At the 1983 International Design Conference at Aspen, a young Steve Jobs predicted that within two years, the market would see more computers than automobiles.
Whether he was an ass or not, the man thought longterm, even when he was young. If you haven’t seen Steve Jobs: The Lost Interview, it’s also worth seeing – some great insights about the computer industry, people in organizations, and more.
Yet Isaacson understands how genius worship has led to multiple interpretations. “It’s like arguing the gospels with a fundamentalist,” he says about the futility of trying to rebut what he sees as misreadings of Jobs’ life. He tells me what he’s told lots of people who have sought him out to catechize about the book—that his biographies aren’t how-to manuals for the good life. He isn’t arguing that readers not look for guidance in the story of Jobs; he knows it is the nature of biography-reading to do so. But Isaacson stresses that Jobs’ life was complex, the lessons to be found myriad.
The legacy of the Walter Isaacson book continues with derivatives. I think Steve Jobs chose wrong, he should have chosen David McCollough. Isaacson missed something; he doesn’t have the love (of technology in this case).
Jobs was a unique character: he didn’t have to be the way he was to be successful, he just was that way.
But I hadn’t known about this addendum from Isaacson (not bad).
Belief: Company X could have came to market with product Y Z years ago!
Implied: Company X would have owned the market like Company A does now.
Reality: Product Y would have sucked and nothing would be different.
Today Nokia announced that it lost $1.7 billion in the second quarter, its fifth quarterly net loss in a row. Just a few hours before the announcement, the WSJ published a great piece revealing how, as early as 2000, the Finnish phone maker had designed a proto-iPhone – complete with a color touch screen and geo-location, gaming, and e-commerce capabilities. The phone, though, never moved into the mass production phase because of ”a corporate culture that lavished funds on research but squandered opportunities to bring the innovations it produced to market.”
While it’s not surprising that a lumbering, oversized multinational corporation failed on the innovation front, it’s clear that Nokia does not suffer from a dearth of ideas: It spent $40 billion on research and development over the past decade, almost four times what Apple spent over the same period. Nokia also developed and ultimately discarded not one but two operating systems, Symbian and MeeGo. Nokia’s deficiency lies in what Vijay Govindarajan and Chris Trimble call “the other side of innovation,” or the problem with executing new ideas, not just thinking them up.
Wrong.
Nokia had a nice piece of hardware in tablet form years ago based on Linux: it never took off. This mythical iphone-pre-iphone would also have had no traction. Nokia phones have always sucked software-wise (if you don’t think so, you just didn’t know any better). Basically no one knew any better until the iPhone arrived (except Palm Treo users to some extent).