Geng Dai Bin Niao Fen Pie Hang 夏 娃 怂 恿 书 痴 追,更 待 斌 鸟 分 撇 航 注释: 如上,一和三两句的前四个字为一个大写字母代表了两个字的拼音   T ue各取拼音谐音为特约,Jan取英文谐音为见,其余均是一个大写字母代表一个字的拼音   斌鸟是一种鸟,分撇一词是分离之意,故斌鸟分撇航意为鸳鸯各自飞。   译文: 一个地方官笑着说:“快欢迎两位王爷到软草原走一走,我为两位特意约了秋云姑娘来见面”,   夏娃听见了,怂恿暗恋秋云的书痴快去追,此时不追,更待何时?难道要等鸳鸯各自飞? 记住后,每按一个键,都得停顿几秒,不过熟悉了字母和声韵母之间的对应关系。 双拼练习网站推荐: https://linci.co/sp/ 

世界需要什么样的智能系统

原文: - By 道哥 - Link:https://archive.ph/h0nNj  笔记: - 人工智能,不应该是一个产业,应该是各个产业,都要有智能; - 智能:感知+行动 (目前很多视觉、语音的识别,停留在感知层面) - 智能技术角度看, 自动驾驶与智能音箱是两个完整的从“感知”到“行动”的闭环     - 对话机器人被成为人工智能界的圣杯 - 构建智能时代:     - 飞行员:各个企业中,智能部门的员工     - 航道:基础设施提供商,比如运营商、云计算厂商     - 机场:最后真正的商业模式,类似苹果的App Store,给机器智能系统提供服务 - 机器与机器的协同交互,价值巨大(以往很看重的是:机器与人的交互) - 数据、训练在内部;一旦进行外部的机器交流,默认为“不信任”模式 - 云计算厂商可能会被智能厂商管道化,就跟运营商被互联网内容提供商管道化一样(因为:云计算和大数据都不是智能)

Steve Jobs: `There's Sanity Returning', 1998

Nobody can doubt the charisma of Steven P. Jobs. The interim CEO of Apple Computer Inc., who returned to the company last July after his ignominious 1985 ouster, has brought back his legendary vision, impatience, and infectious passion for the Macintosh. Jobs spoke to Business Week Correspondent Andy Reinhardt in Apple's stark, fourth-floor boardroom, just after the company rolled out its new software strategy on May 11. Note: This is an extended, online-only version of the Q&A that appears in the May 25, 1998, issue of Business Week. Q: Now that you've introduced the new, bold-looking iMac, are you going to do some radically different products? A: There's a lot of talk about such things -- about handhelds, set-top boxes. A lot of computer companies have been searching for a consumer product. My view is that the personal computer has been the most successful consumer product of the last 10 years. What we have to do, what the industry stopp...

BG投资十问(Baillie Gifford)

  1,公司是否能正面推动经济、社会或者文化发 展? 如果做不到,BG可能就不会再往下看了。比如军火、赌博类公司再便宜,BG不会去看。 2,公司销售额在5年之内能否翻倍? 为什么要讨论销售额?因为BG关注公司成长,销售额是比较简单直观的指标,而利润可有一些方法调节。所以,BG主要先关注销售额,再看现金流。 3,公司5年之后会怎么样? 这是未来5到10年或者5到15年的中间维度,一是看公司的成长空间究竟还有多大,二是考虑5年之后,公司的短期估值会不会下降,会不会变得成熟。 4,公司的竞争优势到底是什么?随着时间会变 强还是变弱? BG认为,如果公司的竞争优势是不断变弱的,将来在更远期挣回现金流的可能性就更低了。 5,公司是否有非常独特的文化?文化是否能够进化? 毕竟要投资这么长时间,对创始人和公司管理文化是非常关注的。特别喜欢创始人领导的公司,而不是说创始人什么都不干,创始人在做房地产,找了一些人在做新公司,要尽量避免这样的公司。 谈到进化在BG看来,大部分公司都会有大公司病,需要看它怎么能维持比较灵活的管理,变大之后还能够保持非常快速的成长,比如亚马逊的day one文化(注:就是始终处在 创业启动状态,充满迷茫和压力,但是充满创造力和颠覆思想 )。 6,公司过去的回报率怎么样? 一方面是考虑到公司的ROE(净资产收益率),二是考虑公司的Margins(利润),看它的过去是不是值得投资,如果每年ROE都不到10个点,可能长期来看也没什么意思。 7,ROE能不能随着时间增长? 有些公司一开始没有盈利,一直在烧钱,5年之后说不定ROE会到20%或者更高,它是一个动态过程。这样的公司BG也会投资,包括一些早期项目,很多公司都是没有盈利的。 8,公司怎么分配资本? 资本现金流无非就是5种方法:再投资、收购、还债、分红、回购股份,要看公司在某个阶段的资本分配是不是最优的。 如果公司明明可以发展更多,结果乱分红了;或者是明明到了特别成熟的时候,还不愿意分红,都是错误的分配资本。 9,公司怎样才能长成5倍? BG关注的是怎样,而不是能不能。这会强迫BG每个人去设想一些未来的可能性,包括公司现在的底层架构能不能够延伸到更多的业务。 比如,早期的亚马逊或者是阿里,连一个概念都没有,BG会考虑这个公司有没有这种机遇,以后去扩展到可触及的市场。 10,市场对公司有哪些误解,哪些事...