This is the third (final) part of the interview featured in the anthology The Playboy Interview: Moguls, which also includes conversations with Jeff Bezos, Sergey Brin, Larry Page, David Geffen, and many others.
.
.
Playboy: What did you do upon your return?
Jobs: The culture shock of returning was stronger than the shock of the trip. Atari wanted me to come back to work. I wasnât eager to return, but over time they convinced me to become a consultant. In my free time, I hung out with Wozniak. He took me to meetings at the Homebrew Computer Club, where computer enthusiasts gathered to share their findings. Some of them were interesting, but overall, I didnât find it very engaging. Wozniak, however, attended the club with religious zeal.
Playboy: What was being said about computers at that time? Why did you become interested?
Jobs: The focal point of discussion was a microcomputer called Altair. At that time, we could hardly believe that someone had learned how to create computers that could be privately owned. Previously, this was impossible. When we were in high school, none of us had access to mainframes. We had to go somewhere and plead with a large company to let us use a computer. Now, for the first time in history, a computer could be bought. The Altair was released around 1975 and cost less than $400.
Though it was relatively inexpensive, not all of us could afford it. This is how computer clubs came to be.
Playboy: And what did you do with those primitive computers?
Jobs: Graphical interfaces didnât exist; only alphanumeric indicators. I got into programming, basic programming. Back then, early versions of computers couldnât even print â character input was done using switches.
Playboy: Then Altair introduced the concept of the home personal computer.
Jobs: It was just a computer that could be purchased. They didnât really know what to do with it. The first thing they added was programming languages so that people could write programs. Buyers started applying them for practical purposes only a year or two later, and that was for the simplest tasks like bookkeeping.
Playboy: And you decided that you could do something better.
Jobs: It just happened that I worked a lot at night at Atari, and Voz would often come by. Atari released a game called Gran Track, the first driving simulator with a steering wheel. Voz immediately got hooked on it. He spent tons of quarters on that game, so I let him in the office, and he played for free all night long.
When I ran into difficulties working on a project, I would ask Voz to take a break from his road adventures for at least ten minutes to help me. Sometimes he was working on something too. Once, he assembled a computer terminal with video memory. Shortly after, he bought a microprocessor, connected it to the terminal, and created a prototype of the Apple I. Voz and I assembled the circuit board ourselves. That's it.
Playboy: So, you did it just out of curiosity?
Jobs: Of course. Well, and to have something to show to friends.
Playboy: How did you proceed to the next step â industrial production and sales?
Jobs: Voz and I raised 1,300 dollars by selling my Volkswagen van and his Hewlett-Packard calculator. A guy who worked at one of the first computer stores told us he could sell our creations. We hadn't thought of that ourselves.
Playboy: How did you and Wozniak organize your work?
Jobs: He designed the computer almost entirely. I helped with the memory and turning the computer into a product. Voz isn't strong in sales, but he is a genius engineer.
Playboy: Was the Apple I intended for enthusiasts?
Jobs: Absolutely. We sold only about 150 units or so. Not a huge number, but we made around 95 thousand dollars, and I began to see our hobby as a business. The Apple I was just a circuit board â there was no case or power supply, essentially no product. Buyers had to purchase transformers and even a keyboard themselves [laughs].
Playboy: Did you and Wozniak quickly realize you were onto something promising? Did you think about how much you could achieve and how significantly computers would change the world?
Jobs: No, not really. We had no idea where it would lead us. Voz's motivation was the search for puzzles and solutions. He focused on the engineering side and soon created one of his greatest inventions â the disk drive, a key component of the future Apple II. I was trying to organize the company, starting with figuring out what a company actually was. I donât think either of us could have achieved what we did together if we had been working alone.
Playboy: How has your partnership changed over time?
Jobs: Woz never particularly cared about Apple as a company. He just wanted to build an Apple II on a printed circuit board to get a computer for himself and take it to the club without fearing that something would break along the way. He achieved his goal and moved on to other things. He had other ideas.
Playboy: For example, a rock festival combined with a computer show, where he lost about ten million.
Jobs: I thought this project was a bit crazy from the start, but Woz really believed in it.
Playboy: What is your relationship like today?
Jobs: When you work closely with someone and go through thick and thin together, an unbreakable bond forms between you. Despite all the squabbles, this bond lasts forever. And although over time you stop being best friends, there remains something even stronger than friendship. Woz has his own life â he distanced himself from Apple five years ago. But what he created will stand the test of time. Now he speaks at various computer events. It's what he loves.
Playboy: The computer revolution began with the two Apple IIs you created. How did it all happen?
Jobs: We weren't just the two of us; other people helped us. Wozniak developed the system logic, an important part of the Apple II, but there were other key components. The power supply â a key element. The case â a key element. The main breakthrough of the Apple II was that it was a finished product. It was the first computer that wasn't a kit. It came fully equipped, had its own case and keyboard â you just sit down and work. That's what set the Apple II apart â it looked like a real product.
Playboy: Were your first consumers enthusiasts?
Jobs: The main difference was that you didn't have to be a hardware enthusiast to use the Apple II. You could be passionate about software. This was one of the breakthrough features of the Apple II â it showed that many more people wanted to have fun with computers, like Woz and I, rather than build their own machines. That was the essence of the Apple II. But despite this, we sold only three or four thousand units in the first year.
Playboy: Even that number seems quite solid â after all, its creators didn't really know what they were doing.
Jobs: It was gigantic! In 1976, when we were still in the garage, we earned about two hundred thousand. In 1977 â already seven million. It was fantastic, we thought. In 1978, we earned 17 million. In 1979 â 47 million dollars. Thatâs when we truly realized what was happening. 1980 â 117 million. 1981 â 335 million. 1982 â 583 million. 1983 â 985 million⊠it seems. This year we expect one and a half billion.
Playboy: You keep all these numbers in mind.
Jobs: Overall, it's just marks on a ruler. The coolest part is that by 1979 I occasionally visited school classrooms with 15 Apple computers and watched the kids work. Those are the milestones I consider important.
Playboy: So, let's return to your recent milestones â the release of the Mac and your struggle with IBM. In this interview, you've made it clear multiple times that you don't see other players in this field. But even though you share about 60 percent of the market, can you really ignore the other forty â Radio Shack, DEC, Epson, etc.? Are they insignificant to you? And more importantly, can you ignore a potential competitor like AT&T?
Jobs: AT&T will definitely operate in this field. The company is undergoing serious transformation. AT&T is moving away from being a subsidized, top-down regulated service enterprise and becoming a competitive technology company, a player in the free market. AT&T's products have never stood out for their highest quality â just look at their phones, theyâre simply ridiculous. But their research labs house brilliant technologies. The main task for the company is to commercialize them. Additionally, they need to learn consumer marketing. I think both tasks are within their capabilities, but solving them will take years.
Playboy: Don't you see AT&T as a threat?
Jobs: I don't think they should be viewed as a concern in the next two years â but they will improve over time.
Playboy: What about Radio Shack?
Jobs: Radio Shack will definitely remain sidelined. Radio Shack tried to push computers into their retail model, which I believe boils down to selling second-rate or low-grade products in stores resembling military surplus. The company never understood that computers interest sophisticated buyers. Their market share has fallen below the floor. I don't think they will recover and become a leading player again.
Playboy: What about Xerox? Texas Instruments? DEC? Wang?
Jobs: You can forget about Xerox. TI's situation isn't as good as they think. Other major companies like DEC or Wang may sell personal computers to existing customers as part of upgraded terminals, but that market will soon collapse.
Playboy: How about budget computers from Commodore and Atari?
Jobs: I see them as just another reason to buy an Apple II or Macintosh. I think consumers have realized that computers under five hundred dollars aren't very effective. They either spark an interest in something bigger or scare users away for good.
Playboy: What do you think of small portable PCs?
Jobs: They could work for journalists who want to jot down thoughts on the go. But for the average person, they're not usefulâvery few programs are written for them. Just when you get the software you want, a new model with a slightly bigger screen will come out, and your programs will be outdated. That's why no one writes them. Wait for our modelsâMacintosh power in your pocket!
Playboy: What about Epson? Other Japanese manufacturers?
Jobs: I've already mentioned: Japanese computers washed up on our shores like dead fish. They're just dead fish. Epson has failed in this market.
Playboy: Automobile manufacturing is another American industry in which, as some claim, we are falling behind the Japanese. The same is now said about our semiconductor manufacturers. How do you plan to maintain leadership?
Jobs: Japan is a very interesting country. Some say the Japanese can only copy others, but I don't think so. I believe they reinterpret it. They take inventions from others and study them until they fully understand. Sometimes they manage to comprehend them better than the inventor does. This way, they create a second, improved generation of products. Such a strategy works when products don't change much over the yearsâlike audio systems or cars. But if the target moves very quickly, itâs hard for them to keep upâsuch a cycle of renewal takes years.
If the nature of personal computers continues to change at the same pace as today, the Japanese will find it challenging. Once the process slows down, they will strike the market with all their strength because they want to secure a leading position in the computer business. There can be no doubt about this â it is their national priority.
We believe that in 4-5 years, the Japanese will finally learn to build decent computers. And if we're going to maintain America's leadership in this area, Apple has four years to become a world-class manufacturer. Our manufacturing technologies must be on par with the Japanese or exceed them.
Playboy: How do you plan to achieve this?
Jobs: When we developed the Macintosh, we also created a machine for producing machines. We spent 20 million dollars to build the most automated computer factory. But that's not enough. Instead of writing it off after seven years like most companies would, we are using it for two years. We will retire it by the end of 1985 and build a new one, use it for two years, and then replace it with another new one. So in three years, we will already have our third automated plant. This is the only way we can learn quickly enough.
Playboy: The Japanese are not just competitors for you â for example, you buy your drives from Sony.
Jobs: We source many components from Japan. We are the largest consumer of microprocessors, advanced RAM chips, drives, and keyboards in the world. We do not have to spend a lot of effort on designing and producing disk drives or microprocessors, and we dedicate that effort to software.
Playboy: Let's talk about software. What revolutionary changes in its development have you seen in recent years?
Jobs: Certainly, a breakthrough was the early stage â writing programming languages onto a microprocessor chip. Another breakthrough was VisiCalc, which first allowed the use of computers for business and demonstrated significant benefits of this application. Before that, you had to program your own applications, and the percentage of people willing to program is no more than one percent. The ability to represent information graphically is very important, which is why another significant breakthrough was Lotus.
Playboy: You are talking about things that our readers may not be familiar with. Please elaborate.
Jobs: Lotus combined a good spreadsheet editor with a graphics program. When it comes to word processing and database management, Lotus isn't the best program on the market. The main advantage of Lotus is the integration of the spreadsheet editor and graphic capabilities, allowing for quick switching between them.
Another breakthrough is happening right now thanks to Macintosh, which provides Lisa technology at an affordable price. Revolutionary software has been written for it and will continue to be created. However, a true breakthrough can only be discussed a few years after it has occurred.
Playboy: What about word processing? You didn't mention it in the list of breakthroughs.
Jobs: You're right. It should have come right after VisiCalc. Word processing is the most common task and one of the simplest to understand. Perhaps this is the primary reason most people need a computer. Word processors existed before personal computers, but a word processor for a personal computer was more of an economic breakthroughâthere were no analogs to VisiCalc before the advent of PCs.
Playboy: Were there breakthroughs in educational software?
Jobs: Many good programs have been created, but there hasn't been a breakthrough on the level of VisiCalc. I think it will happen, but hardly within the next two years.
Playboy: You emphasized that education is a priority for you. How do computers influence its development?
Jobs: The computers themselves, along with the yet-to-be-developed software, will bring a revolution to the learning process. We established an educational fund and will allocate equipment and several million dollars to developers of educational software and schools that can't afford computers. We also aimed to make the Macintosh the standard computer in colleges, similar to how the Apple II became a staple in schools. We decided to find six universities interested in making a large purchase â by large, I mean exceeding a thousand computers. Instead of six, twenty-four responded. We asked colleges to invest two million dollars to join the Macintosh program. All twenty-four, including all Ivy League representatives, agreed. Thus, the Macintosh became standard educational equipment in colleges in less than a year. Each Macintosh we produced this year could have gone to one of those colleges. Of course, that's impossible, but the demand is there.
Playboy: But are there programs?
Jobs: Some. Those that aren't yet available will be developed by specialists within the colleges themselves. IBM tried to hinder us â I heard a task force of 400 people was formed for that purpose. The company planned to give them IBM PCs. But college leaders proved to be far-sighted. They understood that the software they would receive was far more important and didn't want to spend money on outdated IBM technologies. So in some cases, they declined IBM's offer and purchased Macintosh instead. Some even used grants received from IBM for that purpose.
Playboy: Can you name those colleges?
Jobs: I can't. I don't want to get them in trouble.
Playboy: When you were in college during the pre-computer era, what did you and your peers see as the main prospect? In politics?
Jobs: None of my talented college classmates went into politics. They all felt that during the late sixties and seventies, politics wasn't the right field for changing the world. Today, they are all in business, and it's amusing because those same people once walked across India or sought meaning in life in their own ways.
Playboy: Wasn't business and the pursuit of profit the easiest answer?
Jobs: No, none of these people care about money. That is, many of them have made a lot of money, but they are not truly concerned about it. Their lifestyle has hardly changed. Business has become an opportunity for them to try to achieve something, experience failure, succeed, and grow as individuals. For those who wanted to express themselves in the last ten years, a political career was not suitable. As a person who is not yet thirty, I can say: at twenty, you need to be impatient, to desire something new, and in politics, the idealism of these people would have dulled and withered away.
I think America only awakens in times of crisis. And it seems to me that at the beginning of the nineties, we will face a serious crisis â the issues that our politicians were supposed to address are beginning to surface. When this crisis occurs, many of these people will be able to apply their practical skills and idealism in the political arena. The most prepared generation in history will enter politics. These people know how to select teams, achieve set goals, and lead others.
Playboy: But doesnât every new generation say that?
Jobs: We live in different times. The technological revolution is becoming increasingly intertwined with our economy and society as a whole. More than half of the GNP of the USA is generated in information-oriented sectors â and most political leaders have had no participation in this revolution. More key decisions â resource distribution, educating our children, and so on â will be made by people who understand technical issues and the direction in which progress is moving. For now, thatâs not the case. The situation in education is close to a national disaster. In a world where information and innovation play a leading role, America seriously risks becoming an industrial outsider â it only takes losing the technical momentum and existing leadership talent.
Playboy: You talk about investing in education, but isn't the problem finding funds in an era of rapidly growing deficits?
Jobs: In the next five years, America will spend on armaments more than any country has in history. Our society has decided that this is a worthy use of our money â hence the growing deficit and, consequently, the increasing cost of our capital. Meanwhile, Japan, our main competitor on the front line of technical progress â that is, in the semiconductor industry â has revamped its tax policy and societal structure to maximize capital for investment in this area. It seems that few in America see the connection between spending on armaments and the potential loss of our semiconductor production. We need to realize what a threat this is.
Playboy: And you believe that computers will help in this process.
Jobs: Let me tell you a story. I came across a video that was not meant for my eyes and was created for the Joint Chiefs of Staff. From this recording, I learned that every unit of tactical nuclear weapons we've deployed in Europe is targeted using an Apple II. At least, that was the case several years ago. We did not supply computers to the military â they must have been procured through dealers. The knowledge that our computers were used for such purposes was unsettling for my colleagues and me. The only consolation was that the military didn't use the TRS-80 from Radio Shack. Thank goodness for that.
My point is that any tools will always be used for less than desirable purposes. It is up to people to ensure they are employed productively and serve the greater good of society.
Playboy: In which direction will computers and software head in the near future?
Jobs: At this stage, we see the computer as a good servant. We ask it to perform tasksâlike recording our keystrokes to compose an email or build a tableâand it does so remarkably well. This aspectâcomputers as servantsâwill continue to improve. The next step is transforming the computer into a mediator or facilitator. Computers will increasingly anticipate our desires, providing what we want, recognizing patterns and connections in our actions, and asking whether we want to make those actions habitual. Thus, something akin to triggers will be introduced. Weâll be able to ask computers to monitor specific itemsâand under certain conditions, they will take predetermined actions and inform us afterward.
Playboy: For example?
Jobs: The simplest example is hourly or daily stock monitoring. Once the stock price reaches a certain limit, the computer will contact my broker, sell the stocks electronically, and then notify me. Or, at the end of each month, the computer will search the database for sellers who exceeded their targets by 20 percent or more, sending them a personalized email on my behalf. I will receive a report on who received such an email that month. One day, our computers will be able to handle a hundred similar tasksâthe computer will start to resemble our intermediary, our representative. The process will begin in the next 12 months, but overall, it will take about three years to reach this goal. This will be our next breakthrough.
Playboy: Will we be able to perform all these tasks on today's equipment? Or will you sell us new ones?
Jobs: All? Thatâs a dangerous word, and I won't use it. I simply donât know the answer. The Macintosh was certainly designed with these possibilities in mind.
Playboy: You take pride in Apple's leadership. What do you think of the older companies that are forced to play catch-up with the young or fade away?
Jobs: This is simply inevitable. That's why I believe that death is the greatest invention of life. It clears the system of all ancient, outdated models. This is one of the challenges facing Apple. When two guys come up with the next great invention, what will we do â accept it and say itâs wonderful? Will we abandon our models or find an excuse, a reason not to? I think we will do the right thing â we will all be aware and make the correct move our priority.
Playboy: When reflecting on your success, have you ever found yourself banging your head against the wall trying to understand whatâs happening? After all, this success came practically overnight.
Jobs: I thought about how to sell a million computers a year â but I only thought about it. When it actually happens, itâs a completely different story: âWow, itâs all real.â Itâs hard for me to explain, but I donât feel like that success came overnight. The next year will be my tenth with the company. I had never dedicated myself to any endeavor for longer than a year. When it all started, six months felt like a long time to me. So, it turns out that I have been working at Apple my entire adult life. Each year at Apple is so filled with challenges, successes, new knowledge, and experiences that it feels like a whole life. So Iâve lived ten complete lives.
Playboy: Do you know what you want to dedicate the rest of your life to?
Jobs: I often remember the ancient Hindu saying: âThe first thirty years of your life you shape your habits. The last thirty years of your life your habits shape you.â Since I will turn thirty in February, I think about this a lot.
Playboy: And what do you think?
Jobs: Iâm not sure. I will forever be tied to Apple. I hope the threads of our lives intertwine more deeply, and we continue to walk hand in hand. Perhaps I will even step away for a few years, but I will surely return someday. Likely, I will do just that. It is essential to remember that I still have much to learn. I advise those interested in my thoughts not to forget this. Do not take them too seriously. If you want to live life creatively, like an artist, you cannot constantly look around. You must be ready to throw away everything you have created and who you are. What are we? Most people think we are sets of habits, patterns, what we like and what we donât. Our values are embedded in our nature, and our actions and decisions reflect those values. This is why it is so difficult to give interviews and be a public figure. The further you grow and change, the more insistently the world around you tries to prove that your image is your reflection, the harder it is to remain an artist. This is why artists often feel the urge to escape: 'Goodbye, I need to withdraw. Iâm going insane, so Iâm leaving here.' They escape and retreat into their burrows. Sometimes they return, but already a little changed.
Playboy: You can afford it. You definitely donât need to worry about money. You are still workingâŠ
Jobs: [laughs] Due to guilt for the money earned.
Playboy: Letâs talk about money. You became a millionaire at 23âŠ
Jobs: Within a year, my fortune surpassed 10 million; in two years, it reached 100 million.
Playboy: What is the main difference between having a million dollars and having hundreds of millions?
Jobs: Visibility. The number of people with a net worth exceeding a million dollars is measured in tens of thousands in the U.S. alone. Those with more than 10 million are a few thousand. Those with 100 million or more are several hundred.
Playboy: What do money really mean to you?
Jobs: I haven't figured it out yet. Earning more than you can spend for the rest of your life is a huge responsibility. I feel like I should spend this money. Leaving a massive inheritance to your children is a bad idea. Such money will ruin their lives. And if you die childless, the government will take the money. Almost everyone thinks they can manage money for the benefit of society more effectively than the government could. It's essential to figure out how to live with this wealth and how to reinvest it back into the world â that is, either give it away or use it to express your values and concerns.
Playboy: And how do you do that?
Jobs: I don't want to go into that aspect of my life. As soon as I have time, I will set up a public fund. Right now, Iâm involved in several private projects.
Playboy: Giving away all your wealth would take all your time.
Jobs: Yes, but there's nothing to be done about it. I'm convinced that giving a dollar wisely is harder than earning it.
Playboy: Is that why you arenât in a hurry to engage in charitable projects?
Jobs: No, the real reason is simple. To do something well, you need to learn from mistakes. To make a mistake, there has to be a clear scale. And in most types of philanthropy, such a scale doesn't exist. You give someone money for a project, and often you donât know for sure if your hopes for that person, their ideas, or their implementation have been justified. If you can't achieve success or make a mistake, it's very hard to get better. Additionally, most people who come to you bring not the best ideas, and independently searching for better ideas takes a lot of time and effort.
Playboy: If you are going to use your public image to create a positive example, why don't you want to discuss this aspect of your life?
Jobs: Because I haven't achieved much yet. In this field, actions speak louder than words.
Playboy: Are you completely abstemious or do you sometimes allow yourself to be extravagant?
Jobs: Above all else, I love books, sushi, and⊠My favorite things don't cost much. I'm aware that the most precious thing we have is time. Essentially, I pay for success with my personal life. I don't have time to indulge in romances or fly to Italy and sit in a cafĂ© eating mozzarella and tomato salad. Sometimes I spend a little money to relieve myself of unnecessary concerns and buy a bit of time. That's it. I bought an apartment in New York Cityâsimply because I love this city. I'm trying to educate myselfâI'm from a small town in California and I'm unfamiliar with the sophistication and culture of a metropolis. I consider this part of my education. You know, Apple has many employees who can buy whatever they want, yet they hardly spend anything. I hate talking about this as a problem. Readers will surely say: oh, if only I had your problems. They'll think I'm a little pretentious bastard.
Playboy: Your wealth and achievements allow you to dream as big as the vast majority of people cannot. Does this freedom scare you?
Jobs: Once you have the means to realize your dreams and that realization depends solely on you, life becomes much more complicated. It's easy to fantasize about something wonderful when the chance of achieving it is small. As soon as you have the opportunity to bring your ideas to life, with it comes added responsibility.
Playboy: We talked about how you see the near future, but what about the more distant future? If computers are in their infancy, what potential changes do you envision in our lives when they grow up?
Jobs: When I returned from India, I asked myself â what is the main truth I took away? I believe it's that the rational thinking of a Western person is not an inherent trait. We learn this way of thinking. I never considered that if we were not taught it, we would think differently. But it is what it is. Clearly, one of the key tasks of education is to teach us how to think. Now we are beginning to understand that computers will affect the quality of thinking for our children, who have access to these tools. People are users of tools. The most impressive aspect of the book is that you can read what Aristotle wrote yourself. You don't need to listen to any teacher's interpretation. You can choose to listen to them, but you can read Aristotle on your own. This direct transmission of thoughts and ideas is one of the key building blocks of today's society, of ourselves. The problem with books is that you can't ask Aristotle a question. I think that computers can help us somehow... capture the fundamental, foundational principles of experienced events.
Playboy: For example?
Jobs: Let me give a very rough example. The original game Pong reflected the principles of gravity, momentum, and so on, and each subsequent game reflected those same basic principles but differed from the original â just like in life. This is the simplest example. Programming can reflect the basic principles, the essence, and, with the existing understanding, facilitate thousands of different processes, experiences, impressions. What if we could capture the complete picture of Aristotle's world, the foundational principles of his worldview? Then we could ask him a question. Of course, you might say that it's not the same as talking to Aristotle himself. Perhaps we would come up with something incorrect. But maybe we wouldn't.
Playboy: At the very least, it would be an interesting conversation.
JobsIndeed. Part of this complex task is to equip this tool for millions, tens of millions of people, and to make it increasingly sophisticated. Over time, we will learn to create representations of Aristotle, Einstein, or Land â while he is still alive â first in a rough manner and then with greater accuracy. Imagine how wonderful it would be to converse with them in our teenage years. And not only then â but also in our mature years! This is one of our goals.
PlayboyAre you planning to solve it yourself?
JobsIt will be handed over to someone else. This is the task of the next generation. I believe that one of the most interesting challenges in our field of intellectual inquiry is noble aging. I mean, everything is changing so quickly that by the end of the eighties, we would like to pass the baton to a new generation with ultra-modern fundamental concepts. So they can stand on our shoulders and soar higher. An interesting question, donât you think? How to age gracefully.
Source: habr.com
