Few hackers - by which I assume you mean engineers or developers - consider Steve Jobs a "hero." Most would agree he created wonderful products that changed the world, but he isn't much of a hero to a software or hardware hacker. Because as you note, he wasn't technical. Woz is the geek god of the two, because he was building cheap, full fucking computers in a damn garage, by himself. Dennis Ritchie was a hero. Not Steve Jobs.
If anything, hackers are more likely than most to respond negatively to Steve's recent approach toward mobile platforms and use of IP in business... which are the sorts of alienating decisions a technical co-founder can make.
If by "hackers" you meant "people who want to make product(s) for a startup and learned a few things about code to hack out a prototype," you might be more on-target.
I might be hauled before the Politcal Committee for the Advancement of the Revolution for saying this, but please speak for yourself. I am a hacker and by boyhood hero was Steve. He was an artist whose medium was technology. It doesn't get more hacker-like than that to me.
> I am a hacker and by boyhood hero was Steve. He was an artist whose medium was technology. It doesn't get more hacker-like than that to me.
This is why I predicated my post on the definition of "hacker." If we're going with the 2011, mainstream meaning of the word, where CEOs can be hackers because they help create amazing technology, then I have no input. Go ahead and hack your life, make some awesome music by hacking your violin, hack whatever you like.
Why do all of our heroes have to be hackers, anyway? I aspire to be an entreprenuer as well. He's not a bad hero to have in that arena. (And not because Jobs was this wonderful human being, either!)
If we say hackers are those who use their skills and technology to accomplish something difficult, Steve Jobs is one of the greats. He used technology to make technology usable, and that's one of the greatest hacks of all.
I built my first computer from scratch because we couldn't afford an Apple //. (maybe I spent more in the end doing it, but I learned a lot.)
When I say, "From scratch", I mean, I designed it (Z80 based) laid out the printed circuit board, exposed it, etched it, populated it, debugged it, and then I did it all over again to get a video board to connect the computer to a TV set. Then, after all of that, I taught myself Z80 assembly in order to get a minimal ROM OS on it.
I soon decided that software was a lot easier to debug than hardware, and that startups were a lot more fun than big companies.
I've learned a great many disciplines and how to hack them, from economics and investing, to marketing and business, as well, as physics, electronics, materials science, metal working, and of course, every bit of software I could learn.
As a political rebel, someone who took LSD when he was young in order to hack his mind, and a full fledged engineer, startup junkie and capitalist... Steve Jobs is, in fact, my hero.
In fact, I think he's the greatest hero this country as had in my lifetime, bar none.
Being a hacker isn't about sitting in a basement making code that nobody will ever use. Or at least, that's not the only way to be a hacker.
Good engineering means solving problems, and the problems that separate Apple products from the abject crap that everybody else puts out, are as worthy of hacker's efforts as any other engineering problems.
In fact, I question the engineering expertise of anyone who pooh-poohs apple's products. I find the tendency here on HN for people to pretend like Apple isn't innovative to be a sure sign that those posters are really not actually hackers. Because hackers know how hard it is, to not only make something work, but make it work well, and make it work well in a way that is really usable.
Frankly, if Steve Jobs is not one of your heroes, you're not a hacker in my book.
Your post seems to suggest that you do not really understand what adgar was saying
The type of person he is calling a hero, someone like Dennis Ritchie, is someone who has created important algorithms or made advances in chip design. These technologies, Ritchie's in particular, are what make Apple products, and in Ritchie's case very near all other computer products, possible to build at all.
There is the Jobs type of innovation, where you integrate work in a useful and pleasing way. Then there is the academic version of innovation, where you are creating or extending the foundations of our collective knowledge. These are hardly comparable.
Many of us find the latter to be far more of a challenge than the former. That's not to say that doing the sort of work that Apple did was at all easy! But beyond such subjective opinions, the real discord that bothers some of us is that the academic type contributions are every bit as important as the contributions of Jobs, yet often go completely unnoticed, or worse, their successes are misattributed up the chain to people like Jobs.
These people deserve every bit as much praise, but usually get none. So Dennis Ritchie died recently. There were some mentions in the news. But by and large Jobs death is dominating the scene. Ritchie's work has arguably touched far more people. It's sad, but I suppose it's human nature to sing the praises of a few at the expense of the rest.
That said, Jobs was a hugely influential person as well and certainly deserves respect. We just need to remember that there are others that also deserve the same sort of respect. The quiet heros.
Frankly, if Steve Jobs is not one of your heroes, you're not a hacker in my book.
That's just silly. Whether you're a hacker or not depends on what you do, not who your heroes are. That's like saying Slash is not a real guitar player if he doesn't worship Jimi Hendrix.
I never quite understand the hero bit. He was very successful and as such set a great example to follow. But he was in it for the money, and he land-grabbed a lot of stuff away from other people. It's as if somebody would buy all the land in my city. Sure, I would envy him and wonder how to get so much money, but I would not cheer him on for buying the land that used to be my playground.
You make two errors. First, you're wrong to assume he was in it for the money. He could have made a lot more money, and its clear from interviews that money is not what drove him. Secondly, you erroneously presume that capitalism is not a heroic venture. It is. Capitalists like Steve Jobs benefit mankind more than all the efforts of all the charities you could name. This wouldn't normally be so heroic, but in a society filled with people like you who want everyone enslaved to marxist ideology, it is. The idea that he "land grabbed" comes from a lack of understanding of economics, probably due to your education which taught you that an economy was a zero sum game. It isn't.
Capitalism may be a heroic venture, but buying and owning stuff is not the part benefits mankind. I was also oversimplifying with respect to "in it for the money", but the fact is he fought a lot of patent wars. Patents are simply land claims (a ka buying and owning land) and it is not all obvious that they benefit society in a heroic way - capitalism or not.
Also, sorry, but you are just stupid for assuming that I am Marxist just because I criticized some businessman. I never even mentioned any charities. Go find somebody else to vent your frustration to.
No, these are people who think that because they run linux and compiled a kernel once, or jail broke their phones, they are "elite". These are the people who inhabited slashdot in 2001 and said, upon introduction of the iPod "no wifi? lame". Who said the iPhone would be a failure because it didn't have a physical keyboard, who denigrated the iPad is "just a big iPod", and who complained that Apple sucked because they had no marketshare, until Apple stared dominating and they used that as an excuse to claim Apple sucked.
In short, just the kind of posers who overwhelm hacker news.
What I actually meant was that your comment: "Frankly, if Steve Jobs is not one of your heroes, you're not a hacker in my book." is as ridiculous and preposterous as the opposite version I posted. Please don't try to categorize hackers or HN users like that.
> someone who took LSD when he was young in order to hack his mind
I predicated my post on the meaning of the word "hacker." My parents are hackers by your definition and I only made it halfway through your post. In which case I have no disagreement because we're talking about different things - I made sure to say that in my original post.
You're being dishonest by quoting that one line, and ignoring the fact that I'm an electronics and software hacker. I guess, in your book, because Woz used drugs, he doesn't qualify as a hacker, eh?
This is just childish posturing on your part, since you're not an engineer. Your idea of a hacker is someone who jailbreaks their phone or installs linux on their PC and thinks they are "elite".
My idea of a hacker is someone who spends their lives designing and building hardware or software and has significant technological skills.
Your "hackers" hate Apple because Apple doesn't compete at the low end of the market selling cheap gadgets, and since your "hackers" have day jobs at retail establishments, they can't afford Apple gear.
My hackers recognize the significant engineering effort that it takes to make what Apple does look easy.
Your "hackers" hate ability and think too much is being made of Steve Jobs, because anti-capitalism has somehow become cool on a sight ostensibly about people who want to start star ups.
My hackers recognize the difficulty in making a dent in the universe with your startup, and applaud Steve Jobs as for doing so.
Steve Jobs' has hundreds of patents. I have a few. How many do you have?
> You're being dishonest by quoting that one line, and ignoring the fact that I'm an electronics and software hacker.
Your being an electronics and software hacker is irrelevant to any argument.
> I guess, in your book, because Woz used drugs, he doesn't qualify as a hacker, eh?
This argument makes no sense. You used "hack" to describe the process of taking LSD, saying that taking LSD is sufficient to make you a hacker, which I pointed out means my technology-phobic parents are also hackers. I did not say taking LSD disqualifies you from being a hacker, merely that it is not sufficient.
> This is just childish posturing on your part, since you're not an engineer.
You should let my employer know! They're wasting money on me if I'm not actually an engineer!
I'm not even going to try to continue past this point.
If anything, hackers are more likely than most to respond negatively to Steve's recent approach toward mobile platforms and use of IP in business... which are the sorts of alienating decisions a technical co-founder can make.
If by "hackers" you meant "people who want to make product(s) for a startup and learned a few things about code to hack out a prototype," you might be more on-target.