>> i'm al hunt. charlie rose is on assignment. we begin this evening talking about hillary clinton's presidential spain with karen actual tumulty and jerry seib. >> she has to answer what's the rationale for hillary clinton canned deand hillary clinton presidency. they're smart. they knoh#tv it's my turn is not going to be it. but there's kind of a pop lull base in the democratic party that's more assertive. they want to know what's the point and she has to address that with some clarity. >> we continue with charlie rose's conversation about steve jobs, the authors of a new book, brant schlender and rick tetzeli bing steve jobs the revolution of a reckless up to a visionary leader. >> apple su[boò: is different from how it's been described because we never think ofujobs as

patient. in fact we think of him as impatient. and we never think of him as an incremental creator. we think of him with break through products but they were all from imcrementallism and from patients and that's what he has passed on to apple today. >> hillary clinton's announcement and a book about steve jobs when we continue. >> rose: funding for "charlie rose" has been provided by: >> rose: additional funding provided by: >> and by bloomberg, a provider of multimedia news and information services worldwide. captioning sponsored by rose communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose.

>> good evening. i'm al hunt. charlie rose is on assignment. we begin tonight with yhillary clinton has formally announced her candidacy for president of the united states. the former first lady and secretary of state announced her bid in a youtubeaztweekend. she joins gop candidates ted rust and rand paul, florida senator marco rubio announcing hi candidacy this evening. joining me now for a look at the 2000 election are two close observers of the race are karen tumulty is a national political correspondent for "the washington post," jerry seib is the washington bureau chief for the "wall street journal." thank you both for being here. it was no great surprise that she was in, she had an unusual rollout, karen, the video.

first a tweety$kad and then theñ1- video. was it successful? >> well, who knows. we can tell you in november 2016. but it seemed like everything interestingly enough, last time she also started with a video over a weekend. but the message of this video seemed to be, remember how i did it last time i'm not doing it that way again. >> right. the non-2008 hillary. jerry, what did you think. >> look, i thought it was an interesting illustration of how hillary clinton doesn't have to do the things other candidates have to do. she doesn't have to have an announcement that proves she has a room of supporters or that she raised a minute dollars in a day. we know she can do that. she doesn't have to establish her foreign policy credentials. she's got to do something totally different and say really going down to the grassroots with the regular people. i have to prove i can do that and relate to regular people and talk to them on the ground. on those terms it's a different kind of start and probably the right one. >> the video, the mosaic.

that's her coalition and it's obama's coalition. >> and the democratic party's coalition as it exists right now. i thought maybe that was a little too forced in the video to be honest with you a little too obvious but you're right that's the coalition. if you look inside the polling records you're going to get elected as hillary clinton you got to do it with a lot of women and minority support and some, there was that one guy in the factory, some blue collar workers she did better with than barack obama. >> are women to hillary clinton what african americans were to barack obama. >> the last time that wathe case and in fact you look at the video saying we'll start a conversation. she looks pretty inevitable then too. not as inevitable as she does now but eight years ago it was we're going to have a conversation and i'm not going to break a sweat. two or three weeks later barack obama stands on the state

capitol steps in springfield where abraham lincoln delivered&.=eç his health divided speech and he just evoked history in a way last time that hillary clinton did not. and she really still isn't. so i am waiting for that springfield step moment on her part. you know, i'm sure it will come. but you know, she hasn't really pushed that story line as hard as you would think. >> speaking of presidential sign posts, karen she did after her announcement what we've all been doing to do. 17 hour car ride from chappaquiddick new york iowa. >> when we see the instagram of hillary clinton standing at the self serve pump. it is truly an authentic car trip. >> she's lucky she didn't have young kids with her because that five minutes would be mom, are we there yet. >> look al i'm from the mid

west, i've done a van drive to and across iowa. it's not what it's cracked up to be. >> jerry let's look ahead to the next weeks or months. she's going to have meetings in living roomsvx diners and small groups. it's not just that. >> she has to start answering and finish answering in short order the question what is the rationale for the hillary clinton canned deand the hillary clinton presidency. they're smart. they know it's my turn is not going to be it. but there's kind of a populous base in the democratic party that's more assertive. they want to know what's the point and she's going to have to address that with some clarity. i think there was a time in which hillary, the hillary world thought the that saying i'm a more competent version of barack obama would be a good message but that's not enough now. there has to be a reason that she's running a reason to vote for her and she has to lay that out. >> what she has to deal with now she didn't eight years ago is her own foreign policy record because the world looks like a very scary place right now. and so she's got to explain to

people especially people who don't think barack obama has been strong enough overseas, how she would be different when she actually served as his secretary of state. >> hard to break on some of those issues, isn't it. i mean for instancenuclear deal she was there in the beginning and hard to break from him on that. >> i was just in iowa last week and you do get the sense that people are thinking about foreign policy in a way they haven't in a very i think people understand what isis is in a way that they never really understood what al-qaeda was or what you sunnis versus shia. it8'#:f:g8áqb them. >> i suspect she wouldn't mind breaking slightly at least with barack obama and the question of israel. >> and certainly she's got the

democratic base. she would be taking the democratic base with her if she did. >> she has a pretty strong pro israeli record. >> yes. i don't think anybody in the jewish community and particularly the democratic jewish community would doubt she's going to be closer to israel than the current president barack obama has been. look, i think in the long run iw))2pñthinkrwlwthe ability to stand on the stage with any of the republicans that we're thinking about right now andjsort of great knowledge and certainty about foreign policy is not going to be in that. there's going to be a record to defend that will be controversial but in a world which karen says'scared than they were six, nine, 12 months ago. that's probably in the long run. >> it's rather curious because last time in 08j. with a different environment as karen noted,tried to run on strength. i'm tough, i voted for the iraq war. that was a mistake in 08. this time if she can convein

strength it's much more of an asset, right. >> i'm not sure people are ready to go into the next version of the middle east war and that's where iran gets tricky. she wants to be tougher than barack obama in dealing with the iranians but not so tough we'll stumble into ten more years of exposure on the ground. >> oneclaccomplishments she thought for a while was her strong advocacy in libya in 2011. didn't turn out so well did it karen. >> that's right. there is again, as americans are two minds on this. they don't have a very clear sense of how intervention is. that's by the way not just something that's affecting hillary clinton right now. we've watched on the republican side rand paul trying to walk a both sides of that line as well. i think this is something that's going to confound candidates on both sides÷>> there may not be a right wing conspiracy but there will be a strong republican attack machine. we know that.

they advertise it. benghazi hearings. is that going to cause problems for her either one of you. >> right now you get the sense that;qi the republican fund raising, everybody sort of revving their fund raising issues. for those of you who were actually alive in the 1990's, there is a very sort of familiar feel >io all of this. >> this is ahead of time0kmñq jerry or could it wound her. >> i think it could wound her but it has the perverse effect of rallying the democratic base. they've seen the movie before, they didn't like it then they're thought together to like it now. some of the doubters in the party will be pushed into more activism because they want to defend her against the attack machine whether they love her so much or not. that's a short term benefit. i think long run you do have to worry about the attack machine reminding people that the clintons come back into our lives carrying a fair amount of baggage and that makes people cringe a bit in some cases. >> i think thecould backfire. i would argue for instance that

libya, what we did in libya should be a bigger liability than benghazi where there's a lapse that happened before. there could be a84nzv backlash they could overdue the ban goes hearing. >> people are of two minds in the intervention phase. if you are ask?be willing to bomb iran to stop them from getting a nuclear weapon you'll get a majority that say yes. but to they really mean that. in the abstract yes, but if you get the cases and starting to talk about bringing the marines back into the middle east in substantial thumbs that's a different situation. that's going to be part of the debate in the general election. if hillary clinton gets there, that will be fascinating to watch. >> and the role of bill. potential first spouse. >> he was no where to be seen on the video. i think he's going to be no where to be seen for quite a while. what we discovered was that you know, he's much better as a candidate than he is as a

surrogate. so we'll see whether we see the same kind of problems with him as we did in 2008. ñ> this has been such fertile territory for journalists because they had said for instanclonger taking foreign contributions when she was secretary of state. and it turned out they were. so i think these are very valid questions to be raised. yes it does a lot of great charitable work but it's also by giving to the foundation a way of influencing the clintons. so this is going to continue to be a story. >> jerry i agree. what can they do about it? there's still disclosures they have to make that they haven't made. you all have done a lot of original reporting on this. >> i think they have to basically pull her away from the foundation and they have to set

some clearer ground rules and they have to be in this and it's a overused one but they have to be transparent in a way they haven't before. you can't take bill clinton out of the campaign. he was pretty prominent in the saturday night live skit. women everywhere. it's a joke but on the other hand it tells you in the back of people's minds, that's a big deal. i will also tell you i was talking with a prominent repub@pxbff who says he is still her best campaign asset. >> most popular one in america. >> you also saw the smart way of using him last time was for instance during the texas primary they sent bill clinton up into sort of minor media markets in east texas. where anvj expresident coming to town was a very very big deal and yet you could sort of stay blow the radar. and the obama people told me they were shocked to the degree of which again if you use bill clinton right, he can really

pull out a lot of voters. >> nobody better when he's on. there's another member of the clinton family and i'm not talking about the granddaughter. chelsea clinton. i keep hearing she plays a much bigger role and some people aren't sure if it's good or bad. any thoughts. >> she's got her, she's on the cover of elle magazine the latest issue. chelsea clinton she refuses to answer any questions from sort of the traditional mainstream media. she does a lot of fashion magazine shoots. she campaigns with her mother. you know, i think at some point she is actually going if she's in this, she's got to be in it. >> right. jerry. >> i think that last point is right. i mean, if there's a chelsea clinton campaign role, make it prominent. bring it out prudent. i think the sort of behind the scenes aspect is not going to work. but lookj,dintelligent woman whose got a lot of experience on her owny,:÷

right in national politics. i don't think there's anything wrong with her role i think it ought to be kind ofy up front. >> when we look at the potential democratic rivals, we all say that she is a formidable front runner. it's hard to see a barack obama lurking anywhere. which one of those could say this could cause some trouble, pat buchanan trouble for instance. >> i heard both jim webb and martin o'malley appearing but i think before either of them has cause problems she's got to make a few more mistakes as she did on the level of the e-mail controversy. >> her most formidable rival may be hillary clinton. >> totally. >> you don't see o'malley or

webb gaining tractions even a contrarian state like new hampshire. >> i think politics affords a vacuum. i don't think it's as easy as it looks at a time like this. there will be a moment which somebody will look as if they're a plausible alternative and we will all explore that possibility but it's hard to see right now. i do !.jnñ though if there's some serious stump knowledge there's still the joe biden question on the horizon. is the vice president preparing himself to step in and save the party from itself if somebody terrible happens? probably. >> don't forget john kerry. >> how about al gore. >> he may be too young. but iany reason have a health problem boy that bench is pretty weak though. >> i think that's the most striking thing about this chain on the democratic side. there's no bench. i mean, i can't remember giving the point in a national political cycle where there were so few alternatives for either party and i think that's very

striking. but i do think of martin oactually teeing off on hillary that nobody is willing to bring to the surface. that's nothing. >> let me ask you about marco rubio this evening announced his candidacy. it's a top tier in a wide open race would be jeb bush and scott walker and ted cruz and rand paul. can marco rubio joinko that crowd right away from the top. >> he's got a lot going for him but jeb bush is taking up so much it. the republican field almost works like the ncaa in brackets. we're not totally sure what bracket marco rubio fits into but you know until jeb bush really looks like he can't go the distance i think it's going to be really hard for marco

rubio to get his footing. >> poll after poll saying jeb bush has lots of problems. the e lets love jeb bush. but 42% of republicans andf$ cindependents said they would never consider voting for jeb bush. >> i think that the polls right now don't mean a lot because jeb bush has not established himself as anything but another bush. >> right. >> and i think that again if he is successful in establishing his own identity, establishing his own rationale for running, that'sbig question%of the field sell out.kñvy>> jerry your take on any of this, but also how you rate marco rubio's prospect. >> first i think jeb bush is the favorite until somebody proves otherwise so there's thought. i personally think marco rubio can break into thathe canhe's a tea

party con servive in many ways. he's got a family tax plan evangelicals will like. he speaks fluent spanish which he and jeb bush can check off and he has foreign policy credentials over the last couple years. you put though things on the mag and put them up there i think he looks pretty good. doesn't mean he'll get the nomination but can he play at that upper tier i think he can. >> jerry after the experience of your kansas jayhawks, i hate to bring up a bracket but if you play in every bracket you're not more fiddable. rand paul is the lib tertiary bracket, ted cruz is the right evangelical, scott walker is the mid western governor bracket and jebreal future is the establishment bracket. he has to crack that first bracket. >> i think that's right. he has to make the establishment comfortable enough with him as the alternative to jeb bush. we're back to if the front

runner stumbles. if that happens there's a fair amount of comfort of marco rubio among the establishment more so than perhaps the ted cruz or the rand paul both of who scare those guys lation bit. >> karen he's very attractive.k9"- i'm talking about marco rubio. he is a first term senator. his only previous experience was in the state legislature. he is in his 40's. haven't we seen this movie before and haven't the republicans told us they don't like that film. >> on top of that i think the real issue he's going to struggle with is his role in the senate passing the comprehensive immigration bill. that for a lot of republicans is just a deal breaker. >> and it seems to me, jerry that not only did he create problems there but then he's kind of done not a 180 but a 160 if you will which may put him in the worst of both worlds. >> he and rand mall can talk about that a little bit together.

that's a big problem. you can not get around that problem in a republican primary conversation if you're marco rubio just that you can't get around the common core issues in that republican primary conversation if you're jeb bush. he has to explain it that way that's credible and whether he can do that i thinkquestion. he's a bright articulate guy. i think the questionnyou referred to the 43 year old long term senator is as you suggest a profile republican said we should never have bought into as a country and now it's going to be hard for them to do the same. >> yet there are two otheré'w7 in the race. >> that's true. >> it's the same problem that rand paul and even more so ted cruz who hasn't even by 2016 won't even have finished his first term. >> ted cruz doesn't look like he's 23. >> that's serious. >> i think rubio's very charismatic guy. >> no, no. he can say one thing that does matter. he can say if there's a match you against hillary clinton i'm the one republican who can say

we're the party about the future she's about the past and make that a credible argument. >> i was talking to i think i very informed hillary person the other day who said we are convinced that marco rubio will not get the nomination, if he does he's their worst nightmare and i think that's the point you make about match ups. >> that's not an ideal match up. >> it's not but jeb bush versus hillary clinton we don't know if that's a match you. >> it's upsetting. >> something will occur in the six three, are six, nine months that none of us have answer paitdz. >> that's why we're here. >> karen tumulty and jerry seib thank you so much for joining us. >> thank you i. >> than-ñçó you. >> we'll be right back. >> rose: steve jobs revolutionized the personal computer business. he then brought us on ipod iphone and ipad and much more. new book argue that his experience after being fired from apple in 1985 to his trial÷epnx5bbk

-- trial fant return it's call steve jobs the evolution up start. i'm pleased to have the authors brent schlender and rick tetzeli. >> good to be here. >> what made you write this. >> i always wanted to write something about what i knew because i> rose: is it a different man? >>8risç i don't know whether i can call him a different man. >> rose: that you saw then the man walter saw and who cooperated with walter in his book. >> well yes. steve cooperated with him but

the story that emerges in walter's book did not always reflect some of the other sides of steves that not everybody gets to see. >> rose: define the relation shoop4÷ you -- relationship you had or lack of access. >> it was a reporter source relationship to begin with. now, we happen to be the same age and products of real similar backgrounds both socio-economically and intellectually. we both have similar hobbies and interests when we were little kids and we actually have very parallel lives and we discovered that fairly early on. that made it use easy to just be kind of simpatico with him. not every time that i interviewed him did i write a story. because i worked for the "wall street journal" at that time and

just because he got a new fancy logo didn't mean he would run a story on him in the "wall street journal." we didn't even run photographs back then. yes, i would go see him, he would explain to me about this beautiful logo and i wouldn't write anything about that. but we developed a pretty good relationship, just a rapport with each other and it evolved from there.oé>> rose: let me unmac the -- unpack the steve jobs that you saw. >> i think we saw, we came to understand that his relationships were defined by the same incredible ability to prioritize that he brought to his business. one of the things that steve could do in his business was he had incredible peripheral vision and he saw things going on in other industries and things going on in one part of apple and things going on in another

part of apple. and he could sort out what mattered and bring them pieces that mattered together. in his personal life he had close colleagues. he had his family. and he had a close small circle of friends. these developed mostly in the latter half of his life and career. and within those circles h he had the same kinds of warm friendly relationships that you and i might like to have with her friends. outside of that circle, he was far less concerned with manners than you and i might be. it was a question out side of that circle it was a question of what could you do for him what could you do for apple.

often that resulted in abrupt brash behavior because what you were doing wasn't good enough or helpful to him. >> rose: he would call reporters up in the middle of the night. >> excuse me. >> rose: i'm told he would call reporters up in the middle of>> well, yes. >> he would. he used to he would call brent's house and brent'sañ wife got so used to4r>would say steve who just to annoy him. >> he would call on the weekends. i won't say frequently but there was a period of time where i would say four or five years where i heard from him at least once or twice a month.

>>">> he -- >> rose: always about promoting apple or was it about something. >> once he called me and asked do you have any idea of somebody who would make a good female director for the boarddirectors of apple. because of the business journal. actually i gave him a few names. >> he didn't take any of them. but he called and asked. sometimes later on especially when he got back to apple, he would call me and i don't think i was the only one, only journalist, i think steven weedy was called in too. i remember when he was first thinking about how to present the ipod music player he brought me why and showed it to me but he did his usual magic trick of black velvet. there was just him and me sitting in a room and he's doing this. and he says this is our new product line.

oop trying to figure out how to tell peopleçñdifferent than say a walkman. so i just wanted to show it to you and talker about it a little bit. so he showed it to me and he played with it a little bit. it wasn't that revolutionary of an electronic device in a technological sense. but the way it was designed and integrated so it could work with the mac so you could manage the music was really ingenious. >> rose: it is raises the interesting question we always talked about steve had an instinct for design. i mean yet at the same time he was not a computer scientist but he understood technology. >> right. >> rose: help me. >> i think the way to think of him and brent and i talked about this a lot is as an impresssario. he gathered ideas from people from all over the place.

and perhaps his seen justvbrnz is in bringing all of that stuff together. and out of that mosh, getting to something that none of us have ever imagined. it was the, you know, it wasn't that he was a geniuscg of design. johnny ott is a design genius. he wasn't a genius at operations or many of the other things but he could always bring people together and he could always bring ideas together and he makes something new of it. >> rose: what does it say that steve is gone and the genius of apple continues. does it say that he built a company. he created a culture, he chose people that were the best. culture, people. >> i think that was his top priority, to go back to his sense of priority. that was his top priority the last four or five years.

>> rose: once he knew he was sick. >> yes. >> well no, he thought he was going to recover at first. he really did. but i'm talkingñin2007 on he decided that he needed to systematically start sharing with everybody in the center circle and to try to institutionalize thecw:the decisions that he had made over the> rose: did he do that? >> pardon. >> rose: do you think he achieved that. >> we'll see. >> rose: we've seen already and a lot of people said there has been a creation. >> you have to remember that there are dry spells. even in this fast moving technology industry where you're still absorbing and integrating what you've already been given. and so you can't constantly be

breaking the mold or it won't have a chance to evolve in its own right into something that's useful in a real broadway. people have to use these things before you begin to really see their full power. and so this is what steve learned. he actually turned it from bill gates that there's an incremental approach to improving these technologies to hone them, to make them better and help them grow. occasionally you have to punctuate that incremental equilibrium, in you will. you have to punctuate it with something new because you can't reachit. >> rose: talk about when he came back to apple before he came back. some have referred to as the wilderness years. after he was fired from apple. and then he went out and

created bought pixar fromgeorge lucas and started next which was the a big thing. what did he learn. why was that timeb:ñ!q important in shaping the man that came back to apple. >> both of those ventures were really important to him. in the case of both of them initially is partly the school of hard knocks because they couldn't quit get traction. so he returned a lot from skinning his knee so to speak. but each one was actually very different. the next computer, he rushed into itthat he could take the formula that worked for him building the mac -- mcintosh and create a computer called the scholar work station and build a huge business out of that. what he didn't take into account was that there was multiple

companies already making things like that. they wouldn't5? have been as beautiful as his but they were cheaper and they were just as high performance. he was not operating in a vacuum. steve always did really well in an open field but he did not do well when he had the block and tackle and banged up against people. so he chose the wrong thing to do with that. now you got to given credit. he stuck with it. and the reason he stuck with it is because he got money from ross perot, he got $200 million from cannon. and he couldn't walk away from it even if it failed. because it would blow his credibility ever again as an entrepreneur. so he stuck with it and drove his guys, figured out a way to whittle the company down and that became a profitable software company eventually. it's likepaxar was different.

pixar was a lark. he called it his side project. he spent only one day a week there. this was an outfit he thought could create another kind of computer a 3d graphics computer he could sell toresearchers or auto designers. that's what he thought. these guys really wanted to do was make cartoons. and they were total eggbut they wanted to make cartoons and they had a really high artistic sense and they brought in a guy from disney, john lassiter. in the background they were trying to make cartoons. eventually steve woke up and realized they know what they want to do better than i do and he shut down the computer operation. they had something called a"lu ç4,pvpixar image computer, shot it

down, laid off half the employees and they built a strong first of all commercial and then short cartoons. these guys were such a cohesive team such a motley group of creative people that were all very different. and he started watching how they worked together and how ed capmolder managedt the process and learned so much about that where you have crazy wild intelligent people who do creative things. you have to get out of their way sometimes. they need to be nudged but they don't need -- >> rose: steve stayed out of the way. >> steve stayed clear out of the way. >> rose: this is an interview he did sitting here at the very table where you are. >> the things i've done in my life and the things we do at pixar these are team sports. this is not something one guy

does. you have to have an extraordinary team. you try to climb a mountain with a whole party of people. one person can't do it. >> rose: talk about the perfectionism, the drive, the ability to do what you suggested earlier is connect the dots. >> yes. he had this great ability and you get the sense of this best> rwhenb being able to point out the problem, to find problems you haven't thought of in your creation and your design. and yet to also inspire you to try for something that you haven't even imagined trying. so you know that's what he and johnny ives were sitting there talking about at the lunch tablescw when they had lunch together so often in the last years.

it was ives told us he said when you create a product there are two thing that you create. you create the product itself which is very valuable. you also create everything that you've learned during the creation of that product. and that's as valuable as the product itself. and so what apple did was that it took that learning and then immediately applied it to the next project. so they were the advances that happened in the various versions of the ipods or the iphones or whatever, you know, that was 6rnc work of a perfectionist who as soon as the new product was out, he felt oh, we missed out all kinds of things. that's not good enough. so he was up there on the stage presenting his product and talking about how wonderful it was while back at apple they were already, they already dismissed the thing and started

in on what was next. >> rose: take what they learned and move it forward. >> move it forward. that's what they did and that's what's amazing about theback of apple, the last 15 years is that it's one step after another, one careful step after another following their noses whererppwhen he was a young man all he could do was inspire people for a single product. the follow up was never there as aiéshe learned that, he certainly learned that at next where he saw, he used to, he would talk about lassiter. ed capmold has this saying that at(pyn some pointw6w÷hv our movies suck. that's true of apple's products too. and steve tuukka that -- took that

to heart and brought it to apple. >> rose: how did steve thought he had failed. >> he did think he had failed. >> rose: i'm talking about after apple was a success. >> oh. in the later years. >> rose: what he thought he couldbefore he knew that that the disease in the end would not work. >> it's easy to compress in our minds that illness period which actually was started in 2003. he lived eight years. inmultiple versions of the ipod. they builté[#u a manufacturing infrastructure inñ7]ó china that could pound out millions of products a month. when previously all they ever had to do was make thousands.

they took the ipod and the miniaturization technique that they learned. they built the iphone. imagine when steve took leave the second time, shortly afterthat. and so the company was chugging along. there was a lot going on when steve was ill and it did not break stride which is kind of remarkable. >> to your question about how, whyyou know what's interesting is i don't think he thought that way. it was always about what was next. >> rose: a failure was something hadjway to success. >> bobby lane expression the detroit lions quarterback i never lost a game i just ran out of time of. that's what steve jobs said. >> rose: it was bobby lane the great quarterback for the lions. >> yes. >> rose: did he talk to you

about the illness? >> yes. we've talked about it. >> rose: and? >> well, the reason he talked to me about it is that i had my own health issues that were pretty serious. >> rose: you had a virus that impaired your hearing. >> well yes. before that i had heart trouble too. the first time i had a heart attack, he called me in the hospital literally in my hospital bed as soon as they rolled in me after i just had angioplasty which wasmented that huge of a thing. he called up and he said i told you, you really should stop smoking. heulqwhich was typical steve. >> he liked to tellcjthey should behave. he used to tell people they should get married. he called tim=pcook's mother. he called tim cook's mother up and he said you know tim really needs to have a family.

can't you encourage him to at least have a family. and that's the kind of thing. we had several people say that you know even before he had kids, he had this maternal sensibility towards his employees. it was interesting. >> rose: did he know tim was gay. >> yes. >> rose: tim has come forwarded. >> yes. he did. but you know, i don't think, we haven't actually talked to him about this but i don't think he would have ever come out while steve was alive. steve under steve your personal life was not something that should be out in the public sphere. it was a distraction from the mission. >> rose: everything was about the mission. >> everything was about the mission. >> rose: and the mission was m9pá??what was the mission?

>>+great tools for people basically. there are tools where they became entertainment devices too but really they were mainly tools,4vl'really neat cool tools that amplify your intellectual powers, creative or enjoyment. >> rose: apple did not officially cooperate with this book. >> no. >> until for first two years. >> rose: for the first two years. >> yes. >> rose: tim cook, ed q, johnny ivescv>> yes. >> rose: what is it they felt like had to be understood about steve? what was it about books and impressions of steve that they

thought were overblown, unfair. >> i've come to think of it as a combination of things. there's a personal side. they had a friendship with this person. the people, when apple came around, they gave us four people to talk to. they were the four apple employees onysteve's private burial service. it was a small burial service. and there were four current apple employees who were there. katie cotton who is the pr who was the pr chief, eddie q johnny ives and bill cook. the chairman of the board. >> rose: silicon valley. >> there was a personal side. they had a real relationship with this very very famous man, and they saw him as far more

than the irascible jerk that he's stereotyped at. but also the pride they had accomplished under steve from 1997 going forward. all those people have been there. those three men that you mentioned, they've been there through that whole time. they feel enormous pride in what happened. they don't understand how somebody who was just a jerk could have possibly engineered that, all of that. tim cook and eddie q said to us why wouldzi i work for this person for all these years. those years, if he was the way he is described. and the fact is that his personal, his personal growth. >> rose: style or growth. >> his personal growth, his personal style is a large reason

that apple was so successful. >> rose: define the personal style. >> he was somebody who made a group of talented people feel so proud of their work. we spoke to so many exemployees whose relationships with steve ended badly and they said to a person, they said i did the best work of my life when i was working for steve jobs. that's something that's very meaningful. and they felt that,1rv1 they feel that that understanding, the complexity of steve that helped them create that great work is something that has not been understood. >> rose: can you define? >> well we tried in 472 pages. >> rose: i know.r.yó i'm trying to create a circumstance which people would like to read that 400 pages.

>> exactly. the thing about steve is1had such intensity of focus on trying to make the best possible products he could. this sounds like a trite thing but no, he owed it to his company, he owed it to his customers to build a very very very very best beautiful thing that he could. >> but it was also he had an incredible combination of skills. he had a charisma. so when you were working closely with him andchd@ñ he devoted attention to you, you felt special. they liked that feeling. that's something that can keep executives close to you. when he honed in on something you failed on, you respected

that because he had been right in times before. he saw where you could take things in a way that you didn't. ('s always great when somebodysays you know what take that idea, spin it that way and that's going to become x. and you hadn't thought of that. so these were it was this combination of motivation and attention that made him azmotivator for great talented executives. >> rose: his illness. did he fail to deal with it in an optimal way for his health? >> i am still a little puzzled about that. i know steve is a very intelligent guy and he researched things. i know that when his doctors

told him that the form of pancreatic cancer which he had was isolated on one side of his pancreas affecting really one function of the pancreas which makes now or five different insights that he thought maybe i don't really want them to cut me open and do this just because that's all they know how to do. i want to3s(4 check this out a that's the way steve was. >> rose: final there is this sir.yjb=the overarching question that you@the most basic question about steve's career is this how could a man such inconsistent, inconsiderate rash and wrong headed businessman become the convenient rated ceo who revived apple and created a whole new set of culture, defining products. so please answer that question.zv>(r

>> he grew. he grew more patient. ierchally -- ironically it was patience which was the most important thing he learned that he began to apply. if you look back at the history of these great products even none of them was a first attempt of these kinds of things. there was tablet computers there was the walkman. he doesn't jump in first. hejq waits until he can find this magical combination of one more technology that will really make this thing stein. when you think of technology it's real a recumbent thing.

if you could get a bigger hard drive and make it hard. a playersongs. somebody would say why would you want that. well why wouldn't you. i guess that's what i'm trying to say here is that he had this great peripheral vision and he made things that were additive products that were one step further, sometimes two or three. >> rose: next to the last word from you. >> i would say that the thing that he learned along the way is the ability to move incrementally over time. he did create a great company. and he created a great company by getting an incredibly talented group of people together.aà@6c0@6cjúit was a stable group of people.

and he taught them and he worked with them to create one thing after another. and that took patience and that took incrementalism. two things we don't normally associate with steve jobs. and he learned that during his time at exile. and that's what's so interesting to me aboutsuccess is different from how it's been described. because we never think of steve jobs as patient. in fact we think of hip as impatient. and we never think of him as an incremental creator. we think of him as creating break through products but they were all from incrementalism. they were all from patience. and that is what he has passed on to apple today. >> rose: and he said the things i did was not to create

iphone, ipad, any of those products, it was a company that reflected that. that apple was his ultimate. >> in his youth, he loved spouting off in his youth about all kindsóo of things, trade policy, china youhi

steve jobs, the evolutionary up start into a visionary leader. see you next time. more about this program and other episodes visit us on-line at pbs.org and charlierose.com. captioning sponsored by rose communications captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org

this is nightly business report request tyler mathisen and sue gerrera. >> investors hope this important group will be a bright spot for the market. >> payday why the heads of some of the country's biggest companies are taking home even bigger paychecks. why most baby boomers are most definitely not ready to . >> good evening, everyone and welcome. it's here. earnings season and the focus is on the banks. the big ones. the ones that can move the market and give us insight into the health of the economy. before the opening bell rings tomorrow we'll hear from jpmorgan. the financials had a rough start to the ye