Technology

55715 readers

3007 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

435

Twelve years after the death of Steve Jobs, the cracks are starting to appear at Apple (www.notebookcheck.net)

submitted 3 months ago by boem@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

188 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] circuscritic@lemmy.ca 64 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (3 children)

I've never complimented, or defended Steve Jobs before, because he was a grade A piece of shit...but, Steve Jobs transformed technology precisely because he was a phenomenal salesman, with a great eye for technical talent.

Just because he wasn't an engineer, doesn't change the fact that he forged Apple into what it became, and that absolutely contributed to modern technology - for better, and worse.

[–] mox@lemmy.sdf.org 63 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Just because he wasn’t an engineer, doesn’t change the fact that he forged Apple into what it became,

I think the big complaint about Jobs is not the lack of engineering skills, but that he got where he did through deception, taking advantage of people, and often treating folks like garbage. Many of us view him as unworthy of celebrating, because the ends don't justify the means.

(There's also the fact that what Apple became was not all good, but perhaps that's a separate discussion.)

[–] Honytawk@lemmy.zip -2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Steve Jobs could sell his turds to the Apple fanboys, and they would eat it up.

Doesn't mean what he sold is some culinary dish or he a master chef. Just that he could sell them whatever he wants, no matter what it was. Whether it was technology or not.

[–] circuscritic@lemmy.ca 5 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

The irony here is that you're a cliche anti-Apple fanboy, and I don't even use Apple products.

So blinded by your dork rage, that you missed the entire point of this little comment thread.

What's even funnier, is that you also unintentionally proved mine.

[+] AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world -11 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

I think marketers should get to take credit for ad campaigns they create, and engineers should get to take credit for technology they create.

Capitalists just want to take the credit for what others do. Societal leeches. I don't buy into their false narrative that providing the means of production they hoard out of greed means they deserve most to all of the credit for what they permit talented people to engineer and produce by the swear of their brow and the migraines of their solutions.

We should be rewarding the Teslas of the world for what they invent, and punishing the Edisons that would claim other's inventions as their own. But we suck, so we won't.

[–] circuscritic@lemmy.ca 10 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Moving goalpost?

You said he didn't contribute to technology, so I pointed out that he's responsible for Apple becoming what it became, which itself transformed technology.

Now, you're saying he shouldn't get technical credit for...making the iPhone?

Okay...I never said he should...but it you want to go down that path, he was very hands-on with in the design processes for two of their most pivotal products: the iMac and iPod.

Again, he was a grade-A douche bag, who died a fucking hilariously stupid death, but that doesn't erase, or override his impact.

[–] 4am@lemm.ee 2 points 3 months ago

I think the argument is that the motivations society allowed him under capitalism are what drew him to do what he did, not just that he was some brilliant asshole but that he wanted to own the work those beneath him had done.

Lots of us who have spent our lives being told “yeahuh but that’s how it’s supposed to work!” probably have a hard time grappling the concept that just because it turns out good sometimes doesn’t mean we can’t do better.

So to the original point of the rebuttal - we’re lucky it only turned out like it did, and not way way worse (and some other high-on-capital folks have been busy proving that lately…)