It's interesting that they interviewed John Sculley considering Steve Jobs ended up having nothing but contempt for the guy. Anyway, Steve once said: "I didn't see it then, but it turned out that getting fired from Apple was the best thing that could have ever happened to me (...) It was awful tasting medicine, but I guess the patient needed it." In all fairness, Jobs was a terrible manager in 1985, burning money like a drunken sailor, prone to crying and tantrums when he didn't get his way. It's not wonder the board sided with Sculley. Steve learned to be a good manager when NeXT and Pixar taught him frugality.
There was an initial honeymoon between Jobs and Sculley, but once it was over Steve was never bipolar about John and hated him until the end ("What can I say? I hired the wrong guy" he said in an interview)
Steve is just a master class in self-promotion. Woz has an IQ of 200; Jobs' IQ was 160. He was a very intelligent man, but Woz was the genius and created Apple's first two products, one of which floated the entire company
In fact, Jobs received 100 million from his Apple shares in 1985, and until Toy Story hit in 1995, sunk 50 million into Pixar, and millions into NeXT. Not only was he not a billionaire, he was becoming but a modest millionaire.
It wasnt a terrible mistake. Maybe if you had not fired him he wouldnt grow as he did and come back and do what he did. So no it wasnt a terrible mistake. Contrary to this video.
He had Steve fired because he selling Apple 2 like Pepsi (where Pepsi always was the same recipe, same sugar water sold year after year) where as Steve wanted to push through Macintosh for another technological break through… in the end the board, investor and CEO won but lost in a long shot, it goes to show how short slighted these people are
For clarity, Steve was never fired. He was pulled from the Mac line. He could have moved to any dept. after that but was pissed about the whole situation and at John who he saw as having backstabbed him. So, understandably, he decided to take off and go do his own thing.
From what I gathered in two interviews of Sculley, he acted in accordance with what is dictated by corporate governance. He brought up the matter of the disagreement between him and Jobs to the Board. The Board did not act impetously. It assigned the Vice Chairman to study the matter. And the result of the study was that Sculley was correct in his stand. The Board however should not have removed Jobs from his position as CEO. On the basis of the result of the study, they should have passed a resolution contra to the proposal of Jobs. That’s what they are there for. To resolve conflicting matters of major scale in the company in the best possible way. Anyway, this was a hard learned lesson. And it seems, it gave maturity to Jobs, he moved on. And how! May his soul rest in peace.
Steve Jobs himself once said that being fired by Apple did more good to him. At the same time, Jobs was already erratic at Apple having failed on the LISA and the Mac. He needed to get out or in this case, fired. If they didn't fire him and he stayed on, he would not have become the experienced manager and CEO and we won't have these wonderful gadgets that became possible because of Steve Jobs.
Steve brought a new standard of quality for consumer level computer users. Steve backstabbed many of his friends including Woz and people that believed and trusted him. Ruthless man. Something human was missing from his brain.
Steve did not start to wear the turtle neck until sometime in the late 90s or early 2000s, according to the biography. Anyway... it was good that Steve moved on to start Pixar and NeXT. And the Mac II and the expandable Macs that followed was important to Apple and the Mac to persist as the DTP platform of choice and that all happened without Steve and against his original vision of ease of use.
Did you know that if you're using OS X, you should credit NeXT, because it not only was influenced, but also took several things from the NeXTSTEP OS. So NeXT deserves credit.
In some interviews, Sculley says he gave the board an ultimatum to fire Jobs. Here's it's being (purposely?) confused with the moment Jobs was removed from the Mac project.
I think he did need to be fired. he needed business maturity after the macintosh mess and neutering the IIgs project, and he might not have come back as well seasoned if NeXT computers didn't teach him what he needed to know. on top of that I'm glad he threw all that money at Pixar, I think most people will agree good has come out of that.
Certainly sculley was a better business man than steve jobs that time that's why steve hired him. But he's not a product person. Steve jobs is a product genius, without him there wouldn't be apple 2 or mac.
Apple needed both good execution and product vision. Unfortunately, Sculley couldn't tell a good product from a bad one and Jobs back then lacked the business acumen. And yes, the Amiga was a better machine than the Mac (save the proportional fonts, and the Workbench was a piece of junk IMHO). Yet The Mac was able to survive the '90s where the Amiga wasn't.
Commodore did suffer from poor management. They fired the CEO who released the Amiga 500 (the ONE Amiga success). Other than that, they failed to capture the publishing/imaging professionals niche market that kept Apple afloat all these years - even though the Amiga graphic capabilities were a huge plus compared to the Mac.
"the mom" convinced their daughter to give her an entire house and sold it to go on a trip, then she went back to california broke to sell paintings. Jobs knew what he was doing. After he realized this girl was HIS daughter and he had responsibilities, he paid for everything and got her to live with him. so yes he didn't care about money. And I actually think it's really none of our business what he did in his personal life.
I do not buy anything outsourced to Foxconn, I even changed brands when they moved to foxconn. Dell is an example, they left foxconn and went to a more expensive manufacturer once they found out what was going on.
I'm a software engineer and Woz is lengendary but he's a spineless tub of goo. He's back and forth on everything and wasn't around for Next, Pixar, the iMac, iPod, and iPhone
Woz was going to give the apple 2 out for free. Without Steve going out there and trying to sell the Apple 2, Apple wouldn't be here today. People give Woz too much credit but Steve also gets too much credit.
John Sculley did NOT want Steve Jobs to leave Apple. Sculley looked at the dollars and cents, knew the company needed to financially consolidate, and asked Jobs to step away from the Mac division and head up a kind of Visionary division for awhile. It was Steve's choice not to do this. That is what eventually pushed Steve out of the company.
And luxury is a bad thing? The luxury of solid quality hardware and enginering or the luxury of having both a usable interface and powerful UNIX underneath? The luxury of your tools not getting in the way of you work has always been worth the money. I see the margin as added value in future developments.
Well, that is certainly a way of seeing things.I do agree with you he was very ambitious, but I still think he was not chasing money but accomplishments in life.That I say based on the man I see on interviews (especially the one released when he died - the Lost intreview or something). The truth is we will never know for sure.And even if you were right; I think there are a lot of business men out there not chasing profits but accomplishments who were inspired by Jobs' - true or not- example..
Apple probably would not exist today, if steve had stayed. He needed to fall flat on his face and lose his dream, to become the jobs we know today. The jobs of 1985 was way too entitled, prone to tantrums, inexperienced and probably also simply too young. He needed to grow up, before he could come back.
What Apple does is luxury computing. It gives you 110% of efficiency and perhaps enjoyment also over your competitors who don't use Apple, can charge you for 200% of the price they are paying for.
have you even read his daughter's blog? it is heartbreaking hes stories as a kid growing up on welfare.. even when he took her in YEARS LATER it took a long time to feel at home.
I guess were both kind of right. After he became a billionaire, he stopped chasing money , and began chasing accomplishments in life. I was thinking more about the Up and Coming Steve Jobs. Not the older one
Pretty sure this isn't about "dead". I think what we're seeing is about 94.41% & 28% and "One" is the loneliest number that you'll ever know . . . Lisa. And the fact that he was just giving money away like it didn't matter when a technology needed to be nurtured.
I don't blame Sculley. He didn't have it out for Jobs. He came up with a rational plan to get back into black, and it did achieve its goal. The board did have it out for him, and they are pretty despicable in business terms. Why did they have to push him out altogether? Only thing they did right was give investors a buying opportunity.
One of the reasons that made him make all this money was the fact that he never really cared about money, but about making something that is good. Maybe you don't understand that. I understand if you don't, most people cannot grasp it.
@thehmonghawj Have you ever used an Apple computer regularly or know anything about computers or other consumer electronics that compete with apple? If you compare what you are getting with a mac or anything apple makes with it's competitor you will see the price points are actually quite good. What Apple does not do is design and sell bargain pc's or bargain anything. You are going to get first rate products always and that's why the prices are set where they are. You get what you pay for.
NEXT as a stand-alone company flopped. It was likely going totally out of business. Only until APPLE purchased it did Jobs either make a profit/brake even and the NEXT OS really get any widespread use.
Stra grande! Steve Jobs. Personaggi così nascono una volta ogni cinquecento anni!!! Spero che da Lassù continui a godere della tua genialità,insieme ai Santi e gli Angeli che ti fanno gioire,dopo tanta sofferenza!
well as I said it's none of our business whatever actually happened & I told you my opinion so I will not argue more about this on the internet. Also ask the "then" apple employees to tell you if they liked the ways he worked or not. They'll say no but if you read more you'll see in the end everyone (andy, bill, burrell) said it was the best experience of their life.
This guy is the antithesis of Steve Jobs, his avowed enemy, and someone whose incompetence was proved by the destruction of Apple under his command. Could you choose a less appropriate person for this interview?
And Jobs was right. Sculley was a disaster. The only good thing about Jobs' ouster from Apple was that he went on to form the company that helped Apple come back to life again. When Steve Jobs sold NeXT to Apple, and brought in his software people, they created the software platform that every Apple product runs on today. OS X, iOS, watchOS, and tvOS are all based on the same technology created at NeXT.
No, Jobs hired the RIGHT GUY. He nearly ran Apple out of business, and that would have been the best part. Seeing Apple die. Commodore is and always was a better company than Apple. THEY were the true innovators of the computer market. THEY should still be here and Apple should be long forgotten.
Yes he was. The only reason he got fired was cuz the board of directors and the only reason there was a board of directors was because Apple went public and he got rich as fuck. Steve Wizonack or w/e left apple before Next, and by then he was already rich as fuck himself. y don't you think the creator of apple would get rich?
I said "When he realized she was his daughter" which means when he realized it's NOT ok what he did, he agreed to pay for everything. Also he didn't deny a DNA test. He took it. 99% chance the girl was his daughter, which means she was. Also I'm saying he knew what he was doing about the mom asking for money not the needs of his daughter. Of course he was an ass for deserting her.
It was partly Steve becoming a better ceo but also that he gained the authority to do things the right way. He didn’t have that at Apple originally. When he came back, he got rid of the old board and put all of his trusted people in management positions. Arther rock and John sculley were extremely shortsighted. Sculley should just say that he made a mistake!!
After you get a billion or 2 dollars, money becomes irrelevant and you no longer need to impress anybody. Steve was worth like 15 billion. That's why he 'didn't' care about money. Because he already won.
Christopher Nolan should produce a trilogy movie about Steve Jobs. His life is incredibly amazing, and may be beyond human imagination. All movies about Steve are mediocre at this moment. Please re-do it.
I still don't get it, Steve didn't build any of Apple's product with his own hands, he wasn't an engineer at all, he just had an army of engineers working for him ! So how did he manage to find talented engineers to whom he could trust ! Imagine I have an great idea, I have money, I hire an engineer to build a device. The day the engineer see that the device can be patented in future, how can I trust that he is not going to run away from me, steal his own work and get a patent before me ?
First of all, you need a sense for humans and whom to trust and not to trust. But his success is deeply connected with the history of Apple. He didn't invent the first Apple-Computer, indeed he just saw Steve Wozniak, who had this computer and was giving it away for free to people interested in PCs. But Steve Jobs saw, that this PC was the best one existing and really understood how to sell a product and what customers want to have, for example this quote is from him: "A lot of times, people don’t know what they want until you show it to them." (1997). So in the end, it wasn't him being dependent on the engineers, but them being dependent on him. This is especially true for Wozniak, who was(is) a great engineer, but didn't have any sense for business or marketing. And later, if you are such a big company as Apple you simply can force people to stay with contracts they signed and stuff, also if that doesn't mean Apple is just forcing their employees to do whatever some managers want to ;). And the last thing is, that back in the beginning, like 70/80s the PC-market nearly didn't exist so no one would've wanted to be cited before the court for stealing PC-schemes.
I disagree, I think its one of the best things to happen to Steve. Something with that big of an impact could've changed the future. He could've stuck at Apple at just got bored, but because he was fired he was determined to get back up and do better. I think Steve also said something like this himself, that it did more good than bad for him.
Steve Jobs was a visionary and innovator but he's was a terrible people person and not a great personality. Reminds me of those pain in the arse tech architects. Lets not pretend steve Jobs was the most amazing person in the world. He wasn't. But what he did for apple was amazing no doubt.
For the LAST time, Steve was NOT fired, he resigned. He was just removed from managing the Macintosh division, and removed from any other managerial position at Apple at the time.
+Nickolas Evanovich Wouldn't you resign if you had the rug pulled out from under your feet by the company you built? Would there really be any other option? I wouldn't want to work at any company, let alone the one I built, simply to be it's public face watching the ship go down with no control whilst (being its face of course) taking a barrage of criticism from the media as a result of these failures. Technically sure he, you can cling on to the fact that he resigned but he was forced into it; which in my own opinion if not the same thing as being fired, is far worse.
In the modern corporate world, you are typically either "laid off" (group reduction) or given very heavy hints that it's best for you to quit. No company wants a legal action about a firing. They have no chance of that if they force you to quit. If you watch the movie "Something Ventured", you hear Arthur Rock (at 00-02-19) say about Jobs, "I had to fire him…" Rock was the major funder of Apple and an influential original board member. The "firing" was actually figurative but effective. The board voted to support Sculley and his plan to focus on the Apple II, to ignore Jobs suggestion to focus on the Macintosh, and to charge Sculley with re-organizing the Macintosh team. In a somewhat vengeful response to Steve having asked the board to remove Sculley, Sculley took Jobs off the Macintosh team, moved him to an office in another building that was nearly empty, and gave him responsibilities that were trivial, thus crushing his creative instincts. He had to quit if you know anything about Jobs, and both Sculley and Rock knew it. Sculley replaced Steve on the Macintosh team with Jean-Louis Gassée who was connected with BeOS development. A decade later, when Apple began searching for the future of Mac OS, Gassée pitched BeOS to Apple and Jobs pitched NexTSTEP. We know who won that battle. I find it rather odd that Sculley tries to put the whole weight of the "terrible mistake" on the board. Apple insiders remember it as Sculley removing Jobs from the Macintosh team. Sculley knew Jobs better than any of the board members, and knew that if Jobs remained on the Macintosh team, it would lead to a behind-the-scenes battle with the Apple II team. It is a common belief that the board forced Jobs out on the general dislike of his being too difficult to deal with. He was a perfectionist and not tolerant of anyone producing work below their capabilities, but he was forced out because he would not support Sculley's vision and was thought not to have any intentions of promoting the Apple II while leaving the Macintosh as a secondary product.
Perhaps better for Jobs, but not for Apple. Jobs took more than ten years to rethink his people skills, gained an enormous cache of knowledge about animation (Pixar), and put together a dream team of UNIX-Mach engineers. Meanwhile, Apple started licensing the Mac OS to a dozen companies. That was like Kernel Sanders selling his secret sauce. See this chart of Apple stock during the notorious "clone period": www.flickr.com/photos/36589940@N04/4896024965/ After Apple bought NeXT from Jobs for about $450 million and hired him as Interim CEO (iCEO), Jobs rebuilt the board that forced him out and killed the clone project. The clever way he did that was to stop the OS 7.7 release and rename it OS 8. The clone license did not extend beyond versions of OS 7.
fixed what? can you specify? I am not perfect but I am a man... I take care of my own. I also am not perfect but I would never be a part of something involving child labor/slave labor.
It is the greatest tragedy and we were cheated by firing of Steve....we would have been spared the extreme torture of using nonApple products, with no hope of escapes Shame on this guy and the board for destroying the part of Steve connection with Apple in the prime of his career
