Designer's Digest - Steve Jobs on the role of product and marketing people.

Think of why the iPhone existed in the first place. It was because Jobs saw the writing on the wall and knew that cell phones were bound to destroy the market for the iPod, Apple's moneymaker. Before making the iPhone, he made the Rokr and Jobs threw massive amounts of resources into the iPhone at large risk to Apple. He bought up the patent for multi touch back in 2005. I honestly think people overlook this aspect of Jobs leadership, basically from the time he returned on Apple he doubled down on mobile computing repeatedly throwing 50% of Apple's marketing budget into the unproven iPod for instance. Why was Jobs able to see the writing on the wall and not Intel? I think Steve Jobs himself said it best: ▶ this video Intel itself was NOT totally blindsided by the mobile revolution. Intel Atom development started in 2004. Intel Atom could have dominated the market. There were Intel Execs pushing Atom. But all the R&D was pumped into the desktop and server business, the quality silicon was reserved for the desktop and server business, Intels execs didn't want these inexpensive chips for what were presumed to be peoples secondary computers to cannibalise its expensive desktop and server chips, and the strategic vision was simply bad. You can apologise for it but the mistake may have doomed the entire business and plenty of companies did not make the same mistake. Intel wouldn't even exist if they didn't already make such a shift away from the memory market into the microprocessor market firing most of the their company in the process. Intel had leaders with strategic vision and guts back in the day, and the senior leadership simply weren't good enough to commit to mobile when that bridge had to be crossed.

> resource curse, where countries with rich natural resources are prone to foundering Steve Jobs calls this out wonderfully here: ▶ this video > [...] the same thing can happen in technology companies that get monopolies. Like, oh, IBM and Xerox. If you were a product person at IBM or Xerox, so you make a better copier or a better computer. So what? When you have a monopoly market share the company's not any more successful. So the people that can make the company more successful are sales and marketing people. And they end up running the companies. And the product people get driven out of the decision making forums. And the companies forget what it means to make great products. [...] the product sensibility and the product genius that brought them to the monopolistic position gets rotted out. By people running these companies that have no conception of a good product versus a bad product. They have no conception of the craftsmanship required to take a good idea and turn it into a good product. And they really have no feeling in their hearts usually about wanting to really help the customers.

I doubt it. For one thing, the ergonomics of an "orb" are horrible. This is a solution looking for a problem and seemingly designed by people who took the wrong lessons from Apple's success. Incidentally they have a typo in their announcement page[1]. > The Orb is the incluse[sic], secure and anonymous device that enables World ID holders to verify their humanness and uniqueness. I assume "incluse" is meant to be "inclusive". But what's "inclusive" about letting a startup with foggy monetization plans collect everyone's biometrics? Sounds like bullshit. [1] link Edit: I'm reminded of this old clip: ▶ this video From all external appearances, "World" is being run by sales and marketing people from its inception.

Apple has had no problems with providing their macOS libraries, tooling, and associated updates for free, even with a drastically smaller user base, and it appears to have been sustainable for decades. The truth of the matter is Apple would almost certainly continue to do offer their iPhone services, updates, app store, etc; even if they were statutorily prohibited from making any money off of any of it, because in the end it makes for a better user experience and helps them differentiate and sell their phones at a premium. What is happening, is the more financial-minded types within Apple have realized they have substantial lock-in and market power, and they can leverage it to take a % of profits from other market entities. If you actually care about Apple products, and want them to continue to deliver great products well into the future, then the best thing that could happen would be for them to get the message and accept a loss in this battle. Otherwise you will see increased financialization continue until they are thoroughly hollowed out of great product/engineering culture, and collapse under their own weight, like so many before them. ▶ this video

It seems the MBAs are at it again. ▶ this video Twilio is now another Xerox. MBA programs should be illegal. You can thank MBAs for spreading PFAS everywhere, single use plastic, profiteering from insulin, making every American a diabetic by adding sugar into everything, selling glyphosate for residential use, killing all the pollinators, moving all manufacturing to countries with no environmental laws, and other consumer and planet-fucking initiatives. The number of extinct species, diabetic patients, number of employees on minimum wage with no health insurance, policitian revenue from lobbying activities, dead bees, cut trees, lost topsoil, former Roundup users with non-Hodgkins lymphoma, revenue from weapons, atmospheric temperature increase, ocean acidity, plastic waste, pollution, every form of ecocide and every other measure of things going wrong is directly proportional to the number of MBAs. Why? because if shareholder value is everything, then the employee, the environment and society at large becomes irrelevant.