It seems not quite different from what Jobs did. The real difference is the degree of vision associated with reality.
Steve obsessed over details that would benefit users; Bezos apparently forced choices that would benefit Amazon. Seems quite a bit different.
Please list the features that were patently anti-user and done for Amazon's sole benefit.
Parent comment didn't say anti-user, but the dedicated hardware button for identifying and purchasing goods from Amazon is pretty ridiculous. It's like an Amazon Dash button in your pocket all the time. It's hard to argue they weren't thinking Amazon-first on that one.
"But there were some serious problems with it like forced promotions where users would would prefer instead functionality, useless gimmicks, and other silliness. Without fail everytime I pointed one out, the Lead looked down a bit bashfully and admitted Bezos had insisted on this nonsense."
From that angle, it's the difference between a true product maker and a retailer. They have different visions, one is more user-centered and another is more oneself-organization-value-chain-centered. Unfortunately, most of people with huge capital leverage capability are not true product makers and most of true product makers do not have that capability. Jobs happened to be the one that had both. I wish he had lived till 100. Apple without Jobs seems to come out with new products by levering existing products' values or somewhat network effect in products and OS eco, not the other way around.
Except that Jobs knew what customers would need, and Besos doesn't have a clue, he builds what mini me would want.
That whole amazon.com thing certainly has filled a need of mine on countless occasions
jobs know how to entice before locking in. i give him that.
bezos tried to go all in.
what happened to customer obsession. leadership principles 101 bro.
> what happened to customer obsession.
It worked. He was the customer.
This is exactly what the Fire Phone was lacking, and I think that the entire company can learn a lesson from it.
There's something that rubs me the wrong way about that article. It feels like it's trying too hard to drive an agenda, instead of presenting facts and letting the reader decide.
I have no idea about the actual situation, but this article doesn't leave me feeling enlightened.
Interesting article (thanks). My takeaway is that Amazon executes well on delivering low margin goods, but the phone attempted to create a high margin brand.