Why do the big "guns" get more credits for their technical skills then they might deserve?What is this title about you think?
Well it is about the praise we give to the likes of Steve Jobs and Bill Gates for their technical abilities they might not have.
Sure they build successful companies which in it self is impressive, but do they have the actual technical skills that we think they have.
Take Steve Jobs, where would he have been without Steve Wozniak. What did Jobs bring to the table in making the first Apple. Furthermore we praise him for the GUI he brought with the newer Apples, but the fact is that it was people at Xerox PARC who developed the idea.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_graphical_user_interfaceAnd without a lot of good people in the company to develop all the products they sell he would most likely be nothing.
Also take a look at what Steve Wozniak did. Was he brilliant? I don't know, making a computer like the Apple II could have been done by many of us. Take a standard processor, slap some memory on to it, a display system, keyboard interface and you have a computer. And basic was not invented by either of the two so nothing to brilliant there.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BASICThe same applies to Bill Gates. What did he actually invent? Not MS-DOS, because that was made by Timothy Paterson.
https://www.britannica.com/technology/MS-DOSThere are many engineers out there with possibly better technical skills that actually brought a lot to the success of the big "guns" without getting any credit for it. And where would the big "guns" be without them.
Sure making a lot of money like they did is impressive, but making idols out of them just for that. I don't know.
This is not an attack on their personalities, just a simple question about whether they deserve the hail for their technical skills.