Jobs, Reviewed By Steve Wozniak

Jobs, Reviewed by Steve Wozniak

Apple cofounder Steve Wozniak wrote to Gizmodo, weighing in with his own impressions of the movie — and how he and others were portrayed. What follows is Woz's unedited take on Jobs.

I saw Jobs tonight. I thought the acting throughout was good. I was attentive and entertained but not greatly enough to recommend the movie. One friend who is in the movie said he didn't want to watch fiction so he wasn't interested in seeing it.

I suspect a lot of what was wrong with the film came from Ashton's own image of Jobs. Ashton made some disingenuous and wrong statements about me recently (including my supposedly having said that the 'movie' was bad, which was probably Ashton believing pop press headlines) and that I didn't like the movie because I'm paid to consult on another one. These are examples of Ashton still being in character. Either film would have paid me to consult, but the Jobs one already had a script written. I can't take that creative leadership from someone else. And I was turned off by the Jobs script. But I still hoped for a great movie.

As to compromising principles for money, I will add one detail left out of the film. When Apple decided not to reward early friends who helped, I gave them large blocks of my own stock. Because it was right. And I made it possible for 80 other employees to get some stock prior to the IPO so they could participate in the wealth.

I felt bad for many people I know well who were portrayed wrongly in their interactions with Jobs and the company. The movie ends pretty much where the great Jobs finally found product success (the iPod) and changed so many of our lives. I'm grateful to Steve for his excellence in the i-era, and his contribution to my own life of enjoying great products, but this movie portrays him having had those skills in earlier times.


Comments

    Any plans for a WOZ movie?

    Sounds like he is slightly Jealous.

    Also you can't expect a movie to be 100% accurate, it is a movie after all.

      Actually, he sounds very restrained - doing his best NOT to be negative about it. To my knowledge, he has never shown any signs of jealousy in the past, so why now? No, I don't think it's jealousy at all.

        Exactly! He sounds like he's being extremely diplomatic and careful not to offend anyone's feelings.
        Obviously, like everything else about jobs this is another hagiography- People loved him in his later years so they need to make a movie now that extends that same story of love, talent and mysticism all the way back to his early days just to show a magical progression of genius in a narrative form.
        Much like any popular figure- He was "great" in his latter days and somewhat notable in his early ones so you construct a fantasy version that shows how the greatness began and how the end result was destiny and a triumph...
        Which has to piss off the people who were actually there.
        I'm sure Jesus, Buddha, and Mohammed had a lot of pissed off friends from the early days who would say "you know, back then he was really sort of an arsehole..."

        Last edited 17/08/13 9:35 pm

      Jobs (the movie) wouldn't exist without Jobs (the man) who probably wouldn't exist without Apple which wouldn't exist without Wozniak - I think he has a right to give his perspectives on both Jobs the movie and Jobs the man. It sounds like fair criticism to me.

      Unless... you know... there was someone you could possibly have gone to who was well informed about all that stuff that went on...

      Like Wozniak...

      And they didn't...

      To be honest, it sounds like you're just trying to defend a movie that glamorises and white washes reality.

      Last edited 17/08/13 11:29 pm

    Sounds to me more like he's restraining himself from saying "load of fictitious balls" :P

    How did the iPod change anybody's life? It was, at best, an incremental improvement over the Walkmans we'd been using for 15 years or so before. The Walkman was a bigger revolution but even that was just an improvement over the little transistor radios that were around in the 1960s.

      just like how the invention of the bicycle is just a little improvement over the invention of walking.

        Not even close, you moron. Ask anyone what the best thing about their bicycle is and a good chunk of 'em would answer "it saves me from having to walk". Ask what is the best thing about an iPod and I'd say most owners would answer something like "I can listen to whatever music I want, wherever I go." If you'd asked the same question about a Walkman 25 years ago, the answer would have been "I can listen to whatever music I want, wherever I go." Go back 50 years and ask about transistor radios and the response would have been "I can listen to whatever radio station I want, wherever I go." Overall, the aspect that changed lives was being able to listen to music wherever you went without disturbing/annoying those around you. Walkmans improved on the original experience by allowing you to chose exactly what you wanted to listen to, all that iPod did was allow you to carry more than was practical with a Walkman, hence the incremental nature of the improvement.

          looks like someone's pride got hurt. you don't have to prove yourself. i don't care.

            Yeah, right. Your argument was so persuasive it just crushed me. If you don't care, why the fuck bother commenting in the first place? I'd suggest it was you who had his pride hurt by the mere suggestion that your precious iPod is just another gadget that, like every other Apple device, simply built on existing technology with little or no innovation of its own.

            Last edited 19/08/13 7:11 am

              Settle down children, we're all supposed to be big boys here.
              The iPod was incremental in the manner in which it allows users to not only listen to content, but to access it. With IPod came Itunes, which was a incremental step in how people purchased music, and it kick-started the idea of product ecosystems, cross platform operating systems and continuity of functionality across multiple devices. It started the shift from going to a CD store to legitimately buy music, to a system where you could download music without breaking the law. The device itself might be simple, but the idea of using it to transform the way people consume content was an amazing innovation

          Ignorance. Did you grow up with these earlier devices? It certainly doesn't sound like it.

          Radio: no comparison! Listening for hours in vain hope the song you want to hear might be played.

          Walkman: how many CDs can you carry in a case with you? Or cassettes for that matter. 1000 songs on your pocket? Not.

          iPod: your whole library in your pocket. Truly revolutionary. No comparison to portable radio or Walkman.

    Jobs II: Themonuclear War
    Jobs II: Android Strikes Back

    Ashton who? never heard of 'im but I know who jobs was !

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now