Steve Jobs talks about xerox failure and monopolies
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 9 ม.ค. 2022
- In an acute analysis, Steve Jobs analyses, in 1995, why Xerox failed and how a companies market share affect its management orientation.
More about Data Driven 101 : datadriven101.tech/
More about Scopeo : scopeo.ai/ - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
He’s literally describing Apple today
Edit: this statement admittedly applies more to Disney than Apple. But Apple is still one of the worst enemies of right to repair and right to ownership
Yes, completely. As they say, if you stay a hero too long you became villain. Now is only stagnation and price increase.
Its because many dont stop and contemplate the falling of those before them, and assume you'll always be on top.
However, while not giving much respect to their main money maker (iphones) apple has spear headed smaller microchips despite the entire market going for larger, also theyre diversifying to newer markets (like VR).
I don’t think that is accurate. You can accuse Apple of many things (being overpriced, favouring form over function, walled gardens) but they still consistently innovate and set industry trends (Apple Silicon, Vision Pro, wireless headphones, etc.). And sure, they often just copy and improve features which competitors already had, but that still shows that they aren’t just resting on their laurels.
M1 chip? Total marketing. Oh wait.
And yet apple are more profitable now more than ever.
This literally happened to Intel when Ryzen came out. Their leadership was from someone who worked at sales.
True & right to the bones
Today AMD, Intel, and Nvidia are all lead by engineers. This means long term investments into engineering is a priority, and it seems to work. CEOs with business degrees and no experience within the field seem to fail long term, even if they hit record profits in the short term.
I'd like to suppprt AMD, but everyone develops software for Intel and Nvidia...
@@grimbles39 All the stuff that works on Intel and Nvidia chips works on AMD products man.
And well, to Apple.
Fun Fact: Xerox invented the Graphical User Interface, then shelved the project. Jobs was given a tour of their Palo Alto Research Center and they showed him their prototype GUI mock up. Jobs took the idea and ran with it, and made the Apple Macintosh, which took a massive bite out of Microsoft. Xerox sued Apple and lost their case.
Imagine suing someone because they based something on an idea that you never sold or acted on. Can't claim loss of sales if you never sold it. 🤣🤣
Fun fact 2: Later when Bill gates made a similar Gui interface in the next Windows, Steve got furious and publically accused him for copying "Apple's" work and Bill replied that with -"I think it's more like we both had this rich neighbor named Xerox and I broke into his house to steal the TV set and found out that you had already stolen it"
It wasn’t just the GUI. Xerox was the first to make a mouse for a computer and invented Ethernet networking card as well. They had all the components of a fully modern system but never saw the significance of any of it.
Hmm, did Xerox actually shelve the product though? I think they made a big effort to sell the Star system (and Alto before that)...
And that’s what happens when you don’t have a sales and marketing team and only a product team 😂
The fact that he spoke about this in the 90s like it was something common yet we are still witnessing how common those practices are nowadays in many businesses
@@kelsormjaquan indeed
Well he got right on board with monopoly practices towards the end, some people just like money....
That's basic post-war capitalism. Although very wise, he certainly did not invent anything here, all insurance companies were that way even before IBM was even thought
Ironically, it’s now happening at Apple. And I’m writing this comment from my iPhone.
Those who do not learn history and whatnot
He was exactly right. This attitude, and lack of customer service is rampant now in all businesses
It's about making money as quickly as possible. They don't care about the product and they don't provide the experience needed to make the product even better. It is craftsmanship that customers want.
It's also true in film and theatre. Producers know about promotion but not about evaluating the product. That's why there's so much highly promoted junk on the stage and screen today.
Pay your workers and maybe they’ll GAF about providing customer service.
And apple!
@@UnleashthePhuryno one is working for free, calm down.
This explanation is brilliant and deeply insightful. Probably explains a lot of S&P 500 companies that are stuck in mediocrity
Absolutely!
Including Apple
Same with apple. He was running it when Wozniak was the product guy.
Xerox when it first started out was also very distruptive when in the invented the electrostatic toner copying process (a version of which is still used in copiers and laser printers today). Those of us who grew up in the 60's remember the clunky tech that "xerox" copiers replaced... Typewriters using carbon paper, mimeograph copiers that produced smelly wet copies with blue letters, blueprints that reeked of ammonia. IBM had an opportunity to buy Xerox and declined because their consultants told them the maximum market for Xerox type copiers world-wide was in the low thousands. But that is the story of the tech industry... The innovators and disrupters of today are the roadkill of the next decade.
A company I worked for used these big Xerox laser printers. Xerox pushed maintenance plans which required that authorized reps would come by periodically to service the machines. Then HP came out with smaller laser printers that could fit on a desk or small stand. They were reliable though not as sturdy as the big Xerox printers. And they didn't require a maintenance and service contract.
In my experience, consultants are just there for the money and say things that management wants to hear.
Photography being my life-long hobby, I'll add that this is exactly what happened at Kodak. The only difference with Kodak is that it had such a complete monopoly over its industry, and such a strong financial position, that its decline took 30 years to progress to an irreversible destruction of the company, 1970 to 2000.
Two huge chances for Rochester NY that were both ultimately met with failure
Maybe Rochester’s drinking water is to blame. ;-)
@@roystonlodge Kodak certainly hasn't helped with that if you've seen the Genesee River recently
Technology changed and they couldn't adapt because the ones who could adapt the company were pushed out. At least that's what I get from this video.
So now there is a new product on the table that's not yours, but the tech it uses is vastly different than what you can provide. So vast that you don't have the right people to retool the product in your company to compete because these people were pushed out a long time ago. Mainly because there was no reason to improve a perfect product for its time. It's that situation that killed the company.
The development of the photocopy machine is a fascinating story.
Xerox tried for years to find a material that would gently remove the black toner powder from the electrostatic drum.
Top men were brought in, and after great effort they decided on rabbit pelts. Science!
slaughter
@@kuklama0706 Did you know that once you skin a rabbit, you're left with food?
@@kuklama0706 Relax. They will make more.
@@Look_What_You_DidI learned a few months ago that the fibonnaci sequence, was made to track rabbits’ populations. There is literally a mathematical formula that was made for tracking solely how insanely fast they reproduce
@@kuklama0706 not my hecking rodenterinos!!!!
Xerox was copier-focused. I saw it when I worked there in the 70's. They had a 120-pager/minute laser printer in 1979. They could have been #1 in laser printing. Their top people wore blinders.
While all components of a business are important, I think some are more important, period. Jobs is s saying something similar to what Walt Disney said when things began successfully ramping up for him: "I've found I can only make these animated films with artists and animators. I can't make them with accountants and bankers."
He sure loved trashing marketing and sales people. He does it with so much passion, you can feel it.
Which is weird considering how much of a marketing person he was and how much apple relies on marketing.
I see jobs yes as a marketer, but a marketer that is using every ounce of their intellect to drive innovation in product development.
I don't see it as trashing sales and marketing. It's locking out the product people or vice versa.
Creating a great product includes sales and marketing.
@@RuefusPrecisely. His whole point is that you need both types of people - you can’t shut one type out of leadership within a company.
Jobs didn't just trash sales and marketing. He noted that companies that dominate because they are monopolies lose the incentive to develop new products and turn over the company leadership to sales and marketing.
I think it's more basic than what Jobs is saying here. Successful monopoly companies usually can't bring themselves to abandon the product or technology which got them there. So they miss the next big thing. The move from film photography to digital, the move from mainframe computers to personal computers, the move from stand alone computers to networked and ultimately internet connectivity, the move from computers to smart phones.
And mechanical watches to digital. Even the finest mechanical watches today can never keep time like a digital watch - for a substaltially lower price.
True, which is why they often will simply purchase a smaller company that has successfully produced a new innovation or technology.
@@jefflewis4and then they squander the purchased company. Tear it up into smaller compartments of profit and loss, divide successful teams and watch their IP go down the drain, meanwhile another start up is producing the next big thing. Big corp is where innovative companies go to die. HPE is a prime example.
This might have just happened to Google with ChatGPT.
This applies to video game market too. Look at what happened at Blizzard/Activision. Bobby Kotic has made the company creatively bankrupt
as i was listening thought exactly the same thing
who cares, NPCs will still buy mounts and tmogs from the $hop. my boy Kotic is just playing with how retarded the gaming community is
Almost all AAA American gaming companies are like that. EA, activision, 2K etc. Japanese companies like Nintendo, Sony, capcom, square Enix, are literally the only companies taking risks and pushing gaming forward
@@saesang352 I agree. I just called out blizzard specifically because I recalled Bobby’s name.
@@saesang352 i agree. look at the current call of duty. It’s literally the same game with old maps re-released for $80. No creativity left just looking for the money.
The other thing is. People who are good influencers (sales and marketing) sell themselves to get promoted.
This is exactly what happened to AAA gaming. That's why everything is live service, battle passes, cosmetic bundles etc., but the game itself is plagued with issues.
Sad that now apple is that monopoly that barely changes its products
Yes but the new iPhone is slightly shinier
True. Face id, apple silicon, it's all the same.
@@user-vt6td9hp3gthey didn't create the tech for face ID and apple silicon is built using the decades old ARM architecture. Apple is suffering from what jobs describes, M1 was a fantastic first step but they're not iterating fast enough with it to keep it relevant. M2 is a joke compared to current gen intel and amd in all metrics except power efficiency, and that's because it's based on ARM.
apple chips are the most innovative in PC market..
@@RandyTheB_ in one month apple will release 3nm chips while another TSMC customers like AMD or Nvidia will be behind at least one or most probably two years. Intel is a joke, forget about it..
Ironic: Isn't that happening to Apple since Steve's passing? ... Same stuff packaged in the same casing but with better marketing for years now ...
Well, yes and no, Look at Apple Watch and the Apple Vision ... they are were not introduced by Steve .. yes, laptops, ipads more of the same OTH this is what I want as a customer.
@@Axel_Andersen True that ... Hopefully Apple will become more innovative as time goes by. Yet the faster technology grows (exponentially) the faster these things (Apple) might (yes I said might) deteriorate, see Atari, Commodore 64/128, Sinclair, you name it (yes I'm old)... On the plus side they surely have their hard core fans that keep them alive and innovating (me included) ... Lets be positive and hope for great products ahead ... My Mac mini has done me no bad, love it, and will love it just as my old Quicksilver from yesteryear (2001) ... Thumbs up!
The M1 and M2 chips seem to be significant advances.
This would go well with Frank’ Zappa’s criticism of the record industry being ruined by too many empowered middlemen (or the folks in most companies who now just want to have meetings all the time to self-justify the fact that they actually create or add F all!)
I've been in several companies where all a reorganization did was add another layer of management. Great, more middle-management that doesn't do jack, we don't have enough of that yet!
This is brilliant analysis. Steve isn't saying that marketing and sales is not important. We can all think of many iconic marketing campaigns that Apple developed. But marketing and sales must follow a great product, not the other way around. Apple is a product-centric company and when a technology company becomes a sales-centric company, the differential advantage that company has will slowly whither until it is gone.
Well said.
Great summary.
Nailed it as he usually does.
He was a smart cat
"they really have no feeling in their hearts about wanting to help the customers"---- oh your laptop is broken? well we could fix it but that would run you 3000 while you could just buy a new one for 2900.
One of the first things that comes to mind is the gaming industry. Spot on.
same thing happening now at Apple, with a supply chain expert as a CEO.
HAND-PICKED by Jobs when he was dying.
Such a bad take. First of all, Tim Cook was always at Steve's side. Secondly, Airpods which was launched under him, is now as big as a fortune 500 company.
Also vision pro is going to be revolutionary. He's an excellent product guy.
This comment is not gonna age well bro
Apple is now worth $3 billion. And the M1 chip seems to be a significant advance that has led to some great products. Tim Cook seems to know what he is doing.
Apple fanboys don't like criticism I see 😂
Spot on. Timeless advice.
Great clip!!! very astute (and accurate) assessment... I'm going to save this!!!
So true ❤️ ... He had that guts and genuine interest for the customers. That's why he able to describe this row core side of a company.
Beautifully stated!
Exactly. Thanks.
To all people working in marketing/corporate, this is a must watch.
This is more relevant than ever and represents the apathy of apathy and easy money well....especially when you lose focus, serve something else and no longer try as hard.
That's what happens when you have creative industries being carved up by shareholders, board members, and corporate suits who don't understand the importance of taking risk and being bold in creative industry. They want easy steady profits instead of innovation.
This is literally what is happening to Apple right now. The marketing people are running the company and no real innovation is happening after Jobs died.
Once the customer stops being the customer, and instead it’s the shareholder that’s the customer - that’s when a business loses its way. No business can escape the push towards going public, if any of their growth is based on investors, because investors don’t want you to just run your business - they want exponential ROI. Investors are the first step away from customers, because investors become the primary customers who have the power to make demands that you can’t ignore. In fact, they may as well be treated like debtors, who you become subservient to. You’re no longer the business owner, they are. I think free market capitalist proponents need to stop including debts and investing and public trading in their umbrella of successful strategies.
hmm got point. asking nicely, what alternative have you got?
No the investors are literally the owners who you are subservient to. Who tf cares about the customers if they don’t make you the owner money?
The counterbalance is if someone can steal your customers by giving them better deal. That’s the free market.
@@moazim1993 then, to avoid having competitors steal your customers, you are incentivized to lobby politicians to set up regulations to block entrants into your industry. Another technique, a favorite of cable internet providers, is to agree with your competition on geographical boundaries, effectively splitting up the territory so that you don't directly compete for customers. The free market is an illusion, we have a market where companies hold virtual monopolies, because that's what generates the highest short term profits.
This is what destroyed General Electric. They were a national institution for over 100 years. When they became a prostitute to Wall Street and their stock price, a crash was inevitable. It turns out the legendary Jack Welch just played a shell game and used accounting tricks to make the company look more profitable than it actually was and drive up stock prices. Wall Street loved him and their doting media loved him, so did that weird segment of the population that likes to deify corporate CEOs. He retired when it could no longer be sustained. The company started a long 15-year slide into bankruptcy, all any CEO and CFO could do was hold off the inevitable crash as long as possible, which is what they did.
A lifetime in R&D here, including senior roles. Strongly agree.
Right on the mark!
Xerox was generous to employees. We’d get taken out as a team to expensive lunches in Beverly Hills which was the norm for them in 1984. I was on one of those huge computers.
Profound is an understatement.
That last line says it all.
Hey folks, life is short.. it's maybe Best just to try to do as many of the things you would love to do and make sure you have time and build good lives with any people you care about..
It's easy to lose years we can't get back chasing "success" only to find that success would really have been to have had good happy memories of real nice times with people we value lots
I know money is necessary, but really we're being conditioned to chase it and not to truly live and love
I hope life will be good to you
from Rolland
at Castle Hassall
I don't think it's necessarily about chasing money/ success, it's about wanting to do the best job you can and build something great. I can't speak for others but for me, that's one of the joys of life.
@@petermcgowan1705 I agree, there is joy in growing and striving for your full potential and helping others. im not chasing money, im expressing myself, I feel power and freedom. some people like "chilling" and want to "hang". some don't lol
Thanks Obe-wan kanobe.
I wouldn't tar all the people in any single department or sector with the same brush. There will often be innovative people in every part of an industry or company. Good ideas can come from the janitor or the delivery driver or the new guy's aunt. It's important to recognize the people with the vision and energy and leadership qualities. If you don't recognize them early enough you may recognize them when they flourish in your competitor's company. Even so, reading Job's biography I was delighted to read instances in which he showed great insight and good leadership, except when it came to his own health.
Jobs was just unlucky to have bad genetics relayed to health.
@@denysivanov3364 That's sadly true. I just looked it up and the survival rate for pancreatic cancer is about 10%. Someone named Kay Kays is reported to have survived 29 years. Our bodies are always "talking" to us but sometimes we don't take the symptoms seriously. I'm 84 and I can still run but I don't have a clue about what's going to get me . . . type 2 diabetes (controlled) . . . but I'm eating a biscotti with a cup of black coffee before breakfast. Our behavior can be strange . . .
I don't know why but I find this so clearly explained and articulated that I think it's funny.
Very true. It is part of some bigger interview -- does anyone know they year, and other info about it (i.e. I would like to find the full interview). Thank you in advance.
"The Lost Interview" from 1995: th-cam.com/video/TRZAJY23xio/w-d-xo.html
Looks like late 90s.
It’s taken from a very good mid-90s documentary titled Triumph of the Nerds
One of the best management decisions.
Anyone has the complete interview? Thx
great man
Steve Jobs was a marketer and a customer advocate
Guy was an Oregonian and we definitely have many geniuses that come outside the box...with their thinking...mostly come from rural or good classical areas.
spot on!!!! 100% agree with Steve Jobs.
Wow!! He nailed it!
He is merely describing his own situation i.e. Macintosh VS Apple II, and him VS Wozniak.
Sounds like a great many large companies are sales and marketing led.
Lol this was directed pretty hard at John Skully. Can’t blame him. He learned a bitter lesson, hiring that dude.
"Companies forget what it means to make a great product". That one didn't age quite so well.
So True 👍
Master course on confession through projection.
"I couldn't do anything myself but I was really good at telling others what to do" 😂
That's what happened with Apple II at Apple Computer Company in 1980s.
Resources companies are very similar. Geologists making discoveries then sidelined when the mining starts. Fast forward a few years and unsurprisingly many projects fail prematurely due to unforeseen geological conditions or lack of additional discoveries.
This is what is happening in health care right now. It’s far too concentrated into local oligarchies.
How? Please explain.
@@rod1jc Many health care markets have only a few competitors in each area. In many rural areas, there is only one health care system. This is also true to some extent on the payer side, with some markets having many insurance companies serving them, and some having only a few. Whenever companies don’t have to fight for market share, they become unresponsive to customers as there is no market pressure. Think of typical government services such as the IRS and the DMV. They don’t have to think about how to please the customer.
What Mr. Jobs is talking about is the salesman, saleswoman, not really doing their job, which is taking customer’s concerns to heart; And communicating them to the product development designers and engineers who could imagine a new or better product. Instead of pursuing small sales price changes.
And the Michael Milken work of the go go 80s produced financial capital that made the creators win while the hedgerows fell by the wayside.
Good wisdom, though Steve was not immune to errors. He criticises John Scully, but he was the one who hired him under full knowledge of Pepsi’s business model. He also picked Tim Cook to replace him, knowing that he wasn’t a ‘product person’ likes Jobs. So whilst I agree with his points, I’m not sure I fully understand those decisions.
A visionary for sure
Modern Apple is the Xerox he was referring to.
DEC Digital Equipment was the same; they invented lots of things, but did not monetize all. Although whatever they monetized made them very rich.
Say what you will about Steve Jobs (RIP). You can call him an asshole. You can call him a thief. However, in this particular instance, you can not call him wrong. Since what he said is EXACTLY what we're dealing with now. Shitty/"MVP" products that are lifted up by marketing and salespeople... Rest in peace, Steve Jobs.
He was very smart. How many companies/products were created by replicating similar existing products? Too many to count. How many of those products overtook and outshined the product they were replicating though? Not nearly as many...
He was a bit of an asshole though. Nobody loved Steve Jobs as much as Steve Jobs did 😂
@@zeked4200 Steve was not half as bad as Bezos, Musk and Zuckerberg.
When he was alive apple made a shitty iphone with antenna issues and the cube that was a failure too.
@@BarryE48at least they took showers everyday
@@Teluric2 And you know this? How?
The exemplars of Xerox and IBM are not comfortable bedfellows, though the
underlying point is valid. Xerox was employing a technology which required a divergence of approach, whereas IBM could continue a stream development requiring fewer, "quantum leaps", and with a broader product base to buffer matters.
I don't think he is trashing sales and marketing people, as some are assuming. He is saying that the top persons needs to be both sales and product focused. After all, that's what he was. I have been both a marketing executive and a product executive, and I can fully appreciate what he's saying here. (No I am not implying that I am a Steve Jobs).
He is good about Xerox (and in some sense, Apple today...) - but not much about informatics where the term "product people" used to be (long time before him) a blame. Because *informatics used to focus on understanding and solving problems, not manufacturing and selling profitable products.* The difference between the two is an existential threat.
nah I bought a laptop from dell for $2,399 and it had quality control issues and software bugs. bought a Mac for the same price and THE MAC IS PERFECT. IM AN APPLE FANBOY NOW I THINK THEY MAKE SOME OF THE BEST PRODUCTS IN THEB WORLD
@@gcg8187 As a consumer, I agree. I use MacBook as my main gear, Air (after they finally smashed that butterfly) and then Pro (Intel Core i5, waiting for M3). But *we don't talk about the same thing.*
I am a veteran IT engineer (developer and architect from own startups to government and global companies) and researcher (with a half PhD on AI away from the hype because I read the definition of the Turing test...)
I know the origins of informatics and read the warnings about the "product people takeover" (JCR Licklider, Joseph Weizenbaum, Neil Postman, Douglas Engelbart... they are like Newton, Einstein etc. but who knows them today?) I also know that Jobs literally bought up Apple's "inventions" from Xerox, both working prototypes and the people who made them at PARC. And even _that_ was a fragment of previous systems (tailored for future mass production) by product people at PARC.
I hold my statement. *Creating profitable products and solving real problems are in the opposite direction.* But this is a deep rabbit hole and has nothing to do with your personal quality issues with a Dell laptop.
@@lkedves Are you implying that 'creating profitable products' and 'solving real problems' cannot *ever* overlap?
@@nadeemshaikh7863 Short answer, follow the analogy. If two things go in the opposite direction, do they *never* meet? Of course they can, accidentally. But they will *never* go together. Even for products, good ones last and you don't buy another. Less profitable than a bit worse, bit cheaper that you still buy. And buy again. Or cheaper because it was made by cheaper workforce. Etc.
The long answer starts with the saying "It ain’t so much the things that people don’t know that makes trouble in this world, as it is the things that people know that ain’t so." Then I would babble about the fundamental error of being *product-oriented* when trying to solve real problems... but this is already boring.
Nevermind.
@@lkedves But my question now is, before claiming that things are in opposite direction, how do you know that they are actually in opposite direction?
This is exactly the nature of my previous question. Why do you think they are in the opposite direction?
Really wish this guy was still running that company.
A brutal attack on John Scully. The wounds were deep.
Isn't that happeing to Google, Facebook and in parts to Apple right now?
The funny thing is the "product people" still end up with a shit tonne of money. And they are standing on top of designers and inventors who get neglected.
Amen to that
man, this guy said everything in two minutes, easy: sales people end up running the companies, companies makes profit, company crash at end because they fire all smart people who created that product
That's a little reductive. Sales and marketing people are just as smart, and just as important. You need both.
so TRUE
On a superficial note - loved his look back in the day.
As they say, a good product needs no advertising
No. Its a lie. You dont know sh1t
Unity Right Now:
Footage from Triumph of the Nerds.
This is the video game industry today. All celebrities and remakes, zero crunch. Sales people took over and the good devs are overshadowed by the monopolies
The logo of the apple had feeling on the old paper. But now I beat a hand injury
Steve Jobs … so right, brilliant/insightful. But may be surprised to know sales & marketing personnel made 2x-3x MORE than Apple engineers, at least in late 1980’s. (Then an independent Apple developer co-marketing my software with Apple.)
WOW!
Let us also never forget the fact that Apple was guilty of inventing their own screws that they put into the iPad. They are guilty of gluing the batteries into iPhones. They are guilty of the genius bar where you go into an Apple store and instead of trying to repair your item they literally will tell you you need to buy an entirely new item and I believe that Apple was suit on that and lost the lawsuit. I use Apple products, but I find Apple corporation to be a terrible corporation who pushes their ideas on everyone who is anti-competitive who has helped the Chinese grow fat and rich thanks a lot Apple we really appreciate you. I sent this from my iPad.
Stop buying their shit
How much of that is after Steve Jobs no longer ran the company?
“Cook joined Apple in March 1998 as a senior vice president for worldwide operations, and then served as the executive vice president for worldwide sales and operations.[4] He was made the chief executive on August 24, 2011, prior to Jobs' death in October of that year. … He received a Bachelor of Science degree with a major in industrial engineering from Auburn University in 1982 and a Master of Business Administration from Duke University in 1988. … Cook spent 12 years in IBM's personal computer business, ultimately serving as the director of North American fulfillment.[19] During this time, Cook also earned his MBA from Duke University, becoming a Fuqua Scholar in 1988.[20] Later, he served as the chief operating officer of the computer reseller division of Intelligent Electronics.[21] In 1997, he became the vice president for corporate materials at Compaq for six months, but left the position after being hired by Steve Jobs.”
I’ve gone to the Genius Bar 6-8 times over the years. Not once have they every told me to buy a new item.
@@ronaldbell7429 then you're lucky
The situation of Unity Engine.
It funny he says this bc I live in a world [outside the US] where the only job you can get with Apple is with Sales and Marketing...its funny too bc I always thought he as a Sales guy, a very good one; far above most I would say with his reality distortion field he was famous for.
Just described Hollywood for at least the past decade
Basically modern cinema 🎥
🔥
Products =Leaderships
Inventions works = Money
Inventions don't work = Wisdoms
Direct vs Indirect
The wisdoms of operation systems keep markets variable and alive
The hands creat the miracles
😂😂❤❤
I worked for Kodak, then i worked for Xerox, they were both destroyed by their short sighted managers, who thought they could make a good living off the backs of the true pioneers who pushed technology forward.
Isn't it ironic how apple has pretty much become exactly what Steve warned us about.
Of course, I am sure the opposite can be true as well. Focusing on the product and neglecting sales and marketing would of been the end of many companies I bet.
Surprisingly, this also applies to most monopolies. Look at Disney.
And today the next iphone is the same as the last iphone
Sounds like the problem at my (monopoly) utility company.
It is leadership
Is he talking about Tim Cook?
That's exactly what's happening with SAP. They mostly focus on marketing, not on making their product better.
It comes down to the fact, that the new better product would hurt the value of the old golden goose.
-Same reason, it took Google so long to release Google Bart.
The LLM is bad for Google search revenue in some conception.