Unfortunately, the movie's producers tried to sum up Jobs's entire professional career in two hours, which clearly was not possible. Too many significant parts were left out, and the movie did not accurately show the genius that Jobs was. We all know that Jobs was lots of other things too, and many of them weren't qualities you'd want in a person.
The movie seemed to imply that Steve Wozniak was the brains behind all the real engineering work. To some extent that's true (at least as far as I'm aware), but not to the extent that the movie portrayed it. I'm pretty sure Jobs knew his way around a soldering iron.
The movie also stopped short of some of Jobs's biggest professional accomplishments, namely the iPhone and the iPad. Say what you want about the devices, but you can't deny the economic success that they were and continue to be. They've driven Apple stock to places that I never thought were possible.
Now that Jobs is gone, will we see anymore true innovation from Apple? A next-generation this or that, an improved camera, or larger display is hardly the type of innovation we've come to expect from Apple, at least while Jobs was at the helm. Hopefully, the company can regain its "wow factor."
On a personal note, I met many of the people who were depicted in the movie, so I found that doubly interesting. This includes Wozniak, Gil Amelio, and Jony Ive. My recollections of them are similar, but clearly Hollywood used its artistic license.
If you're in our industry, I think you'll enjoy the movie. Otherwise, maybe not.
@Charles: Yes surprise indeed but I feel the movie cannot depict a character of an exact person since movies are being created based on a particular script. So they have to adjust it accordingly to match the script and that will change the things. We have to remember that movies are being done for commercial purposes.
I'm not surprised at all. Apple needs to survive and thrive without Jobs. It would be beneficial if people believe that his part was smaller than it may have been.
From an outsider's perspective, when I invested in Apple (1999 or '98, pre ipod), Jobs was the heart of the company. It wasn't clear the he was the brains. It was clear that Apple attracted an amazing group that really believed in something new.
I don't doubt that we'll see an evolution of innovation from Apple in the future. The expectation that it should be the same level and spectacle that we saw before is unrealistic and unfair to the next generation of designers and leaders.
I believe in the end that the "open" systems will overtake both Apple and Microsoft in many market segments. I don't think that either will be going away soon, but they will be challenged by open source stuff.
I have been watching with interest since my son recently switched from an Apple phone to an Android. The first couple of days were good, but on the third day I thought he was going to crack and go back to the Apple. He stuck it out, and somewhere before the 15 day "trial" period, he decided to stick with the Android based phone. I am monitoring the situation to get some objective feedback on the actual differences between the Apple and Android phones. His experience interests me, because he doesn't really have an axe to grind one way or the other. He is just a user that is looking for a product to meet his needs, and he happened to use Apple first, and now is trying Android.
Rich, Jobs was an interesting character. On the other hand, there is one thing that has not changed at Apple. They create closed systems that never take all the market. I can think of one exception, the iPOD, but this device has been basically superseded. The iPhone share does very well, but its share is shrinking. Their Macs started to get some traction, but now have fallen back to about 5% of the market. They did very well by selling premium gear, and then by innovating with the store idea. That is the real innovation, not the devices.
I am interested in this becuase of Microsoft's situation. I also was at IBM after they had started to recover from a near death experience. Both of those companies are having problems with perception of their future prospects, but both remain very profitable (and currently have similar market caps). Apple went through a couple of near death experiences. Jobs experience is an interesting tale for corporate America.
Truchard will be presented the award at the 2014 Golden Mousetrap Awards ceremony during the co-located events Pacific Design & Manufacturing, MD&M West, WestPack, PLASTEC West, Electronics West, ATX West, and AeroCon.
Robots that walk have come a long way from simple barebones walking machines or pairs of legs without an upper body and head. Much of the research these days focuses on making more humanoid robots. But they are not all created equal.
The IEEE Computer Society has named the top 10 trends for 2014. You can expect the convergence of cloud computing and mobile devices, advances in health care data and devices, as well as privacy issues in social media to make the headlines. And 3D printing came out of nowhere to make a big splash.
For industrial control applications, or even a simple assembly line, that machine can go almost 24/7 without a break. But what happens when the task is a little more complex? That’s where the “smart” machine would come in. The smart machine is one that has some simple (or complex in some cases) processing capability to be able to adapt to changing conditions. Such machines are suited for a host of applications, including automotive, aerospace, defense, medical, computers and electronics, telecommunications, consumer goods, and so on. This discussion will examine what’s possible with smart machines, and what tradeoffs need to be made to implement such a solution.