Skip to content

Comment on Xerox PARC, Apple, and the truth about innovation.

Comments

Gladwell does a tremendous job of cherry picking bits of information to form a compelling narrative. I find his constant and blatant omission of inconvenient data to be intellectually dishonest.

> I find his constant and blatant omission of inconvenient data to be intellectually dishonest.

Such as...?

I've posted about Gladwell's critics before, I hope you forgive me linking an older comment, but I don't want to just repeat myself. edit This is a link to the whole thread because it's worth reading for other discussion on Gladwell.

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1758542

I generally find him entertaining but always take anything I read by him with a grain of salt.

It would be more interesting/relevant to hear if you had any specific beef with the particular article on PARC rather than rummaging up unrelated complaints.

I agree that I wasn't really being fair to Gladwell. I posted this comment to support Krylez's more general assertion about Gladwell's style.

But I'll come out and say what I hinted at elsewhere in this thread: I really wish Gladwell had bothered to tie together the threads between PARC, Alan Kay, Smalltalk, Objective-C, the iPad, the Scratch app being banned and Apple's vision of app-store-based-computing. It seems to me that he really missed out on a exactly the kind of cherry-picking and narrative forming he's good at, and in this case I think there might be a pretty interesting story buried in there. Unfortunately, I don't know enough about the history to know if there really is, and it's likely it wouldn't have really worked in the New Yorker.

AboutSource Built by g1lg1l

Hackerly is an independent reader for Hacker News, built on the public HN API. Not affiliated with Y Combinator.