http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1xxn3o_bbc-the-story-of-sc...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00s9mms
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Story_of_Science:_Power,_Pr...
They both matter, and you need both. They come with a different price to pay, and a different reward.
When I found out the truth - that he was a businessman more than an inventor - it was quite a let down. Many of his ideas were stolen from people who worked beneath him and the publicity campaign for DC power over AC power is simply terrible.
>it doesn't matter who invents a thing, what matters is who uses the thing to bring actual change to people.
And this is the sad truth of many famous 'inventors'.
My respect for him was one of an inventor. The problem is everything I had respected him for inventing - he hadn't even invented!
It's like being told Superman isn't actually Superman, he's Batman. Sure, he's still a superhero and might do awesome things. But I like Superman, I'm not a big fan of Batman. *
*this is a terrible analogy, but I hope you understand what I'm trying to convey.
Why do you think that? Is not the person who makes the lightbulb useful is deserving of more praise than the person who merely invents it?
There are a lot of prototypes out there that never make it in the real world. I don't think the hard work that goes into making things useful on a day-to-day basis should be disregarded.
Try making light bulb without glass blowing knowledge. Try making light bulb without electricity. Try making light bulb without food and water.
Of course, you can't make something useful before is is invented. But that doesn't mean the invention must be hold at higher important.
My argument is not that a new invention cannot be based off of or require previous inventions in order to function. My argument is that improving an invention is not possible without the invention existing.
It's like improving upon a camera without cameras existing. The invention of the camera, in my opinion, is more important than the continued improvements of the camera, at least up until digital cameras - which is innovative enough to recapture the concept of photography but improve upon it in many significant ways. [0]
While improving upon an invention has its own worth and merit - I do not typically hold improving something to the same merit as inventing it. Coming from someone who often improves things, but does not create them.
When it is a drastic improvement or an entirely different approach (ie. innovative changes) - those hold a great deal of merit and may be worthy of respect. But being able to market something better is not something I respect.
I do not hold a lot of respect for marketers and advertisers. I see it as an abuse of trust against people by feeding them subtle lies and abusing how impressionable people can be. If you respect good marketers, then we're merely at a disagreement of opinion. I do not respect people who are skilled at manipulating people. While it may certainly take skill, require knowledge, and may even be difficult! It is not deserving of respect, in my opinion.
[0] Or arguably make it worse, depending on your artistic perspective.
Like Jobs and Munk, it is even better if the "hero-inventor" did not invent a single thing.
Seriously though, when I was a kid I would read about "famous scientists of old" every night. They were my rockstars. Edison, Watt, Lister, the list goes on. I had a book about them, their lives, their inventions. Everything. I must have read that book a thousand times before I was 14.
Then one day when I was 18 I visited the London technical museum. In it was a Watt exhibit. It said "Watt bought a lot of patents, he invented a few small things, but his main innovation was leasing steam engines instead of selling them."
It was then that I realized all those scientists of old I worship weren't scientists at all. They were good engineers. Excellent integrators of other people's inventions and work. Magnificent funders of scientists' work.
But most of all they were businessmen. Because it doesn't matter who invents a thing, what matters is who uses the thing to bring actual change to people.
It doesn't matter who invented the lightbulb. It matters who invented the electricity grid so people could actually use lightbulbs in their homes.