Steve Jobs has passed away after his quite public battle with cancer. Say what you like about apple (and if you've seen the iPhone 4S thread, you'll see that I usually do), but you can't fault Jobs' business instinct.

No decent person should die at 56.

if every decent person died at 56, blinky would only have 4 years to live D: cancer is an evil thing, one of my 17 year old friends has had leukemia twice, and someone in my year was found to have something wrong to do with their brain involving blood (I don't know the details), which wasn't an aneurysm so the Norfolk and Norwich hospital think they have a brain tumour =/ (the diagnosis is due tonight) which is incredibly unfair at the age of 14

Blinky is 52? I didn't know that.
But steve was a legend, even with all his gimmics he changed the way we use computers.

operator:hello. welcome to starbucks, how may i help you?
steve:yeah, id like 4000 lattes to go please XD ?

one of the BEST steve quotes EVER before he died!
note: this quote was taken from the first iphone announcement!

Blinkly is 52? I didn't know that.
But steve was a legend, even with all his gimmics he changed the way we use computers.

joeboe1998

who is this BLINKLY you speak of

Just in time for their new product, the iDied.
What, too soon?

I don't think it was cancer. I think he saw the new iPhone 4S and went "But it's exactly the same!" I think Steve Jobs died of shame.

I don't think it was cancer. I think he saw the new iPhone 4S and went "But it's exactly the same!" I think Steve Jobs died of shame.

Discharge

You know, I said something similar on G+. Someone posted "If you could say one thing to Steve Jobs, what would it be?"

My reply was "The iPhone 4S announcement wasn't THAT bad!"

...I immediately felt like an insensitive prat. In my defence, though, I said it to a group of Applytes, not Steve Jobs' family.

I think it was horrible that he had to go.

I know that the Iphone 4S isn't that good but....

He was a good guy

He was a genius.

They are gonna put Steve jobs in an iCoffin apparently.
Too bad it doesn't come with iLife lik tge iMacs do! ):

The world has lost a great visionary today, that visionary changed the way we look at technology.That person was Steve Jobs, RIP.

we've not lost a genius and a revolutionary, we've lost a businessman that got very lucky and made the right choices of people to hire to do the work he used to do.

He (or rather his employees) mastered the art of putting a circuit board in a fancy package and selling it at ludicrously higher markups than the competition.

That's business! And I wont deny that he was bloody good at it too!

It's a shame to lose a great and humble person though, which is the case when anyone of reasonable ethics passes on. He's no revolutionary though. Computers would have still become as popular, and hardware advances would in all probability have evolved in much the same way.

People are making it out to be so much more than it is.

Probably

lots of stuff...

diablothe2nd

You're drastically underestimating Jobs' impact on computers.

It's a generally accepted fact that important milestones in human history would have happened regardless, meaning that, if Newton hadn't come up with the laws of motion, someone else would. There is no guarantee, however, that it would have happened anywhere near as early.

Jobs didn't invent things (nor did he ever claim to) but he was a visionary. He micro-managed Apple on a scale that no other CEO [in tech] has done or does. This can be seen as a bad thing, but look at it this way; micro-managing on that scale puts you in a position of culpability much greater than someone who runs their company normally. If Apple had failed, it would have been Steve Jobs' fault.

Apple didn't fail [while Jobs' was in charge] though.

My point about Newton is relevant because, without Jobs, it might have been years before we got a decent GUI. Without Jobs, the music industry might have taken another decade to go digital. Without Jobs, the personal computer might only just be coming into the mainstream, let alone iPhones, iPads or iPods.

The term "genius" is not exclusive to mathematics or science. Innovation is not exclusive to those who make things.

Would we have gotten to where we are without Steve Jobs? Most likely. Would we have gotten there as quickly? I doubt it.

Also, he was ruthless when it came to business, a complete control freak, and as focused on his goals as a laser beam. Look at how much Apple as affected technology, and then look at how much Jobs has affected Apple.

my point was to emphasise that people are hailing him in a godly status.

jobs did not do much for gui's. like microsoft, ideas were copied/stolen and improved on. in the 80's there were so many computing companies popping up and dying that it'd be very difficult indeed to trace the route of who got there first for many things without looking at the patent suits from the big boys buying out and shutting down the smaller companies to retain the patents for future suits. the 90's wasn't much better either.

if my memory of computing history serves me correctly microsoft actually stole the mouse point and click idea from xerox. macOSX "borrows" alot of unix code... as does windows (microsoft AND apple were both caught out for close sourcing code with a GPL license!). hell even unix/linux have pinched from the other two.

my point is that fundamental advances in computing were rife anyway. everyone borrows ideas and improves on them. linux was first with the wobbly windows and window squashing into the dock, not apple. amiga was there first with true multithreaded multitasking, not microsft.

apple did not invent the mp3 player, the smart phone, the powerpc based computer and most of the features of their os are based on someone elses. like i said, the only thing they innovate in is fancy packaging and a more expensive price tag with an expensive and flashy marketing campagin. i bet their cust services is no better than microsofts either. but hey... everyone does it... it's just when someone does it to apple, they dig out a vaguely written patent either aquired from agressive takeovers or thought up in the pub and written on a beer mat and take it to court!

more to my point of "luck" in apples business. i recall gates helped jobs out just before they collapsed... or was that amstrad? or both? i forget which. what if gates decided to help commodore? or sinclair? but wait, they weren't best buddies in their youth

then there's apple's string of ridiculous patent suits. if anything apple's crippling innovation to the point where they're negating all the cool stuff they brought to the table by crushing innovation. unless it's their own innovation of course.

jobs was never a saint businesswise. he was a ruthless businessman. he did have great personality qualities though which is why i'm not saying a bad word about him as a person.

You're drastically underestimating Jobs' impact on computers.

"beagrie"

The only thing apple did that "changed the world" was making an online downloadable service tied to devices which allowed people to easily download applications/music/etc. Everything else was just other peoples ideas shoved in an expensive "Stylish" case.

All Apple really does is make existing technology "Cool", so more people buy it. Tablets existed before the IPad, its just they weren't "Cool", so only Geeks would have been interested in one. IPhones are meant to be rubbish as a phone, but they are stylish and cool.

The technology however has not improved because of Apple. IPhones, IPods, IPads, etc do not make the world a better place

Steve saved Apple by realising that if you make something Stylish then people will pay inflated prices for it. He was good at making money, but he didn't improve technology.

if my memory of computing history serves me correctly microsoft actually stole the mouse point and click idea from xerox.

Apple took the Windows/Icons idea from xerox. They gave them apple shares to get a tour and see what they had developed. Apple as far as i understand had to write there own version but they "Nicked"(Technically they paid for it) the idea and also took some of there staff(Well hired them). I don't know if Microsoft nicked from xerox or apple.

@diablo - it sounds like you're mostly agreeing with me; Jobs didn't create, he improved. (As Stux pointed out, it was Apple that took the GUI idea from Xerox, Windows copied Elise). Steve Jobs even famously said that, had they done things differently, Xerox could have owned the computer market today.

They didn't, though. Steve Jobs did.

@Stux - Again, yes, he took other people's ideas and made them stylish, but that's rather the point, isn't it? What he did to Xerox's GUI created a demand for personal computers from people who weren't coders or hackers. GUI's were around, but it was Apple's GUI that got copied and became the standard.

To take another example, how many smart phones were keyboardless before the iPhone? The idea of a phone without a physical keyboard was laughed at. Now, it's hard to find a phone with a keyboard.

Microsoft have been trying to push tablet PC's since the 90's, yet nobody wanted one until the iPad came around, and now everyone is copying that.

iTunes - not the first music download service, certainly the most successful
iPod - not the first mp3 player - definitely the most successful

Jobs went to the length of taking a picture of the strap on his wrist watch and emailing it to a technician because it was exaclty how he wanted the brushed metal effect in Apple software to look like. He always had an exact vision of how things should be, and nine times out of ten, it became the standard for the rest of the industry.

Apples not always a round of a plause for everybody that watches Thier WWDC meet-ups. Only recently did apple announced the 4S - everyone was cheering at the announcement - but when you interview those who were there, you will find they will be pretty disappointed by it if they have a 3GS. A friend told me: "I waited 15 months for a 5 to come out but it's only just a slight upgrade to the 4 - better RAM, better CPU. that was what o cared about. Not f**king Siri and sending postcards through your phone - especially when there are apps that can do the same thing, like funky pidgeon"

And that brings me onto copying- iOS 5 now includes iChat, with is apples version of BBM, them there is sending postcards for the new 4S. As my fiend above stated - there are apps lIke funky pidgeon or similar like that!

@Beagrie: When it comes the GUI and Mouse, Apple were the first to have commercial success using them. That doesn't mean that they changed the landscape of computing. It was other companies that were behind them and the sole reason that we have them today. Without apple someone else would have done it. Thats the point. Without apple you would still have the same technology.

Microsoft have been trying to push tablet PC's since the 90's, yet nobody wanted one until the iPad came around, and now everyone is copying that.

Tablets are pointless for home users. Apple is good at making gimic technology sellable to home users. A tablet does not improve life in any way... unless you like looking at your e-mail on the toilet. A computer/laptop is a far better solution. The only market where tablets are useful is where you are on the move alot, like a doctor in a hospital. Thats where tablets shine.

To take another example, how many smart phones were keyboardless before the iPhone? The idea of a phone without a physical keyboard was laughed at. Now, it's hard to find a phone with a keyboard.

Most ideas in history were laughed at when they were first though of, then someone comes along years later, implements it and its a success. Timing is one of the things you need. Most ideas are before there time. Projection keyboards for example existed since around 2002, so the idea of removing the need for a keyboard from devices was around before the iPhone. So the concept was already around.

P.S IPhones/IPads like to freeze. Just because they have sold alot doesn't make the devices good. People mainly buy them because of social reasons, IPhones/IPads are the stylish device to impress your friends. If people want a working phone for phone calls they would pick a device which had a better track record at being a phone.

------------------

All apple did was make devices look stylish. They were not innovative. Without apple you would still have mouse's, you would still have GUI's like todays, etc. The only difference is devices may not look as "stylish". The look of a device does not change the course of computing, technology innovation does.

When it comes to standards, they only come from what is the most popular, not what is the best.

P.S While i think apple are an evil company who only cares about ripping people off, that does not change my views on what has been a good contribution to technology/computing. I don't believe that apple have done anything special which has really made a difference. They are not the shining beacon of innovation like Applites would have you believe.

@stux - Here we go again

@Beagrie: When it comes the GUI and Mouse, Apple were the first to have commercial success using them. That doesn't mean that they changed the landscape of computing. It was other companies that were behind them and the sole reason that we have them today. Without apple someone else would have done it. Thats the point. Without apple you would still have the same technology.

But someone else didn't, Steve Jobs did. GUI and Mouse changed the landscape of computing, and Steve Jobs brought GUI and Mouse to the masses. He didn't invent them, he made them successful. I believe my earlier reply to Diablo pointed out that, had someone else (Newton, in my example), not done something when they did, someone else would probably have done it. Are you saying that Einstein did not change the landscape of physics because someone else would have made the conclusions he made, eventually?

Tablets are pointless for home users. Apple is good at making gimic technology sellable to home users. A tablet does not improve life in any way... unless you like looking at your e-mail on the toilet. A computer/laptop is a far better solution. The only market where tablets are useful is where you are on the move alot, like a doctor in a hospital. Thats where tablets shine.

Except that's exactly what Steve Jobs proved wrong. Microsoft were unsuccessful with tablets in the commercial industry for years because they were pointless. The iPad comes along and, hey presto, people at home have a use for them. You might still think they're pointless (so do I, as matter of fact, but for MY purposes, not in general) but millions of people don't.

Most ideas in history were laughed at when they were first though of, then someone comes along years later, implements it and its a success. Timing is one of the things you need. Most ideas are before there time. Projection keyboards for example existed since around 2002, so the idea of removing the need for a keyboard from devices was around before the iPhone. So the concept was already around.

I believe I said that. Keyboardless phones have been around for years, and nobody wanted them. Jobs' iPhone was put together in a way that made them attractive and useful. Time was a key element. The tech has been around for over a decade, Jobs has been in charge of Apple (the second time) from 1999, he could have made an iPhone any time in the last decade, but he didn't, he made it in 2007, and it was a success. I fail to see how the fact that it was a matter of timing diminishes the achievement. Are you saying he was just lucky?

P.S IPhones/IPads like to freeze. Just because they have sold alot doesn't make the devices good. People mainly buy them because of social reasons, IPhones/IPads are the stylish device to impress your friends. If people want a working phone for phone calls they would pick a device which had a better track record at being a phone.

I won't argue that a heavy amount of initial sales are because Apple devices are pretty, but you can't possibly be claiming that that they are broken. I use an Android phone, I wouldn't go back to an iPhone (short of some amazing tech additions) and I could probably be called a Google fanboy, but I can admit that my Nexus S crashes a hell of a lot more than my iPhone ever did.

All apple did was make devices look stylish. They were not innovative. Without apple you would still have mouse's, you would still have GUI's like todays, etc. The only difference is devices may not look as "stylish". The look of a device does not change the course of computing, technology innovation does.

Yes, we probably would still have mouses and GUI's, and whoever had brought them to mass market would be as much an innovator as Steve Jobs was. The fact of the matter is, Xerox didn't bring it to market. beOS didn't cut the mustard, DOS was too confusing for most people, Unix was too confusing for everyone! Apple changed all that, the fact that somebody else would have done it if Jobs hadn't is irrelevant; he did do it.

When it comes to standards, they only come from what is the most popular, not what is the best.

"Best" is subjective. If you're looking solely at hardware specs then, yes, Apple is very rarely the "best." What about looks? Well, that's subjective. Apple are known for being stylish, yet I am bored to tears of the look of iOS and the iPhone. I think they look dull and bland, but a general consensus would probably place Apple as "best" when it comes to looks.

Ultimately, "best" can be determined by whatever criteria you like, but "the one that most people want to buy" is a damn good indicator.

@itsme - Yeah, the iPhone 4S announcement was a let down (both as an event and as a product), but the general belief now is that Tim Cook (and the rest of Apple) knew what was happening with Jobs (how could they not?) and that contributed to the lacklustre keynote. As for the product itself, I blame Apple fanboys/the press. They all wanted an iPhone 5, they all said it was going to be an iPhone 5, why? The 3G was followed by the slightly upgraded 3GS, why did they expect an full version jump here?

I was generally surprised at the disappointment, I thought people were hoping for an iPhone 5, I didn't realise that they genuinely expected one.

Are you saying that Einstein did not change the landscape of physics because someone else would have made the conclusions he made, eventually?

beagrie

Einstein invented maths. Apple invented nothing.

The iPad comes along and, hey presto, people at home have a use for them. You might still think they're pointless (so do I, as matter of fact, but for MY purposes, not in general) but millions of people don't.

beagrie

They are pointless for anything other than to people who are on the move alot like doctors. Most people will use them at home sitting down, which is a pointless use for them as a laptop is a better solution. But laptops are not a fashion accessory, they are not a social status symbol.

Are you saying he was just lucky?

beagrie

Im saying he never did anything special, he took other peoples ideas and put them in a stylish case. That in my book does not make him a guy who changes the course of history, the people who change the course of history are the people who invent innovative things. The very people which he nicked ideas off. The person who invented the mouse made a far bigger contribution than the first person to make alot of money selling them.

I could probably be called a Google fanboy

beagrie

That isn't coming through based on this thread.

but I can admit that my Nexus S crashes a hell of a lot more than my iPhone ever did.

beagrie

My phone never crashes. But thats proberly because its just a phone. It doesn't have any of the pointless crap (Though it does have some, like a camera with such a rubbish resolution you can't make out peoples faces in the pictures, etc) that the IPhone or any of the recent phones have. Im a practical guy, when i buy a phone i want a phone, not a Mini PC which crashes...

but "the one that most people want to buy" is a damn good indicator.

beagrie

Public as a whole are morons. Individuals can be smart however. If you do polls about things you will find that quite a few times the public will not pick the "Correct" option.

For example, years ago i made a poll about which 2 button images would go well with a GUI. The first option was in the same theme as the GUI and fitted with the design. The second option didn't have the same theme, it stuck out like a sore thumb. The people chose the 2nd option even though it didn't match the GUI.

What you have to remember is with things like Phones people do not normaly choose them because they are the best phones. Alot of people choose them for social reasons like "I want a phone that impresses my friends". Phones are the Status symbols of today and Status symbols are all about what is "Cool" not what is innovative technology.

---------------------

Basically i believe that people who make the innovative technology, etc are the ones who change the course of history not the people who first bring it to market. The people who invent the technology are the true Heroes not the people who make the most money from the inventions.

@beagrie every apple fanboy wanted an iPhone 5, not a 4S to come out because of iOS 5! It would make no sense to release an iPhone 4S and then include it with iOS 5!
And the upgrade from 3G to 3GS was in the name, mainly because the second iPhone was called the 3G. So it would also make no sense to make the next iPhone the '4' when it Is the third iPhone, but if apple did, it would make sense to release the '4S' after that.

But no, apple had to make things complicated, and make a '4S' with iOS 5. Now that's a bit of an iFail.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9610000/9610863.stm

Einstein invented maths. Apple invented nothing.

That statement shows a complete lack of understanding of... well, anything. Nobody invented math, or English, or computing, or cars. Creation is an iterative process, one which Einstein built upon with his Theory of Relativity. Without all the work of those before him, Einstein wouldn't have been inventing the first numbering system, not the precursor to a unified theory of everything.

And, arguably, Apple have as much claim to invention of the personal computer as Frank Sinclair or Nolan Bushnell.

They are pointless for anything other than to people who are on the move alot like doctors. Most people will use them at home sitting down.

You, Stux, are not everybody. If doctors find a use for them, they are useful for something. If people want to sit at home and browse the Internet on their couch with an iPad, it is useful to them. The fact that it is not useful to you does not invalidate it as a product.

Im saying he never did anything special, he took other peoples ideas and put them in a stylish case...

That's your opinion. The fact is Apple, however they came by their products, shaped the personal computing world. Someone else could have done it, but Apple got their first.

...The person who invented the mouse made a far bigger contribution than the first person to make alot of money selling them.

That is a naive statement. Betamax and VHS. LaserDisc and DVD. HD-DVD and Blu-ray. Each product (except LaserDisc, I guess) was on-par with its competitor. Each technology was more or less equally innovative, yet the inventor of Betamax has contributed little to the world (through the sole creation of Betamax, I don't know if he did other things... or if he was a he, for that matter) but the inventor(s) of VHS inspired a generation of home video, changed copyright law and brought movies into the home.

The difference? VHS sold better.

I could probably be called a Google fanboy

beagrie

That isn't coming through based on this thread.

Fortunately, I don't feel the need for validation on this matter. This thread is about Apple, why would I talk about my Google fanboyism in detail.

My phone never crashes. But thats proberly because its just a phone. It doesn't have any of the pointless crap (Though it does have some, like a camera with such a rubbish resolution you can't make out peoples faces in the pictures, etc) that the IPhone or any of the recent phones have. Im a practical guy, when i buy a phone i want a phone, not a Mini PC which crashes...

Fair enough. I prefer to have an all in one device than a phone, a camera, etc. I accept crashing the price of progress. Neither of us are "wrong."

Public as a whole are morons. Individuals can be smart however. If you do polls about things you will find that quite a few times the public will not pick the "Correct" option.

For example, years ago i made a poll about which 2 button images would go well with a GUI. The first option was in the same theme as the GUI and fitted with the design. The second option didn't have the same theme, it stuck out like a sore thumb. The people chose the 2nd option even though it didn't match the GUI.

A GUI should cater to the user (Graphical USER Interface). If the user prefers an ugly-ass button that doesn't fit with the rest of the theme, unfortunately, that makes it the right choice.

What you have to remember is with things like Phones people do not normaly choose them because they are the best phones. Alot of people choose them for social reasons like "I want a phone that impresses my friends". Phones are the Status symbols of today and Status symbols are all about what is "Cool" not what is innovative technology.

That is partly true. I listen to constant technology podcasts, read tech blogs and have a number of tech friends. A lot of these people have iPhones. These are intelligent people whose job is knowing which devices are better.

A lot of them have iPhones.

The simple fact of the matter is, a product - any product - will only go so far on its looks. If I put out a book that is absolute rubbish, but has a really good cover and a well written blurb, it might sell well to start with because people like the look of the book, but, ultimately, it will flop, because it's rubbish.

The iPhone would not still be one of the best selling handsets in the world if it was, at its core, an inferior device.

Basically i believe that people who make the innovative technology, etc are the ones who change the course of history not the people who first bring it to market. The people who invent the technology are the true Heroes not the people who make the most money from the inventions.

On that point, we're at an impasse, as I doubt you'll change your mind on it. I think that, in finding/making a place for the personal computer in the world, Jobs did more than the person(s) who invented the mouse. You say that Jobs would have done nothing without the Xerox's GUI, but how could Xerox have come up with a GUI if someone before them hadn't invented programmable computing machines? How could that have happened if the valve hadn't been invented? How could the valve have been invented if someone long before hadn't worked out how to make and form glass?

How would we know about any of this, if someone didn't find a use for all these inventions in the real world?