/biz/ - Business & Finance

[Anonymous No.718763]

Hi /biz/

I want to become the next Steve Jobs.

How should I do that?

[Anonymous No.718764]

Get pancreatic cancer and 'treat' it with alternative medicine instead of getting real treatment.

[Anonymous No.718765]

Find a Wozniak

[Anonymous No.718767]

>yfw you realise that bill gates is Steve jobs and Wozniak combined in to one

[Anonymous No.718770]

>>718765
Don't need to though, look at Bill Gates.
>>718767
Not really. They're different people. But Gates and Jobs were both similarly ruthless to be successful.

Gates just happened to come from a privileged background, which meant he was well educated, had confidence in his intelligence, and could indulge in learning everything he wanted to about computers to show off his intelligence.

Jobs came from a working class background, and was profoundly affected by the fact that he was adopted. His drive was to prove to everybody that an adopted, working class kid from a small house in a small Californian town could dupe everybody and win at life. And of course he was genuinely interested in things technological - but he realised that if was to win, his time was better spent on building a business rather than learning the technology.

Different people - to compare them and say "one of them is the other guy plus another guy" is just crass and stupid.

[Anonymous No.718771]

>>718764
The guy was an idiot, his hippy shit literally killed him

I particularly liked the fact that thousands went on the streets holding stupid candles on their ipad when he died. If they had ever met him irl they would probably despise him, just like his coworkers.

[Anonymous No.718772]

>>718765

[Anonymous No.718773]

>>718770
Jobs was more lucky than skilled. Gates and Woz were extremely skilled. You're confused.

[Anonymous No.718774]

>>718763
What he did was take existing technology, make it sexier and less compatible with its competitors, i.e. more exclusive.

Basically, Apple is a luxury brand comparable to Louis Vuitton. The difference is that Apple can pretend its items are practical and pragmatic and not just status symbols.

Take existing items, make them more elegant looking and expensive, pretend that this change makes them more useful while also subliminally saying "This shows everyone your're top dog."

[Anonymous No.718776]

>>718774
> make it sexier and less compatible with its competitors, i.e. more exclusive.
But thats not true though. Apple products sacrifice compatibility for usability, not for the sake of exclusivity. The exclusivity is just a byproduct.

>Take existing items, make them more elegant looking and expensive, pretend that this change makes them more useful while also subliminally saying "This shows everyone your're top dog."
Again not true, Macs, Iphones, Ipads, they all DO work a heck of a lot better than their competitors. The only thing they do 'wrong' is overpricing it but you don't make this argument anywhere.

You people must remember hating something because it is cool also makes you a hipster, just like the crowd you claim to hate.

[Anonymous No.718777]

There are some technologies that can makes billionaire. Requires genius in science and technology, not for normal people.

quantum computer
fast charging/longer battery usage time
graphene

[Anonymous No.718779]

>>718763
use LSD and go to charity churches to mooch free food

[Anonymous No.718781]

>>718763
You can start by leaving 4chan.

[Anonymous No.718783]

>>718773
Luck exists at the cornerstone of opportunity and preparedness.

[Anonymous No.718784]

>>718779
Wow China even has a knockoff market on humans

[Anonymous No.718785]

>>718779
Chinks are so fucking strange

[Anonymous No.718786]

>>718776
Maybe that's true. I'm not some kind of anti-mac zealot, and I'm thinking of getting one basically as a form of bling.

Are they better than the opposition? Maybe. But most people don't test the opposition.
Women in particular don't care. Scientific method and rational judgement really does not come into it.

Exclusivity is often an end in itself.
The fact that used car dealer types prefer Windows et al for the sake of compatibility and familiarity makes Mac et al seem above all that schlubby stuff.

You can assemble a computer that outdoes a Mac without too much difficulty. If the people who crow over the specs really cared, they'd do that, and save money to boot. But they're largely in it for a combined package of aesthetics, pre-approved consumerism, and social cachet.

I'm not American, so I'm not entirely sure what a hipster is. I think it involves effeminacy and facial hair.

[Anonymous No.718790]

>>718773
...is exactly what a bitter, autistic, never-going-to-make-it beta computer programmer would say.

They were all skilled (apart from Woz) in being businessmen.

You don't belong on this board. Perhaps you should go to >>>/g/ instead.

[Anonymous No.718792]

>>718774
>>718786
>I'm not some kind of anti-mac zealot

But you clearly are you dumb cunt

If you're going to have an opinion at least have the balls to stand behind it

[Anonymous No.718795]

>>718792
: )

[Anonymous No.718796]

>>718790
I made $190k last year as a never-going-to-make-it beta computer programmer :^)

[Anonymous No.718800]

>>718786

I'm a programmer and it's so much easier to do things for macs because of their rigid standards. When you're on a PC sure you can just bump your RAM requirements and call it a day, but on mobile devices where resources are set and scarce their standards are a godsend.

For enterprise uses ipads and iphones are the majority of devices and it's not because the users want it. At work we support this enterprise app for Android and iOS.

We hate supporting android since we never know how long manufactures will take to push out critical system updates and we have to constantly look into how the app reacts and renders across different screen sizes and OS versions and add tons of conditional code to keep up support. With iOS we just need occasional tweaks at worst.

[Anonymous No.718809]

>>718800
>I'm a programmer and it's so much easier to do things for macs because of their rigid standards.

Lel, you have to pay to develop on iOS and OSX

Lol faggot.

Supporting nonfree software fucking cunt

You are cancer

[Anonymous No.718821]

>>718800
You really program on anything without a keyboard?

I'm not dismissing Apple completely, I just look at things from an open source software / DIY hardware perspective. I've never bought a piece of software in my life.
A MacBook Air would be a pretty nice thing for me to have, just for compactness.

But as I see it, most of Apple's success comes from this "compactness" angle rather than from more basic approaches. (A "basic approach" being the production of good quality hardware that you can assemble yourself.)

A prepackaged app, a prepackaged laptop, a prepackaged tablet, all neat, pretty, convenient, and instantly available. And they bleed you fucking dry for this convenience.

I prefer to take the time to buy sources in bulk rather than spend extra for short term convenience.
My immediate business plans are to assemble "convenient" kits of cheap items and sell them as a group, for twice or thrice their original prices when bought separately in bulk.
To assemble cheap ingredients and sell them in combinations for similar profits.
I regard this as a shady tactic on my part. Basically, I see myself as deceiving my customers and taking them for a ride. And I'd really rather not be taken for a ride myself.

If money were no object, I'd be willing to buy convenience in small amounts, like a Macbook Air versus an uglier laptop with similar specs, but until then I see it as an unprofitable way to think. If working with Apple helps your business, fine, but that's beside the point, which is the essential glossy prepackaged-ness of the brand.

[Anonymous No.718827]

>>718809
>Lel, you have to pay to develop on iOS and OSX
A dev account is $100 a year. Are you impoverished?

[Anonymous No.718832]

>>718827
>Paying to program
>Blowing Tim Cook with your yearly stipend
>Thinking Objective-C and Swift are real languages, not babby shit

lel, you MUST be a macfag

[Anonymous No.718834]

>>718821
>I prefer to take the time to buy sources in bulk rather than spend extra for short term convenience
The question is how valuable is your time? As people get jobs and families, a few extra hundred dollars is not an issue, it's the time. People happily pay extra for things to be set up for them.

[Anonymous No.718839]

>>718809
> implying I'm the one paying anything
> implying open source software isn't objectively shit 101% of the time

>>718821
The actual programming is done on a desktop Mac, but the app is a mobile one.
And what you mention is exactly the pain of it. That pcs and android devices do whatever they want and hardware is seen as sperate from software. The reality is that you can get much better performance out of hardware with software and drivers optimized for it, but that's impossible to do if you let the user or manufacturers pick whatever hardware they want.

Think of it like this, who would have an easier conversation: a Chinese guy and Mexican guy speaking English to each other, or two people speaking their native language?

[Anonymous No.718841]

>>718839
> implying open source software isn't objectively shit 101% of the time

Most servers run some kind of GNU/Linux, which is open source software, faggot

[Anonymous No.718847]

>>718834
I agree that it's sometimes worth a trade-off.

But I still think that Apple's main selling point is its luxury status.

When you consider most people's hourly pay, the hours spent looking for a bargain begin to make more sense, especially for something as expensive as a Mac.
As you move into the baller income bracket, Macs begin to make more sense.

>>718839
I see. Well, if I were running an IT business, I'd still prefer not being bound to Apple's monopoly, just for budget reasons. I certainly can't see myself even running a basic non-IT office on Macbooks. It'd probably be Debian on Thinkpads. But if you're making apps, I can understand why you might need to specialise.

[Anonymous No.718858]

>>718763
Get in to the next big leap in technology. Make it comprehensible to the laymen. Adopt a vertical business model. Steal a REALLY great piece of tech developed by some people with passion but no business sense. Never sell out.

That's basically Jobs and Gates, although for Gates replace "Vertical" with "Horizontal".

[Anonymous No.718863]

I had a business aimed at helping college students be more productive. The product was great, but young people just don't have the ability or willingness to pay for such things. I shifted my focus to entrepreneurs and it changed everything. Helping an entrepreneur save an hour a day is worth far more than saving a student an hour a day. When I show college students what I now charge, they accuse me of the same thing that people accuse Apple of. Not as violently, but in the same sort of tone as "why would people pay that?" They make the mistake of thinking their time is worth the same as everyone else's. But those college students are not even my market. This mentality infects people when they are too close to something, like computers.

Steve's strength was that he could identify what people really want, instead of lecturing that they should or shouldn't. The way people talk about the computer business is absurd. You wouldn't talk shit about a chef that focused on the taste of the food to make people feel good. And if that chef served Fortune 500 CEOs and made their day a little better, he deserves to be paid in amounts that most people would call a ripoff. It's not for them!

The whole point of business is to serve other people what they want. You need to humble yourself. If you want to make money, target the people that are willing to pay. Ignore the free riders that your product isn't even made for. The market determines the value you offer. Respect it.

[Anonymous No.719565]

>>718776
>Macs, Iphones, Ipads, they all DO work a heck of a lot better than their competitors.

Post this on /g/ and proceed to laughed right out. Hell even /v/ would shit on this comment, you are objectively wrong.

Go ahead and look at the just announced Macbook, go to even macrumors and macworld. Post this comment about it, you'll get shit on even at your home court.

[Anonymous No.720133]

>>718784
>>718785

[Anonymous No.720184]

>>718847
I'm this guy.

I've had another thought. I talk about Apple's slickness, its compactness and convenience, but there are other things with similar qualities.

Muji is a clothing and general household items chain. They have the same minimalist look - aesthetically speaking, everything matches everything else. You could randomly grab enough items to furnish an entire house and wardrobe and everything would look congruent. Compare this to other fashion and home chains where there are a mix of styles and you begin to see why Muji gets so many repeat customers. That's partly why Apple does - homogeneity, convenience, reliability. In a word, aesthetic and practical intregration.

If you were to sell kitchenware, you could sell toasters, kettles, etc. in matching minimalist styles and in similar colours and deliberately simple designs.
Habitat does this with furniture.

To be the next Steve Jobs, look at Muji, Apple, and Habitat, and see what they have in common. Find a field where you can apply these design and marketing tactics and hire the best people you can.

A lot of this minimalist design stuff has Japanese influence, so hire people who've been there or studied the traditional aesthetic (e.g. neatly laid out bento boxes or sushi trays, tatami mats, paper doors, japanese gardens, etc.)

[Anonymous No.720193]

>>718763
get cancer and be so stupid you think you can cure it with your mind

[Anonymous No.720194]

>>718764
beat me to it

[Anonymous No.720219]

Smoke crack cocaine. Trust me. This is Steve Ballmer.

[Anonymous No.720220]

does the startup market really produce many richfags? these fucks are trying to make something happen http://briksapp.co/

[Anonymous No.720222]

>>720220
No, it really doesn't. The odds have been shown to be super-low

[Anonymous No.720231]

>>718763

get lucky

That's really it, really both Gates and Jobs were very lucky to have people like Ballmer and Wozniak around them to back them up. Likewise, they came around at a very unique point in time when the powers that be (namely AT&T and IBM) weren't being risky or progressive enough promoting new ideas (such as a GUI) in their products.

Taken broadly, modern computing should have more or less be centered completely around AT&T, because it was AT&T that invented modern computing and the Internet (as well as UNIX) via Bell Labs. However, IBM started making consumer desktops off their business line while AT&T was too focused on making just phones and fax systems, later on it's surprising that small startups like Microsoft and Apple could rise in such an environment.

Anyway, you just need to have the right personality, the right vision, and be in the right place with the right people at the right time.

[Anonymous No.720427]

So, basically, can advertising through spambots on whatsapp/viber debase the image of a company?