Gates, Jobs, & the Zen aesthetic

As a follow up to yesterday's post on Bill Gates' presentation style, I thought it would be useful to examine briefly the two contrasting visual approaches employed by Gates and Jobs in their presentations while keeping key aesthetic concepts found in Zen in mind. I believe we can use many of the concepts in Zen and Zen aesthetics to help us compare their presentation visuals as well as help us improve our own visuals. My point in comparing Jobs and Gates is not to poke fun but to learn.

Simplicity
A key tenet of the Zen aesthetic is kanso or simplicity. In the kanso concept beauty, grace, and visual elegance are achieved by elimination and omission. Says artist, designer and architect, Dr. Koichi Kawana, "Simplicity means the achievement of maximum effect with minimum means." When you examine your visuals, then, can you say that you are getting the maximum impact with a minimum of graphic elements, for example? When you take a look at Jobs' slides and Gates' slides, how do they compare for kanso?

"Simplicity means the achievement of maximum effect with minimum means."
                                 — Dr. Koichi Kawana

Naturalness
The aesthetic concept of naturalness or shizen "prohibits the use of elaborate designs and over refinement" according to Kawana. Restraint, then, is a beautiful thing. Talented jazz musicians, for example, know never to overplay but instead to be forever mindful of the other musicians and find their own space within the music and within the moment they are sharing. Graphic designers show restraint by including only what is necessary to communicate the particular message for the particular audience. Restraint is hard. Complication and elaboration are easy...and are common.

The suggestive mode of expression is a key Zen aesthetic. Dr. Kawana, commenting on the design of traditional Japanese gardens says:

"The designer must adhere to the concept of miegakure since Japanese believe that in expressing the whole the interest of the viewer is lost."
                                  — Dr. Koichi Kawana

In the world of PowerPoint presentations, then, you do not always need to visually spell everything out. You do not need to (nor can you) pound every detail into the head of each member of your audience either visually or verbally. Instead, the combination of your words, along with the visual images you project, should motivate the viewer and arouse his imagination helping him to empathize with your idea and visualize your idea far beyond what is visible in the ephemeral PowerPoint slide before him. The Zen aesthetic values include (but are not limited to):

• Simplicity
• Subtlety
• Elegance
• Suggestive rather than the descriptive or obvious
• Naturalness (i.e., nothing artificial or forced),
• Empty space (or negative space)
• Stillness, Tranquility
• Eliminating the non-essential

Gates and Jobs: lessons in contrasts
Take a look at some of the typical visuals used by Steve Jobs and those used by Bill Gates. As you look at them and compare them, try doing so while being mindful of the key concepts behind the traditional Zen aesthetic.

      
Above. Does it get more "Zen" than this? "Visual-Zen Master," Steve Jobs, allows the screen to fade completely empty at appropriate, short moments while he tells his story. In a great jazz performance much of the real power of the music comes from the spaces in between the notes. The silence gives more substance and meaning to the notes. A blank screen from time to time also makes images stronger when they do appear.

Also, it takes a confident person to design for the placement of empty slides. This is truly "going naked" visually. For most presenters a crowded slide is a crutch, or at least a security blanket. The thought of allowing the screen to become completely empty is scary. Now all eyes are on you.

      

Above. Gates here explaining the Live strategy. A lot of images and a lot of text. Usually Mr. Gates' slides have titles rather than more effective short declarative statements (this slide has neither). Good graphic design guides the viewer and has a clear hierarchy or order so that she knows where to look first, second, and so on. What is the communication priority of this visual? It must be the circle of clip art, but that does not help me much.

Dr. Kawana says that "to reach the essence of things, all non-essential elements must be eliminated." So what is the essence of the point being made with the help of this visual? Are any elements in this slide non-essential? At its core, what is the real point? These are always good questions to ask ourselves, too, when critiquing our own slides.

      
Above. Here Jobs is talking to developers at the WWDC'05 about the transition from the Power PC RISC chips to Intel. Sounds daunting, but as he said (and shows above) Apple has made daunting major shifts successfully before. (He also said sheepishly earlier in the the presentation, that every version of OSX secretly had an Intel version too...so this is not a new thing. The crowd laughed.).

A note on having an "open style"
One thing that would help Mr. Gates is an executive presentations coach and a video camera. One unfortunate habit he has is constantly bringing his finger tips together high across his chest while speaking. Often this leads to his hands being locked together somewhere across his chest. This gesture makes him seem uncomfortable and is a gesture reminiscent of The Simpsons' Mr. Burns. By contrast, Steve Jobs has a more open style and at least seems comfortable and natural with his gestures.    

      
Above. Mr. Gates needs to read Cliff Atkinson's Beyond Bullet Points, ironically published by Microsoft Press. Atkinson says that "...bullet points create obstacles between presenters and audiences." He correctly claims that bullets tend to make our presentations formal and stiff, serve to "dumb down" our points, and lead to audiences being confused...and bored. Rather than running through points on a slide, Atkinson recommends presenters embrace the art of storytelling, and that visuals (slides) be used smoothly and simply to enhance the speaker's points as he tells his story. This can be done even in technical presentations, and it can certainly be done in high-tech business presentations.

The "Microsoft Method" of presentation?
The approach we've seen in Microsoft's last public presentation we can label the "Microsoft Method." This method is not different than the norm, in fact it is a perfect example of what Seth Godin and others call "Really Bad PowerPoint." Here's the rub: A great many professionals see the absurdity of this approach, even a great many professionals on the campus of Microsoft in Redmond. But change will continue to be slow, especially when the executives of the company which produces the most popular slideware program in the world use the program in the most uninspiring, albeit typical way.
   
       
Above. Chief technology Officer, Ray Ozzie follows the "Microsoft Method" too. (Left) Bullet No.3: "...interfaces through...interfaces"? (Right) Fundamental presentation rule: Do not stick your hands in your pockets. Informality is fine, but this is inappropriate even in the USA (and especially in cultures outside the U.S.). 

Refrain: It all matters!
We've talked about many presentation methods here at Presentation Zen, methods that are different than the "normal" or the "expected" but also simple, clear, and effective. Who wants to be "average," "typical," or "normal"? Ridderstrale & Nordstorm say it best in Funky Business: "Normality is the route to nowhere." I'm not suggesting you "present different" for the sake of being different. I am saying that if you move far beyond what is typical and normal in the context of presentation design, you will be more effective and different and memorable. Maybe Microsoft can afford lousy PowerPoint presentations, but you and I can't. For "the rest of us," it all matters.
Can we learn from a Japanese garden?
Looking for inspiration in different places? Find a book on Japanese gardens (like this one from my friend, designer Markuz Wernli Saito) or visit one in your area (if you are lucky enough to have one). You can learn a bit here about the Zen aesthetic and Japanese gardens in this article by Dr. Kawana. Living here in Japan I have many chances to experience the Zen aesthetic, either while visiting a garden, practicing zazen in a Kyoto temple, or even while having a traditional Japanese meal out with friends. I am convinced that a visual approach which embraces the aesthetic concepts of simplicity and the removal of the nonessential can have practical applications in our professional lives and can lead ultimately to more enlightened design.

Comments

[stephan]

mr. burns as "real self" shadow of bill is a nice hint too, but for the sake of credibility, you should consider to comment it.
really like to follow up your ideas and hope to adapt some of them.
but there is always one big question: how to answer the "oh how boring and empty, we thought you are a creative designer.." comments on more reduced designs, from people who are completely convinced that MS design is great (because everybody uses it, hence expect something similar) ? in other words how to move the attention from the plain number of features, products and domination to something like overall customer experience which comes usually with reduction and openness?

[Evan Erwin]

Really fantastic post. I've forwarded this to my boss in hopes that he looks, reads, and learns.

Thanks again.

[Paul (from Idea Sandbox)]

A great illustration.

But executives aren't typically the REAL target audience... it is the executive assistance and admin that need the PowerPoint class. They're the ones, however, 'below the radar' who are NOT getting training.

I'll bet for each of the presentations above there are notes on a yellow legal pad submitted to an assistant to transform into a presentation.

[wayan]

Ah, I see Death By PowerPoint starts at the top. That's a shame for you'd think Bill would be good at presentations by now. The contrast shows in the product too - Apple does vibrant cutting edge work, Microsoft does bloatware. I wonder what a Linus Torvalds presentation looks like?

[Jens Meiert]

Impressive. Thanks for sharing.

[The cult of Apple?]

Oh hail the mighty Steve Jobs!

Down with the evil Microsoft!

Nice overview, except I couldn't read past the glowing praise for Mr. Apple and then the complete diversion to bagging Microsoft.

[Paulo Eduardo Neves]

How would you scape from bullet points and charts if you are presenting a technical subject? Your presentation posts are excellent, but I feel hard to apply it to technical presentations.

[J234]

To Paulo I would say view some of Apple's keynote streams--WWDC
have a many technical info in them. Just as an example of course.

[Gabriel Salcido]

Garr,
Mr. Gates DOES NOT need to read Cliff Atkinson's Beyond Bullet Points (...yet). He needs to read your blog first!
(then, he can read "Cliff's notes")
Thanks for sharing...

[Garr]

>>I couldn't read past the glowing praise for Mr. Apple and then the complete diversion to bagging Microsoft.

I do not mean to excessively praise Jobs or knock Gates. Gates is a smart man, and I respect him. If you can show me a better presenter than Jobs who uses slideware, I will be happy to publicly praise him/her. (I am sure better presenters exist, and I have shown some different types here in the past). This is not about Gates or Jobs or Apple or Microsoft — that war is long over. My only aim in comparing the two is that I think we can learn from their two very different approaches. The fact that they are high profile and public gets our attention.

As for technical presentations and bullet points, why do technical presentations require bullets more than other types of talks? If I had a truly difficult technical point to get across, some form of visual — a chart, a table, an x-ray, a CAT-scan, a formula, a photograph, a schematic, a map, 3-D models, etc. — would aid my talk much more effectively than a text version on screen of what was already coming out of my mouth. People are there to *listen* to you, not be guided through a series of bullets. People can read on their own time.

Take a look at this earlier post sent to me by an MD in the States talking about technical presentations.

http://presentationzen.blogs.com/presentationzen/2005/09/md_gives_advice.html

[Papillon]

Though I agree with the thrust of your arguments about the need for a clear simple message, I must say that the use of Gates and Jobs to illustrate the point smacks, pardon me, of sensationalism. They are not addressing the same type of audience or marketing the same issues: Gates is expounding on a platform for what some MSFT analysts have called a paradigm shifting launch- it's a statement of vision more than an act of salesmanship.

Jobs, on the other hand, is seeking to sell a product to end consumers and his audience, as usual consists of fawning Mac affecionados already won over by the man's charm. No need for bullet points to take home and ponder upon. He's appealing to the senses.

Different audience, different style. Don't fool, don't be fooled. KISS.

[Garr]

Are you saying that Bill Gates' example (or just bullet points in general) is an example of KISS? I, with all due respect, have to disagree then. It was *Jobs' approach* that I was saying is an example of KISS. "Easy" does not equal "simplicity" to me. Bullets may be easy, but they are also most always for the benefit of the speaker, not the audience.

Again, if you want to say Gates' approach is necessary for very technical presentations then I am confused because his "live" presentation was not a particularly technical one.

And the "kill-two-birds-with-one-stone" approach of having wordy slides for the presentation that also serve as handouts leads to confusion all around. Slides are one-to-many, handouts are one-to-one. In a handout you can go deep. A list of bullet points read two days later will seem rather encryptic, something to be decoded rather than read. Much better to leave documentation that is written in a way that expands and goes deep. Bullets do not go deep. Bullets were meant for lists (in written documents). They are sometime useful for lists in presentations too.

[Robert Gremillion]

I love Steve Jobs' presentation style and slides.

But there is a problem if you rely on PowerPoint Slides for Presentation Support AND Documentation.

If someone emailed you both presentations, you'd probably be more likely to make out Bill Gates' message.

[Gabriel Salcido]

Garr,

Got some questions:

Based on your experience, are audiences (particularly business audiences) "used to" presentations full of bullets just like Mr. Gates' in the example above?
If they are, how do they react to simpler presentations like Mr. Jobs'? Do they miss the "crutches" that the bullets provide?

Regards

Gabriel S.

[Jaisalmer]

It fails me to realize how the mess that is the overcrowded Live presentation gives a statement of vision. If something can be said of Gates, it's that he's a very smart businessman, but completely lack vision. Vision is about imagining the future and knowing how to get there. Cramming things that are already here, yet unconnected, on a presentation slide is futurologism at best, rather than vision. As a member of the public, you really find yourself confused as to what's the message of the Digital Lyfestile/Digital Workstyle slide, say.

[Eirik Solheim]

Inspired by two of the comments here I have put together a short presentation guide with an example of how to present technical stuff without bullet points.

The example also includes the document you have to make for the people not attending to your presentation:
http://www.eirikso.com/2005/11/08/how-to-avoid-making-boring-presentations/

Garr: thank you for an excellent site!

[Bartek]

Good article! and comments too.
How about presentations given by Tom Peters? Any comments on them? Is he more into 'Zen' style or the opposite.

PowerPoint Newbie

[eirikso]

As an answer to a question on how to present software functionallity without using bullet points I have now made another post in this series:
http://www.eirikso.com/2005/11/09/presenting-software/

[jack]

It seems to me that the Job's presentation is all about the presenter vs. Gate's where he has a large amount of data (no comment on the value of that data).

Where I work we do a lot of presentations over the phone lines so no one can tell that you are putting your hands in your pockets and a blank screen means that your computer connection is down. In such an environment, body language means nothing.

It does not seem odd that different approaches would work better in different situations. It does seem odd that different situations are not taken into account in this critique. But I guess the best part of doing the presenting is that you get to choose what you leave out.

[Shane Robinson]

Followed a link from Seth's Blog and wanted to thank you for a very thoughtful and insightful entry.

What I find most interesting is that no one mentioned that Jobs uses Keynote (http://www.apple.com/iwork/keynote/) while Gates is stuck using PowerPoint.

It's difficult, but not impossible, to create a good looking presentation with PowerPoint. It's difficult, but not impossible, to create a bad looking presentation with Keynote.

What this really illustrates is the core difference between Apple and Microsoft. Apple really gets design, innovation, and communication. From beginning to end. And the public is starting to understand that.

[Phil]

Another point of difference between the two styles is the location of the presenter in relation to the slides.

In the photographs I've seen of the Microsoft presentation the presenter is standing in front of the slides, partially obscuring them.

In comparison, the Jobs slides are either projected above his head or he is standing to one side of them.

As far as I can tell this isn't related to the location of the person taking the photograph.

[labbai]

So funny...

[Trevor Claiborne]

I've seen both Gates and Jobs give talks before. They are both excellent speakers who get their message across.

I think that is the important question here. Is the message being delivered?

And, yes, despite different styles of communication, both men convey their message.

[Joel]

labbai comments that “Gates and Jobs .. are both excellent speakers who get their message across.” I think not. I fell asleep during Gates’ 2003 COMDEX keynote and it was quite possibly the most boring speech I have ever heard from a supposed technology icon.

I am not alone in this assessment. In Computerworld, December 8, 2003, Thornton A. May said Gates’ keynote “may well have been the worst piece of oratory ever inflicted upon the technology industry.” May goes on to say, “in my row, half the people were asleep. It wasn't just a matter of Gates' skills as a speaker, but also of the ideas he was presenting.”

http://www.computerworld.com/managementtopics/management/story/0,10801,87813,00.html

[Will Southerland]

The points made about the style differences are quite interesting and have plenty of merit. I respect the point of views and even agree that simplicity is king in presentations.

However, the conclusions are hard to swallow given the amount of success Microsoft/Gates has had compared with Apple/Jobs. Of course, corporate strategy and presentation style affect overall outcomes differently, but who would you really rather be?

Many might read this and think "Maybe being a poor presenter isn't such a bad thing after all." Compared with most of us, sure Jobs' success is overwhelming and is certainly someone to strive to be like. However, the weight of this arguement is very much deminished when comparing Jobs to Gates.