SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Joe Nocera writes in The New York Times that a forthcoming biography “Becoming Steve Jobs,” is leading readers to re-evaluate the “stagnant stereotypes” of Jobs that have only grown stronger after his death. According to the stereotypes, “Steve was a genius with a flair for design,” whose powers of persuasion were such that he could convince people that the sun rose in the west and set in the east. On the other hand, he was also “a pompous jerk,” who humiliated employees and “disregarded everyone else in his single-minded pursuit of perfection.”
It is Schlender’s and Tetzeli’s contention that Jobs was a far more complex and interesting man than the stereotype, and a good part of their book is an attempt to craft a more rounded portrait. According to Nocera the callow, impetuous, arrogant youth who co-founded Apple was very different from the mature and thoughtful man who returned to his struggling creation and turned it into a company that made breathtaking products while becoming the dominant technology company of our time.
How did a young man so reckless and arrogant that he was exiled from the company he founded become the most effective visionary business leader of our time, ultimately transforming the daily life of billions of people? For Schlender and Tetzeli, the crucial period was the most overlooked part of Jobs’s career: The years from 1985 to 1997, when he was in exile from Apple and running NeXT. Equally important, Jobs also owned Pixar, the animation studio he bought from George Lucas. It took years before Pixar came out with its first full-length movie, “Toy Story.” During that time, Jobs saw how Ed Catmull, Pixar’s president, managed the company’s creative talent. Catmull taught Jobs how to manage employees.
"When Jobs returned to Apple, he was more patient — with people and with products. His charisma still drew people to him, but he no longer drove them away with his abrasive behavior and impossible demands. He had also learned that his ideas weren’t always the right ones, and he needed to listen to others." Perhaps the most important example of this was the App Store. Jobs had initially opposed allowing outside developers to build apps for the iPhone, but he did a quick about-face once he realized he was wrong. "Jobs has long been hailed as one of the great creative minds of modern business," concludes Nocera. "He was [also] a great manager. You can’t build a great company if you aren’t one."
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 20 2015, @03:11PM
Should sexist opensource developers have their projects censored or removed? - Yes, It's one thing to disagree with people, it's another to devalue another person based on how they were born.
* Are the social or political views of an author of free software relevant to that software's inherent quality? - Yes, open source is a political movement. Why wouldn't it be relevant?
* Should the beliefs of an opensource developer weigh when when evaluating whether a piece of opensource software is worthy of any publicity or public notice? - Yes
* Should men with unpopular or "forbidden" views be excised from the opensource movement and "not allowed" to contribute, in a manner similar to that which is done in employment? - Excised from the movement? Until they learn to grow up, yes.
* Has the free/opensource software movement changed in these respects since its founding? If so is this a positive change? - Yes, the open source movement used to be a group of nerds who escaped into technology as a means of establishing a place of their own and their love of problem solving. Now it's become more inclusive to allow more people to enjoy the same sense of wonder and achievement we all had by creating safe, welcoming spaces for everyone, which means not allowing trolls.
* Should there be gatekeepers to opensource that decide who may and who may not contribute. Should abusive developers be "blackballed" to maintain proper social order and controls? - No one said you shouldn't make software, no one has to promote your software if you're a jerk. Trisquel welcomed you with open arms. Apparently xonotic did as well. You got blackballed from one site where well reasoned and rational arguments were made as to why you shouldn't be included.
* What are the consequences of not doing this - less inclusion from people who would otherwise contribute, aside from yourself.
I suspect I'll now be called a SJW or whatever it is you're calling people these days, say that being open means I have to accept that everyone deserves an equal voice(they don't, everyone deserves an equal "opportunity" for a voice and you've used yours to torment and harass others, free speech comes with consequences)
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday March 20 2015, @04:12PM
Look, you want this to get talked about, submit it as an Ask Soylent story. Here, it's Offtopic the first time and Spam every time after that.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.