He may have not been a complete jerk, or the same type of jerk.
Maybe he only wasn't nice to people but didn't hire his incompetent friends, etc. Maybe he was so good at other stuff that a negative jerk effect was not enough to offset the positive parts.
But my point was that according to the definition given in the article I don't think you can say "the jerk effect" was zero at TT, I think the author made a convincing argument.
Perhaps Apple survived because the jerk was doing a good job where he was, despite being a jerk?