the Immoral Entrepreneur?

[amirm]

Great interview with author Malcolm Gladwell ("Outliers"). Jump to around 9:00 minutes for the more interesting parts:

Great comments on Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, etc. Really worthwhile and fun to watch.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

A fair amount of business wisdom there, but I'll have to check him off as one more analyst who doesn't get Apple. Yes, Jobs was obsessed with design, and the oxygen mask story is amusing. But design is not what makes Apple products what they are -- a superior, integrated system of products and services or a frustratingly closed one, depending on your POV -- what makes them what they are, and has made them wildly succeed where their predecessor products (he's right that they didn't do much of anything first) floundered, was Jobs' even greater obsession with the user experience. And when someone doesn't get that, the rest of their business wisdom, smart as it may sound, becomes suspect, because the user experience is almost everything.

Tim

 

[amirm]

Well, for me the realization was that Jobs took his money to the grave with him. Now a bunch of relatives are rich beyond their wildest needs. Bill used his IQ to realize this and changed his course of action. Jobs was so focused on his success that he did not. He lacked sensibility in that regard. Just like the oxygen mask story....

 

[cjfrbw]

Gladwell's term was amoral, not immoral.

I don't think Jobs accepted the reality of his own death. Giving away that kind of money is a full time job to do it right. Jobs just wanted to keep doing what he wanted to do.

It was surprising to hear that he probably shortened his life by ignoring medical advise and pursuing some kine of holistic hocus pocus at critical junctures of his illness, but then maybe not, that kind of ego would trump any kind of advice.

 

[Keith_W]

It was surprising to hear that he probably shortened his life by ignoring medical advise and pursuing some kine of holistic hocus pocus at critical junctures of his illness, but then maybe not, that kind of ego would trump any kind of advice.

He didn't "probably" shorten his life - consensus is that he DEFINITELY shortened his life. When you are offered potentially curative surgery at an early stage of your cancer, you take it. By refusing surgery, he signed his own death warrant.

 

[NorthStar]

-----This is called 'ego', a derivative function of narcissism.

...Or a lack of touch with true reality. ...A mind lapse ....

* And professional psychiatrists/psychologists are not sure of a cure for them people.
...Because them people exactly think that they don't need a cure, a treatment, as they are already perfect; and they simply would refuse such treatment, and walk away and go back to their own demise.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Jobs never retired. Had he lived long enough to do so, we don't know what he would have done with the next stage of his life. Perhaps he never would have retired. Running a business for the passion for the products, making money as a result, is a bit harder to walk away from than chasing winning for the sake of winning. In spite of the obvious parallels, I think Gates and jobs had careers that were very different, and necessarily came to very different ends. And I don't think Gates' predictable exit into atonement is at all surprising. It probably will make more history, though.

Tim

 

[Keith_W]

I don't think so. I think Gates has contributed far more to the well-being of mankind, whereas Jobs has contributed to the well-being of his closed cult of followers. Ultimately Jobs will be viewed as the greater man, simply because people are vapid and shallow.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Just count me as one not overly impressed by the ruthless businessman's December transition into philanthropist. It is what it is, and I'm glad to see anyone take a turn toward the light, but it's an old, predictable, story. I'll bet the robber barrons turned philanthropists of the 19th century are still pleading their cases at the gates of heaven.

Tim

 

[NorthStar]

I don't think so. I think Gates has contributed far more to the well-being of mankind, whereas Jobs has contributed to the well-being of his closed cult of followers. Ultimately Jobs will be viewed as the greater man, simply because people are vapid and shallow.

-----Something rings wright on that .... :b

 

[Johnny Vinyl]

Without Melinda I don't think Bill would have been quite as "generous".

 

[Ronm1]

Without Melinda I don't think Bill would have been quite as "generous".

Now there's a WAF for ya!!

 

[Mosin]

I don't think so. I think Gates has contributed far more to the well-being of mankind, whereas Jobs has contributed to the well-being of his closed cult of followers. Ultimately Jobs will be viewed as the greater man, simply because people are vapid and shallow.

I believe the exact opposite.

A question:
Who was the greater man, Thomas Edison or Nicola Tesla?

 

[Soundproof]

Foundations are a great way of keeping substantial wealth intact, and are therefore used for that precise purpose. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation does good, and is an excellent tax-shelter.

Jobs was a psycho with a mission, and probably convinced himself that his absurd attitude to health, food and cures was going to keep him going. He put the money back into Apple, while waiting for the day when his company would surpass Microsoft in value. Job accomplished, he died.

 

[JackD201]

All I can say is I loved the book. I put my son in school later rather than earlier and he is doing very well. Thanks Malcolm.

Both Gates and Jobs have made my life easier and better. They deserved my money.