"Brilliant, yes, but not an Einstein"

I'm loving the tech geeks who seem to think anyone other than them would give a ***** about their work if it wasn't for people like Jobs and Gates.
 
I agree. It is the worst article ever written on Steve Jobs. She obviously has zero knowledge on anything IT related and it shows. She should rather be writing for tabloits.

*Malema voice* She's a man *clears throat* And he writes for the Daily Mail which is a tabloid.
 
In fact there wouldn't be nearly as big a market for your work. You'd all be TV repairmen with an obscure hobby.
 
haha, I see iol has censored my comments on that article and not published them.
 
Actually, probably one of the truest articles written. Jobs didn't really invent anything (no, he didn't invent the GUI, ask Xerox), he merely knew how to make things sell. Great business man, terrible inventor. As for innovator, maybe, but there have been innovations with much more reaching implications than his (where's Claude Shannon's world cry-a-thon?).

Anyways, flame away fanboys. Fact is, he's done little for humanity except for increasing consumerism and I guess if one doesn't know the real processes of research, invention and innovation, they wouldn't be able to comprehend this.

Exactly couldn't have said it better myself.
 
We should be thankful that Jobs is no Einstein otherwise it would be cool to own nuclear weapons.
 
You would swear he ran apple and designed/marketed all its products man alone the way people are going on. ***** pays to be a good businessman now days ,get compared to jesus for making a pretty phone and ripping thousands of people off.
 
That article was written by clearly the most jaded journalist on the planet - and everything out of context.
I am no Jobs fan & his death quite frankly is neither here nor there with me, & as an Apple user it effects me & what I do with my computer in no manner whatsoever.

Someone as equally tired & jaded as that journalist, living in Europe can say the same of apartheid - so what, it didn't effect me - Nelson Mandela, Tutu & others dealt with a localised problem that didn't effect me & the rest of the world really.

The same goes for Thatcher & others regards Gorbachev - didn't effect me - don't give a hoot.

Cancer - how many people who are not affected by this terrible disease in any way are really having sleepless nights about a cure.

It's what he did that he was really good at , not what he was not trying to do - like solving global poverty & bringing about peace on earth!

Money being no object, most would probably choose an iPhone over a Nokia, a MacBook Pro over a Dell, an iPod over a Zune, an iPad over a Kindle and so on.

That, is where his "brilliance" lay, in his field of expertise, & there only - not solving humanitarian problems.
Trying to diminish what he set out to do & do so successfully, by comparing him to Mandela & others is disingenuous & obtuse at best.
This is the type of journalist we can pretty much expect to try diminish the stature of Nelson Mandela when he dies by comparing him to Henry Ford, Alexander Graham Bell & the Wright brothers!
 
Last edited:
Stuff that did change the world:
Computer
Transistor
Integrated Circuit


All Steve Jobs did, was use existing technology to create products and market them cleverly. Not an easy feat in itself, but hardly world changing...
 
iWonder if people realise that jobs did not single handedly invent all his shiny overpriced gadgets.... he knew how to sell them though, thats for sure.
 
iWonder if people realise that jobs did not single handedly invent all his shiny overpriced gadgets.... he knew how to sell them though, thats for sure.
Well isn't that the most important thing about any innovation ... getting people to feel they really "need" to haves it?
Edison didn't invent the light bulb, but he sure as hell knew how to get it to market and who do you think gets credit for the innovation?
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X