Insanely Simple: The Obsession that Drives Apple's Success

作者是廣告公司高層, Apple 的 Mac, Phone, Pad, 之前的 i , 是由他命名. 

前幾章不錯, 輕鬆有趣. 寫Steve Jobs如何嚴格, 罵人很兇, 給他罵過叫"being Steved", 開會要很精簡, 不要bullshit, 與會議不相關的人, 未得他的批准, 會立即給攆走, 是很鐵面的人. 

here is a general perception that Steve Jobs was the nasty tyrant who demanded allegiance, barked commands, and instilled the fear of God in those around him. While Steve certainly did exhibit these behaviours, this portrait is incomplete. The man could also be funny, warm, and even charming. There is a huge difference between being brutally honest and simply being brutal. 

To settle for second best is a violation of the rules of Simplicity, and it plants the seeds for disappointment, extra work, and more meetings. 

Most people understood that Steve was pushing them for a purpose. They knew that "being Steved" didn't necessarily mean you were marked for death. 

His voice was calm. It didn't indicate danger ahead. But as he spoke, that calm voice slowly become more angry and agitated, and then he got madder still, to the point he talked himself into some major (and loud) verbal abuse. The condensed version went like this:"The work you showed me last week was shit. I knew it was shit, you knew it was shit, but you came all the way out there and showed it to me anyway. That's not acceptable and I never want it to happen again. Ever. 

...The halls of Apple would have been littered with bodies. But mostly it was the senior staff who had to deal directly with Steve, and just because you'd been attacked didn't mean you'd been fired. If you left the room employed, you'd likely find yourself stronger. Now you were a survivor. You'd develop a growing immunity to attacks,frontal and otherwise.   

Start with small groups of smart people - and keep them small. The small-group principle is deeply woven into the religion of Simplicity. It's key to Apple's ongoing success and key to any organization that wants to nurture quality thinking. The idea is pretty basic:everyone in the room should be there for a reason.

會議要很少人參加, 只要尖子, 因為要簡單, 有效率. 

公司的brand name很重要, 會給人留下深刻印象. 他是為Apple 包裝的, 當然這樣說. 

整本書都說Steve Jobs要求simplicity, 例如iPhone不要按鈕, 很多重複, 很累贅.  也說Dell, Intel如何如何複雜及會議太多, 如何冗贅.

我覺得一個品牌要長久, 不是靠一個人可以成事, 看Nokia, Motorola也曾叱吒一時, 如今是凋零落泊. Apple可否成為百年基業, 現在是未知之數. 也不可以過份吹捧. 作者也不應貶低人家去抬高Apple. 

至於Simplicity, Steve Jobs運用在工作是可以, 他的人生一點也不simple, 太大的工作壓力, 要求太高, 自己負荷不了, 於是, 健康就差, 最後是56歲就走完人生路. 我認為他的simplicity理念運用不到他最重要的性命之上.