The Three Faces Of Jobs - which is worse, in truth...?
Nobody really wants to know...
ThreePicSplit Courtesy of CNN

With the symbolic retirement of one Steve Jobs this month, what better time indeed to review (or run through the gauntlet) all the major... let me rephrase that... all the most influential guys from the Information Technologies Age... Because these guys may be nerdy, they might have been transplanted hippies, they might be meek - but they sure played by their own rules, didn't give a damn and it paid off for them too! Besides, the Bible tells us that the meek shall inherit the Earth, so there is no point in over-emphasizing these guys' lack of true grit - visibly so, at any rate...


À tout seigneur tout honneur, so let us begin with Steve Jobs indeed! Steve has been awarded the National Medal of Technology (by Reagan himself - Reagan before Alzheimer's, is it required to precise?) an honor he shared with Steve Wozniak. Jobs is widely regarded as the most powerful person in business -just ask Fortune- and now, you see, that is something he shares with no one else!
Jobs has been quoted saying that his model for business has been none other than the Beatles: "They were four guys that kept each other's negative tendencies in check; they balanced each other. And the total was greater than the sum of the parts." he stated once, at a Paul McCartney concert. "Great things in business are not done by one person, they are done by a team of people." he added - and it made me wince! This egomaniac actually believes that he is emulating what he is saying and professing to be his philosophy? He was tyrannical on his best day, condescending on the rest: he wanted to extract the best contribution from all of his parts - but through the old "squeezing the lemon dry" method (which is a proven method, sure, but that is beside the point here!) which included unbelievable long hours, stretching the day until 2 or 3 AM...! Heck, the KLF should be his second most favorite band...! The undeniable fact is that Steve Jobs has been famous for his idiosyncracies as much as for his new toys that he so slyly offered to the masses. These masses appreciate the man's good taste and evident craving for refinement, not just functionality; these masses are likely all dreaming of being Apple shareholders too! Notwithstanding the lure of massive capital gain, the Apple bunch crowds around Jobs as if he was the guru of a worldwide sect that knows better than anybody else - and, in a way, he does and they do. The Mac is certainly a product rid of all the bugs and infestinal ailments that the competition suffers chronically from. Add to that all the inventions that are credited to Jobs, as he is listed "as either primary inventor or co-inventor in 338 US patents or patent applications related to a range of technologies from actual computer and portable devices to user interfaces (including touch-based), speakers, keyboards, power adapters, staircases, clasps, sleeves, lanyards and packages." Whew!
The man's contribution cannot be denied, either. Yet, for all he's done, he never did it out of the goodness of his heart (although his dynamic speeches would have you believe so!) He has never given without expecting a return. In a word, philanthropy is simply not his thing. In fact. after resuming control of Apple in 1997, Jobs eliminated all corporate philanthropy programs. He doesn't believe in sharing that apple pie - ever. Well, until now, that is - as illness forced him to resign his active role in the company he created for fame, fortune and glory; nothing else, really... And, really - as far as his contributions go: if it hadn't been him, it would have been someone else - or several someone elses, working by committee!
Aye, he just relinquished his role and title of CEO to one Tim Cook who has been his patsy for the better part of the last ten years! Ironically, Cook bears more than a passing physical resemblance to Jobs' betrayer, Bill Gates! Speaking of Gates (ahead of time here) Arik Hesseldahl of BusinessWeek magazine once noted that "Jobs isn’t widely known for his association with philanthropic causes", as Jobs was being compared to Bill Gates' efforts. The truth here is that one wonders if Steven Paul Jobs even loves himself - let alone others, humankind in general... or his own flesh and blood. Or anyone he ever had by his side or under him at Apple...

Steve Wozniak was Jobs' buddy and co-founder of Apple. He owns four patents to his exclusive name - the first of which (that which is about a "microcomputer for use with video display" indeed) earned him a place in the National Inventors Hall of Fame, nothing less! Wozniak only stayed on with Apple for twelve years as he quit his position after much reflection and life-altering events... He gave back to his community ever since; perhaps to atone for the fact that he was the one who priced the original *Apple I* at the unsightly number of $666.66, something he claims to have done without any idea about the correlation between the number and the mark of the beast... He was quoted saying that he had come up with this price "because I like repeating digits." It was $500 plus a 1/3 markup, which is actually $666.67, rounding up to the nearest penny - what a coincidence that was, hmm? Some say that there are no coincidences... But that is another story! Personal life wise, Wozniak is a much better guy than Jobs is: although he couldn't get along with wives Candice Clark and Suzanne Mulkern ultimately (not at the same time though - don't worry); didn't entirely click with Kathy Griffin either and was involved with a mysterious Alice from the Order of the Eastern Star chapter of the Freemasons, no less...! (That was his first wife, actually) He has since found solace with one Janet Hill. And has not renounced any of his three (only? I mean, with four wives...) kids - unlike the other Steve...

Ronald Wayne was the third founder of Apple - and the adult of the original trio. He wrote the first manual for the very first primitive-looking Apple computer in 1976. (Really, it was - even typewriters looked better than that! But we're digressing here...) And he designed the original logo for the company too. But he was to leave very soon after, as he felt he could not stick around due to varied factors of risk that were impossible to ignore at the time - ones that somehow outweighed the potential (HUGE) gains to be made...! "Wayne received a 10% stake in Apple but relinquished his stock for US$800 less than two weeks later, on 12 April 1976," due to the fact that he realized that, if things went wrong, he was in way over his head - again. CHAT ÉBOUILLANTÉ CRAINT L'EAU FROIDE as they say: and so, Ronald Wayne had been partially traumatized by past failed business ventures (most particularly a slot machine company that had gone under five years prior) plus he had personal assets he did not to risk here - and these would be seized first by any and all creditors if the Apple adventure went kablooey. That was a very real possibility since Jobs and Wozniak were just kids (21 and 25 respectively) and, "legally speaking, all members of a partnership are personally responsible for any debts incurred by any other partner of the venture." Later that same year, the partnership was converted to a corporation - and anointed with clairvoyant success, I guess. "Wayne received another check, for $1,500, for his agreement to forfeit any claims against the new company" and, right after that, the success did come indeed. One could see growth every single year as, "in its first year of operations (1976), Apple's sales reached US$174,000 In 1977, sales rose to US$2.7 million, in 1978 to US$7.8 million, and in 1980 to US$117 million. By 1982 Apple had a billion dollars in annual sales."
Ronald Wayne had renounced upon a gold mine. "He claimed that he did not regret selling the stock as he had made the "best decision with the information available to (him) at the time." It is not as if he had lacked foresight any - as Wayne also stated that he "felt the Apple enterprise would be successful, but at the same time there would be bumps along the way and (he) couldn't risk it. (He) had already had a rather unfortunate business experience before. (He felt that he) was getting too old and those two (Jobs & Wozniak) were whirlwinds. It was like having a tiger by the tail and (he) couldn't keep up with these guys."
Perhaps true - and quite flattering for the ambitious young Jobs and energetic young Wozniak, but still the fact remains: "had (Wayne) kept his 10% stock it would be worth over 35 billion dollars today."
After this Apple adventure ended way too prematurely for him, "Wayne resisted Jobs' attempts to recruit him back to Apple, remaining at Atari until 1978 when he joined Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, and later a Salinas, California electronics company." After that, he retired and currently "sells stamps, rare coins, and gold from his Pahrump, Nevada home." Funny fact: Ronald Wayne, founding original block of Apple, has never owned an Apple product.
Ronald Wayne holds a dozen patents of his own, too, "but has never had enough capital to make money off any of them." Further evidence that the nice guys, creative minds and truly inventive ones do not rule anything - money does.
Ronald Wayne is planning to publish a memoir titled "Adventures of an Apple Founder" very soon - in fact this very same year that saw Steve Jobs call it quits at last. What a coincidence, is it not? The book is to be "initially available exclusively on the Apple iBookstore" (one supposes that Jobs feels as though he owes it to Wayne - and vice-versa, I'm sure) and then through "most major book sellers" sometime later in 2011. (Well, better hurry up now - 2011 is almost done!)
Wayne is quite prolific as of late with the word processor (wait - we forgot that he owns no Apple product! No Apples in this House of Wayne! Maybe he types on an old-fashioned typewriter then?) and so he has "also written a socio-economic treatise" reportedly titled "Insolence of Office", which he describes as "...the product of decades of research and observation into the evolution of human governance, and the foundations of the American Constitutional Republic. Through this analysis the reader is introduced to a complete, yet simplified understanding of the architecture of our Constitution, its foundations, principles, and the essential meaning of its structure all in the context of modern living.
"Insolence of Office" - what a title! Judging by Steve Jobs' natural disdain of MS Offfice and all associated products out there, I'd say that it must be Jobs' favorite of these two offerings from old buddy Wayne here! The second book is also to be released in 2011 - coincidence? Probably not...! (And if there is something I.T. guys could agree on, it is this: there most certainly is no coincidence as surely as there isn't any "accidental code" that just spontaneously writes itself and produces any kind of results"...! But we are digressing now...)

Mike Markkula is not someone the I.T. world has much admiration for, in truth... (But he's better than Ballmer - anyone is better than Ballmer!) Markkula received a Bachelor of Science and Master of Science degrees in electrical engineering, lo, many years ago, from the University of Southern California - something that didn't exactly lead to his making a fortune - at all. He actually made millions on stock options he acquired as a marketing manager for Fairchild Semiconductor and Intel soon after! This enabled the guy to be able to retire at the ripe old age of 32. Markkula was then lured out of retirement as away from his gothic castle that he'd retired into by Steve Jobs, who was referred to him by Regis McKenna and venture capitalist Don Valentine (ever the doubting thomas, Jobs needed two references rather than one in order to deem that guy "good enough for Apple" - or hip enough for it!) Legend has it (and it is a funny anecdote too) that Don Valentine asked Regis McKenna the following question upon meeting the young, unkempt Jobs: "Why did you send me this renegade from the human race?" It was no surprise that Valentine was "not interested in funding Apple" after that! However, Valentine did mention Jobs' new company to Markkula - perhaps sniffing a good money opportunity prevailed over any other feelings there could have been, be it disdain, disgust or worse? Valentine could always pass - and then collect later, on "the favor"... Jobs convinced Markkula of the market share potential for the Apple II and personal computers in general. And so, in 1977, "Markkula brought his business expertise along with US$250,000 ($80,000 as an equity investment in the company and $170,000 as a loan) and became a one-third owner of Apple and employee number 3 - effectively replacing the departing Ronald Wayne. The rest is history, as they say - and Markkula can probably buy himself the title he wishes, to go with his gothic castle and exotic name, now... See if we care...

We mention Markkula - we might as well make a mention of Arthur Rock too - for he was an early investor in Apple and, without him, there would have been no Apple success. Not as quickly as it happened, there wouldn't have been...! All the geeks would have been less than happy, for a time.

On to the soft competition...


Steve Ballmer is not an "I.T. Guy" per say - at all. He is a sideshow artist, a cheap salesman who would have stuck to used cars or some other darn thing if he had not been given the chance to sell software instead by his good buddies Bill and Paul (too bad it wasn't Bill & Ted, eh)
Ballmer is the showman that Bill Gates isn't - and, seeing as the competition could do it all (Jobs had the flamboyance as well as the nerdy qualities Gates always possessed - but then again, Jobs was a klutz in being fooled so easily by Gates when the latter copied Apple software and made it onto his own product! But that is another story - for the complete run down, watch this film.) Microsoft needed some sales expertise - and so Ballmer got the nod! Enough about this one...

Bill Gates now - try and bear with it! Still involved with Microsoft as its chairman (non-executive) and co-founder of the place, he is revered by some and loathed by most as a shrewd businessman whose tactics reeked of attempts to build a monopolistic iron fist on the industry that he feels he gave life to. Bill Gates would have all of us believe that he went from chairman to charityman years before Jobs finally "quit" as well - and he would have us believe that he has complete confidence in goofball Ballmer while he is off being altruistic like that. Anyone who believes that this chairman of the board is purely ornamental at this stage is an even bigger goofball than Ballmer himself! There is no doubt whatsoever that Gates still has the final word on all the important decisions made by Microsoft since his so-called "retirement" - and Ballmer is just the personality show. For, as we've just said, Ballmer has what Gates lacks and the emulative style that was so good in building Microsoft into what it became had to go as far as that too - and that is the only reason why Ballmer is the company CEO now. Gates found the way to some people's hearts through his philanthropic endeavours - but really now, most people see through as easily as they see through his choice for a bride: the dream plastic blonde every nerd dreams of but is afraid to approach - unless he makes billions with software first, that is.

Paul Allen, even though a massive shareholder and co-founder of Microsoft (he even came up with the name -MicroSoft as it was- which makes one wonder what did Bill Gates ever do by himself, really? But that is another digression here...) Allen is most famous for being the one who bought the DOS code from that other guy... (More on that other guy - later!) Without that purchase, of all the rights to commercialise an operating system that was promptly resold (or, actually, pre-sold before it even existed in reality - the Gates version, anyways), there would have been no Microsoft, period. Paul Allen, therefore, retains a place of choice in this entire history of the intangible techies fluff: he is the sole reason why IBM sucks so much and millions upon millions of "users" got such a bad reputation too...! But that is another story as well...

The fact is that, when one looks at it a certain way, it is hard to decide who were the worst three crooks of all time: was it Dubya, Cheney and Rumsfeld (Rumsy to his intimate circle) or was it Gates, Allen and Ballmer?

Let the insiders decide - for the "users" already know the answer to that one!
;-)


All these bit players are seen, of course, in that certain film therefore - and they are hailed by the legions of nerds as "the foundation" - the legends that made it all possible for all these nerds to have quite the profitable careers that they've had - so far! For, before the "funny boxes with pretty lights" even came to be, way before there was any coding written to program them, before any software existed at all - what were the prospects for the likes of these guys? Fixing typewriters? Working the usual menial jobs? Maybe some could have become pettifoggers and others would have surely gone into accounting - where they get to play with numbers, their most favorite (not to say near-orgasmic?) thing! After a while several of them would have been imprisoned for embezzlement and that would have been the end of their lives right there! (Because nerds could hardly have survived in the tough prison environment - the penal system is not for their fragile constitution! But we are digressing here - again.)

So they are called the pioneers of this field - the builders of the Information Age!

Ha.

The truth is that, if it hadn't been them, it would have been somebody else indeed. Like the guy whose code Paul Allen bought for Bill Gates for peanuts - and then Gates turned around and made himself, Allen and Ballmer absurdly rich. That guy has a name -it's Tim Paterson- and that guy also had aspirations of his own - dreams of his own. Tim or some other dreamer out there; anyone could have dared to dream as "big" as Jobs did, as ambitiously as Gates did too. All it took was a dreamer with some intestinal fortitude; one who, though he lacked the style and business acumen of Jobs or Wozniak, would have, in time, gotten over the hurdles and been listened to, somewhere, somehow... This world belongs to the go-getters though; and two of them -Jobs and Gates, of course- most particularly of all went all out to "go get it." And so they did; and so they reaped all the rewards, all the accolades and the prestigious labels of both "pioneers" and "geniuses" - no less.

They did do everything their praisers say they did: they did "change not only the way we communicate, but the way we live" - and is that a good thing? The case can be made either way, really: certainly there will a great many more arguments for it than against it - and that is entirely understandable. But the world was the world before the Information Age. Business was still conducted - at a slower pace, maybe, but things were still getting done. The one single thing that is undeniable is that our very lives were lived in radically different ways. Life was lived in a far more natural way, before the advent of all this - people actually looked around themselves and observed, without having any electronic gadgets to obsess over at any time deemed to be "down time"... Surfing was actual surfing, nothing else. Even browsing required physical activity - and, yes, the case can be made that loitering and going to the dusty old post office is more beneficial for your health than texting and checking your virtual mailbox! People live virtually and forget to truly live and BREATHE...! I could go on...

Gates, Jobs and their ilk changed everyone's lives, or altered it all, surely: and they don't care beyond their company being sued for anything at all - including if the batteries on your cellphones or computers could cause you to develop any form of cancer.

They did it their way - they wanted to rule the world à leur façon...

A world they stand to inherit, anyway...?

No - their ascension was not in any way, shape or form a fulfillment of that prophecy - for they are not the meek that the prophecy was speaking of in the first place...

These meek fellows - the I.T. guys - are not even like those in The I.T. Crowd - at all. With rare exceptions, these guys cannot be called that, not even for a micro-second! They are business sharks; that is what they are! They saw the opportunity to create a depency and went for the jugular of the masses! They are hardly "meek" at all, actually - one has the temperament of a jackal, the other is a backstabbing, lying, rotten sonovagun and yet another is, quite simply put, a bastard. (You figure out which is which...!)

These guys are the Information Age's version of the Barbarian Invasions. Their invaded territory was that of the deplorable, morally-decaying Empire of Capitalism - not strictly American by any stretch of the imagination. And both these unruly barbarians as the empire that they ransacked for their own gain will not endure; as their forebearers, much more solidly anchored in archaic reality, did not either.

Wozniak and Wayne got out while it was still time - the others...?

It won't be pretty for them.

:!

Labels: I.T.Crowd, Unapprovable Unruly Ones

Half-way between Zsa Zsa Gabor
and a stoned (as in high - or stonewalled too) Janis Joplin
there is Michèle Richard.
This dame is quite the original creature though
not truly described through any comparison whatsoever.
She feuds with her own people routinely
(and by "her own people" we mean
the wretched make-believe local star system
they have in place
in her country of birth
and wretched hometown of Montreal)
and she never ceases to amaze
by her sheer willingness to be a "star"
in a shine-deprived county...!
Because, let's face it:
the only thing that shines
in Québec, Canada
is the snow that falls there
half of the year...
But that's another story.

Michèle Richard has some cause
that justifies her delusions of grandeur:
she is the daughter of a famed violinist
one who did a lot for the local folklore music
and she has been a do-it-all pop starlet
since her very teens there...!
She was one of those artists
who made a fortune with translated versions
of big time American hits
(not sure if she got the Nancy Sinatra hit
"These Boots Are Made For Walking" -
but with her attitude, she should have!
Instead, it probably went to such
wussies as Anne Renée,
Renée Martel or
another dime-a-dozen blonde -
and there always is quite a lot of them
available, at any given time!
But that is another story too...)

Several times throughout the years
this particular one has felt
under-appreciated, undervalued,
perhaps even exploited
(by local tabloids, for sure?
What else do they have to write about -
even the gays there are not half as
scandalous as she can be!
Note, also, that she isn't a real blonde -
brunette by birth, indeed!
Maybe it explains the irksome character?
Mix it with blonde glamour
enforced by those aforementioned delusions
and you get a drama queen diva
of gargantuan proportions!
But it's just a theory...!)

Every time she has felt like that -
she fights back!
She counter-attacks!
Or, just like... attacks!
And there is hell paid...


The video above
shows Michèle at her most flamboyant
as she settles some scores
on an evening celebrating local TV.
She chose that gala soirée
to shoot arrows in several directions
while promising to shoot some more
when the time would come for it!

Must be something with the Mic women
(Michaêlle Jean, Michèle here...)
or something in the Culbec water...?

Somehow following in the footsteps of Adrienne Clarkson, mostly due to the fact that she came from the SRC as AC had come from the CBC, MJ here had just finished her tenure as Governor General of Canada, a position that has no real meaning and absolutely no weight whatsoever save that of being subbing for the Queen...

As Governor General, Michaëlle Jean was good - very good! What better ambassador could Canada possibly get, really? She could converse intelligently in both French and English (though the latter was a bit sagging, it was still intelligible) and she was the embodiment of that diversity that Ottawa calls a "mosaika"...!

Let us hear her now explain why she got that position and what were her motivations...




Ultimately, she only acted unruly on that night - as she was leaving her cushy job of "GG" and moving back into relative obscurity. She will never again act so "cool", so irrational, so unruly in front of the camera, especially not if she makes a return to media, meaning broadcast television.

She made a few "unconnections" there, with what she said - hence, if she does return to media, it probably won't be in the province of Culbec... er, Québec, yeah.

Labels: music, original thinking, YouTube