From: erics@infoserv.com (Eric S. Smith)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.hardware
Subject: Re: Woz in apple ad?
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 92 09:57:23 PDT
Organization: Reigning Cats and Dogs
Reply-To: erics@infoserv.com
X-Mailer: uAccess - Macintosh Release: 1.6v1


spatter@netcom.com (Steve Peterson) writes:

> erics@infoserv.com writes:

> >peterco@eff.org (Peter Cohen) writes:

> >> You sound like someone who's spent a great deal of time in an educational
> >> environment.

> >Hardly. I've worked in the computer industry for the last 15 years.
> >During that time I've been fortunate to be associated with a number
> >of very talented individuals, many of whom I'm sure are just as talented
> >as Mr. Wozniak. The reason why they are still laboring in obscurity
> >while he is relaxing on his multimillions has mostly to do with luck,
> >with being in the right place at the right time.

> I don't agree with this statement.  We had a guy on our football team
> who recovered an unbelievable amount of fumbles.  At first I thought
> that was luck, but then when I watched him play I realized that at
> times when everyone else who figured the play was just about over had
> stopped to catch their breath, this guy was still hustling over to
> wherever the ball was.  It wasn't luck that gave him all those
> recoveries, it was probability -- he caused himself to be near the
> ball more often than any other defensive player.

Well I think there's always a certain amount of luck and being in the
right place at the right time in order to convert talent, no matter
how much one has, into success, however you want to measure that. To
use your football example, you might say that "the ball has to bounce
the right way".

I'd like to clarify my earlier comments if I can, because apparently
at least one person felt that I was criticizing Steve Wozniak, or somehow
questioning his goals. That was not my point at all; I don't mean to
say anything against Steve Wozniak. I think he's probably a very fine
person; I've met him personally a couple times and spoken to him. In
1989 we attended a Spanish language school in Mexico at the same time.
(I spent a month there, studying at the school and living with a Mexican
family. Steve flew home every weekend. And I don't mean that to be a
criticism; if I'd had his money I might have done the same thing. :-)

Now, as far as I understand his motivations, and this is only my impression
so I apologize in advance if it's incorrect, he never set out to make
multi-millions of dollars. He was a bright young engineer who enjoyed
working on interesting hardware designs and playing around with state
of the art technology (which in the '70s was the field of microprocessors
and large scale integrated circuits). In this respect Steve was no different
than many other really talented engineering people I've met in my career.
As I said, I've been in the computer industry for 15 years, the last
13 of them in and around Silicon Valley. I've met some people who did some
really amazing things, both in software and in hardware. In Steve's case,
other people took the things he was working on and turned them into a
business that took off. Steve made multi-millions, and I think that
that was a case of him being in the right place at the right time.

> >> While "Publish or Perish" may be necessary for college
> >> professors, it's hardly necessary for people who have made their money,
> >> are happy to let others continue breaking ground where they've pioneered. 
> >> I admit, this attitude can be construed as slightly mercenary, and is
> >> probably totally inaccurate of what Mr. Wozniak's actual intentions are,
> >> but who are you to question his goals, anyway?

> >I never questioned his goals at all. He can do whatever he wants, as
> >far as I'm concerned. I was questioning the statement of the previous
> >article, that Woz "still is one of the best engineers of all time".
> >What are the facts to support that statement?

> I have to agree here: it is much easier to measure the talent on a
> football field (in terms of who wins and who loses) than it is to
> quantify and compare the abilities of a bunch of engineers who are all
> engaged in different projects and who work inspired by various
> motivations.  To say that Wozniak is the best is almost to imply that
> engineers be measured by the millions they have made.  Does that make
> Bill Gates, then, a better engineer than Wozniak?

Well, that's my point exactly. How do you define what "better" means,
in terms of something like engineering? The statement that I was
criticizing was the one that claimed that Woz is "still one of the best
engineers of all time". And what I was trying to get at was for the
person who made that statement to supply the criteria on which it was
based. How do you decide who is "best of all time" in the first place?
And as far as the "still" part applies, Steve Wozniak to my knowledge
hasn't engineered much for some time. But again, by saying that I don't
mean to question his goals. His goals may be completely outside the field
of engineering now, and that's fine.

Unfortunately, I think talent is too often measured in our society by
the amount of money one accumulates. The greatly talented individuals
I've worked with are unlikely to be selected by an outside person as
the "best engineers of all time". Why? Because they've probably never
heard of them because they didn't make millions of dollars. Take the
case of Ross Perot. A lot of people seem to think that because his
personal worth is upwards of $3 billion that must mean he's some kind
of super-businessman. But the other side of the coin is that Perot's
company, EDS, was struggling to keep its head above water until the
federal entitlements programs really got rolling. When Medicaid needed
a billing system, EDS was in the right place at the right time. Perot
made billions, but he owes his wealth more to federal programs than
to private sector savvy. I wouldn't rate Perot as being a better
businessman than many Silicon Valley entrepreneurs I've met. But he's
got lots of money, so people assume he must have more talent.

In our society, it's important to a lot of people to believe that hard
work + talent = success, and they naturally assume that the reverse
must also be true. Otherwise what's the point of working hard? But it
isn't always true; just look at all the lottery winners. And now, before
I get even further afield from comp.sys.mac.hardware, I better sign
off. :-)

-----
Eric Smith
erics@infoserv.com
CI$: 70262,3610


Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.hardware