The Logic Off Topic list

GAmoore@...> wrote:
>Jobs is not an engineer, inventor, or designer, but he is a visionary. He
>can see what is available, what protypes and interesting ideas are in the
>works, and shape those into something which is an inspired piece of
>technology which raises the bar, and is a commericial success.

I hope this doesn't include NeXT. Nice machines but NeXT failed bigtime .

>He drives
>his people with a religious fervor to outdo themselves and come up with
>something "insanely great". He done this over and over again.

He may have more successes than I am aware of but...
Don't count OSX,  as that is 'NeXTStep 2000" as I like to call it. If you
have ever used a NeXT  then you'll understand. And NextStep itself is just
a GUI built ontop of  a flavour of Unix.  In this respect OSX is pretty
'unvisionary". No matter how good OSX is, I don't believe that any OS based
on an almost forty year old operating system can be considered
visionary.

>What Gates does, is take something which someone else has already
>developed, and made successful, then try to buy it or steal it. Thats why
>Microsoft is always playing catch up, as is most of the PC hardware world
>maybe with the exception of a few like Sony which have a few new ideas.

Jobs, didn't develop Unix now did he? And how original is the early Mac
OS. (Think Xerox PARC for example).. So what is the difference?
Frankly, I don't know all that much  about either of these guys, but I
would say they're not as different as you have made them out to be here...
They both have a strong  entrepeneurial streak and have been pivotal in
getting a number of significant computing products to market. And in
both cases, these days at least , their sucess or otherwise is due in large
part to the ideas, sweat and labour of numerous minions...

I know a lot of people will disagree but this is my opinion. And yes,
I speak here without full biographical knowledge of either Jobs, or Gates.

BTW: I use Macs almost exclusively and avoid Microsoft Products.