posts about or somewhat related to ‘steve jobs’

Steve Jobs: Everything I Create Will Become Obsolete

Trailer for Steve Jobs: Visionary Entrepreneur.

Via Silicon Valley Historical Association:

Steve Jobs: Visionary Entrepreneur is a 60-minute documentary built around a 20-minute interview of Steve Jobs in 1994 that was conducted by the Silicon Valley Historical Association.

Steve Jobs was asked to give advice to young entrepreneurs who wanted to go out and start their own businesses. He talks about risk and the willingness to fail, the role of building illegal blue boxes prior to founding Apple Computer, and his philosophy on how to approach life.

FJP: We are all but sediment.

Polaroid
Wired: Steve Jobs considered [Polaroid Founder Edwin] Land one of his heroes. They both had a single-minded vision; they both paired a strong design sense with technology.
Christopher Bonanos: They were both artist-technologists, and both really believed in the importance of the product itself, instead of just filling a market segment or carving off some market share. You know, there were lots of MP3 players around before the iPod, and they were ugly or annoying to use or bulky or otherwise flawed–and then here came this perfect little white brick, and when you got it in your hand, you went aaaah. It went the same way with Land’s ultimate achievement, the SX-70 camera — it’s a marvel even now, because it’s a single-lens reflex camera that folds down flat to something barely bigger than the film pack inside. As perfect a little object as it could be.
Wired, Why Polaroid Was the Apple of Its Time.
Bonanos’ new book, Instant: The Story of Polaroid tracks the rise and near fall of the company.
Image: 1986 Polaroid booth near the New York’s World Trade Center introduces the Spectra system, via Wired.

Polaroid

Wired: Steve Jobs considered [Polaroid Founder Edwin] Land one of his heroes. They both had a single-minded vision; they both paired a strong design sense with technology.

Christopher Bonanos: They were both artist-technologists, and both really believed in the importance of the product itself, instead of just filling a market segment or carving off some market share. You know, there were lots of MP3 players around before the iPod, and they were ugly or annoying to use or bulky or otherwise flawed–and then here came this perfect little white brick, and when you got it in your hand, you went aaaah. It went the same way with Land’s ultimate achievement, the SX-70 camera — it’s a marvel even now, because it’s a single-lens reflex camera that folds down flat to something barely bigger than the film pack inside. As perfect a little object as it could be.

Wired, Why Polaroid Was the Apple of Its Time.

Bonanos’ new book, Instant: The Story of Polaroid tracks the rise and near fall of the company.

Image: 1986 Polaroid booth near the New York’s World Trade Center introduces the Spectra system, via Wired.

Forbes Blogger Steals $20,000 and 1 Million Pageviews from New York Times by Changing Headline
Now how’s that for a grabber? If it got your attention it just demonstrates how important headlines are in online journalism. Sensationalism, link bait, and a little SEO can be worth tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands of dollars to your organization.
The New York Times  got into a bit of a dustup over a piece of its investigative reporting that became a runaway hit only after it appeared Kashmir Hill’s Not-So Private Parts blog on Forbes. 
Nick O’Neill writes:

They say a picture is worth a thousand words, but how much is a title worth? If the story that proceeds is any indicator, a title is worth over 6700 words and months of research. It all began Friday when the New York Times published an article “How Companies Learn Your Secrets“. It was an extremely long article which discussed how large companies like WalMart and Target collect data about your individual consumption patterns to figure out how to most efficiently make you happy. It was a great piece but there was one problem: it didn’t have the title it deserved.
The original title was “How Companies Learn Your Secrets.” Kashmir Hill, a writer at Forbes, realized this and quickly developed a condensed version of the article with a far more powerful title: “How Target Figured Out A Teen Girl Was Pregnant Before Her Father Did“. It cut out the crap and got to the real shocker of the story. As of the writing of this story, the New York Times article has 60 likes and shares on Facebook versus 12,902 which the Forbes article has. The Forbes article also has a mind boggling 680,000 page views, a number that can literally make a writer’s career.

Even those numbers are a bit dated. The Forbes retelling will likely hit 1 million views before Monday morning. And beyond the pageview count, and prestige for the reporters involved, there’s a very real monetary cost associated with sloppy or overly-cautious headline writing. Let’s calculate.
A June 2010 report from Econsultancy pegs the average CPM for all news sites at $7 industry-wide. CPM stands for cost per mille and represents the amount of money publishers receive from display advertisements for each thousand pageviews. According to the report, the New York Times brand was receiving 32.5 million monthly viewers and 719 million pageviews in May of 2010. An average CPM of $7 drags down the likely value of display advertisements on the NYT, the website for the paper of record.
I tried to dig up some display advertising rates for NYT.com and I found a current rate sheet. That said, but I can’t conceive of anything less helpful. (The Times has a bit of attachment to opaque financial disclosures)  Assuming that the current CPM for the New York Times is $20,  the company forfeited $20,000 in potential advertising revenue to Forbes on the basis of a headline. My guess is that the Times has a much higher CPM than $20. Considering what staff journalists earn these days, a single headline cost The New York Times newsroom the equivalent several months of a reporter’s salary.  And the story no doubt  required the investment hundreds of man hours, and thousands of dollars in wages to. Unfortunately, it’s fair game and nothing will stop it from happening again.
The whole episode reminds me of the story from the Steve Jobs autobiography. In the early 1980s Jobs asked Gates and Microsoft to create a version visual interface, BASIC, for Apple’s Macintosh computers. In November of 1983, before Apple was able to ship its Apple IIs with a graphical user interface, Microsoft had already released an early version of Windows for IBM compatible machines, based on the product originally developed for Apple. Jobs was furious at Gates for ripping off the Windows operating system from Apple and summoned him to Cupertino for a brow beating. In a boardroom packed with Apple minions Gates calmly explained to Jobs that both Apple and Microsoft had stolen the idea from Xerox research, which they had been too slow to commercialize themselves. Gates told Jobs, “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.”
The rich neighbor is The New York Times in the news business. Almost every news outlet worth its salt rewrites original New York Times stories and tailors them for a specific audience. Parasitic properties like Gawker and Huffington Post would not exist were it not for the nourishment of a host like the Times. Today both are much larger and more robust organizations that publish plenty of original content.
Unfortunately for The New York Times Company, it is still years away from realizing the dollar value of its editorial influence, and its considerable investment in original reporting. In the meantime, expect the break-ins to continue unabated.
Image:Flickr

Forbes Blogger Steals $20,000 and 1 Million Pageviews from New York Times by Changing Headline

Now how’s that for a grabber? If it got your attention it just demonstrates how important headlines are in online journalism. Sensationalism, link bait, and a little SEO can be worth tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands of dollars to your organization.

The New York Times  got into a bit of a dustup over a piece of its investigative reporting that became a runaway hit only after it appeared Kashmir Hill’s Not-So Private Parts blog on Forbes. 

Nick O’Neill writes:

They say a picture is worth a thousand words, but how much is a title worth? If the story that proceeds is any indicator, a title is worth over 6700 words and months of research. It all began Friday when the New York Times published an article “How Companies Learn Your Secrets“. It was an extremely long article which discussed how large companies like WalMart and Target collect data about your individual consumption patterns to figure out how to most efficiently make you happy. It was a great piece but there was one problem: it didn’t have the title it deserved.

The original title was “How Companies Learn Your Secrets.” Kashmir Hill, a writer at Forbes, realized this and quickly developed a condensed version of the article with a far more powerful title: “How Target Figured Out A Teen Girl Was Pregnant Before Her Father Did“. It cut out the crap and got to the real shocker of the story. As of the writing of this story, the New York Times article has 60 likes and shares on Facebook versus 12,902 which the Forbes article has. The Forbes article also has a mind boggling 680,000 page views, a number that can literally make a writer’s career.

Even those numbers are a bit dated. The Forbes retelling will likely hit 1 million views before Monday morning. And beyond the pageview count, and prestige for the reporters involved, there’s a very real monetary cost associated with sloppy or overly-cautious headline writing. Let’s calculate.

A June 2010 report from Econsultancy pegs the average CPM for all news sites at $7 industry-wide. CPM stands for cost per mille and represents the amount of money publishers receive from display advertisements for each thousand pageviews. According to the report, the New York Times brand was receiving 32.5 million monthly viewers and 719 million pageviews in May of 2010. An average CPM of $7 drags down the likely value of display advertisements on the NYT, the website for the paper of record.

I tried to dig up some display advertising rates for NYT.com and I found a current rate sheet. That said, but I can’t conceive of anything less helpful. (The Times has a bit of attachment to opaque financial disclosures)  Assuming that the current CPM for the New York Times is $20,  the company forfeited $20,000 in potential advertising revenue to Forbes on the basis of a headline. My guess is that the Times has a much higher CPM than $20. Considering what staff journalists earn these days, a single headline cost The New York Times newsroom the equivalent several months of a reporter’s salary.  And the story no doubt  required the investment hundreds of man hours, and thousands of dollars in wages to. Unfortunately, it’s fair game and nothing will stop it from happening again.

The whole episode reminds me of the story from the Steve Jobs autobiography. In the early 1980s Jobs asked Gates and Microsoft to create a version visual interface, BASIC, for Apple’s Macintosh computers. In November of 1983, before Apple was able to ship its Apple IIs with a graphical user interface, Microsoft had already released an early version of Windows for IBM compatible machines, based on the product originally developed for Apple. Jobs was furious at Gates for ripping off the Windows operating system from Apple and summoned him to Cupertino for a brow beating. In a boardroom packed with Apple minions Gates calmly explained to Jobs that both Apple and Microsoft had stolen the idea from Xerox research, which they had been too slow to commercialize themselves. Gates told Jobs, “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.”

The rich neighbor is The New York Times in the news business. Almost every news outlet worth its salt rewrites original New York Times stories and tailors them for a specific audience. Parasitic properties like Gawker and Huffington Post would not exist were it not for the nourishment of a host like the Times. Today both are much larger and more robust organizations that publish plenty of original content.

Unfortunately for The New York Times Company, it is still years away from realizing the dollar value of its editorial influence, and its considerable investment in original reporting. In the meantime, expect the break-ins to continue unabated.

Image:Flickr

Page 39, FBI File on Steve Jobs
Via New York Magazine:

The FBI has released its file on Steven Paul Jobs, the late Apple founder, compiled mostly during the presidency of George H.W. Bush. According to the The Vault description, “In 1991, Jobs was considered for an appointed position on the U.S. President’s Export Council. This release consists of the FBI’s 1991 background investigation of Jobs for that position and a 1985 investigation of a bomb threat against him.” The background check includes tidbits like, “Several individuals questioned Mr. Jobs’ honesty stating that Mr. Jobs will twist the truth and distort reality in order to achieve his goals.”

The file can be viewed here.

Page 39, FBI File on Steve Jobs

Via New York Magazine:

The FBI has released its file on Steven Paul Jobs, the late Apple founder, compiled mostly during the presidency of George H.W. Bush. According to the The Vault description, “In 1991, Jobs was considered for an appointed position on the U.S. President’s Export Council. This release consists of the FBI’s 1991 background investigation of Jobs for that position and a 1985 investigation of a bomb threat against him.” The background check includes tidbits like, “Several individuals questioned Mr. Jobs’ honesty stating that Mr. Jobs will twist the truth and distort reality in order to achieve his goals.”

The file can be viewed here.

Steve Jobs Doll Legal In Most States, Not Indiana
Oh the irony. Apple, notorious for suing anyone and everyone over intellectual property issues, may not be able to prevent a Steve Jobs doll from being sold in most US states.
Via paidContent:

Apple’s lawyers have a fearsome reputation for defending the company’s intellectual property. But it sure looks like they’re bluffing in the controversy over a new Steve Jobs doll.
A UK newspaper caused a stir yesterday when it reported that Apple (NSDQ: AAPL) had threatened legal action against a Chinese company that plans to sell an eerie replica of its late founder starting next month. The Daily Telegraph said Apple claims to own rights to Jobs’ likeness…
Dead or not, Steve Jobs is still huge news and the story went viral. Media outlets, noting that Apple had stopped the release of another Jobs doll in 2010, reported the story as a warning to other companies who would dare appropriate the property of mighty Apple.
But there is a huge problem here—Apple’s legal claim is largely bogus. While people can indeed own rights to their likeness, those rights usually apply only to living people. Unlike other forms of intellectual property like patents or copyrights, image rights do not survive beyond the grave in most places.
Under American law, so-called “personality rights” exist only at the state level—there is no federal law. And only about a dozen states recognize image rights after death. Oddly, it is Indiana that has the strongest protection, restricting commercial use of a person’s image for 100 years after their passing.
But in New York and most other places, there is no protection at all. This was confirmed five years when a court in the state found that no one had the exclusive right to market Marilyn Monroe. Efforts to change the law have so far failed.
What this means is that Apple’s warning about the doll is an empty threat in most places. It may not even be able to stop others from using the name Steve Jobs as, surprisingly, the term does not appear on the company’s long list of registered trademarks. 

Steve Jobs Doll Legal In Most States, Not Indiana

Oh the irony. Apple, notorious for suing anyone and everyone over intellectual property issues, may not be able to prevent a Steve Jobs doll from being sold in most US states.

Via paidContent:

Apple’s lawyers have a fearsome reputation for defending the company’s intellectual property. But it sure looks like they’re bluffing in the controversy over a new Steve Jobs doll.

A UK newspaper caused a stir yesterday when it reported that Apple (NSDQ: AAPL) had threatened legal action against a Chinese company that plans to sell an eerie replica of its late founder starting next month. The Daily Telegraph said Apple claims to own rights to Jobs’ likeness…

Dead or not, Steve Jobs is still huge news and the story went viral. Media outlets, noting that Apple had stopped the release of another Jobs doll in 2010, reported the story as a warning to other companies who would dare appropriate the property of mighty Apple.

But there is a huge problem here—Apple’s legal claim is largely bogus. While people can indeed own rights to their likeness, those rights usually apply only to living people. Unlike other forms of intellectual property like patents or copyrights, image rights do not survive beyond the grave in most places.

Under American law, so-called “personality rights” exist only at the state level—there is no federal law. And only about a dozen states recognize image rights after death. Oddly, it is Indiana that has the strongest protection, restricting commercial use of a person’s image for 100 years after their passing.

But in New York and most other places, there is no protection at all. This was confirmed five years when a court in the state found that no one had the exclusive right to market Marilyn Monroe. Efforts to change the law have so far failed.

What this means is that Apple’s warning about the doll is an empty threat in most places. It may not even be able to stop others from using the name Steve Jobs as, surprisingly, the term does not appear on the company’s long list of registered trademarks. 

Charlie Rose interviewing Mark Zuckerberg, Arianna Huffington, Reed Hastings and Rupert Murdoch on the influence Steve Jobs had on them.

Or, at least, the SNL version of all the above discussing Jobs’ influence.

The best bit is with Murdoch.

But Who Will Play Steve Jobs? →

Ready for his close-upOne measure of our culture’s esteem for its visionaries is which celebrity is chosen to portray them in the motion picture versions of their lives. 

Your time is limited, so don’t waste it living someone else’s life.

— Steve Jobs Stanford Commencement Speech in 2005

Here’s to the Crazy Ones.

That includes you, Steve Jobs.

Well done, Wired.

Quoting Steve Jobs. We Will Miss You. Be Well.

Quotes gathered via the Wall Street Journal and Wired.

Select thumbnails to view.

Background on Steve Jobs stepping down as Apple CEO.

iCloudius: Apple’s Man in the Sky | A Meditation on iCloud & God →

Jobs is God?When it rains it pours for Apple’s Steve Jobs. The gadget guru and rainmaker just introduced iCloud but will it unite Heaven and Earth?

emergentfutures:

CHART OF THE DAY: Proof The iPad Is Affecting Consumer PC Sales
 
Microsoft’s consumer PC sales growth has pretty much never declined. Not even when Microsoft released Vista. Not even when the economy went in the toilet.
But suddenly, the growth of sales is about to go negative, says Citi analyst Walter Pritchard
Full Story: Business Insider

emergentfutures:

CHART OF THE DAY: Proof The iPad Is Affecting Consumer PC Sales

Microsoft’s consumer PC sales growth has pretty much never declined. Not even when Microsoft released Vista. Not even when the economy went in the toilet.

But suddenly, the growth of sales is about to go negative, says Citi analyst Walter Pritchard



Full Story: Business Insider
At a special event held this morning at Apple headquarters, CEO Steve Jobs introduced an “ultra-magical, breathtaking, life-changing” new 42-inch widescreen iPad. The device, which he christened the iPad 42, capitalizes on consumers’ rising use of tablet computers — a market Apple has dominated since the introduction of the first iPad in early 2010 — for viewing video.

The latest iPad will retail for $1,699 when it goes on sale, first in the United States, on Sept. 22. An innovative origami-style cover, sold separately, allows it to be propped up at a 90-degree angle or even hung from a wall, though Mr. Jobs emphasized that the iPad 42 is “surprisingly light” at just 38 pounds and is meant to be a portable device…

…Still, some industry observers questioned whether consumers might be confused by Apple’s new offering, given that its form factor is similar to that of other existing products. “Of course, when the first iPad came out,” said tech analyst Delia Dougherty, “people dismissed it as just a giant iPod Touch, and then Apple went on to ship 15 million of them by the end of 2010. Call the iPad 42 an iPad on steroids or a glorified flat-screen TV set if you want — but remember, whatever it is, it has Apple’s logo on it, and that makes it a game-changer.”

Simon Dumenco, AdAge, reporting from next year as part of a series looking at the future of television.

Apple CEO Steve Jobs Introduces iPad 42, ‘Ultra-Magical’ New 42-inch iPad.