staunch

In fact, the average person in Silicon Valley is as clueless as you are about Steve Jobs and would agree he was merely a good salesperson.

But people that know what it takes to build great products almost universally respect his world-class design and leadership, and even his deep technical knowledge.

The fools are the people who express more hatred for Steve Jobs than cigarette, oil, and pharma CEOs that irreparably injury and kill millions of humans simple because of his obnoxious methods of demanding the best from his highly privileged teammates.

Standards are important. So is perspective.

Woz in this case was acting as a subcontractor, doing a one-off favor for a friend. This was before they became partners when creating Apple.

Things are always more complicated than this...

As a rule, Apple gave stock to employees prior to the IPO, many of whom got rich. But some employees weren't eligible according to the criteria Steve (really, the board) came up with, and so they did not receive stock. Their criteria were typical for the time.

Woz and a few others felt bad about this and shared some of their stock.

Whether those ineligible people "deserved" stock is a matter of judgement...

Steve Jobs gave Woz half of the base amount, which is what Woz agreed to. Jobs withheld the fact that he was going to receive a bonus on top of the base amount, and did not share any of that money.

Was it an ethical mistake? Sure. He should have at least disclosed that he was receiving the bonus money, even if he didn't want to share it.

But claiming it was a "major ethical mistake" seems fairly out of touch with reality.

And of course, taken in the context of all of the good things they did together, it was completely insignificant and Woz has said as much.

Steve Jobs was a superficial asshole but was fundamentally a good and ethical person. There's only one major ethical mistake documented in his entire life (being an absentee father while his first daughter was young), which he spent decades making amends for.

The people that emulate Steve Jobs poorly are usually real assholes with a long list of ethical mistakes.

Woz was a great engineer. He was years ahead of any other engineer on the planet in terms of building awesome PC designs. Millions of the computers he designed and programmed were sold, for billions of dollars. The computer he created was the "Model T" of the personal computer industry. It's hard to be more technically accomplished as an engineer.

He could not have done it without Steve Jobs. But Steve Jobs could not have done it without him, either.

Steve Jobs was a major believer in the idea of the 100x engineer. During his entire career, he always tried to hire them.

And why did Steve Jobs believe in hiring 100x engineers? Because he knew and worked with Steve Wozniak.

> Believe the hype.

I'd rather believe the test results.

Is there a neutral third-party that has validated S3's durability/integrity/consistency? Something as rigorous as Jepsen?

It'd be really neat if someone compared all the S3 compatible cloud storage systems in a really rigorous way. I'm sure we'd discover that there are huge scary problems. Or maybe someone already has?

Update: seems like it was already ~2 months out of sync when Caesar went to Gaul, so this is basically incorrect?

Caesar procrastinated so hard he changed time itself!

(This is funny, but I'd be interested to read a source on how true this is. Presumably there were priests that could take care of such things. He took care of lots of other Roman business while he was in Gaul.)

It would be unsurprising to find that Oracle's MySQL cloud service is 1000x faster than AWS Aurora for some specific things, or maybe even entire classes of problems.

It would be equally unsurprising if Aurora is 1000x faster for other classes of problems.

That's a very misleading set of partial quotes to assemble in that order...

Ellison wasn't confused about any of the technical topics around cloud computing. He was complaining about the marketing trend at the time of slapping the "cloud computing" buzzword on all kinds of things that already existed.

This is a thing that happens in the tech world a lot, and it is pretty annoying. A more modern example is the over-use of "serverless" buzzword.

I agree the DGXA100 is a "complete solution" because it's NVIDIA selling NVIDIA customized integrated/certified/tested/supported hardware and software.

NVIDIA's advantage is that they're a proprietary company and they're the ones actually making the chips they're putting in a box.

That's very far away from a random little open source startup slapping third-party GPUs in a generic box.