Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm.
Sir Winston Churchill
One other thing I would like to add with respect to this article is that it reeks of a blog post designed to elicit a reaction by pitting two concepts with opposite meanings against one another. This sort of thing is useful when those concepts are concrete and discrete (lazy vs eager evaluation, for instance), but with something as fuzzy as success and failure you just make a mess by trying to place them in artificially constructed boxes.
This is in my view another prime example of people trying to think in binary in too many areas of their life. Success does not exist without failure, literally. Success is the absence of failure. They need one another to exist. Trying to write about how one is more important than the other is, IMO, a fool's errand.
Really? I thought the opposite was quite true. Marc Andressen, Steve Jobs, Jim Clark etc.
One could argue that while Steve Jobs made a lot of money from cofounding Apple Computer, he essentially became a failure when he was ousted from the company.
If he didn't go on to start NeXT, his failure at Apple probably would have defined him.
One might consider that Apple's failure after Jobs' departure suggested Jobs was successful. We're getting into the crux of the interplay between success and failure. They are dependent on one another, and they change with time. Again, this totally undermines any sort of binary representation one might try and espouse.