Steve Jobs' Real Genius: Tweaking, Curating, Editing & Remixing To Make Things Better
from the indeed dept
We've argued a few times that Steve Jobs' real success wasn't in inventing anything particularly new, but in taking what others had done and making it better. That's why we found his complaints about Android seem so odd. Now, as a ton of you have submitted, Malcolm Gladwell has penned a piece on Steve Jobs' "real genius," which he describes (eloquently, as always) as a "tweaker" more than inventor. Elsewhere, he's described as an "editor," rather than inventor.Jobs’s sensibility was editorial, not inventive. His gift lay in taking what was in front of him—the tablet with stylus—and ruthlessly refining it. After looking at the first commercials for the iPad, he tracked down the copywriter, James Vincent, and told him, “Your commercials suck.”This is a key point that we've been arguing about for years. There's tremendous value in what Jobs did: innovating not actually by inventing, but by tweaking and "editing" the ideas and designs of others to make them "perfect." That act of taking what others have done and making it more valuable is such an underrated skill -- and yet it's really the key ingredient to innovation.
“Well, what do you want?” Vincent shot back. “You’ve not been able to tell me what you want.”I’ll know it when I see it. That was Jobs’s credo, and until he saw it his perfectionism kept him on edge. He looked at the title bars—the headers that run across the top of windows and documents—that his team of software developers had designed for the original Macintosh and decided he didn’t like them. He forced the developers to do another version, and then another, about twenty iterations in all, insisting on one tiny tweak after another, and when the developers protested that they had better things to do he shouted, “Can you imagine looking at that every day? It’s not just a little thing. It’s something we have to do right.”
“I don’t know,” Jobs said. “You have to bring me something new. Nothing you’ve shown me is even close.”
Vincent argued back and suddenly Jobs went ballistic. “He just started screaming at me,” Vincent recalled. Vincent could be volatile himself, and the volleys escalated.
When Vincent shouted, “You’ve got to tell me what you want,” Jobs shot back, “You’ve got to show me some stuff, and I’ll know it when I see it.”
If you look back, historically, it's what Thomas Edison really did as well. He didn't actually invent very much himself. But he took others' ideas and made them better -- often recognizing how valuable the ideas were much more than those who originally came up with them. That's a form of editing and a form of remixing to make things better -- and Edison and Jobs were both amazingly skillful at it. So skillful, that many people falsely credit them with "inventing" things they really just remixed.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: curation, editing, innovation, remix, steve jobs, tweaking
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Steve Jobs "genius" was in being a bigger asshole than anybody else in dork valley.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Exactly, the idea that it takes wings to fly can only belong to one, or in this case two men. Oh, and birds. They kind of had the lock on winged flight for a long time. Maybe we should think of the birds?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Innovation
:)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
But ideas are owned
Today, the balance of power between IP holders (copyright & patents) is far to weighted to the inventor. In fact, I would say there really is no balance. Its as if a 100 lb weakling is standing on the opposite side of the scales form the 800 lb gorilla. To say there is any kind of balance is a joke.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Really, if Apple's products were Better, don't you think they could have gotten more than 8% of the PC market?
Better implies an absolute: all other parts equal, a 3 gigahertz processor is BETTER than a 2 gigahertz processor. Apples products did no such thing. They appealed more to a subset of the population who wanted an easy way to accomplish tasks via computing devices, and did not mind paying a premium and losing some flexibility.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Sometimes it's power consumption, sometime it durability or just cost.
Not everyone want best, some people prefer cheap.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
That was kind of his point, wasn't it? Apple products aren't "better" than the competition, they're just different. For example, I was shopping for a large screen laptop. I got a Windows 17" laptop for about $650. I could have had a 17" Mac for something like $2000. Was the Mac better? Not for me, I got what I needed and saved $1300.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Processor (type and clockspeed)
Memory (size, type and clockspeed)
Storage (size and type - SSD or platter based)
Ports (number and type - USB 3?, Thunderbolt?, HDMI?, etc..)
Which OS is included (a stripped down windows? 64 or 32 bit)
Additional software included? (not crapwear - useful pgms)
Bluetooth? (macs come standard with bluetooth connectivity)
After you upgrade your machine to matching specifications, please let me know how much your "bargain" system cost you. And then consider the added value of an all aluminum case, a magnetically connected power connector that doesn't damage the case just because you trip over the cord, the minimal impact of viruses on the platform, etc...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
You guys just love to lose dont you?
Apple fan boys - No amount of reason gets through.
"Bluetooth? (macs come standard with bluetooth connectivity)" LOL. I almost fell off my chair on that one.
And before you start crying I support both platforms, and own quite a few MAC's as well... as well as I didnt pay for them. LOL.
MAC MAC MAC MAC MAC MAC MAC. Shut up already. We all know you are just buying locked down PC hardware.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Why would I do that? My requirements were 1. new 2. laptop 3. 17" screen. The $700 computer met all those requirements just as well as the $2000 one.
And then consider the added value of an all aluminum case,
Don't care...
a magnetically connected power connector that doesn't damage the case just because you trip over the cord,
Never tripped over the cord...
the minimal impact of viruses on the platform,
Can't get lower than zero (I never got any viruses)...
etc...
If you want to buy Apple because it's a better match for you, go right ahead, I won't criticize you. I chose to save a boatload of money by forgoing all that Apple stuff, and it worked out fine for me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Clock speed is not everything, and by extension bigger is not always better. My quad core processor running at 2.8 GHz will far outperform my older single core clocked at 3.2 GHz. My server's Xeon processors are only clocked at 1.8 GHz but because of the architecture are far more capable than my quad core.
As I'm fond of saying, use the right tool for the job. For gaming and general computing, use a Windows PC. For servers, either Linux or BSD, for niche needs and nerdy street cred, use Linux, if you're idea of turning on the computer is smacking your forehead into the "on" button and you lack any sort of problem solving ability, by all means use a Mac.
Written by an Arrogant Linux Elitist.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Currently 12.5% US, and rising.
But back in the day, they weren't THAT much better, and Sculley insisted that Apple matain their premium prices. Microsoft shipped Windows, and to penny-pinching corporations, one machine with windows and a mouse looked pretty much like another machine with windows and a mouse. And since one was significantly cheaper...
Then people started using computers at home, and they got what they already knew and used at work.
"They appealed more to a subset of the population who wanted..."
Who wanted to actually get things done, instead of fighting with the machine.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Microsoft also had the ability to run tons of software, from nearly all versions of it's software. DOS programs run on Windows 7 machines! Does an OS7 program run on OSX? Any of them?
Microsoft has Visual Studio, allowing anyone to write software. Especially now with the Express Editions. And let's not even bring up Linux, with all development tools and libraries free for the taking...
What was Apple's development studio called again?
BTW, Wikipedia say's 8.15% share, I dunno where you got your data.
I also see that you are dedicated to Apple development on your profile. I think it would be safe to say you are not a neutral commenter. Neither am I, as I only code for Windows and Linux systems.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What Edison did best.....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What Edison did best.....
Do we even have the names of the design engineers who made the iPhone 4? Or the iPad? Or the iPod? Or do we just attribute this to Jobs because he was the one on stage holding it during a press conference?
Pretty much all CEOs do this, Edison was the definition of a modern-day CEO. Riding atop the shoulders of the true nameless geniuses who were below him.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: What Edison did best.....
You mean like Ive?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: What Edison did best.....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A minor counter
Then you just put the next wave of refinements into the next product and upsale the improvements :D
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The ulimate VAR
I'm not a Jobs fan or even an Apple fanboi (I don't own a single Apple product), but I do like to give credit where credit it is due. Jobs has earned a tip of the cap from me for helping advance modern consumer electronics.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"then gets a better grade..."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Shouting at people to "produce" is your notion of innovation?
And I consider all Apple products crap.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Shouting at people to "produce" is your notion of innovation?
Almost all of their products are as good as or better than their competitors. Asthetics, user experience, features and ease of use are what brings customers into Apple stores. While you are stomping your feet about how bad Apple products are every electronics manufacture in the world is trying to duplicate their success.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Shouting at people to "produce" is your notion of innovation?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That is a skill.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Uhh, really WOW..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Uhh, really WOW..
What gave you the idea Techdirt is a news agency? It's an opinion blog.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Uhh, really WOW..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Did their utmost
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Steve Jobs is not really dead
He's also working on a new version of Einstein's theory of relativity. Much better, smoother and appealing to the ear, and here's the kicker, it looks much better on paper than the original formula, he's using a fully copyrighted font called 'Apple Retentive Helvetica' Patents on the new theory are pending.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
There ain't no Inventors
"That's a form of editing and a form of remixing to make things better -- and Edison and Jobs were both amazingly skillful at it. So skillful, that many people falsely credit them with "inventing" things they really just remixed."
As I have posted elsewhere:
These observations are both very true and very important to our proper understanding of this World.
What is almost always overlooked, however, because of our naturally anthropocentric standpoint is the logical consequence of such observations. Namely that, except in a very limited sense, we do not "create" or "design" things but rather that and technology EVOLVE within the medium of our collective imagination.
As Carl Sagan put it "To make an apple pie from scratch you first have to create the universe"
Without Jobs we would still have functionally comparable user interfaces, pointing devices and so forth. Just as without Newton or Liebnitz we would still have the calculus of variations, or relativity without Einstein, without Stephenson, the steam engine, without Edison, the phonograph I am not disparaging any of these individuals but it must be admitted they were mostly picking the low-hanging fruit.
This is a major theme of my latest book : "The Goldilocks Effect: What Has Serendipity Ever Done For Us?" (free download in e-book formats from the "Unusual Perspectives" website)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
adding value
What he actually did is turning an existing set of inventions, refining them, deciding what worked and what not, mass-produce them and make the WHOLE world perceive them as premium objects.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]