The fact that Steve Wozniak has to air his dirty laundry and personal disagreements makes him look like a sour little kid. He should just keep that crap between himself and Steve Jobs. Judging by Woz's reaction and handling, I'd say Jobs did the right thing. Why associate yourself with someone who talks about you in public? Poor form Woz.

It's not bad form, unless it's fiction sold as non-fiction, or vendictive. People are interested in history. Woz was responsible for changing the world and many people would like to hear how it all happened by the guy that did it. Steve Jobs had the idea to sell it, but Woz created it. If what's in the book is true and doesn't cross the boundaries of decency and civility, then Steve Jobs is acting like a big baby. We'll just have to wait and see..

if you're basically giving Jobs the opportunity to rebut anything he takes issue with?

If anything it further defines how Jobs and Gates used and abused Woz and Allen. Opportunists more interested in changing their bank accounts than the world. Sellers versus creators.

Quote

Guest wrote:
It's not bad form, unless it's fiction sold as non-fiction, or vendictive. People are interested in history. Woz was responsible for changing the world and many people would like to hear how it all happened by the guy that did it. Steve Jobs had the idea to sell it, but Woz created it. If what's in the book is true and doesn't cross the boundaries of decency and civility, then Steve Jobs is acting like a big baby. We'll just have to wait and see..

I'm talking about the fact that he is publicly stating that Steve Jobs declined to write the foreword, not that he wrote the book. If a friend of mine asked me to do something which I declined to, for whatever personal reasons, and they go around telling everyone they can that I declined to do that thing for them, I wouldn't keep them as a friend for long. Who needs friends like that?

Jobs is a leader--fickle though he may be. Perhaps it's just not a priority for him?

How was it bad form? He was being interviewd. Questions and answers. I don't see the problem.

First, the title should read, "Foreword," not "Forward."

Second, in answer to, "Woz was responsible for changing the world," remembert that Woz had nothing to do with the Mac. As I recall (it has been a long time), he was actually opposed to the project. His vision of the future was rather limited, it seemed. He did do some excellent programming for the Apple II--the BASIC interpreter and the IWM--Integrated Woz Machine, as I recall, which drove the floppy disk drive. (Before then, software was loaded via cassette tapes.)

Jobs is the business genius, as well. Woz's ventures tended to be a bit wild-eyed (I actually own one of the products he came up with, an "amplifier" for IR remote controls) and not well-run. I admire the fact that he went back to college--under a false name, so as to not draw attention nor prejudice--and got an electrical engineering degree. As far as I know, Jobs never finished a degree, though he has often spoken to college audiences encouraging them to do what he failed to do, while also retainng their creativity.

Yes, Jobs is also arrogant and often doesn't do well with criticism. However, I've noted that he gets most upset by criticism directed at his behavior, decisions, etc., that are far in the past. He can justifiably say, "So what?" to most of these. Success can be the best response to criticism.

Foreword not Forword

It's a fairly informal interview, and I can see where Woz might have let his guard down (if he even has a guard). But he does seem to volunteer the info, as if he has something to get off his chest. That's bad form and immature. Then again, it could just be the way the artcle's been written and edited.

He does go on to give Jobs credit while also admitting they're not close (nor have been). And then he refers to the company as "we," which I find refreshing – he still considers himself a part.

The interesting question is who played the more vital role... Jobs or Woz? One lovable, one ruthless. One soft, one hard. One ingenious, one clever. I myself am more like Woz, but I think Jobs is the real reason Apple exists. These are the men that make things happen. And keep men like Woz (and I) employed.

Quote

gslusher wrote:
First, the title should read, "Foreword," not "Forward."

Second, in answer to, "Woz was responsible for changing the world," remembert that Woz had nothing to do with the Mac.

Uhh.... no Woz, no Apple. No Apple, no Mac. Woz was indeed responsible for changing the world.

Unless of course you honestly believe that Jobs could've designed and built the Apple II, which got the company rolling to the point where it could invest in something like the Mac. Not a terribly valid belief, given Jobs limited technical skills.

Steve had the opportunity to come off as a statesman, instead his refusal to write the forward makes him look petty. Irrespective of which way he went he would be rich in money, but the path he has chosen makes him poor in spirit.

Aha! Therefore Disney is superior to Da Vinci & Van Gogh, Elvis is superior to Mozart and Chopin. What a strange world you live in. Or how is it that you measure success? Let's see, Bill gates has about 95% of the market and Steve Jobs has about 3.5% of the market. That's success? I admire Steve but i'd hardly suggest that he's so special. Better than Gil Amilio for sure, but not worthy of being placed in the pantheon of businessmen-staesmen beside Andrew Carnegie. He has far, far to go before he is worthy of a word in a history book.

I write this on a powerbook while my nanopod hangs from a lanyard around my neck. I acknowledge his accomplisments but understand his failures.

Woz did more than just write basic and do a few things on the Apple. Woz invented the personal computer as we know it. He designed the Apple I and then the Apple II from the ground up. Every clever design to get the max out of the hardware was his own.

Having said that, Woz clearly would never have done anything with it without other people. He has (IMHO) a "geek" mind, an engineering mind, not a visionary mind.

Woz also tends to be someone open and childlike in the same sense that many intellectual but geeky people can be (I don't mean that in a negative sense or as a slam but I know people like this) and he apparently calls it as he sees it without trying to sugarcoat or play games. In his mind, again IMHO, the story about Jobs not writing a foreword for the book is not trying to start trouble as much as it is a factual anecdote.

Quote

Guest wrote:
Aha! Therefore Disney is superior to Da Vinci & Van Gogh, Elvis is superior to Mozart and Chopin. What a strange world you live in. Or how is it that you measure success? Let's see, Bill gates has about 95% of the market and Steve Jobs has about 3.5% of the market. That's success?

But why are you making it a comparative issue? success isn't something that has to be compared to someone else. Was Van Gogh a success? By his standards, and by the standards of many, yes. But you can't compare his success to Disney... they don't relate. Steve Jobs is a great success in what he does, and Woz was/is a great success at what he does. You can't cut out a mold, and try to fit them both into it. Life doesn't work that way...

It's a bad habit, btw, to begin comparing yourself to others. It gets you either really proud at how 'good' you are, if you compare yourself to the wrong people, or how rotten you are, if, once again, you compare yourself to another group of wrong people. I fear, however, that often such comparisons are made by people who are jealous of another's success in a certain area--as if the success of the other is at their expense. It's not a zero-sum game. One person's success does not detract from another's.

Besides that, the point the original poster was attempting to make was that Steve Jobs ignores the naysayers, and doesn't bother bragging about what he's done. He just goes and does it. He lets his actions speak for themselves, and doesn't toot his own horn, so to speak. I think I agree with this assessments.

-Jon

Quote

gslusher wrote:
First, the title should read, "Foreword," not "Forward."

Maybe he asked Jobs to write it in Chinese, in which case Jobs would write it backward (right to left), no?

Quote

madgunde wrote:
If a friend of mine asked me to do something which I declined to, for whatever personal reasons, and they go around telling everyone they can that I declined to do that thing for them, I wouldn't keep them as a friend for long.

If I were rich and powerful like Steve Jobs, I'd have that "friend" killed, or maybe just have him sent to vegan conversion camp for a couple months.

Van Gogh Was a total Failure period. He sold one painting in his life even though is brother was an art dealer. In fact his brother was Gauguin's art dealer. Van Gogh was a clinically depressed nut job who lived the last half of his life in institutions. He met Gauguin, G treated him badly and Van Gogh cut off his ear lob and mailed it to his, not wife, a hooker the Gauguin frequented. Van Gogh Died penniless and having sold one painting. So either get better analogies or explain that one to me.

Quote

gslusher wrote:
in answer to, "Woz was responsible for changing the world," remembert that Woz had nothing to do with the Mac.

Actually, the Apple ][ changed the world… and lived an amazingly long life. Longer than any other computer of its era. It’s longevity bested only by the Mac, and then only in recent years. The Apple ][ was the archetype for IBM when designing their PC.

Without the success of the Apple ][, there would have been no Macintosh.

Quote

gslusher wrote:
His vision of the future was rather limited, it seemed.

Yes, it was Jobs who was the visionary. Woz was more grounded in “today.”

Quote

gslusher wrote:
He did do some excellent programming for the Apple II--the BASIC interpreter and the IWM--Integrated Woz Machine, as I recall, which drove the floppy disk drive. (Before then, software was loaded via cassette tapes.)

Yes, and he wrote the Apple ][ monitor (ROM) code too (the IWM was in the ROM on the Disk Controller Card).

And before someone comes along with partial facts: Woz wrote the super fast Integer BASIC, which came standard in ROM on the original Apple ][. The floating point BASIC, which was standard on the Apple ][+, and otherwise available in ROM on the Firmware Card, or could be loaded into RAM on the Language Card, was based on code originally written by Microsoft. In fact, it is Apple’s decision to license this BASIC that kept Microsoft alive. Too bad Apple didn’t have one more engineer on staff to add floating-point to Integer BASIC!

Quote

gslusher wrote:
Jobs is the business genius, as well. Woz's ventures tended to be a bit wild-eyed (I actually own one of the products he came up with, an "amplifier" for IR remote controls) and not well-run. I admire the fact that he went back to college--under a false name, so as to not draw attention nor prejudice--and got an electrical engineering degree. As far as I know, Jobs never finished a degree, though he has often spoken to college audiences encouraging them to do what he failed to do, while also retainng their creativity.

Nobody, including Woz, has said Woz has any business sense. He’s a great engineer, pure and simple.

As for the degree, i seriously doubt Woz learned much by going back to college. It may surprise many people to learn that there are quite a few very talented engineers who lack degrees. Very often, it is the un-credentialed engineers which are the best.

The greatest value that a degree gives a young person is not training and knowledge – as that can be quite easily gotten by a library card and $10 worth of overdue fines at your local library (nod to Good Will Hunting) – but the doors it opens… if you want to work for someone else.

My, how critical we are.
And what the $%&# have you guys done lately.

"if you're basically giving Jobs the opportunity to rebut anything he takes issue with?"

Yes, I hereby give Jobs the opportunity to withdraw from writing any foreward to any book, anytime. I think that's reasonable.


"Uhh.... no Woz, no Apple. No Apple, no Mac. Woz was indeed responsible for changing the world."

Hmm, you're right... No Woz, no Apple. No Apple, no Mac... Hmm... How about, Without Woz's parents, no Woz, no Apple, no Mac.... Or, Without Woz's parents employers while raising Woz, no money for Woz, no hardware to work on, no apple (apple ][, etc), no mac! Or wait wait, No America...!!! No Earth!!!!

Ok we can credit interstellar winds and meteorites and such for making the earth what it is, being able to support life and tehrefore responsible for the Mac!

Quote

Anonymous wrote:
etc), no mac! Or wait wait, No America...!!! No Earth!!!!

Ok we can credit interstellar winds and meteorites and such for making the earth what it is, being able to support life and tehrefore responsible for the Mac!

Do these kinds of arguments really mean anything to you, or do you just engage in them to render pointless the entire discussion? Just asking.

Woz directly allowed Apple as a company to be born by personally creating the Apple II computer. Directly. Meteorites were only partially involved.

Jobs has one more letter in his name.

After years of being quiet and dignified WOz is suddenly on TWIT, taking Geek Cruises, speaking at events, etc., often saying some pretty wacky things. Hey, he can do what ever he wants but honestly I don't care! I REALLY don't care!

Obviously you don't know the difference between Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak and I'm almost positive that you haven't read the book, so maybe you should keep your uneducated, useless comments to yourself.

It was Bill Gates and IBM that changed the world. Woz and his Mac was aimed at nerds with arty intentions. It never took off.