Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

besson3c · Oct 6, 2011, 12:09 AM

The Steve Jobs media attention got me thinking about this, since I've seen Steve Jobs compared to Thomas Edison and other inventors, as well as being hailed as a great visionary and entrepreneur.

Is an inventor the person who thinks of the concept of something, even if they don't actually build it? Is the inventor the person that actually builds the thing? Is the inventor the patent holder? Is the inventor the funder, the backer that gets to take credit for things in some cases? Some combination thereof? I realize that there often isn't a single inventor, but we usually speak about inventors in a singular sense - one person definitely takes the bulk of the credit.

I'm sad for the passing of Steve Jobs, what I'm about to get into in no way intends to take anything away from his accomplishments or assert anything in particular, I'm just using what we know about him and Apple as an example to explore these questions in a more general way.

I realize Jobs' name is on a number of patents, and that he had the vision for certain concepts. However, in some of these cases he wasn't necessarily the first person to think of a concept (e.g. the concept of touch screens), but the first person to help lead a team to bring those ideas to reality. In this case, would he be the sole inventor, or one of the inventors? Is it fair, whether this is an Apple product or any other, for the leaders/managers to sort of take credit for the work being done by the actual engineers?

Again, I realize that many of you including myself are in shock and are particular sensitive towards anything that might seem demeaning to Steve Jobs right now. Again, please trust that this is not my intent, I'm just curious and am too impatient for this story to die down before I can ask these questions about the invention title in a very general way

subego · 12:54 AM

I think that's one of the reasons "visionary" gets bandied about.

It's not so much invention, as realizing what the market wants (even if they don't know themselves). Convincing all those engineers and designers (or a board of directors, or VC types) to follow your vision, and then marketing it.

I'd say invention is something different.

Edison invented very little (certainly not the light bulb). He was a marketing guy.

besson3c · Oct 6, 2011, 01:08 AM

That makes sense...

To me it is a mistake to think of invention as an act undertaken by a single individual, no matter what sort of invention you are talking about really.

It is easy to conflate all of these things together though, I guess. If you did a poll most people would probably tell you that Edison was an inventor.

Shaddim · Oct 6, 2011, 01:24 AM

Jobs was likely the greatest manager and salesman of our time, but I wouldn't call him an inventor.

OreoCookie · Oct 6, 2011, 01:53 AM

@Shaddim
I have to disagree: he's clearly not a salesman. In fact, if you look at Apple's success, it's not because of good marketing. When Jobs took over, there was a Q&A session at WWDC (1997 or 1998, I think, you can find it online). A guy asked when we'll see nice TV ads and stuff to let people know they're still in the market. Jobs answered that there won't be any ads and that the best marketing are good products.

Jobs has clearly shaped five breakthrough products (the original Mac, the iPod, the iTunes ecosystem, the iPhone and the iPad). If you want to call him visionary instead of innovator, I'm fine with that.

Some friends of mine work or have interned at Apple, and from what they've told me, Jobs' attention to the most minute details goes way, way beyond what a manager or, gasp, a marketing guy does.

@subego
I don't think he makes stuff »the market wants«, because before game changers exist, people don't know that they want that particular product. I think Apple built stuff the way they envisioned things should be.

subego · Oct 6, 2011, 02:04 AM

Originally Posted by besson3c

It is easy to conflate all of these things together though, I guess. If you did a poll most people would probably tell you that Edison was an inventor.

Unless I'm mistaken, that's exactly what he wanted you to think of him as.

Having that stick, even long after death, is some serious marketing chops.

Shaddim · Oct 6, 2011, 02:06 AM

Sure he was a salesman, just not in the traditional "pitch man" sense. Enzo Ferrari was a great salesman too, even though they sold relatively few cars to the public. They were strong personalities who knew how to work the brand and make them into icons. It's about passion and instilling it in others.

subego · Oct 6, 2011, 02:07 AM

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

@subego
I don't think he makes stuff »the market wants«, because before game changers exist, people don't know that they want that particular product. I think Apple built stuff the way they envisioned things should be.

This sounds suspiciously similar to my parenthetical "even if they don't know themselves".

OreoCookie · Oct 6, 2011, 02:36 AM

Originally Posted by Shaddim

Sure he was a salesman, just not in the traditional "pitch man" sense. Enzo Ferrari was a great salesman too, even though they sold relatively few cars to the public. They were strong personalities who knew how to work the brand and make them into icons. It's about passion and instilling it in others.

No, I disagree, it's about good products. You invest your passion into the product. Jobs did have a talent to pitch stuff at talks, but that's really secondary. We wouldn't be talking about him if he was just good »pitch man«.

Originally Posted by subego

This sounds suspiciously similar to my parenthetical "even if they don't know themselves".

Yeah, I know, but I still think it's a few degrees off. As I see it, Apple doesn't make products people want to buy, but products Apple people want to have and use. In any case, it's just a minor comment of mine.

Shaddim · Oct 6, 2011, 02:44 AM

Nah. Apple made sexy things and pitched them well, the fact that they were solidly made and of high quality was a great bonus.

Waragainstsleep · Oct 6, 2011, 04:12 AM

I saw a quote somewhere last night along the lines of "You can't give the public what they want. By the time you've built it, they'll want something else." Supposedly that was from Jobs himself.

I think invention depends on the invention in question.

Imagine you invented the hand drill. Thats your invention, you invented it. Some other person then invents the electric motor which is his invention. A third person then combines the two to make a power drill.
The devil is in the details in this example. Anyone who has seen an electric motor used to drive anything could more than likely work out how to get one to run a drill without needing to be particularly clever to do so.
In this example, Steve Jobs would be a 4th guy who tells the third person "It would be cool if I could run a drill using an electric motor. Go do that."

Most of his inventions and indeed these days most inventions of any sort are combinations of other inventions or discoveries. Steve made the decisions on which discoveries and inventions should be combined to form new inventions and on how they interacted with each other to achieve that.