Buried deep in this thread, ksec quoted Jobs: "When you’re a carpenter making a beautiful chest of drawers, you’re not going to use a piece of plywood on the back, even though it faces the wall and nobody will ever see it. You’ll know it’s there, so you’re going to use a beautiful piece of wood on the back. For you to sleep well at night, the aesthetic, the quality, has to be carried all the way through.”

It's also analogous to a batter who doesn't stop his swing right after the moment he hits (or misses) the ball; he follows through. Because having the attitude of always following through, even when it seemingly no longer matters, increases the number and range of hits.

In response to the ksec's Jobs quote, maxbond said: "You're suggesting asking people to work into the night to make an aesthetic change that will benefit no customers, that will not make the workplace friendlier or more productive, and that you may never even lay eyes on again, is craftsmanship? I would suggest its authoritarian control for it's own sake."

The proof is in the pudding. Jobs exhibited extremely unusual, 1-in-10,000, seemingly odd, useless behavior in making the painting demand. Is it really nothing but pure coincidence that the same individual had the extremely unusual, 1-in-10,000 achievement of taking a company that was on its deathbed, arguably in its last throes, and turning it into one of the largest, most successful and influential companies in the world?

No, it is not. That doesn't mean it's worth it to the individual workers who had to do that work. Clearly, in many cases, including ksec's, it was not. But was it was worth it to the company and its shareholders? Yes.