There's only one Woz, but we can all learn from him

I wanted to comment on this. Please correct me if I am wrong as I used LLM sources to find

So from what I can find (from human searches) was that https://commandlinux.com/statistics/linux-web-server-market-... Linux is indeed ~55%

But the other thing is that some servers (from Chatgpt, I am not gonna lie) it says that there's an Unknown/CDN servers around 20 or more% (I feel like its more) to then reach the ~88% data estimate in some sense.

So can someone please clarify me on this if this is the true case or not?

Oft repeated, and not untrue, but very incomplete.

Jobs also made a lot of people. A lot of fortunes in SilVal only exist because of Steve Jobs.

He also virtually single handedly and without much fanfare at the time or credit in the history books created the employee compensation model that came to define SilVal success, with workaday employees and especially engineering contributors receiving stock options to reward them and keep them invested in the company's success.

Meanwhile, Woz has been involved in all sorts of products, including a cryptocurrency, and I can't think of a single one that got significant traction.

He made up with Lisa - to the extent one can after all that - in the end. And he raised three other kids, after becoming older and wiser as a dad.

Jobs went on to start NeXT (which became modern Apple) and turned Pixar into a the studio that released Toy Story.

Jobs wasn’t just a salesman, he was a serial entrepreneur. His footnotes would be most people’s whole career. His talent wasn’t just sales, but also building teams of talented people and selling them on his vision.

Having sat in many a meeting, partially yes, but these things are massively expensive. There is an equation, How much would it cost us to write a replacement that covers what we need versus how much does it cost us to use what exists that isn't efficient.

And this is where you miss the biggest part of the problem. It's the end users that bear the biggest part of the costs. Yes, there is an internal cost for their own developers, but that is comparatively small to the costs of their paychecks.

The next comes to management of the lightweight solution over time. If it's owned by a company at the end of the day companies are rarely interested in lightweight, they are interested in making the most money and quite often that means adding more and more features to accomplish lock-in.

Open source is more likely to keep a project remaining light, but to do that it's quite often by not accepting bulky features that would make companies more money. So you see where the catch-22 situation starts to arise from.

You're talking in the aggregate and making some good points.

I am talking about what concretely I am seeing on the ground. It's become a little too easy to churn out junk that looks plausible enough to pass the initial sniff test but that ultimately results in negative productivity. Someone has to go back and not only redo the initial work but also deal with all the knock-on effects. It's unclear to me that these effects are offset by productivity gains elsewhere. This can also result in highly problematic incentive structures: the initial launch ticks some box, whoever did it gets rewarded and then someone else is left to pick up the pieces. Higher overall cost to the orgnisation and worse experience for the customers than doing it well in the first place.

Not totally clear how to fix this other than by shifting towards longer-term incentive structures (which have their own drawbacks).

None of this is completely new, but has become 10X easier thanks to the current generation of tooling.

This is in addition to my concerns around what this is doing to our junior developers' skills.

Maybe the tooling will soon get good enough that nobody has to ever write any code except for enjoyment, but it's not clear to me that this is the trajectory we're on.