Forums | MacLife

I dont "hate" Jobs. I just disagree with some of his ideas.

ScifiterX wrote:

For someone who doesn't hate the guy, you seem to target him in particular even when it is a market wide condition or a condition that existed even when he wasn't with the company. You might want to consider why that may be.

Steve Jobs has some brilliant ideas.
He also has some bone headed ideas.

There is nothing wrong with calling him on the bone headed ideas.

Remember - it was Steve who continued to NeXT for some time on a non Apple laptop (IBM Thinkpad I believe) while he was the CEO of Apple.

What's good for the goose ...

frankly wrote:

Bat wrote:

My point was that, in each case, those folks' knowledge is so dated as to be nearly irrelevant, no matter how smart they were. Newton was fairly sharp too, but I wouldn't want him working quantum mechanics these days.

You are displaying an enormous amount of ignorance if you don't think that someone as smart as Newton would be able to get up to speed on modern developments. There is a reason it is called Newtonian physics.

...and you're awfully quick to call others ignorant, Frank, displaying a sizeable amount of arrogance. I'd avoid that and try a little more humility. You might not want to, say, compare IQs with some others hereabouts. (You might learn how to consolidate replies, too, with your mighty IT background. It's tedious seeing 5 consecutive posts from you).

It's called Newtonian because, for the last century, it's become a special case subset. Newtonian physics is a generalization that's only accurate at low relativistic velocities, decreasingly so as velocities increase. Quantum mechanics is a highly specialized field that many folks' brains aren't well equipped to handle and makes no 'common' sense. Either/or... both? No telling because observing can change the result?

Newton'd have to go back to school at best. Just dropped in here as a mature adult with formed theories and precepts, it'd be a tough adjustment- "Everything you know is wrong." <Cue user> And science history is replete with academics, however intelligent, who can't cope with a paradigm change.

Critical thinking, Frank. Consider what is said, not what you think is said or implied at first blush.

Meanwhile, find an interesting background read here.

The factory that Jobs had configured to produce 10,000 computers every month produced hundreds every month. Because of the low volume, human labor was cheaper than maintaining the automated equipment.
...

Months after the debut at Davies Symphony Hall, NeXT released the final version of the NeXTcube, which retailed for US $10,000. Jobs and the senior executives made another grand tour looking for customers and developers. Most of the companies (like Disney and AT&T) remained solidly Macintosh, but Jobs charmed a couple big customers. NSA became a loyal NeXTstep user; so did Lotus (which agreed to develop an "object oriented spreadsheet", Lotus for NeXTstep) and GM. Stanford and Carnegie Mellon both made small orders of NeXTcubes as well.
...

There was a typically Jobsian introduction for the NeXTstation. During a highly choreographed September 1991 press conference, Jobs' staff had licensed the scene from Wizard of Oz where the black and white world of Kansas transforms into the colorful Oz. The scene played, and it stunned the audience. Nobody had ever seen full color, high resolution video on what was basically a high-end personal computer.

The demonstration was something of a fraud, however, since the video didn't actually play on the computer. NeXT engineers had connected the machine to a LaserDisc player and simply used the NeXTstation as a display.
...

The first ever NeXTworld Expo was held on January 22, 1992. Among the minor hardware upgrades, it was revealed that NeXT would start shipping NeXTstep 486, a version of the operating system that would run on Intel hardware. The newly liberated software only took a few months to port, but it would have a huge impact on NeXT - and eventually on Apple as well.

Also announced was NeXTstep 3.0, which included better networking and file system compatibility with Windows and DOS.
...

On February 8, 1993, InfoWorld ran a story claiming that NeXT was abandoning its hardware business. On Wednesday of the same week, Jobs confirmed the rumors: NeXT would become a software-only company, which meant new hardware partners and big layoffs. NeXT's staff of 530 would be reduced to 200.

Jobs always thought of himself as a hardware designer. Though the public at large considered the Macintosh and NeXTcube groundbreaking software achievements, Jobs was much more involved in the hardware. Jobs spent weeks obsessing over the positioning of the floppy drive on the Macintosh or the shade of black used on the magnesium case of the NeXTcube. And now NeXT was essentially a startup software company with no product, no customers, and few prospects.

Bat wrote:

frankly wrote:

Bat wrote:

My point was that, in each case, those folks' knowledge is so dated as to be nearly irrelevant, no matter how smart they were. Newton was fairly sharp too, but I wouldn't want him working quantum mechanics these days.

You are displaying an enormous amount of ignorance if you don't think that someone as smart as Newton would be able to get up to speed on modern developments. There is a reason it is called Newtonian physics.

...and you're awfully quick to call others ignorant, Frank, displaying a sizeable amount of arrogance. I'd avoid that and try a little more humility. You might not want to, say, compare IQs with some others hereabouts. (You might learn how to consolidate replies, too, with your mighty IT background. It's tedious seeing 5 consecutive posts from you).

1) Get over yourself. You're the one that called Newton "fairly sharp." And then you bash me for responding? Seriously?

2) I'm sorry I don't sit around waiting for replies to come in to the forums so that I can reply to them as they come in.

3) As much as my responses to each post get on your nerves your super long responses to multiple posts get on mine. To each his own. Yours are a pain in the ass to respond to since you have to cut out all of the parts you're not responding to.

4) I'm glad you think you have a higher IQ than me. Whatever helps you get through the day.

5) I don't think I ever said that I have a mighty IT background. Since you don't know me or anything about me you might want to be careful when you start bashing me.

6) ... I'll leave out what your response actually deserves for the sake of decorum.

Mr. T wrote:

frankly wrote:

5) I don't think I ever said that I have a mighty IT background.

Didn't you?

I was referring in part to these. You seem to recall them also...

frankly wrote:

Mr. T wrote:

Czachorski wrote:

Mr T - [..] geeky IT person.

It's not like most of my friends are in CS.   I'm a geek, tho. [..].

I am likely in a later stage of life than you as well. Since I teach CS I am more than familiar with the type of people with which you hang out but I am also able to differentiate that sample group from the computer buying public at large. 20 years ago the CS people were a much larger percentage but these days with computers being as ubiquitous as they are they represent a much smaller percentage of all users.

&

frankly wrote:

...And my interaction is mostly with IT and CS people.

Frank

...which I remembered, tho it took a bit of searching. It was not pleasant. I would suggest decorum has already left the room and write no further. DBAJ.

frankly wrote:

I will try to remember to avoid conversations with you in the future.

Please do, and easily done.

'Mighty IT background' is a slight exaggeration, a style element that well conveyed my reasonable displeasure at

...that personal attack you made

...your own repeated characterizations of me in the vein of

then quite frankly you are either an ass

Get over yourself

Yours are a pain in the ass to respond to

I'm glad you think you have a higher IQ than me. Whatever helps you get through the day

(Never said; your interp)

I'll leave out what your response actually deserves

You are displaying an enormous amount of ignorance

then quite frankly you are either an ass or you have issues of your own that you need to deal with

...just in your last few posts. In the aggregate, your derogatory characterizations of others beggars belief, as I was reminded in my brief reread of some of your posts. A number of folks on these boards know me in real life and characterize me otherwise.

It has been noted that it is insane to repeat an action and expect different results after many trials, so I will make none further and simply not read your posts.

Just to shake things up a bit more, there is now a modified BOOT-132 (free and open source) that can work boot a retail copy of Leopard, as well as ensure trouble-free upgrades (you can use a CD, thumb drive, another partition, etc...).  Compared to EFI-X, this seems to be "higher-level."  For example, EFI-X likely provides EFI interfaces for dsmos, power management, graphics, network and audio, thus allowing the OS to run completely unmodified.  This is the ideal "low-level" solution.  On the other hand, the modified BOOT-132 method is "high-level."  It works by allowing better-matching modified extensions to load in leu of Apple's problematic ones, namely Apple's dsmos and power management extensions (neither serves a useful purpose, anyway).  Graphics, audio and network extensions work unmodified, but since the bootloader can't (yet) detect the hardware, you need to add boot strings for them after the installation with EFIStudio (a nice GUI app that does the dirty work for you).

From the user's point of view, Modified BOOT-132 will offer a similar experience to that of EFI-X.  You can boot from the retail DVD, and updates should work without issue.  However,with the BOOT-132 method, you'll need to run EFIStudio after the installation to get graphics/audio/network working properly (this need only be done once).

Last edited by Mr. T (2008-07-08 1:00 pm)

There's no need for drivers if you're running a Core CPU with an Intel chipset.  Apple's drivers will work just fine -- even the graphics drivers will work with practically every card released over the past 6 years.  If you have some unsupported PCI card, you'd obviously need to provide a driver, just as you would on a Mac Pro.

If, on the other hand, you're running --say-- an AMD CPU with an NVIDIA chipset, you'll need to supply your own drivers (they are available).  In this case, BOOT-132 might be a better solution, since you can add whatever you need, and make it stick (there's some pretty fancy tricks needed to get AMD CPUs working smoothly, and BOOT-132 could handle all of that automagically).  Otherwise, if you have a Core CPU and Intel chipset, EFI-X is the way to go since:  Core CPU + Intel chipset + EFI-X = Mac.  You could use BOOT-132 in this case as well, but EFI-X is really the purist solution.

Last edited by Mr. T (2008-07-08 10:35 pm)

Oh, I'm still running PC EFI (not even Chameleon) with my Hackintosh.  The added convenience of these solutions doesn't justify reinstalling the OS just to set it up.  As it stands, the only thing I do to keep it running is run a script (that prevents a power management kext from loading) before installing some official Apple updates (which are otherwise harmless).  This isn't really a big deal to me, but I'll definitely use either EFI-X or BOOT-132 for Snow Leopard.

Last edited by Mr. T (2008-07-08 10:52 pm)

BOOT-132 is free.  But I'll let you know about EFI-X.

Pariah wrote:

That is my conclusion from going on 27 years of being an interested observer of all things Jobs.
There is one hell of a lot of irony in an educator dismissing research. As much irony as the apparent fact that Jobs thinks his gift is in hardware design when aside from a honest talent at making objects look pretty he really doesnt do it all that well, while is is a fantastic software design manager.

The fact that you think what you've "observed" over 27 years constitutes research says a lot. Research would constitute you talking to him, you talking to people that know him, you observing him in his work and home environment. Do you really think that you have an inkling as to what Jobs is really like? Based on what? Watching him at keynotes, watching the occasional interview he gives, and following which products Apple releases as a company? You don't have any idea what he says or does 99.999999999999999999999% of his day. Most passive "observers" of your statements would be hard pressed to think anything different than you hate Steve Jobs. The words you use when talking about him are so demeaning and hurtful. You act like he isn't an actual person.

frankly wrote:

Pariah wrote:

That is my conclusion from going on 27 years of being an interested observer of all things Jobs.
There is one hell of a lot of irony in an educator dismissing research. As much irony as the apparent fact that Jobs thinks his gift is in hardware design when aside from a honest talent at making objects look pretty he really doesnt do it all that well, while is is a fantastic software design manager.

Do you really think that you have an inkling as to what Jobs is really like? Based on what? Watching him at keynotes, watching the occasional interview he gives, and following which products Apple releases as a company?

Don't leave out the numerous recollections of him made by those who knew him well (there's a good website somewhere that maintains a collection of "Jobs stories").  For instance, did you know that he fought with engineers to remove all of the cooling fans from the Apple III, thus inducing an astronomical hardware failure rate, and consequential failure in the market?  That's one example.  Taken together, these personal accounts reveal a common thread of OCD-esque behavior (not just wrt fan noise).  Though toned down much since the 80's, I believe this character flaw remains in him to this day.

You don't have any idea what he says or does 99.999999999999999999999% of his day.

And you don't have any idea how --for example-- your state senators spend 99.9999999999% of their days, yet it (hopefully) does not affect your ability to form opinions of them; that would be tragic.

Most passive "observers" of your statements would be hard pressed to think anything different than you hate Steve Jobs.

He gave the man props for putting Apple back on the map, where his predecessors have failed.  And then he expressed admiration of his software vision, which has played a key role in Apple's present success.  And then he criticized him for his faults.  In its full context, it is incorrect to interpret this as "hateful."

The words you use when talking about him are so demeaning and hurtful.  You act like he isn't an actual person.

I'm sure Jobs won't loose any sleep over it.