Steve Jobs Interview - 2/18/1981

1981-02-1819:39English

Transcript

Machine transcript in the original language. It may contain errors. Select a timestamp to play that moment.

We have to presume any time we do a story that most of the audience hasn't, that any time you
introduce any subject or any topic or any big word really, that you have to familiarize the
audience with. You were talking about 60 Minutes. They do the same thing. Harry Reisner did a piece
on some guy who was a card counter playing blackjack a couple of weeks ago, and they spent
about three minutes in the context of the story establishing how to play blackjack.
Just the fact that you have to...
Sure, go for 21.
Yeah, go for 21.
So...
Yeah, that's an interesting thing about television is it always seems to shoot for the lowest
common denominator.
Yeah.
Steve, I'd love to get a two shot that we need.
It sounds a little peculiar, but you can't, and it'll be painless and over quickly.
Great.
Thank you.
I could embrace him if you wish.
No.
The reason they take these two shots is because they do all of this market research on television
and they go into a shopping center and grab 50 viewers and put them in a trailer and show them tapes
to try to find out what they like and what they don't, what bothers them and what doesn't.
One of the things that they found bothered viewers was the typical nightly,
just like to see the environment that you're talking in, so hence the wide shot.
Yes.
Is it over?
It's at that painful part, though.
Steve, when you began to develop this five years ago,
what sort of need did you see that existed then
that you felt these computers was going to fill?
Well, basically, the question...
Are we actually doing this now?
Yeah.
Oh, great.
The question is really what is a personal computer,
and why is it different than all the other computers
all the other computers that have existed throughout history.
Probably the best way to explain that is through an analogy.
When you look at the invention of the first electric motor in the late 1800s,
it was only possible to build a very large one.
And it was very, very expensive, and therefore it could only be cost justified
for the most expensive or large applications.
And the electric motor really took its next step in proliferation
when somebody hooked a long shaft to it and ran it down the center of a factory
through a series of belts and pulleys brought that power down
to maybe 15 or 20 individual workstations,
thereby cost-justifying or sharing that horsepower
among some medium-sized applications.
But the electric motor really achieved a true proliferation in this society
with the invention of the fractional horsepower electric motor.
And at that point, the horsepower could be brought directly to where it was needed
on a personal scale, cost-justified for a small number of things.
And we see the same thing, the same evolution,
if we examine the history of computing.
the first computer, ENIAC, in 1946, was designed primarily for weather and ballistic calculations,
very large tasks.
And the next revolution in computing was in the 1960s with the invention of what's called time sharing.
In essence, sharing one of these very large computers with maybe 40 or 50 terminals scattered through a company,
and thereby cost-justifying it for medium-sized applications.
What we think the personal computer industry is about is the invention of the fractional horsepower computer,
something that can be cost justified on the personal level,
something that weighs 12 pounds that you can throw out the window if you don't like.
And it's really changing the way that people interact with computers.
There's a one-on-one relationship that develops between one person and one computer.
Now, when you use the term personal computer,
you're avoiding the term home computer for a deliberate reason, right?
Right.
We view, we segment our market really into four major segments.
education, professional small business, home consumer, and scientific industrial.
Now, the home market hasn't really taken off.
It's probably the smallest of those four I've listed.
We view the home now not as a market, really, but as a location
in which personal computers are used for a variety of functions sometimes.
In other words, you can use a personal computer to do some portfolio management on some stocks.
You can use a personal computer to do some educational.
Can I answer that question?
Sure.
Yeah.
You can just pick it up.
We'll change the table while we do that.
Great.
So when you grew up, you say, are we still waiting for a question?
And we'll pick it up there.
Great.
OK, John.
And when you use the term a personal computer,
you're deliberately avoiding the use of the term home
computer, aren't you?
Right.
We view the home not really as a market yet.
We view it more as a location. We sell a lot of personal computers that are used
for financial analysis, for education in schools,
for running laboratory experiments in universities.
in scientific applications.
And a lot of these personal computers are used in the home as a location,
some of the time.
But there's not enough specific applications
to cost-justify spending $1,000 to $3,000
for a personal computer to be used in the home yet.
So we don't think the home is quite yet ready
either culturally or economically.
What type of person would need a personal computer today
of the type you offer?
Well, it gets back to the question of what is a personal computer again.
Again, another analogy.
There was an article in Scientific American in the early 70s
which compared the efficiency of locomotion for various species of things on the planet.
In other words, they measured how much energy it took for a bird to get from point A to point B
compared with the energy it took a fish to get the same distance,
and a goat, and a person, and all sorts of other things.
And they ranked them.
And it turns out the Condor won.
Condor was the most efficient, and man came in with a rather unimpressive showing about a third of the way down the list.
It's somewhat disappointing.
But someone there had the insight to test the efficiency of man riding a bicycle.
And man riding a bicycle was twice as good as the Condor, all the way off the end of the list.
And what it really illustrated was man's ability as a tool maker to fashion a tool that can amplify an inherent ability that he has.
And that's exactly what we think we're doing.
we think we're basically fashioning a 21st century bicycle here,
which can amplify an inherent intellectual ability that man has
and really take care of a lot of drudgery

Transcript

Machine transcript in the original language. It may contain errors. Select a timestamp to play that moment.

We have to presume any time we do a story that most of the audience hasn't, that any time you

introduce any subject or any topic or any big word really, that you have to familiarize the

audience with. You were talking about 60 Minutes. They do the same thing. Harry Reisner did a piece

on some guy who was a card counter playing blackjack a couple of weeks ago, and they spent

about three minutes in the context of the story establishing how to play blackjack.

Just the fact that you have to...

Sure, go for 21.

Yeah, go for 21.

So...

Yeah, that's an interesting thing about television is it always seems to shoot for the lowest

common denominator.

Yeah.

Steve, I'd love to get a two shot that we need.

It sounds a little peculiar, but you can't, and it'll be painless and over quickly.

Great.

Thank you.

I could embrace him if you wish.

No.

The reason they take these two shots is because they do all of this market research on television

and they go into a shopping center and grab 50 viewers and put them in a trailer and show them tapes

to try to find out what they like and what they don't, what bothers them and what doesn't.

One of the things that they found bothered viewers was the typical nightly,

just like to see the environment that you're talking in, so hence the wide shot.

Yes.

Is it over?

It's at that painful part, though.

Steve, when you began to develop this five years ago,

what sort of need did you see that existed then

that you felt these computers was going to fill?

Well, basically, the question...

Are we actually doing this now?

Yeah.

Oh, great.

The question is really what is a personal computer,

and why is it different than all the other computers

all the other computers that have existed throughout history.

Probably the best way to explain that is through an analogy.

When you look at the invention of the first electric motor in the late 1800s,

it was only possible to build a very large one.

And it was very, very expensive, and therefore it could only be cost justified

for the most expensive or large applications.

And the electric motor really took its next step in proliferation

when somebody hooked a long shaft to it and ran it down the center of a factory

through a series of belts and pulleys brought that power down

to maybe 15 or 20 individual workstations,

thereby cost-justifying or sharing that horsepower

among some medium-sized applications.

But the electric motor really achieved a true proliferation in this society

with the invention of the fractional horsepower electric motor.

And at that point, the horsepower could be brought directly to where it was needed

on a personal scale, cost-justified for a small number of things.

And we see the same thing, the same evolution,

if we examine the history of computing.

the first computer, ENIAC, in 1946, was designed primarily for weather and ballistic calculations,

very large tasks.

And the next revolution in computing was in the 1960s with the invention of what's called time sharing.

In essence, sharing one of these very large computers with maybe 40 or 50 terminals scattered through a company,

and thereby cost-justifying it for medium-sized applications.

What we think the personal computer industry is about is the invention of the fractional horsepower computer,

something that can be cost justified on the personal level,

something that weighs 12 pounds that you can throw out the window if you don't like.

And it's really changing the way that people interact with computers.

There's a one-on-one relationship that develops between one person and one computer.

Now, when you use the term personal computer,

you're avoiding the term home computer for a deliberate reason, right?

Right.

We view, we segment our market really into four major segments.

education, professional small business, home consumer, and scientific industrial.

Now, the home market hasn't really taken off.

It's probably the smallest of those four I've listed.

We view the home now not as a market, really, but as a location

in which personal computers are used for a variety of functions sometimes.

In other words, you can use a personal computer to do some portfolio management on some stocks.

You can use a personal computer to do some educational.

Can I answer that question?

Sure.

Yeah.

You can just pick it up.

We'll change the table while we do that.

Great.

So when you grew up, you say, are we still waiting for a question?

And we'll pick it up there.

Great.

OK, John.

And when you use the term a personal computer,

you're deliberately avoiding the use of the term home

computer, aren't you?

Right.

We view the home not really as a market yet.

We view it more as a location. We sell a lot of personal computers that are used

for financial analysis, for education in schools,

for running laboratory experiments in universities.

in scientific applications.

And a lot of these personal computers are used in the home as a location,

some of the time.

But there's not enough specific applications

to cost-justify spending $1,000 to $3,000

for a personal computer to be used in the home yet.

So we don't think the home is quite yet ready

either culturally or economically.

What type of person would need a personal computer today

of the type you offer?

Well, it gets back to the question of what is a personal computer again.

Again, another analogy.

There was an article in Scientific American in the early 70s

which compared the efficiency of locomotion for various species of things on the planet.

In other words, they measured how much energy it took for a bird to get from point A to point B

compared with the energy it took a fish to get the same distance,

and a goat, and a person, and all sorts of other things.

And they ranked them.

And it turns out the Condor won.

Condor was the most efficient, and man came in with a rather unimpressive showing about a third of the way down the list.

It's somewhat disappointing.

But someone there had the insight to test the efficiency of man riding a bicycle.

And man riding a bicycle was twice as good as the Condor, all the way off the end of the list.

And what it really illustrated was man's ability as a tool maker to fashion a tool that can amplify an inherent ability that he has.

And that's exactly what we think we're doing.

we think we're basically fashioning a 21st century bicycle here,

which can amplify an inherent intellectual ability that man has

and really take care of a lot of drudgery