Being good at discovering advantages is far more important than disadvantages

Let’s start with Lao Luo’s release of TNT.

When Lao Luo launched TNT at the Hammer Bird’s Nest conference, public opinion was like a mountain of overwhelming criticism. It is unanimously agreed that TNT is far from the so-called revolutionary product that changed the PC era. It also spawned jokes like "You made me use TNT".

Of course, one of the big reasons for the one-sided public opinion is that Lao Luo touted TNT as a god-like product. In addition, Lao Luo speaks unabashedly and has a dark physique. As a result, no one will really recognize the value and significance of TNT, let alone whether it is worthy of the definition of revolutionary.

Facts have also proved that TNT is an ungrounded failure. But so what? Most of us predicted TNT's failure, but then what? Hammer will continue to try, and then public opinion will spread again, and then wait for Hammer to fail. I believe that such a cycle is of no help to the Hammers and does not produce any additional value to public opinion.

Advantages are more meaningful, while disadvantages can only define what failure is.

Jack Ma once said that we should study more why companies fail instead of trying to study why they succeed. The reason is that there are only a few reasons for failure, while there are thousands of ways to succeed and cannot be copied. There is nothing wrong with Ma Yun's point of view, but in my opinion, failure in research can only avoid failure, but only in successful research can it be possible to draw inspiration from success and have the possibility of success. What Ma Yun wants to say is not to try to achieve success by imitating successful people. In contrast, studying failure is more meaningful.

But what I want to say is that often seeing the advantages and strengths of successful people and even losers is the best way to provide inspiration for self-improvement and entrepreneurship. This is what is meant by learning from others' strengths.

Why do you say that? Let’s take TNT as an example. This way of human-machine touch + voice interaction is the biggest highlight. Of course, this is not the first time Hammer has done this. As such an immature product, it naturally has many shortcomings and problems. We showed it to 10 people, and 9 of them could tell the problem. This is the habitual thinking of ordinary people, because it is always human's instinct to find problems. But only a few people can see an interaction method that represents the mainstream of the future, and the efficiency and experience will naturally be qualitatively improved. The key is that it seems too far away because the technology is not mature enough, not that the idea is wrong. Failure is not because the idea is wrong, but mainly because you want to do it too early. This is the most valuable point of TNT, followed by the second point, which is the imagination and convenience of using mobile phones to replace computers. With the advancement of mobile phone computing power and technology, it is only a matter of time before mobile phones have computer capabilities, and it will be much more convenient if the mobile phone is used as a computer host. You can have one screen at home and one at work. You can just carry your mobile phone to and from get off work every day, which also eliminates the problem of transferring files and chat records between mobile phones and computers.

Those who are good at discovering the strengths of others will grow relatively faster

Returning to looking at people themselves, those who are good at discovering the strengths of others will grow and improve themselves faster.

Positive examples are often more valuable for learning than counterexamples. Because counterexamples can only tell you what you are doing wrong, just like telling you what the wrong answers are when solving a problem, it does not significantly help you find the correct answer. Especially when the correct answer is complex enough, counterexamples are even less valuable.

Talking about people themselves, everyone has a unique growth environment and genes, so everyone has their own areas and skills that they are relatively good at and relatively bad at. A ruler is shorter and an inch is longer. In a school or workplace environment, everyone has their own strengths and weaknesses. And those who are good at discovering the bright spots of others, and learning from and absorbing them, or even just imitating them, will grow faster than others.

In short, under the same time and environmental conditions, it is far more cost-effective and meaningful to discover more advantages and valuable places than to focus on problems and shortcomings. Of course, this is not the case in every case. It is just recommended that you have a pair of eyes that find value, which is more helpful than a pair of eyes that find loopholes.