Nipate
Forum => Kenya Discussion => Topic started by: vooke on September 29, 2017, 01:50:24 PM
-
(https://s26.postimg.org/xwcv5rro9/0_D9_ACE3_C-59_FF-4991-9_F6_B-_FEB646_DC60_AA.jpg)
This bazungu thought like several collective negroes 30 years later. And he wa Sonko 29 :o
http://reprints.longform.org/playboy-interview-steve-jobs
-
Playboy: We were going to say guys like you and Steve Wozniak, working out of a garage only ten years ago. Just what is this revolution you two seem to have started?
Jobs: We’re living in the wake of the petrochemical revolution of 100 years ago. The petrochemical revolution gave us free energy—free mechanical energy, in this case. It changed the texture of society in most ways. This revolution, the information revolution, is a revolution of free energy as well, but of another kind: free intellectual energy. It’s very crude today, yet our Macintosh computer takes less power than a 100-watt light bulb to run and it can save you hours a day. What will it be able to do ten or 20 years from now, or 50 years from now? This revolution will dwarf the petrochemical revolution. We’re on the forefront.
-
Playboy: Most computers use key strokes to enter instructions, but Macintosh replaces many of them with something called a mouse—a little box that is rolled around on your desk and guides a pointer on your computer screen. It’s a big change for people used to keyboards. Why the mouse?
Jobs: If I want to tell you there is a spot on your shirt, I’m not going to do it linguistically: “There’s a spot on your shirt 14 centimeters down from the collar and three centimeters to the left of your button.” If you have a spot—“There!” [he points]—I’ll point to it. Pointing is a metaphor we all know. We’ve done a lot of studies and tests on that, and it’s much faster to do all kinds of functions, such as cutting and pasting, with a mouse, so it’s not only easier to use but more efficient.
-
Playboy: Aside from some of the recurrent criticisms—that the mouse is inefficient, that the Macintosh screen is only black and white—the most serious charge is that Apple overprices its products. Do you care to answer any or all?
Jobs: We’ve done studies that prove that the mouse is faster than traditional ways of moving through data or applications. Someday we may be able to build a color screen for a reasonable price. As to overpricing, the start-up of a new product makes it more expensive than it will be later. The more we can produce, the lower the price will get—
-
interesting
-
Playboy: A lot of guys in their 40s are going to be real pleased with you. Let’s move on to the other thing that people talk about when they mention Apple—the company, not the computer. You feel a similar sense of mission about the way things are run at Apple, don’t you?
Jobs: I do feel there is another way we have an effect on society besides our computers. I think Apple has a chance to be the model of a Fortune 500 company in the late Eighties and early Nineties. Ten to 15 years ago, if you asked people to make a list of the five most exciting companies in America, Polaroid and Xerox would have been on everyone’s list. Where are they now? They would be on no one’s list today. What happened? Companies, as they grow to become multibillion-dollar entities, somehow lose their vision. They insert lots of layers of middle management between the people running the company and the people doing the work. They no longer have an inherent feel or a passion about the products. The creative people, who are the ones who care passionately, have to persuade five layers of management to do what they know is the right thing to do.
What happens in most companies is that you don’t keep great people under working environments where individual accomplishment is discouraged rather than encouraged. The great people leave and you end up with mediocrity. I know, because that’s how Apple was built. Apple is an Ellis Island company. Apple is built on refugees from other companies. These are the extremely bright individual contributors who were troublemakers at other companies.
You know, Dr. Edwin Land was a troublemaker. He dropped out of Harvard and founded Polaroid. Not only was he one of the great inventors of our time but, more important, he saw the intersection of art and science and business and built an organization to reflect that. Polaroid did that for some years, but eventually Dr. Land, one of those brilliant troublemakers, was asked to leave his own company—which is one of the dumbest things I’ve ever heard of. So Land, at 75, went off to spend the remainder of his life doing pure science, trying to crack the code of color vision. The man is a national treasure. I don’t understand why people like that can’t be held up as models: This is the most incredible thing to be—not an astronaut, not a football player—but this.
Anyway, one of our biggest challenges, and the one I think John Sculley and I should be judged on in five to ten years, is making Apple an incredibly great ten- or 20-billion-dollar company. Will it still have the spirit it does today? We’re charting new territory. There are no models that we can look to for our high growth, for some of the new management concepts we have. So we’re having to find our own way.
-
Playboy: Was any of your decision not to become compatible with IBM based on the fact that you didn’t want to knuckle under to IBM? One critic says that the reason Mac isn’t IBM-compatible is mere arrogance—that “Steve Jobs was saying ‘Fuck you’ to IBM.”
Jobs: It wasn’t that we had to express our manhood by being different, no.
Playboy: Then why were you?
Jobs: The main thing is very simply that the technology we developed is superior. It could not be this good if we became compatible with IBM. Of course, it’s true that we don’t want IBM to dominate this industry. A lot of people thought we were nuts for not being IBM-compatible, for not living under IBM’s umbrella. There were two key reasons we chose to bet our company on not doing that: The first was that we thought—and I think as history is unfolding, we’re being proved correct—that IBM would fold its umbrella on the companies making compatible computers and absolutely crush them.
Second and more important, we did not go IBM-compatible because of the product vision that drives this company. We think that computers are the most remarkable tools that humankind has ever come up with, and we think that people are basically tool users. So if we can just get lots of computers to lots of people, it will make some qualitative difference in the world. What we want to do at Apple is make computers into appliances and get them to tens of millions of people. That’s simply what we want to do. And we couldn’t do that with the current IBM-generation type of technology. So we had to do something different. That’s why we came up with the Macintosh.
-
: At what point did you meet Steve Wozniak?
Jobs: I met Woz when I was 13, at a friend’s garage. He was about 18. He was, like, the first person I met who knew more electronics than I did at that point. We became good friends, because we shared an interest in computers and we had a sense of humor. We pulled all kinds of pranks together.
Playboy: For instance?
Jobs: [Grins] Normal stuff. Like making a huge flag with a giant one of these on it. [gives the finger] The idea was that we would unfurl it in the middle of a school graduation. Then there was the time Wozniak made something that looked and sounded like a bomb and took it to the school cafeteria. We also went into the blue-box business together.
Playboy: Those were illegal devices that allowed free long-distance phone calls, weren’t they?
Jobs: Mm-hm. The famous story about the boxes is when Woz called the Vatican and told them he was Henry Kissinger. They had someone going to wake the Pope up in the middle of the night before they figured out it wasn’t really Kissinger.
Playboy: Did you get into trouble for any of those things?
Jobs: Well, I was thrown out of school a few times.
-
Playboy: Like computers, the automobile industry was an American industry that we almost lost to the Japanese. There is a lot of talk about American semiconductor companies’ losing ground to Japanese. How will you keep the edge?
Jobs: Japan’s very interesting. Some people think it copies things. I don’t think that anymore. I think what they do is reinvent things. They will get something that’s already been invented and study it until they thoroughly understand it. In some cases, they understand it better than the original inventor. Out of that understanding, they will reinvent it in a more refined second-generation version. That strategy works only when what they’re working with isn’t changing very much—the stereo industry and the automobile industry are two examples. When the target is moving quickly, they find it very difficult, because that reinvention cycle takes a few years.
As long as the definition of what a personal computer is keeps changing at the rate that it is, they will have a very hard time. Once the rate of change slows down, the Japanese will bring all of their strengths to bear on this market, because they absolutely want to dominate the computer business; there’s no question about that. They see that as a national priority.
We think that in four to five years, the Japanese will finally figure out how to build a decent computer. And if we’re going to keep this industry one in which America leads, we have four years to become world-class manufacturers. Our manufacturing technology has to equal or surpass that of the Japanese.
-
Playboy: You mentioned investing in education, but isn’t the problem finding the funds in a time of soaring deficits?
Jobs: We’re making the largest investment of capital that humankind has ever made in weapons over the next five years. We have decided, as a society, that that’s where we should put our money, and that raises the deficits and, thus, the cost of our capital. Meanwhile, Japan, our nearest competitor on the next technological frontier—the semiconductor industry—has shaped its tax structure, its entire society, toward raising the capital to invest in that area. You get the feeling that connections aren’t made in America between things like building weapons and the fact that we might lose our semiconductor industry. We have to educate ourselves to that danger.
Playboy: And you think computers will help in that process.
Jobs: Well, I’ll tell you a story. I saw a video tape that we weren’t supposed to see. It was prepared for the Joint Chiefs of Staff. By watching the tape, we discovered that, at least as of a few years ago, every tactical nuclear weapon in Europe manned by U.S. personnel was targeted by an Apple II computer. Now, we didn’t sell computers to the military; they went out and bought them at a dealer’s, I guess. But it didn’t make us feel good to know that our computers were being used to target nuclear weapons in Europe. The only bright side of it was that at least they weren’t [Radio Shack] TRS-80s! Thank God for that.
The point is that tools are always going to be used for certain things we don’t find personally pleasing. And it’s ultimately the wisdom of people, not the tools themselves, that is going to determine whether or not these things are used in positive, productive ways.
-
Playboy: Where do you see computers and software going in the near future?
Jobs: Thus far, we’re pretty much using our computers as good servants. We ask them to do something, we ask them to do some operation like a spread sheet, we ask them to take our key strokes and make a letter out of them, and they do that pretty well. And you’ll see more and more perfection of that—computer as servant. But the next thing is going to be computer as guide or agent. And what that means is that it’s going to do more in terms of anticipating what we want and doing it for us, noticing connections and patterns in what we do, asking us if this is some sort of generic thing we’d like to do regularly, so that we’re going to have, as an example, the concept of triggers. We’re going to be able to ask our computers to monitor things for us, and when certain conditions happen, are triggered, the computers will take certain actions and inform us after the fact.
Playboy: For example?
Jobs: Simple things like monitoring your stocks every hour or every day. When a stock gets beyond set limits, the computer will call my broker and electronically sell it and then let me know. Another example is that at the end of the month, the computer will go into the data base and find all the salesmen who exceeded their sales quotas by more than 20 percent and write them a personalized letter from me and send it over the electronic mail system to them, and give me a report on who it sent the letters to each month. There will be a time when our computers have maybe 100 or so of those tasks; they’re going to be much more like an agent for us. You’re going to see that start to happen a little bit in the next 12 months, but really, it’s about three years away. That’s the next breakthrough.
-
Playboy: Let’s talk about the money. You were a millionaire at 23—
Jobs: And when I was 24, my net worth was more than $10,000,000; when I was 25, it was more than $100,000,000.
Playboy: What’s the main difference between having $1,000,000 and having several hundred million?
Jobs: Visibility. The number of people who have a net worth of more than $1,000,000 in this country is in the tens of thousands. The number of people who have a net worth of more than $10,000,000 gets down to thousands. And the number who have a net worth of more than $100,000,000 gets down to a few hundred.
Playboy: What does the money actually mean to you?
Jobs: I still don’t understand it. It’s a large responsibility to have more than you can spend in your lifetime—and I feel I have to spend it. If you die, you certainly don’t want to leave a large amount to your children. It will just ruin their lives. And if you die without kids, it will all go to the Government. Almost everyone would think that he could invest the money back into humanity in a much more astute way than the Government could. The challenges are to figure out how to live with it and to reinvest it back into the world, which means either giving it away or using it to express your concerns or values.
-
Playboy: With your wealth and past accomplishments, you have the ability to pursue dreams as few others do. Does that freedom frighten you?
Jobs: The minute you have the means to take responsibility for your own dreams and can be held accountable for whether they come true or not, life is a lot tougher. It’s easy to have wonderful thoughts when the chance to implement them is remote. When you’ve gotten to a place where you at least have a chance of implementing your ideas, there’s a lot more responsibility in that.
-
That guy was truly a genius. I am split btw him and Billy Gates. I think Bill Gates ought to have long won a nobel and is possibly the greatest man alive.
-
That guy was truly a genius. I am split btw him and Billy Gates. I think Bill Gates ought to have long won a nobel and is possibly the greatest man alive.
Yessir, he was a manager and visionary rolled into one,and he damn well excelled in both. I read the article and wondered whether Tim Cook will ever come close to that
-
That guy was truly a genius. I am split btw him and Billy Gates. I think Bill Gates ought to have long won a nobel and is possibly the greatest man alive.
Yessir, he was a manager and visionary rolled into one,and he damn well excelled in both. I read the article and wondered whether Tim Cook will ever come close to that
Tim Cook, to quote Jobs, "is a logistics wizard" responsible for the value chain - US to China to markets - that created huge margins. Jobs said Cook and Design VP Jony Ives were the biggest Apple stars. You need Cook+Jony to run the tight ship. With time Apple will lose the edge. See already they are losing consumer electronics leadership to likes of Amazon kindle & echo speakers.
Microsoft is lucky Gates is still around. Otherwise cloud business has been taken over by Amazon too 8) Gates of course stepped down as CEO at 45 :) but continues to to call the shots as technical advisor.
Jobs & Gates both started business at 20... CEO as first job. I think Jobs was more multi-talented - with crazier ideas - and starting animation/film companies one that he sold off to Disney for billions.
To me the greatest mind of today is Elon Musk. Dude has sweeping vision and energy. Ford, GM, etc are losing out to Tesla... despite billions of capital & experience - with Tesla gigafactories popping up everywhere. Show me another company in cutthroat competitive industry like Auto with 1yr+ of advance orders with down payments 8) Plus taking over the green energy sector. Even the Amazon dude is seeing dust fighting with Musk for space industry... where SpaceX suddenly has 60% of global market as 15yo company. Beating kina Boeing hands down.
-
Jobs: Mm-hm. The famous story about the boxes is when Woz called the Vatican and told them he was Henry Kissinger. They had someone going to wake the Pope up in the middle of the night before they figured out it wasn’t really Kissinger.
:D :D :D
This was one of funniest stories about Jobs & Woz... plus fake bombs of course. It was before large-scale terrorism so maybe it was funny. There were stories about Jobs being bipolar - delusional - denying paternity of his own kid for years. It took a court order for the billionaire to cough up school fees :o
-
To me the greatest mind of today is Elon Musk. Dude has sweeping vision and energy. Ford, GM, etc are losing out to Tesla... despite billions of capital & experience - with Tesla gigafactories popping up everywhere. Show me another company in cutthroat competitive industry like Auto with 1yr+ of advance orders with down payments 8) Plus taking over the green energy sector. Even the Amazon dude is seeing dust fighting with Musk for space industry... where SpaceX suddenly has 60% of global market as 15yo company. Beating kina Boeing hands down.
Musk is just a sleek hawker selling hot air.
There’s absolutely nothing he has contributed to science or tech
Electric cars predate him and he sells far too few units
Same case with his batteries
SpaceX? Valuation based largely on fantasies just as Tesla
He just keeps his fans busy with his fantasies but produces zero value
Jobs dreamt and made it happen
-
To me the greatest mind of today is Elon Musk. Dude has sweeping vision and energy. Ford, GM, etc are losing out to Tesla... despite billions of capital & experience - with Tesla gigafactories popping up everywhere. Show me another company in cutthroat competitive industry like Auto with 1yr+ of advance orders with down payments 8) Plus taking over the green energy sector. Even the Amazon dude is seeing dust fighting with Musk for space industry... where SpaceX suddenly has 60% of global market as 15yo company. Beating kina Boeing hands down.
Musk is just a sleek hawker selling hot air.
There’s absolutely nothing he has contributed to science or tech
Electric cars predate him and he sells far too few units
Same case with his batteries
SpaceX? Valuation based largely on fantasies just as Tesla
He just keeps his fans busy with his fantasies but produces zero value
Jobs dreamt and made it happen
You're so wrong. Noone ever "created" any science or tech. Obviously auto started long before Tesla including EV. Well, even computers started long ago before Jobs & Gates with kina Alan Turing, GE dude Tom Edison, etc. Before that kina Faraday started electricity, including Musk's hero Nikola Tesla who singularly invented AC - alternating current elec - what transformed power distribution to light cities. Eons earlier we had likes of Newton who invented quantum theory of particles... noone owns anything wholly really. Like they say everyone is a genius in some unknown area... Biggest difference is marketing - entrepreneurship - ability to create hype & mobilize resources and fandom. Like Gates, Jobs and Musk.
EVs had died before Musk showed up. I read GM actually crashed the last of the "unprofitable" EVs into a yard somewhere. Same as rocket/space industry - NASA and airforce were mono-sourcing to ULA - Lockheed & Boeing sub - for super-expensive launches that even Russia could not hack. Before Elon showed up with SpaceX NASA moronically estimated that a Mars venture would cost US$200B :o :o Launching a satellite was actually US$200M - installing commercial satellites out there for telcos, etc - well, Musk has cut that down to US$60M 8) That is real value if you ask me - and Airforce & NASA were too embarassed to continue mono-sourcing to ULA - and SpaceX promptly took over the big contracts.
Fossil fuels - gasoline - are the biggest cause of pollution and global warming. Meaning EVs & green energy. From US$150K for Model X to US$35K Model 3.
So Musk actually says: currently you need US$10B fare per head to go to Mars. He wants to slash that to US$200K per head - that's 50K times efficiency 8) - and he's doing it with reusable rockets. Innovating at mind-boggling rate that noone can keep up. Tesla & SpaceX are top 5 most innovative companies globally if am right.
Availing super-tech solutions to the masses for cheap - that's something.
-
This Steve Jobs mania is a challenge for me. We are all celebrating not just his genius, but his relentless pursuit of perfection, his refusal to compromise, his unconventionality, his prickly personality, his unforgiving drive. We all want to be more like him (including me). The thing is, we would never hire him, and if we found him in our midst, we would get rid of him.
Look at the way we all conduct and review job interviews, the questions we ask reference checks, the annual performance review forms. Teamwork, interpersonal skills, acceptance of the company mission statement, blah, blah: Steve Jobs didn’t give a rat’s ass for any of those things. We all want to be like Steve Jobs, but if he worked at most companies, he’d probably tell us how stupid we all are, he’d probably be right, and we’d probably fire him before hump day.
http://www.ellisdon.com/blogs/steve-jobs-mania-revisited/ (http://www.ellisdon.com/blogs/steve-jobs-mania-revisited/)
-
"Bill is basically unimaginative and has never invented anything, which is why I think he's more comfortable now in philanthropy than technology. He just shamelessly ripped off other people's ideas," Jobs is quoted as saying in 2011.
-
To me the greatest mind of today is Elon Musk. Dude has sweeping vision and energy. Ford, GM, etc are losing out to Tesla... despite billions of capital & experience - with Tesla gigafactories popping up everywhere. Show me another company in cutthroat competitive industry like Auto with 1yr+ of advance orders with down payments 8) Plus taking over the green energy sector. Even the Amazon dude is seeing dust fighting with Musk for space industry... where SpaceX suddenly has 60% of global market as 15yo company. Beating kina Boeing hands down.
Musk is just a sleek hawker selling hot air.
There’s absolutely nothing he has contributed to science or tech
Electric cars predate him and he sells far too few units
Same case with his batteries
SpaceX? Valuation based largely on fantasies just as Tesla
He just keeps his fans busy with his fantasies but produces zero value
Jobs dreamt and made it happen
Actually between Gates, Musk and Jobs, Jobs is the hawker. The other guys have some technical chops on their resumes. If Musk was fantasy, NASA would not be doing business with him. NASA demands proof that you can deliver in the fields of hard(as opposed to consumer) science and technology.
-
Bill Gates is a software genius...while jobs was great with hardware.
-
You're so wrong. Noone ever "created" any science or tech. Obviously auto started long before Tesla including EV. Well, even computers started long ago before Jobs & Gates with kina Alan Turing, GE dude Tom Edison, etc. Before that kina Faraday started electricity, including Musk's hero Nikola Tesla who singularly invented AC - alternating current elec - what transformed power distribution to light cities. Eons earlier we had likes of Newton who invented quantum theory of particles... noone owns anything wholly really. Like they say everyone is a genius in some unknown area... Biggest difference is marketing - entrepreneurship - ability to create hype & mobilize resources and fandom. Like Gates, Jobs and Musk.
EVs had died before Musk showed up. I read GM actually crashed the last of the "unprofitable" EVs into a yard somewhere. Same as rocket/space industry - NASA and airforce were mono-sourcing to ULA - Lockheed & Boeing sub - for super-expensive launches that even Russia could not hack. Before Elon showed up with SpaceX NASA moronically estimated that a Mars venture would cost US$200B :o :o Launching a satellite was actually US$200M - installing commercial satellites out there for telcos, etc - well, Musk has cut that down to US$60M 8) That is real value if you ask me - and Airforce & NASA were too embarassed to continue mono-sourcing to ULA - and SpaceX promptly took over the big contracts.
Fossil fuels - gasoline - are the biggest cause of pollution and global warming. Meaning EVs & green energy. From US$150K for Model X to US$35K Model 3.
So Musk actually says: currently you need US$10B fare per head to go to Mars. He wants to slash that to US$200K per head - that's 50K times efficiency 8) - and he's doing it with reusable rockets. Innovating at mind-boggling rate that noone can keep up. Tesla & SpaceX are top 5 most innovative companies globally if am right.
Availing super-tech solutions to the masses for cheap - that's something.
I never said created, I said contributed to science and tech.
If you notice, all you can praise for Musk is dreams and promises...nothing tangible or concrete.
Musk is basically
Electric cars-Tesla
Batteries and green energy- Solar City
Space tech- SpaceX
Solar City is burning losses plus their batteries are manufactured elsewhere so nothing worth talking about
If you believe that a company that sells 80K in a year is worth more than one that pushes 10M units, you have a big problem. This is market hubris, get ready for a reset
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-stocks-tesla-idUSKBN17C1XF
Let’s get to SpaceX.
What exactly are they contributing?
- All SpaceX achievements are basically 40-50yr old government funded research. Kina Lockheed and Boeing have some REAL innovations to show in this place,something you can’t take away from them. SpaceX just managed to make rockets land vertically of course accompanied by some sizzling hot high def videos to bewitch you. Just that
- SpaceX is selling a fantasy of reusable rocket launchers. Great idea because these are damn expensive,right? But how come nobody is interested, I mean Russia,China,India? It’s simple cost v risk. Brand new launchers sometimes buckle under pressure and bleed billions. Risk of a recycled launcher is infinitesimally higher given the severe strain it undergoes during its first. Then the cost of refurbishing may actually exceed cost of a new one....and so forth
-And finally, out of the whole space thing, launching is usually among the cheapest component. Even if Musk slashed launch costs by recycling launchers, he’d be dealing with about not more than 20% of the entire cost. That’s hardly enough to bring down space exploration costs significantly.
In short,re-using launchers is risky and not necessarily cost effective
SpaceX bagging some government contracts is no biggie, but it’s not about to disrupt the space industry. It will be just another regular and SMALL player doing what everyone else is doing. SpaceX can only grow into a dominant player if one of the others screw up BIG
That’s why all you can muster is Musk says not Musk does
-
That’s why all you can muster is Musk says not Musk does
Roger that vooke. Innovation means doing more and better for less.
SpaceX - 60% marketshare of commercial space launch. This sector was previously dead as dodo and dominated by ULA, Europe (France) & Russia. Cost per launch drop from US$200M to 60M. How is that hot air? Solid tech, solid action, solid cost savings. SpaceX is a private company valued at $20B. No Wall Street speculation unlike Tesla. And this startup is 15 years old unlike 100 years old Lockheed Martin & Boeing :)
http://www.popularmechanics.com/space/rockets/a27290/one-chart-spacex-dominate-rocket-launches/ (http://www.popularmechanics.com/space/rockets/a27290/one-chart-spacex-dominate-rocket-launches/)
The relatively inexpensive cost of a Falcon 9 launch, staring at around $62 million, has also lead the Department of Defense to move away from their old go-to, United Launch Alliance, a joint venture between Boeing and Lockheed Martin.
(http://pop.h-cdn.co/assets/17/28/1499967787-screen-shot-2017-07-13-at-13630-pm.png)
Tesla - the market is not crazy to value them at $57B... higher than Ford, GM & Daimler and all the other luxury auto brands. None of those companies have any advance orders unlike Tesla. Tesla has not sold few units for lack of customers but rather lack of production capacity... which is what the gigafactories are about... and why batteries are outsourced to Panasonic. While GM and others face shrinking demand. You may be aware most govts - US, EU, Far East, Aussie - have mandated EV in coming decade. This escalating shift to clean energy is what fuels the big evaluation of Tesla Inc - Motors & Energy - not hot air. They will continue to dominate EV market - which will supplant gasoline auto - and push those dinosaurs you're praising out of business. That's why a 15 year old startup with 1% of market is 3rd most valuable - after Toyota & Nissan - 100 year old companies. The Japs are a tough nut to crack.
Musk - have you looked at his profile? Dozens of innovation awards says something. Unlike Jobs & Gates who had a handful in their days. Musk at 35years already was Global Innovator of the Year for a few years mfululizo... this is the award that got Dr James Mwangi of Equity kudos all round Africa including from Raila :D Do you think the issuers of these awards don't know anything? Are they just as sold to the hype as Wall Street?
-
Pastor vooke - Musk at $20B networth... will soon catch up with Gates 80B as we move to EV gloally. And satellite supplants telco for telephony & internet supply. He already beat Jobs meagre $6B networth :)
How are about these awards - enough to feel a home library :D - do you suppose they are hot air?
- In 2006, Musk served as a member of the United States National Academy of Sciences Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board.[197]
- R&D Magazine Innovator of the Year for 2007 for SpaceX, Tesla, and SolarCity.[198]
- Inc Magazine Entrepreneur of the Year award for 2007 for his work on Tesla and SpaceX.[199]
- 2007 Index Design award for his design of the Tesla Roadster.[200] Global Green 2006 product design award for his design of the Tesla Roadster, presented by Mikhail Gorbachev.[201]
- American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics George Low award for the most outstanding contribution in the field of space transportation in 2007/2008. Musk was recognized for his design of the Falcon 1, the first privately developed liquid-fuel rocket to reach orbit.[202]
- National Wildlife Federation 2008 National Conservation Achievement award for Tesla and SolarCity. Other 2008 recipients include journalist Thomas Friedman, U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT), and Florida Governor Charlie Crist.[203]
- The Aviation Week 2008 Laureate for the most significant achievement worldwide in the space industry.[204]
- National Space Society's Von Braun Trophy in 2008/2009, given for leadership of the most significant achievement in space. Prior recipients include Burt Rutan and Steve Squyres.[205]
- Automotive Executive of the Year (worldwide) in 2010 for demonstrating technology leadership and innovation via Tesla. Prior awardees include Bill Ford Jr, Bob Lutz, Dieter Zetsche and Lee Iacocca. Musk is the youngest ever recipient of this award.[206]
- Listed as one of Time's 100 people who most affected the world in 2010.[207]
- The world governing body for aerospace records, Fédération Aéronautique Internationale, presented Musk in 2010 with the highest award in air and space, the FAI Gold Space Medal, for designing the first privately developed rocket to reach orbit. Prior recipients include Neil Armstrong, Burt Rutan of Scaled Composites and John Glenn.[208]
- Named as one of the 75 most influential people of the 21st century by Esquire magazine.[79]
- Recognized as a Living Legend of Aviation in 2010 by the Kitty Hawk Foundation for creating the successor to the Space Shuttle (Falcon 9 rocket and Dragon spacecraft). Other recipients include Buzz Aldrin and Richard Branson.[209]
- In 2010, Musk was elected to the board of trustees of the California Institute of Technology,[210] however no longer holds the position.[211]
- In a 2010 Space Foundation survey, he was ranked as the No. 10 (tied with rocketry pioneer and scientist Wernher von Braun) most popular space hero.[212]
- In February 2011, Forbes listed Musk as one of "America's 20 Most Powerful CEOs 40 And Under".[213]
- In June 2011, Musk was awarded the US$250,000 Heinlein Prize for Advances in Space Commercialization[214]
- In 2011, Musk was honored as a Legendary Leader at the Churchill Club Awards.[215]
- In 2012, Musk was awarded the Royal Aeronautical Society's highest award: a Gold Medal.[216]
- Musk was the 2012 recipient of Smithsonian magazine's American Ingenuity Award in the Technology category.
- In 2013, Musk was named the Fortune Businessperson of the year for SpaceX, SolarCity, and Tesla.[217]
- In 2015, he was awarded IEEE Honorary Membership.[218]
- As of 2015, Musk serves on the board of advisors of Social Concepts, Inc.[219]
- In 2016, The Drive, a division of Time, named Musk the most influential person in the car business and as the second most influential person in the automotive tech sector.[220]
- In June 2016, Business Insider named Musk one of the "Top 10 Business Visionaries Creating Value for the World" along with Mark Zuckerberg and Sal Khan.[221]
- In December 2016, Musk was ranked 21st on Forbes list of The World's Most Powerful People.[23]
- In March 2017, Musk was listed by UK-based company Richtopia at number 3 in the list of 200 Most Influential Philanthropists and Social Entrepreneurs.[222][223]
Honorary doctorates
- Honorary doctorate in Design from the Art Center College of Design[224]
- Honorary doctorate (DUniv) in Aerospace Engineering from the University of Surrey[225]
- Honorary doctorate of Engineering and Technology from Yale University[226]
-
Yup. Windows & Microsoft Office is Gates legacy. While Jobs created Mac, iPod, iPhone & iPad - hardwares. Jobs wins because Gates was stuck in enterprise/corporate stuff while Jobs dominated consumer. Apple revenue is 3X Microsoft's. Simple maths.
Bill Gates is a software genius...while jobs was great with hardware.
-
Actually between Gates, Musk and Jobs, Jobs is the hawker. The other guys have some technical chops on their resumes. If Musk was fantasy, NASA would not be doing business with him. NASA demands proof that you can deliver in the fields of hard(as opposed to consumer) science and technology.
Jobs' expertise was hardware design - aesthetics - while Gates was software guru. Apple took over consumer vs MS enterprise dominance. MS failed spectacularly in mobile - buying brain-dead Nokia :D - and watched haplessly as Apple, Google & Amazon ran amok. MS ex-CEO Steve Ballmer even attempted to buy now-dead Yahoo :D - to merge with Bing - instead of innovating. In the end Gates hired Indian dude - Satya Nadella - as new CEO to save him in mobile & cloud. Ballmer actually "retired" due to dismal performance as competitors ran circles around MS.
Musk excels in both hw & sw starting with Paypal then cutting metal live-live with cars & rockets. Musk has serious tech chops - as chief designer of Tesla and CTO of SpaceX. Jobs and Gates are child's play to Musk.
-
Another dinosaur that will die shortly - like GM, Ford, et al - is IBM. I recently as last year was in a project to create apps for Watson API - and discovered it's full of bugs and half-baked functions. Very poorly designed too. We actually resorted to Google DeepMind. The lady exec who picked Watson was cut loose - for derailing the project big-time in time & cost. Ginny Rometty should accept her shortcomings and step aside like Uber dude - for some young Musk or Zuckerberg :) - while he she has a chance.
-
Robina,
As I understand it, SpaceX is simply undercutting the veterans,or the veterans overpriced the launches being monopolies. Since SpaceX is a private company, it’s hard to get under its hood and see exactly how profitable it is. But Washington Post did and they realized it has had very thin operating margins and losses even when it pretended to be profitable.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/exclusive-peek-at-spacex-data-shows-loss-in-2015-heavy-expectations-for-nascent-internet-service-1484316455
USAF will probably grant them more contracts but note the reasons. It is no innovation just price war. And quite possibly they are incurring losses just to give a semblance of innovation.
The good of listed companies is you can peep at their books and contrast thst with the stock valuation in the market. The bad is stock valuation may be totally unrelated to the books. Tesla is a perfect example. If you believe they did 80K because they can’t keep up with demand, please tel me how many units are preordered.
The good of not listing is you basically believe what the company wants you to believe. The bad is investors have no way of valuing what you are doing.
-
Robina,
As I understand it, SpaceX is simply undercutting the veterans,or the veterans overpriced the launches being monopolies. Since SpaceX is a private company, it’s hard to get under its hood and see exactly how profitable it is. But Washington Post did and they realized it has had very thin operating margins and losses even when it pretended to be profitable.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/exclusive-peek-at-spacex-data-shows-loss-in-2015-heavy-expectations-for-nascent-internet-service-1484316455
As a CEO or board - your concern is investors - followed by customers. Stock price is the ultimate metric that tells you what investors think about your company. Not profits. If Tesla investors (owners) cared about profits the stock would tank. GM despite huge profits has sinking stock - due to dismal innovation and shrinking market.
Check here Musk's targets - no profit - just operating margins & marketshare. Why should he care about profits - when his boss the stock holders don't care?
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/another-tesla-win-elon-musks-compensation-plan-is-executive-pay-done-right-2016-04-22 (http://www.marketwatch.com/story/another-tesla-win-elon-musks-compensation-plan-is-executive-pay-done-right-2016-04-22)
Musk gets 10% of his options every time Tesla adds (and sustains) $4 billion in new stock market value up to $43.2 billion, as long as the company also meets an operational goal that accompanies the milestone. Those include getting the Model X crossover through development and on to the market, then doing the same for the less expensive Model 3 sedan whose 2017 debut will make Tesla a mass-market producer.
USAF will probably grant them more contracts but note the reasons. It is no innovation just price war. And quite possibly they are incurring losses just to give a semblance of innovation.
Innovation is independently measured - by Forbes, Fortune, academia, etc - and Tesla & SpaceX are top globally. ULA, Lockheed, GM, Ford, etc are nowhere near the top. 8)
Most innovative companies 2017: 1.Salesforce 2.Tesla 3.Amazon 4.Shanghai RAAS 5.Netflix ....
https://www.forbes.com/innovative-companies/list/ (https://www.forbes.com/innovative-companies/list/)
Price war is there in many sectors. If ULA had any value outside monopoly it would not lose on price alone. For instance Apple gadgets are twice as expensive as say Samsung yet dominates market with other redeeming strengths. ULA & the Europeans & Russians are simply not innovative. No value-adds. So price alone kills them. ULA sublets everything to contractors who in turn sublet. Layers of fat mean it cannot compete on price. Musk knows this and is eating their lunch.
The good of listed companies is you can peep at their books and contrast thst with the stock valuation in the market. The bad is stock valuation may be totally unrelated to the books. Tesla is a perfect example. If you believe they did 80K because they can’t keep up with demand, please tel me how many units are preordered.
The good of not listing is you basically believe what the company wants you to believe. The bad is investors have no way of valuing what you are doing.
All valuation is independent of course. So the $21B for SpaceX is legit - that's why separate valuers come to the same figure. Otherwise Google et al would not sink in billions for minor stakes.
400K units of Tesla Model 3 are pre-ordered ... deliverable by end of 2018. Panicked GM & Ford dealers are pushing state laws to ban Tesla direct sales. You order a Tesla online and pick it at the factory - on a future date - cause there are no huge inventories lying around like Toyota and GM... who need sales reps to push old stock down your throat.
-
vooke - imagine this "Other US" is ULA - Lockheed & Boeing - who will be reduced to 0% this year :D :D Decimated by SpaceX in 4 years.
(https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/sacex1.jpg)
-
His take on making life multiplanetary. I enjoy his views on this, even though I am less optimistic. Until I see it with my eyes, I will continue to consider the universe as a place uniquely suited to making sure that earthlings cannot survive long beyond that thin blanket that is our atmosphere.
-
Windy did that happen on Thursday?? Oh my, how did I forget :(
The issue will be habitability of Mars obviously. He claims the atmosphere - CO2 & H2O - makes it perfect to produce rocket fuel. A depot will be setup by 2024 once the pioneer crew arrive. First mission 2022.
-
BFR = Big F**g Rocket :)
Like that sea droneship used as launchpad off California... "Just Read The F**g Manual" :D
These stuff are branded by nerds.
-
You're nuts - Bill Gates has been richest man in planet for how many years now - and Apple has been in out of bankruptcy for years - now ridding on Iphone - which like RIM's blackberry is little toy that cannot outlast a company as big as Microsoft. Bill Gates build a solid company and has gone ahead to do amazing things in philanthropy. Bill gates brilliance didn't start yesterday - his IQ was always off the charts.
Yup. Windows & Microsoft Office is Gates legacy. While Jobs created Mac, iPod, iPhone & iPad - hardwares. Jobs wins because Gates was stuck in enterprise/corporate stuff while Jobs dominated consumer. Apple revenue is 3X Microsoft's. Simple maths.
-
Stege jobs Equal trump. a marketing genius. However he was a fucking flawed individual, a toxic personality, he creat d a cult about apple prducts..to me apple products are exepnsive for no reason..I am an Android person. I refuse to pay for technology or innovation in a consumer product...Steve jobs started to eat a fruit diet to cure himself of cancer.the telsa guy is another marketer and fraudster. He bough two plants in my hood that were form general motor plants..he got a few subsidies from State ..the bugger never even set his foot in there they never even got a can of paint..he took the valuation and press from this and used it to defraud wallstreet..
Bill gates ..that is a genius ..he is wise man..his legacy will live long ..after iPhone apple will do what?
Like one tech told me..apple is for Americans they are so daft they cannot know when they are being sold shit.. corporate America needs to abandon iPhone and if will crash and burn
-
Ruto's rich too :) Bill struck out with lady luck in enterprise software. I was basing my rating Jobs higher on Bill's spectacular screwups whenever he attempted consumer computing. Thank God you are above all that.
You're nuts - Bill Gates has been richest man in planet for how many years now - and Apple has been in out of bankruptcy for years - now ridding on Iphone - which like RIM's blackberry is little toy that cannot outlast a company as big as Microsoft. Bill Gates build a solid company and has gone ahead to do amazing things in philanthropy. Bill gates brilliance didn't start yesterday - his IQ was always off the charts.
Yup. Windows & Microsoft Office is Gates legacy. While Jobs created Mac, iPod, iPhone & iPad - hardwares. Jobs wins because Gates was stuck in enterprise/corporate stuff while Jobs dominated consumer. Apple revenue is 3X Microsoft's. Simple maths.
-
Robina
Do you a liberal coolaid fountain in your home?
-
Robina
Do you a liberal coolaid fountain in your home?
Yes I do.
-
Cool, I can see..every thing green is good, fossil bad, ..I bet you you recycle even tea leaves