Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 13th Aug 2013 11:48 UTC
Oracle and SUN

Business magnate Larry Ellison thinks that without Steve Jobs -- "our Edison" and "our Picasso" -- Apple corporation is in trouble.

Larry Ellison was one of Jobs' closest friends. Then again, this is the same Ellison who presided over one of the most idiotic and - for Oracle - disastrous lawsuits in technology history.

Update: A few new tidbits from the interview: Google is "completely evil" because of Java, and the mass surveillance by the US government is "absolutely necessary". So, aside from being utterly delusional (the Google and Java thing), he also does not believe in civil rights, and would much rather everyone give up their privacy and right to free speech.

What a tool. No wonder nobody cares about Oracle.

Thread beginning with comment 569551
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Not a good comparison
by Soulbender on Tue 13th Aug 2013 19:12 UTC in reply to "Not a good comparison"
Soulbender
Member since:
2005-08-18

I would hope the reasons for why this is unwise would be quite obvious but apparently not


Yes, because it isn't obvious. Two periods of leadership, one significantly more globally successful than the other. Obviously he's not infallible and obviously he learned something from his mistakes. A comparison would actually be very interesting.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Not a good comparison
by jared_wilkes on Tue 13th Aug 2013 20:16 in reply to "RE: Not a good comparison"
jared_wilkes Member since:
2011-04-25

It's not obvious that a kid in his twenties leading a company from a garage to attracting major corporate growth over its first seven years (the first wave of the new Silicon Valley) -- and leaving in his wake control to MBA/corporate types rather than trusted, experienced, tech-focused generals -- is a lot different than a much more mature man leading the same but very different company more than a decade later, after a great deal of maturing and learning experiences at new enterprises, for a decade and a half and turning it into the most profitable technology company in the world led by the same core group that Jobs has been grooming for leadership for 5-15 years?

I feel bad for the people who can't see the obvious differences and only see similarities.

Edited 2013-08-13 20:18 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Not a good comparison
by Soulbender on Wed 14th Aug 2013 07:56 in reply to "RE[2]: Not a good comparison"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

I feel bad for people who don't understand why it's an interesting and instructive comparison.

Reply Parent Score: 6

BallmerKnowsBest Member since:
2008-06-02

It's not obvious that a kid in his twenties leading a company from a garage to attracting major corporate growth over its first seven years (the first wave of the new Silicon Valley) -- and leaving in his wake control to MBA/corporate types rather than trusted, experienced, tech-focused generals -- is a lot different than a much more mature man leading the same but very different company more than a decade later, after a great deal of maturing and learning experiences at new enterprises, for a decade and a half and turning it into the most profitable technology company in the world led by the same core group that Jobs has been grooming for leadership for 5-15 years?

I feel bad for the people who can't see the obvious differences and only see similarities.


Funny, because I feel bad for anyone who tried to parse your 120-word run-on sentence. But yes, he was clearly a different person - for example, during his first tenure at Apple, Jobs didn't mastermind any illegal pricing-fixing arrangements with publishers.

Reply Parent Score: 4