Wow. Apparently Steve Jobs was an overprivileged asshole.

[Lance_Boyle]

He never put tags on his cars and liked to park in handicapped spots. Heckuva guy. Certainly worth of a cult following.

http://www.edibleapple.com/2011/10/27/the-story-behind-... /

[Warpy]

1. Yeah, the man had a hell of a lot of warts and one of them contributed to his death

but you still have to give him props as one of those applied science geniuses who comes up with stuff we didn't know we needed until he designed it.

[HappyMe]

2. Yeah, but we really don't need

the crap he came up with.

[Bake]

14. Yeah, no shit.

We just need caves. And fire. And clubs.

Bake

[HappyMe]

18. lol!

So you've seen my place...



I meant that people really don't need every new little pricey thingy that gets put out.

[adigal]

30. When I was growing up, we didn't have ipod and iphones and wow!!!

We had great childhoods!! We actually went OUTSIDE to play!! Can you imagine?? And we ate dinner together, no TV, no texting. Wild!! We don't need 90% of the BS the marketers convince us we need. Advances in medicine and the internet?? Yes. Every new gadget? And an i-phone that talks to me, so I don't even have to bother typing a message?? No.

[Bake]

33. Yeah, I had a great childhood too!

And a generation later, my kids had cell phones so I could get in touch with them whenever needed.

But feel free to stay in the 19th century ... Go check the parking meter for your horse and buggy.

Bake

[SidDithers]

39. You gotta laugh at posters railing about frivolous technology...

while posting on the internet.

Sid

[ChadwickHenryWard]

70. The Internet is not frivolous.

It is only in its infancy and it already rivals the printing press in importance.

[Stuckinthebush]

34. Yeah, I remember those days

It would have been great to have a cell phone to call my parents when I was riding my bike around town.

They were fun but not as wonderful as we sometimes remember.

[MedicalAdmin]

45. Speaking as someone with limited mobility in my arms and hands ...

... due to partial paralysis, I am grateful that voice recognition software is finally becoming integrated. I actually like that part.

But I also don't need a new model every few months.

[Amonester]

90. Yep. It would be nice if the new model wasn't made to break 18 months later

on purpose (once the multi-billionnaire's gadget consumer is addicted, gotta go buy a new one).

They call it "unlimited" growth.

[CreekDog]

58. Bah! What's this "fire" thing?

burned my tongue. i liked my food cold anyway!

[apocalypsehow]

32. Speak for yourself: I couldn't materially function without my iPad. Or my phone, for that matter.

[Warpy]

37. Well, I certainly don't

I'm a Luddite who really does have a spinning wheel next to the computer. However, a lot of people out there think they really need those ipods and iphones and iwhatevers and maybe they do. I can't judge the needs of other people along other paths.

[valerief]

9. Xerox designed the gui. He marketed it. nt

[Bake]

19. So without Jobs, you'd still be typing commands on a DOS line?

Thank God I'm not.

Bake

[jayfish]

23. I was fond of DOSSHELL myself. -NT-

[Bake]

25. Good for you. Jump on our there.

You and one or two others.



Bake

[JVS]

48. Dosshell was the shit!

[girl gone mad]

27. No.

GUIs were being developed independently throughout the world. Steve Jobs brought some people together to develop a GUI for Apple based on work done at Xerox PARC. To assume that without his direction everyone would still be using a command line is preposterous.

[Bake]

35. I didn't say Jobs invented it.

But was Xerox marketing it? No. It was stuck in XPARK, while the rest of us wrestled with the command line (which by the way, I was pretty handy with). So yeah, without Jobs, we'd probably still be wrestling wtih Bill Gates' software on a command line and a DOS prompt.

Why all the hatin' on Jobs????

Bake

[girl gone mad]

55. This is revisionist.

several groups were developing GUIs with the intent to build and grow the market. In reality, Microsoft was the company that actually won the marketing war with Windows. Jobs probably stalled progress to some degree by promoting closed systems and suing or threatening to sue any company which used GUI features similar to Apple's.

The widespread adoption of the graphical interface was always going to happen, whether or not a Steve Jobs had ever existed.

[DirkGently]

61. And the airplane was going to happen, with our without the Wright Brothers. Sad, petty Jobs hating.

[girl gone mad]

66. Note hate, just reality.

The comparison to the Wright brothers is silly.

[DirkGently]

68. No, what' silly is the preposterous idea the things Apple created "would have" come from elsewhere.

It's a laughable, simplistic fallacy, and the Wright brothers' "invention" of the airplane fits pretty well. If Apple haterism applied to Wilbur & Orville, people would scream that kites and motors already existed, and some guy in France was working on the same thing. Taken to its logical conclusion, no one ever creates or invents anything, at least not in the field of technology, because there are always precursors and prototypes.

But that's the way creative endeavor works. Ideas are out there, but they're incomplete or not synthesized, or not able to be produced. The Macintosh was lightyears beyond anything Xerox had at PARC. Xerox brass was focused on selling expensive, networked machines to big business. Jobs wanted to bring personal computing to the desktop for individuals and families. The fact he didn't personally invent the electron doesn't somehow diminish the achievement.

We heard the same nonsense about the Iphone and Ipad. Smartphones already existed. Touch screen technology was far from new. The tablet computer had been around as an idea for decades.

But somehow, no one else did it. If Jobs and Apple's contributions were so minimal, how is it that no one else just picked up those pieces laying around and did it? I keep hearing Apple's only magic is "marketing" and Jobs mesmerizing hype skills. But marketing can only happen after you actually have something to market. Even now, all those others who "could have" made the iPhone and iPad are just making the best copies they can. You'd think Apple's particular implementations could be easily surpassed by the next person who tried, but instead, the copies are slavish and rarely as good.

The fact is, Xerox DIDN'T revolutionize the home computing market, with its GUI and mouse. Neither did IBM or HP or any of the other dozens of much larger, better-funded companies than Apple, which was barely out of the Jobs' family basement when it did just that.

So how is it, exactly, that the all those companies NOT doing what Apple did, somehow deserve the credit instead?

[girl gone mad]

82. Your history is inaccurate.

Apple didn't develop the GUI out of the family basement. They had tens of millions to invest by that time and were bringing in engineers directly from Xerox. Pretty much everyone who got invited to PARC wanted to create something similar to Alto for the home computer market the instant they used it. The Mac (also Lisa) architecture was better than Alto/Star in some ways, but worse in many other important ways. It wasn't nearly "light years ahead", which is why Microsoft caught up so rapidly with Windows.

Jobs made important contributions, no doubt, but let's not overstate them. He was able to recruit and oversee a diverse and talented group of employees and get them to deliver a good finished product almost on time. On the down side, his vision was fundamentally flawed and Apple lost out to the PC over the long term because of that. I think he repeated this mistake with the iPhone and Android will win the market in time.

[DirkGently]

95. You deliberately mischaracterize my post, which said "barely out of the basement."

Apple was still David to IBM's Goliath when the Mac came out. No one's overstating Apple and Jobs' achievements. On the contrary, it's the frankly nutty attempt to discount them that's out of balance.

Apple and Jobs designed a solid line of innovative products. They didn't just get lucky. They didn't just market well. They did things others admired and copied.

Your thought that the Android will win the smartphone market "in time," is perfectly reasonable. It just steps neatly around the fact that Android followed where Apple led.

Just as Windows followed the Mac OS.

Just as the tablet market is struggling to replicate the Ipad.

Design innovation doesn't happen by accident, and it's a significant achievement, no matter how much irrational hatred people wish to aim at Apple and how many try to dance pathetically on Jobs' grave.

[girl gone mad]

96. Android was in development years before iPhone was released..

Windows was also in development before the Mac was released, though it's true that Microsoft stepped up its game once it saw the Mac. Tablets have been around for over a decade and it remains to be seen whether or not the current iteration is a fad or will genuinely change people's computing habits over the long term.

[dionysus]

76. Amiga had a GUI called workbench, it loaded from a single floppy.

[valerief]

42. No. Someone else would have run with it. And Gates stole the gui from Jobs.

Jobs was an opportunist. And I don't mean that in a bad way at all, despite the fact he was a well-known asshole.

[TNLib]

65. actually the Commodore Amiga had an even better UI than apple.

I believe gates stole from the Amiga more than jobs.

[valerief]

81. No, Xerox did the development, Jobs stole from Xerox, and Gates stole from Jobs.

The Lisa came before the Amiga.

[girl gone mad]

89. Imagine how much more advanced our technology would be today..

if only the Amiga had been more successful.

[PoliticAverse]

86. Jobs didn't work for Xerox, where graphical computer interfaces were invented...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_graphical_u...

[ChadwickHenryWard]

69. "Didn't know we needed it until he designed it."

I think that's more marketing than anything else.

[Warpy]

77. Marketing is the infomercial

His stuff almost sold itself.

[ChadwickHenryWard]

83. "Marketing" does not mean "advertising."

While Apple ads are more or less ubiquitous, that's not what I'm talking about. Marketing is the complete organizational modus operandi of a company; it entails deciding what to make, how to make it (design, function, component materials, manufacturing process including who will make it,) how and where it will be distributed and what retailers will sell it, and who will buy it. Advertising is part of this, but I'm not primarily concerned with the way ads talk about Apple products. In a world where everybody already has both a cell phone and an mp3 player, it is an uphill battle to convince consumers that they need to buy something that does both. I paid a lot of money for my phone and I paid a lot for my mp3 player. Their utility lasts until they either break, or I obsolete them by replacing them with a new product. The money is sunk, but it's up to me when the utility expires; why would I intentionally destroy the utility of two costly objects by buying one new one? This is not a product that sells itself. There is no self-apparent need for such a product; fire extinguishers sells themselves - iPhones not so much.

Then there are the annual Moses-coming-down-from-Sinai product expositions. Fruit of the Loom has a new men's brief on the market this year; why do I care more about the phone than the underpants? This is not a question I answered for myself. Apple provides the answer for us by having the expos. Again, while it's not advertising, it is most definitely a marketing function. And then we have the perceived obsolescence of Apple products. When the iPhone 4 came out, it was observed that the changes from the previous year's model were largely aesthetic, but there was a marked reduction in functionality as far as making and receiving phone calls. The decision to sell a new product every year is a marketing function.

That's what I mean when I say it's marketing. I don't mean the way Apple presents itself in advertising - I'm talking about the totality of the company and its operations.

[Lucian]

3. I never understood his appeal. I always thought he was an asshole.

[closeupready]

20. He was very photogenic in the 70's. That's about it.

IMO.

[MedicalAdmin]

46. You knew him? Really?

Because I don't assume anything about anyone I don't know pretty well, and I'm not too sure about them either.

[Lucian]

60. I see the fanboys are out.

[MedicalAdmin]

88. Really? That's your response?

Pathetic retort.

[Lucian]

94. Better than your pathetic response to me.

[trumad]

4. Yeah---and Edison invented the electric chair...

so what?

[Bake]

5. But he supported the current Democratic** President ...

*** Democratic *** and I use that term loosely.

You people crack me up.

Bake

[Enrique]

6. we already know he denied being his daughter's father

that seems worse than parking in a handicapped spot, plus it's confirmed to be true.

[trumad]

7. Yeah and we also know that he made up for it

and his daughter became very close.

[Enrique]

15. maybe he made up for parking in the handicapped spot

i'm not saying he's a terrible guy, I'm saying that imo this story kind of pales in comparison to other things that have been reported about him, like the paternity thing and also him being big jerk at work and yelling at everyone.

[trumad]

21. Wow---he yelled at people...

my God!

[Enrique]

26. absolutely right

I rarely see people yelling at their underlings at work and when I do I see the yeller as a total asshole. Do you yell at your employees? If so, do you think it's cool?

[MedicalAdmin]

49. I used to work in musical theatre (decades ago)

And yes, some of the best producer and directors would yell occasionally. Sometimes it was real, sometimes it was for effect.

But at the end of the day, the show was a good one and the people involved produced at a level that was above what they thought they were capable of. It doesn't excuse true assholic behavior, which he may very well have engaged in, but the point (for me) is that we simply don't know.

He's dead. Move on.

[MilesColtrane]

97. I've even heard that sports coaches *gasp* yell at their players.

The barbarity of it all!

[ChadwickHenryWard]

84. A man who is nice to you but mean to the waiter is not a nice person. n/t

[MedicalAdmin]

47. Don't forget that Bill Clinton once got a blow job.

*clutches pearls*

[CreekDog]

8. are you saying the terminally ill can't park in handicapped spaces?

[valerief]

11. No, Handicapped spaces appear to be reserved for 20-year-olds driving oversized SUVs. nt

[Warren DeMontague]

10. considering that he's dead, now

doesn't this strike you as just the tiniest bit petty?

I mean, it's not like he was eating babies. He waited to get plates for his new car, like 50 bajillion other assholes I've seen on the 280. He parked in the handicapped spot at his own company. Yeah, slightly dickish, but not exactly indelible-karmic-stain-for-all-eternity stuff.

[trumad]

12. Of course it is...

There are douchebags on the left as well --- proven by this thread.

[Bake]

38. OH hell yes we've got more than our share of douchebags.

Nobody does self-righteous douchebag better than a DUer ...

Bake

[name not needed]

17. I'm surprised nobody's gone after him for driving a Mercedes yet.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

72. Well, both he and Hitler drove Mercedes.

[JVS]

92. Hitler never learned to drive.

[CreekDog]

13. and read the article --no license plates, the way he did it, was legal

and he was pictured in the handicapped spaces sometime recently when he was very, very ill.

Mr. Boyle, time for a redo. Your post ain't very convincing.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Hutzpa]

22. wow another thread pissing on Steve jobs

"by their thrash we shall know them"

[Poll_Blind]

24. Barnum dies, worshippers of the Fiji Mermaid have meltdowns for the next six months.nt

PB

[LanternWaste]

28. One of these days, I'll be made aware of the perfect human

One of these days, I'll be made aware of the perfect human-- the individual who lacks any ethical, mental or physical flaws. Until then, I imagine I'll tempter my admiration for an individual with the realization of imperfection in all people. However, I do realize the self-serving nature of conflating admiration with a cult to better dramatize one's own position... melodrama is better in black and white, though




There must be one person out there who has never acted like an asshole at one time or another...

[MedicalAdmin]

51. Given your username ...

you aren't Diogenes of Sinope, are you?

[Demstud]

29. Those are pretty petty offenses

How about the Apple Chinese factory problems? I'm a bit more concerned with that issue, and unlike his stealing handicap spots, it's not something that's going away with his death.

I like the product, but I never particularly care for the man or the company.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

31. He could have supported American workers and had American factories.

but he didn't. The almighty dollar was worth more than American jobs and American manufacturing capability.

The story about firing the woman in the elevator, with no discussion, tells me he was a grade-A jerkwad. Cruel and inhuman. Sociopathic. Like a lot of bosses I've seen.

I have never bought an Apple product. Second verse, I never will.

Yet, he would have had a billion or two dollars less had he manufactured his stuff in the U.S.A.

But he's still dead. He didn't learn anything, obviously. No loyalty to American workers at all.

[redqueen]

36. Right well I may as well join in... he also was all buddy buddy with Murdoch.

So yeah, Apple's business practices + his choice of friends + his behavior in general = grade A asshole.

I give him credit for some revolutionary thinking, but that doesn't mean he gets a 'be a dick and get away with it' card. He was a greedy prick, and he never stopped being one till the day he died (as evidenced by his comments re: the Android).

[DirkGently]

63. The book discusses how he lectured his "buddy" on the destructive nature of his Fox network.

[redqueen]

64. Yes, I know. Why is "buddy" in quotes?

They were very close apparently.

And despite him thinking Fox was destructive, he was all about abusive business practices, employee mistreatment, offshoring, etc.

[DirkGently]

67. "Buddy" is in quotes because you were trying to smear by association. Obviously.

... even though Jobs and Murdoch obviously did not share a worldview, which is exactly what your "he was all buddy buddy" post attempted to imply.

Apple's business practices are subject to valid criticism. It and Jobs should have found a way to compete without offshoring manufacturing the way every single other major electronics manufacturer in the world does. Once they did, they should have insisted on better treatment of their foreign workers than everyone else permits. That makes them guilty of failing to be better than others.

Why some feel the need to pretend that Apple, an American company founded by a middle-class kid out his basement, which ended up making people-friendly, well-designed products no one else seemed to have the ability or will to create, is somehow best understood as an example of the worst of corporate America is beyond rational explanation.

[redqueen]

71. LOL... no, no smear involved.

people often judge individuals whom they don't know based on the company that individual keeps. Some may find it unfair and sometimes it probably is. However based on his business practices and his fanatical greed, I think it's a safe bet that he probably had a lot more in common with Murdoch than his seemingly fanatical devotees would like to admit.

I'm not pretending they're the worst, so I don't know why you're raising that issue with me. I know a lot of people are just sick and tired of the people who rush out to buy the latest Apple gadget simply because it says "Apple" on it... it's rather offputting to many to be so unashamedly consumerist / materialistic / into conspicuous consumption... so they might be transferring some of their disgust with the people who do that onto Jobs... who knows?

And more importantly... what the fuck does it matter? The fact that there's a huge argument about this guy is frankly laughable IMO.

[DirkGently]

74. Agreed it's laughable there are so many Apple/Jobs bashing threads. Definitely something going on.

As for the supposed masses who rush out blindly to buy Apple-branded products, that's another strange meme in the Apple-hating phenomenon. Says who? The logic there is specious. The products sell well, so the people that buy them must be idiots?

And why would Apple stuff, widely adopted by creatives, be a particularly offensive example of materialism? Computers are tools that everyone relies upon at this point. Having a good one seems more mindFUL than mindless to me. "Consuming" one solid piece of technology seems to me better than participating in the marketplace of cheap, plasticky garbage designed with nothing but naked profit and disposability in mind.

Well-made things are hard to come by. I think they are a good in themselves. I have no problem with the idea that focusing one's life on materialism is destructive and empty, but if something IS going to made and used or consumed, why shouldn't it WORK as well as possible, and in the most human-friendly way possible? I find it's one of the rarest things in our technology drenched world to find a piece of equipment that is designed and built to be functional, reliable, and elegant. And by "elegant," I don't meant white opera gloves and cigarette holders. I mean things that are spare, and lean, and skinned down to the minimum they need to be to serve a human purpose.

I didn't find simplicity and elegant, functional, fully considered design in the pile of cheaply constructed computing junk I've been obliged to own over the years, and I don't think they ever emerge from cruelty or corporate greed, and I think it's a insulting to intelligence itself to suggest Jobs and Apple's success are attributable to them. Good design has to be done for its own sake, and it deserves appreciation on that basis. If it can't be, we just reinforce the exact kind of crass materialism and naked profit-motive you're talking about.

[redqueen]

75. Come on now...

people going and camping out to be the first one to buy a fucking phone? Or whatever else they go apeshit about.

Maybe it's harmless but I can understand the perception that it's fucked up and representative of something really wrong with society.

[DirkGently]

78. Something wrong with society maybe, but not with Apple. People camp out at toy stores at X-mas too.

That's not an Apple problem, it's an over emphasis on consumerism in general. It doesn't support the weirdo cult of claiming Apple products are unfairly perceived as good, or do well out of nefariously manipulative marketing. There's something really psycho about the anti-Apple rants out there. No one leaps all over a new Sony product, or the Sony chairman, whomever they might be, claiming its overpriced garbage in a tarted up case, only bought by clueless, technologically impaired slaves to marketing hype, or that the company's CEO is a mock-turtleneck wearing bogeyman.



That's a special kind of nuts.

[MedicalAdmin]

53. I'm gonna go out on a limb and assume that you don't use any computers then.

Are there any that are made in the US?

[Johonny]

40. Didn't the dude have terminal cancer

pretty sure a man suffering from terminal cancer is handicapped in my book.

[Bake]

41. OMG!!! Didn't put tags on his cars!! Parked in restricted parking spots at HIS COMPANY!!

Wow, I guess he ought to burn in hell for that!

Hardly.

Bake

[spanone]

43. really? judge a man on those things?

[Bake]

50. Are you kidding? Judgmentalism is a common value here.

Sometimes I seriously wonder why I'm here.

Bake

[Blue_Tires]

44. His taste in cars sucked, too

[slutticus]

52. I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who didn't think...

...that he was an asshole. That's common knowledge. But he's a fascinating asshole nonetheless and I can't wait to read that book.

[Marrah_G]

54. I never thought of him as a hero, I do think he contributed quite a bit to our tech evolution.

[Cumberland Guy]

56. The last word on Steve Jobs

http://gawker.com/5847344/what-everyone-is-too-polite-t...

I don't think this was posted above but come on... the guy denied paternity testifying that he was incapable of having kids. Then went on to have three more kids.

Sorry folks - he was a really good salesman, and they are usually the assholes.

[laundry_queen]

85. 1000 times this^

My impression of Steve Jobs is he was just a phenomenally good salesman who had a knack for technology. Most salesmen I have known that were really successful were all lacking a conscience in one way or another. They would say anything in order to make a buck. Steve Jobs, imo, is not the best technology geek ever, he's just the best salesman ever. I have owned 2 iPods (older and newer), my kids have an assortment of Apple products, including a new Macbook pro. I will never buy the meme that Steve Jobs was a perfectionist. I can find a zillion things that could have been done better on my iPod. He was simply a micromanaging asshole that had some good ideas - as anyone who had been in the industry that long would probably have been able to come up with.

So, Cumberland Guy, you are bang on. It's a pattern of assholish behavior that is impossible to ignore. I also despise deifying CEO's. That is one of the HUGE problems with the US - always deifying the rich and famous.

[Cumberland Guy]

87. Thanks. I think that article was SPOT on.

Weird, he never gave a cent to charity (at least publicly - I'll eat crow if he did give anonymously) but look at the billions Bill Gates has given away. Yet he is the evil empire.

[Donnachaidh]

57. ahh, the cult of Jobs will be flaming your ass

got them flame-retardant undies on?

Seriously, he was an asshole who didn't deserve the bootlicking some seem to automatically do whenever his name is mentioned.

Fer chrissake, you'd think he was L Ron Hubbard, just from the vitriol on this board whenever his *warts* are pointed out.

Didn't know Apple had it's own brand of koolaid.

[closeupready]

59. I never met Condaleeza Rice in person. But I'm confident that I know enough about her

to know that I wouldn't like her, and that I disapprove of her performance.

[DirkGently]

62. ... who ushered in the era of personal computing with heretofore unseen design & quality.

People are all lots of things. What's the obsession people have with trying to "prove" Apple or Jobs were bad? I'm sorry, but Apple-haterism is the only irrational cult going on. He's dead. Not good enough for a business figure you didn't care for? People STILL need to keep beating the drum.

He built things no one else pulled off, starting with his friends out of a garage. Changed the design and computing worlds. He produced useful products that were built and worked in ways no one had bothered to even attempt. There's no undoing that, and trying, particularly right after the guy died a painful death is just weirdly obsessive and grotesque.

You'd think he stepped on all these people's personal cats, rather than having an obnoxious personality and making computer products they find overpriced. There's really weird, sour-grapesy vibe to the whole thing. Some people think HP's products suck. Some would say Sony makes a lot of overpriced junk. But they don't police the Internet looking for opportunities to argue that anyone who buys their stuff is suffering from mass hallucination, or wait for the person who built the company to die to dance on their graves like he was Mussolini.


The products were, and are, fantastic examples of uncompromising design & vision that had and continue to have a huge impact.

I'm reading the book now, it amplifies on a lot of Jobs' story, mostly tending to confirm & amplify both the good & the bad everyone's already heard. He obsessed over build quality and design. He considered himself a hippy-esque seeker of enlightenment, but was also manipulative and sometimes cruel. He thought he could bring together humanistic and aesthetic values with high technology. He haggled exceptionally well.

But he bottom line on the products is they wouldn't have happened without him.

Xerox's PARC labs was an unloved basement of geek that the home office cared nothing about. The company gave Jobs unprecedented access to its work because it wanted to invest $1 million in Apple. They tried twice to do a dog-and-pony show that didn't reveal how the bitmapping and other key features worked, but Jobs saw through it, and kept insisting they "open the kimono."

As soon as he saw the GUI, bitmapping, and mouse, he said "This is it." What "it" was, was a vision he had that big companies like Xerox had no interest it -- a home computer for the masses.

But the Macintosh would never have had the impact it did if changes Jobs insisted on hadn't been implemented. Xerox's "mouse" was a $300, wheeled device with three buttons that couldn't select a file by clicking, couldn't drag and drop, couldn't move any direction except left, right, up, down on straight axis. Typical Jobs: He fired the Apple engineer that said a 360-degree mouse was impossible, hired one who figured it out, and had the whole thing re-designed to cost $15.

It's a good book anyone interested in the company's history would enjoy. It won't convince anyone Jobs was a saint, because he wasn't, and neither he nor his wife asked it be written that way. What it does show is how some of the most revolutionary, best-designed computing and electronics in the world came to be, beginning with $1,300 in cash and two guys' working out of a garage.

[fascisthunter]

73. rumor or real?

[Exultant Democracy]

79. The tags on the car part was pretty funny, if he had advanced cancer he may have had to park there

Just playing the devils advocate. I don't really care either way nor do I see why it really matters.

[devilgrrl]

80. Good to know that he's right down there with Dick Cheney and George W. Bush - Falwell, etc...

[Safetykitten]

91. Gee, he was a scumbag. How surprising.

[applegrove]

93. I know. He sounds like an idiot.