pirates of the slicon valley ? is it true [Archive]

Chaszmyr

Jan 31, 2007, 08:21 PM

There was at least one documentary with "Nerds" in the title that was more factual and less dramatic but it was basically all of Silicon Valley, not just Apple and Microsoft.

Triumph of the Nerds is what you're thinking of, but it's not as entertaining as Pirates of Silicon Valley, and I'm not sure that it really gives you as good of an idea of how things went, despite a handful of inaccuracies in Pirates.

I would absolutely LOVE for them to make a sequel. So much has happened since Pirates left off that anyone who hasn't been watching the industry in these past several years would really be misled by the film.

IJ Reilly

Jan 31, 2007, 08:24 PM

Triumph of the Nerds is what you're thinking of, but it's not as entertaining as Pirates of Silicon Valley, and I'm not sure that it really gives you as good of an idea of how things went, despite a handful of inaccuracies in Pirates.

I think "Triumph" is far better, because it's actual history and "Pirates" is largely fictionalized. It's also quite entertaining, IMO. I don't know where you'd find it anymore, though.

bousozoku

Jan 31, 2007, 08:55 PM

"Triumph of the Nerds." It was on PBS many years ago, and was based on a book by Robert X. Cringely called "Accidental Empires." This is one of the books I'd recommend reading instead of watching "Pirates."

Yes, that's the one. Christine Comaford and quite a few other journalists of the time were involved. It wasn't about acting. It was about reality.

There should be more than one and I believe the original is available through PBS.

Triumph of the Nerds is what you're thinking of, but it's not as entertaining as Pirates of Silicon Valley, and I'm not sure that it really gives you as good of an idea of how things went, despite a handful of inaccuracies in Pirates.

I would absolutely LOVE for them to make a sequel. So much has happened since Pirates left off that anyone who hasn't been watching the industry in these past several years would really be misled by the film.

Triumph showed how it was. It wasn't sensationalised or as inaccurate as Pirates was, though the bit about the smell wasn't sensationalised. It was downplayed.

IJ Reilly

Jan 31, 2007, 11:52 PM

There should be more than one and I believe the original is available through PBS.

Only one, but here it is:

http://www.shoppbs.org/product/index.jsp?productId=1978852

And here:

http://www.amazon.com/Triumph-Nerds-Robert-X-Cringely/dp/B00006FXQO

bousozoku

Feb 1, 2007, 01:58 AM

Only one, but here it is:

http://www.shoppbs.org/product/index.jsp?productId=1978852

And here:

http://www.amazon.com/Triumph-Nerds-Robert-X-Cringely/dp/B00006FXQO

Yes. All three available on video tape but only one on DVD.

For a mere donation of $2500, you can get it for free from your local PBS station. ;)

I really miss those days. Computers were so much more interesting then, even though they're more functional now.

IJ Reilly

Feb 1, 2007, 10:39 AM

Yes. All three available on video tape but only one on DVD.

I believe the DVD includes all three installments, though one of the user comments on Amazon notes that they edited the series somewhat to make it fit the DVD format.

protozoa

Feb 13, 2008, 10:52 PM

I just recently saw Pirates of Silicon Valley.

I thought it was interesting in that it provided a dramatic stage for my understanding of the whole Jobs/Gates story. I am reading a fantastic book called Hard Drive: Bill Gates and the Making of the Microsoft Empire, and have seen the DVD titled Triumph of the Nerds. So, based on those sources, quite a bit of "Pirates" is based on real events... or at least universally accepted urban legends. :D

The things that I saw that didn't seem to match "reality" were mostly minor. For instance, there was a scene where Gates was visiting IBM that screwed up some of the details. My understanding is that he purchased a tie at a department store on the way to the meeting... not from a guy in a restroom like in the movie. Also, the scene in the movie looked like it was shot in New York or somewhere. The initial meetings were at an IBM facility in Boca Raton, FL. The movie also sort of made that scene look like gates initiated the contact with IBM. He did not. Big Blue came looking for him. At another point in the movie, Gates runs into Paul Allen's car with a bulldozer. I believe the story was that he almost ran over his own Porsche, not that he hit Allen's car. In the movie, Gates immediately drops out of Harvard to work on the contract at MITS. In reality, I believe he only worked in New Mexico for a Summer before returning to Harvard. He dropped out of Harvard about a year later.

The one thing that "Priates" added to my understanding was how mean Jobs has been at times. There is a scene in the movie where he enters a room while a software engineer is being interviewed for a position at Apple. Jobs berates and embarrasses the man so bad that the poor guy looks like he is about to cry. That scene just sort of made me cringe. Frankly, the movie sort of made me have some second thoughts about buying a Mac (which I have yet to do).

In all fairness, I know that Gates has been cruel to his employees at times. I'm neutral enough on the PC/Mac rivalry to even think that "Pirates" comes across as anti-Mac propaganda. Other than yelling at people, Gates has not been above business moves that sort of screw people over... like buying a DOS system for $50K and turning around and making billions on it... or playing hard ball with MITS or IBM... or using Harvard's mainframe to create commercial products. Microsoft apologists would say it was just good business, but it sure wasn't always pretty. The "Pirates" movie seemed to play down things that made Gates look bad (it didn't include any scenes of his obnoxious youth). For instance, the movie spent alot of time focusing on Jobs' screwed up relationship with his daughter, and didn't really touch on Gates' personal life (other than to show a scene where Steve Ballmer was sort of teasing him about his lack of a personal life).

I would normally be more at home around a hippie (like Jobs) than I would a nerd (like Gates)... but the movie made Jobs look much more like a crazy and abusive megalomaniac. At least, that was my impression.

IJ Reilly

Feb 14, 2008, 10:28 AM

You've put your finger on some of the inaccuracies in "Pirates." I recall there being others, but it's been years since I've seen this movie. I do remember rolling my eyes quite a bit though. You might also want to read "Overdrive," the follow-up to "Hard Drive." These books were written by solid journalists. The book "Gates" by Manes and Andrews is also pretty good. All of them are worth reading, if you find actual events to be even more entertaining than fiction.

Both Jobs and Gates are megalomaniacal control freaks in their own ways, as are a lot of successful businesspeople. But Gates really takes the prize in this contest IMO. He believes in winning at all costs, and just for the sake of winning.

Nick T.

Feb 14, 2008, 01:45 PM

The complete version of PoSV for Real Player is available at:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1552555273778978142

protozoa

Feb 14, 2008, 01:54 PM

But Gates really takes the prize in this contest IMO. He believes in winning at all costs, and just for the sake of winning.

I guess it all depends on what version of meglomania you dislike the most. :D

Me, I can handle a "win at all cost" ideology. I can even handle having a mean boss who gets off on yelling at people (heck, I was in the Army for 12 years!). But, if Steve Jobs is at all like the character in "Pirates" I would have been one of those Apple employees who tried to beat the crap out of him.

Thanks for the book recommendations. I'll check them out.

RumMunkey

Feb 14, 2008, 07:46 PM

Check your local library :D

http://img.skitch.com/20080215-wni3sru5i3c17a7hy6qh1hihn.jpg

I've yet to get a chance to watch it though. I wonder if this will ever make it's way to the iTms? ;)

IJ Reilly

Feb 14, 2008, 10:04 PM

I guess it all depends on what version of meglomania you dislike the most. :D

Me, I can handle a "win at all cost" ideology. I can even handle having a mean boss who gets off on yelling at people (heck, I was in the Army for 12 years!). But, if Steve Jobs is at all like the character in "Pirates" I would have been one of those Apple employees who tried to beat the crap out of him.

Thanks for the book recommendations. I'll check them out.

Well as you know from reading "Hard Drive," Gates has a habit of throwing hissy fits too.

KurtangleTN

Feb 14, 2008, 10:18 PM

While were on the subject, is there a really good, accurate book on Steve Jobs?

protozoa

Feb 15, 2008, 12:32 AM

Well as you know from reading "Hard Drive," Gates has a habit of throwing hissy fits too.

Oh yeah. I said that in my previous post (#16, paragraph next to last).

My point is that I'd much rather have some nut case yelling at me for not generating some work ten minutes faster.... than to have a shoeless psycho asking me details about my sex life (like the Jobs character did in this movie).

I had a boss for a couple years that I was in the Army who threw a fit because some guy took some time off when his mother died. He was an absolute head case. So, I know what it's like to work for crazy idiots.

From what I understood, at least Bill Gates was at least mission oriented in his abusive behavior. Jobs appears to simply be a raving lunatic.

wctaiwan

Feb 15, 2008, 05:07 AM

While were on the subject, is there a really good, accurate book on Steve Jobs?

I don't know about that, but I did enjoy reading about Jobs and some former Apple execs at http://www.lowendmac.com/orchard/. Can't say I respect Jobs as much as I used to after reading that though.

wctaiwan

IJ Reilly

Feb 15, 2008, 10:46 AM

Oh yeah. I said that in my previous post (#16, paragraph next to last).

My point is that I'd much rather have some nut case yelling at me for not generating some work ten minutes faster.... than to have a shoeless psycho asking me details about my sex life (like the Jobs character did in this movie).

I had a boss for a couple years that I was in the Army who threw a fit because some guy took some time off when his mother died. He was an absolute head case. So, I know what it's like to work for crazy idiots.

From what I understood, at least Bill Gates was at least mission oriented in his abusive behavior. Jobs appears to simply be a raving lunatic.

I don't get that impression exactly. I mean, I do think they get to be judged at least some for the products their respective companies make. I believe that Jobs is a lunatic in pursuit of excellence whereas Gates is a lunatic in pursuit of mediocrity. That said, I don't know how much time I'd like to spend in a room alone with either one of them.

Quillz

Feb 15, 2008, 10:48 AM

He believes in winning at all costs, and just for the sake of winning.
As do all corporate CEOs. But, hey, at least Gates is giving away his fortune, I don't see Jobs doing that.

Quillz

Feb 15, 2008, 10:50 AM

Check your local library :D

http://img.skitch.com/20080215-wni3sru5i3c17a7hy6qh1hihn.jpg

I've yet to get a chance to watch it though. I wonder if this will ever make it's way to the iTms? ;)
Probably not, as it portrays Apple in a bit of a negative light. I'm pretty sure the Steve would never allow such a movie to be available for purchase.

Not to mention it's more akin to the old Apple of the late 80s/90s, which actually made some really horrible products. "Apple 2.0," which began when Steve came back in 1997, I think, is an entirely different corporation in of itself.

IJ Reilly

Feb 15, 2008, 11:02 AM

As do all corporate CEOs. But, hey, at least Gates is giving away his fortune, I don't see Jobs doing that.

When I say at all costs, I refer to breaking the law to get what they want. If you followed the antitrust trial like I did you'd know that Gates & Co. have no scruples whatsoever. They have no problem providing falsified evidence to a judge, if they think they can get away with it.

It's commendable that Gates is giving away some of his fortune, but he was notably stingy with his wealth before that, and his approach to charity is much the same as his approach to running Microsoft. It's a lot about making people dance to his tune. I don't know anything about Jobs' charitable efforts.

protozoa

Feb 15, 2008, 11:43 AM

They have no problem providing falsified evidence to a judge, if they think they can get away with it.

And as evil as that is, I'd much rather support a company that did that sort of thing versus one where the CEO acted like Jobs.

I'd buy a hundred PCs before I spent a dime on a product that would end up in that a-hole's pocket. This two-minute clip ruined the idea of buying a Mac for me...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwYy8R87JMA

IJ Reilly

Feb 15, 2008, 11:49 AM

And as evil as that is, I'd much rather support a company that did that sort of thing versus one where the CEO acted like Jobs.

I'd buy a hundred PCs before I spent a dime on a product that would end up in that a-hole's pocket. This two-minute clip ruined the idea of buying a Mac for me...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwYy8R87JMA

The unlawful behavior is a matter of fact. The personal quirks were dramatized in a TV movie. You decide.

protozoa

Feb 15, 2008, 03:17 PM

The unlawful behavior is a matter of fact. The personal quirks were dramatized in a TV movie. You decide.

Shrug. I don't care about unlawful behavior that has no real impact on me.

The events in the movie may have been dramatized. However, there are enough things portrayed in the movie correctly to make me wonder how off base they are (or are not) about Steve Jobs.

IJ Reilly

Feb 15, 2008, 03:47 PM

Shrug. I don't care about unlawful behavior that has no real impact on me.

The events in the movie may have been dramatized. However, there are enough things portrayed in the movie correctly to make me wonder how off base they are (or are not) about Steve Jobs.

It has an impact, whether you know it or not. But then, I'm not making decisions about what products I buy based on the portrayal of a CEO on a TV movie. Whether it's accurate or not, I just can't see the sense in it, nor can I see how it meets your test of having a real impact on you. If you're really determined to not buy products that line some "a-hole's pocket" then I suggest living in a cave might be your best course of action.

twoodcc

Feb 15, 2008, 04:03 PM

And as evil as that is, I'd much rather support a company that did that sort of thing versus one where the CEO acted like Jobs.

I'd buy a hundred PCs before I spent a dime on a product that would end up in that a-hole's pocket. This two-minute clip ruined the idea of buying a Mac for me...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwYy8R87JMA

wow. you base your life on clips like that? what is that, bad acting? i mean, it's a movie.

there are plenty of "a-hole's" around. better not spend any money anywhere.

protozoa

Feb 15, 2008, 04:09 PM

I live three miles from an interstate highway. If I were to discover that my neighbor speeds on it regularly, I would not give a crap. His violation of the law doesn't bother me in the least. However, if I discover he regularly kicks his dog, I seriously doubt I'd be inviting him over to watch football anymore. I place mean jerks on the scale a bit lower than criminals.

All products come from "a-holes." Of that, I have no doubt. I probably would be living in a cave if I knew more about the people who provide my consumer products. Fortunately, I am blissfully unaware that my clothes were made by a 12 year old in Pakistan, or that my dentist is having an affair behind his wife's back. As time and information permits, I discover things like this... and I adjust my consumer habits accordingly.

Is your point that you think Steve Jobs isn't a jerk?

If not... then why do you enjoy sending your money to a jerk?

Or perhaps the question should be... what about an anti-trust lawsuit makes a guy more reprehensible than someone who berates his employees?

protozoa

Feb 15, 2008, 04:17 PM

wow. you base your life on clips like that?

Buying a computer is not my whole life. I guess it is for you. :D

I base consumer decisions on alot of different things. Very few of them have anything to do with how much of a "good guy" the manufacturer's CEO is. This is a case where it comes into play.

JNB

Feb 15, 2008, 04:33 PM

Is your point that you think Steve Jobs isn't a jerk?

If not... then why do you enjoy sending your money to a jerk?

Or perhaps the question should be... what about an anti-trust lawsuit makes a guy more reprehensible than someone who berates his employees?

Single-minded genius, jerk, what's the difference? Edison was a complete jerk. Quit using light bulbs. Ford was a raging jerk. Quit buying cars made on assembly lines.

I'd hate to see how you come to a decision about whom to vote for.

Oh, and Bill Gates was--and still is--a jerk, known for his red-faced screaming fits while being a monopolist and a pirate at the same time. He makes Wal-Mart look like the best thing to come to your city in history.

Either your standards and sources for personal judgements are limited to YouTube and sound bites, or you've painted yourself into a corner here and can't find a way to back off with honor.

It's your money, buy from whom you wish, just please don't claim a superior moral position with those arguments.

protozoa

Feb 15, 2008, 04:42 PM

Single-minded genius, jerk, what's the difference? Edison was a complete jerk. Quit using light bulbs. Ford was a raging jerk. Quit buying cars made on assembly lines.

A major hole in your logic here is that Henry Ford doesn't make a dime off me when I buy a Toyota. Same for Edison, or any other dead guy you can come up with.

Oh, and Bill Gates was--and still is--a jerk, known for his red-faced screaming fits

I've admitted as much in three posts now. I see a difference in the behavior of the two men. Gates wants to win in business, Jobs wants to screw with people's heads. It's the difference between a guy who speeds on the highway, and a guy who kicks his dog.

JNB

Feb 15, 2008, 05:12 PM

Winner of the most twisted logic award of the day. :rolleyes:

J@ffa

Feb 15, 2008, 05:17 PM

Fortunately, I am blissfully unaware that my clothes were made by a 12 year old in Pakistan, or that my dentist is having an affair behind his wife's back.

Could just be me, but it doesn't sound like it!

A major hole in your logic here is that Henry Ford doesn't make a dime off me when I buy a Toyota. Same for Edison, or any other dead guy you can come up with.

I've admitted as much in three posts now. I see a difference in the behavior of the two men. Gates wants to win in business, Jobs wants to screw with people's heads. It's the difference between a guy who speeds on the highway, and a guy who kicks his dog.

Even if you drove a Ford, I'm pretty sure that Henry Ford has very little to do with the company that exists today. AT&T and Verizon aren't beholden to Antonio Meucci either.

Anyhow, to me, the knowledge that Jobs is so driven makes me want to buy a Mac more, not less. Gates is symbolic of the sort of bean counter mediocrity that pollutes fields way beyond consumer electronics. I like the fact that he values the Apple engineers who sat down and thought that mobile phones don't need half the crap the cerebrally-challenged engineers at Motorola and the like cram their devices with. That floppy disks could go to hell, portable music players sucked, PC laptops are ugly, etc. Quite aside from design acumen, he has the presence of mind to tell people their ideas suck. Maybe he's mean to people sometimes, or overly controlling... but I could care less. Everyone's got flaws, and his are obviously magnified. It kind of perturbs me that watching sensationalised accounts of his career makes you not want to buy a Mac. Surely you should be judging it against its peers, rather than acting out against a CEO you'll probably never meet?

IJ Reilly

Feb 15, 2008, 05:20 PM

It's your money, buy from whom you wish, just please don't claim a superior moral position with those arguments.

A fair summary.

This started out as an interesting discussion, anyway.

protozoa

Feb 15, 2008, 05:50 PM

It kind of perturbs me that watching sensationalised accounts of his career makes you not want to buy a Mac. Surely you should be judging it against its peers, rather than acting out against a CEO you'll probably never meet?

Why would it "perturb" you? It's my money. If I like one jerk better than another, and base a consumer decision on that... why should you care?

What makes you think anything in Pirates was "sensationalized"? I don't honestly know as much about Job's story as I know about Gates.... but the things in the movie about Gates were spot-on.

Is there any specific scene in that movie that you guys think is completely fictional?

protozoa

Feb 15, 2008, 05:54 PM

Winner of the most twisted logic award of the day. :rolleyes:

I wasn't the one who somehow linked Henry Ford to the purchase of a car (any car) sixty years after his death.

IJ Reilly

Feb 15, 2008, 07:12 PM

When your horse is dead, it's time to dismount.

JNB

Feb 15, 2008, 07:49 PM

When your horse is dead, it's time to dismount.

Where is that glue factory, anyway?

Virgil-TB2

Feb 15, 2008, 08:08 PM

And as evil as that is, I'd much rather support a company that did that sort of thing versus one where the CEO acted like Jobs....Wow. That's just shameful. :eek:

You'd rather work for a criminal with no morals at all, than a guy with a "bad personality?" One that he has been working on ever since and is by all accounts quite a different man than he was when he was younger. Wow.

The thing I find amusing is that Jobs basically acted like the typical rock-star that had fame "go to his head." What the average young person thinks is "cool" if their favorite music-idol does is somehow "evil" when Jobs did it? Double standard if you ask me.

Also to those that are talking about the "charitable efforts of Bill Gates," remember that just because he doesn't crow about it, doesn't mean that jobs doesn't also give away millions. We just don't know if he does or not. I wouldn't be surprised to find out he gave nothing or that he gave millions. We just don't know either way.

protozoa

Feb 15, 2008, 08:41 PM

You'd rather work for a criminal with no morals at all, than a guy with a "bad personality?" .

You could not have exaggerated the characteristics of one guy in one direction, and the other in another direction any more if you had tried.

What the average young person thinks is "cool" if their favorite music-idol does is somehow "evil" when Jobs did it? Double standard if you ask me. .

I'm not an "average young person." In fact, I'm easily old enough to have kids out of college at this point. I don't admire any "rock stars" these days; and certainly none that act like a-holes.

Also to those that are talking about the "charitable efforts of Bill Gates," remember that just because he doesn't crow about it, doesn't mean that jobs doesn't also give away millions. We just don't know if he does or not. I wouldn't be surprised to find out he gave nothing or that he gave millions. We just don't know either way.

Actually... nobody was talking about the charitable efforts of Gates. Could you give us some more doublespeak about Jobs and his philanthropy... that he may or may not do? :D

When I read your last paragraph I started to wonder if you were a 5th column debater interested in supporting my comments! Didn't you just say that Gates has "no morals" in the same post?

yeroen

Feb 15, 2008, 08:56 PM

Well, Steve Jobs' LSD trip was real.

He's on record as saying it was one of the most significant experiences of his life.

JNB

Feb 15, 2008, 08:59 PM

So let me get this straight: You are claiming a lack of desire to do business with the company of one individual merely because of a two-minute dramatic portrayal on a several year old teleplay (which is certainly your choice), but at the same time defend that same position by claiming that the opposite player is justified in having similar personality traits, but is the better of the two because he conducts business in a mercenary, cutthroat manner.

Once again, this is entirely your choice, and I wouldn't deign to change your mind, but the logic in reaching that position is curious, to say the least. My conclusion is that not only is your reasoning flawed, but the source of your information is flawed as well, or have I completely missed the point?

protozoa

Feb 15, 2008, 09:24 PM

or have I completely missed the point?

You have mostly missed the point.

The two minute clip I provided was (to my understanding) an accurate representation of Job's modus operandi. You guys have tap-danced around this (by saying it was "sensationalized" or "dramatic") but none of you has had the balls to say the scene is pure fiction.

I'll try and explain this once again. When Gates chews an employee's ass (or breaks the law), he is doing it because he wants the company to win. When Jobs goes over the top, he is apparently doing it because he is a psychotic nut case.

I have worked for plenty of "Gates" in my life. I know how they tick. I know what their goal is. I often hate them, but I can understand the logic in what they do. I have more respect for someone who just wants to win (even if they break the law, and have no people skills), versus some freak who just wants to get inside people's heads. I'm not willing to give my money to someone who just gets off on being sadistic (if I can help it).

JNB

Feb 15, 2008, 09:49 PM

OK, the scene is fiction. The entire teleplay was fiction. It was based on a fictionalized version of history. Have you ever seen anything on TV that was the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but? Why you should take this little bit as a perfect portrayal and the gospel is simply incomprehensible. And don't think for a minute that there was any intent to portray the key characters in a perfectly representative manner, consistent with actual reality. Context is everything.

When Gates screams at somebody, it's because he (and now his pit bull Ballmer) want to dominate an industry, it's cost, ethics, and law be damned, and it's always been that way with Microsoft. When Jobs does it, it's because he is a freaking perfectionist (not a "psychotic nut case"), and he wants the product being shipped to be the absolutely best possible that can be made at the time with the technology available (and inventing the technology if need be). Try and look into the documented history, involving interviews with people that have actually dealt with them. Yeah, they're both insufferable, but I'd rather take my chances with a visionary than a shark. It's not all about the money, you see.

And I, too have worked for many of the same people you have. Hard drivers who never forgot their people, nit-picking fools trying to hide their own inadequacies, and ring-knockers that had no business in uniform, much less command. I'll take a leader over a manager any day.

That's the reason so many here "drink the Kool-Aid." It's because historically, Microsoft has been about simply dominating every market it decides to enter, with no consideration for the product or consumer or law, where Apple has been about the product first; hardware, software, human interface. Yes, I oversimplify, but even in generalities there is truth.

I've been in & around this industry before it was an industry, when IBM was known more for typewriters, and tubes ruled. I've watched and paid close attention to the rise & fall of a lot of companies, and I've learned a deep distrust of anything out of Redmond, and for good reason. I've managed to lose some love for Apple over the years, too, but not from Day 1.

Look, don't feel like we're ganging up, or just rabid fanboys, or this isn't a great place to get answers, exchange views, and even respectfully disagree. We don't have to change anybody's mind.

Iamtherealwoody

Feb 15, 2008, 10:07 PM

You're all crazy, :D

protozoa

Feb 15, 2008, 10:35 PM

Why you should take this little bit as a perfect portrayal and the gospel is simply incomprehensible.

Actually, I think I've already explained why it is comprehensible.

Everything I know about Gates, the little I know about Jobs, and the real life drama during the birth of the industry is accurately portrayed in that movie*... to even include some seemingly worthless details that are never fully explained in the plot (such as the inclusion of Miriam Lubow's character). Why would the screenwriters stay so true to telling Gates' side of the story, but turn around and "sensationalize" Jobs' personality???!

There is no possible way that you can convince me that this is the case. It makes absolutely no sense. The best you could hope for might be to dig up some evidence that Microsoft financed the movie. :D

*caveat: Early in this thread, I did point out areas where the movie is incorrect. They were fairly unimportant details. On all the big stuff (to include the personalities of Gates, Wozniak, and Ballmer) the movie was spot-on.

HLdan

Feb 15, 2008, 11:51 PM

That scene just sort of made me cringe. Frankly, the movie sort of made me have some second thoughts about buying a Mac (which I have yet to do).

.

Dude, I don't mean any disrespect but in all honesty that is really a stupid statement to make. You sound like some of the other idiots that say, "Mac users are smug so they make me not want to buy a Mac:.

It's stupid to deprive yourself of an electronics object because of the people using it or the history of the company's founder.
Some of you guys need to check yourselves. You may not want to buy a Mac because of how certain people act? Your not living with these people.:rolleyes: We all really should think twice about buying a Windows PC because Gates snaked his way through to make his company successful.

Quillz

Feb 16, 2008, 12:40 AM

Dude, I don't mean any disrespect but in all honesty that is really a stupid statement to make. You sound like some of the other idiots that say, "Mac users are smug so they make me not want to buy a Mac:.

It's stupid to deprive yourself of an electronics object because of the people using it or the history of the company's founder.
Some of you guys need to check yourselves. You may not want to buy a Mac because of how certain people act? Your not living with these people.:rolleyes: We all really should think twice about buying a Windows PC because Gates snaked his way through to make his company successful.
You just said it's stupid to deprive yourself of an electronics object because of the people using it or the history of the company's founder, then your reasons for having people avoid Windows PCs like the plague is for those very reasons. I guess you're an Apple fanboy.

HLdan

Feb 16, 2008, 12:49 AM

You just said it's stupid to deprive yourself of an electronics object because of the people using it or the history of the company's founder, then your reasons for having people avoid Windows PCs like the plague is for those very reasons. I guess you're an Apple fanboy.

No, you misunderstood me. I should've reworded my post. That was sarcasm. I was saying if people feel like avoiding Macs because of the people that use them then we should all ditch Windows for the same reasons. I was making a point not making a shot against Windows.
I was saying that it makes no sense for anyone to ditch any product just because of some of the people that act in a rude way.
So I digress, I didn't write my post clearly for you to understand.

BTW, refrain from the Fanboy name calling, I'm sure you are bigger than that.

protozoa

Feb 16, 2008, 09:55 AM

It's stupid to deprive yourself of an electronics object because of the people using it or the history of the company's founder.

I completely disagree. If I don't like someone, I'll do whatever I can to avoid sending them money. That's exactly what I'm doing in this case.

People do it all the time. The reasons can include things like discovering the company contributes to a political candidate they don't like, finding out the company isn't eco-friendly, finding out that the company exploits workers, finding out that the company outsources components (putting domestic workers out of work), etc, etc, etc.

Wow, it only took three pages for someone to call someone else "stupid" (which is extra ironic since the same guy gets all offended when he is called a fanboy). :D That's not too impressive.

IJ Reilly

Feb 16, 2008, 11:51 AM

protozoa

Feb 16, 2008, 12:30 PM

The odd part of this discussion is that I thought we'd settled the issue of whether "Pirates" is factual or largely fictional. I thought all were in agreement .

Here's a quote from my first post in this thread (I think it's post #16 or something)...

"The things that I saw that didn't seem to match "reality" were mostly minor."

As I've mentioned, the movie includes some impressive details that really do not drive the dramatic plot. I would have a hard time believing that the writers felt it important to include that material, while just making up parts that are significant (like the personality and antics of Steve Jobs).

You claim that the "interview scene" I linked from YouTube was fiction. How do you know this? Or, perhaps the question should be... why do you suspect this? Are you the one person in the world who doesn't realize that Jobs is very capable of berating a person (and generally acting like a lunatic)?

IJ Reilly

Feb 16, 2008, 01:29 PM

Here's a quote from my first post in this thread (I think it's post #16 or something)...

"The things that I saw that didn't seem to match "reality" were mostly minor."

As I've mentioned, the movie includes some impressive details that really do not drive the dramatic plot. I would have a hard time believing that the writers felt it important to include that material, while just making up parts that are significant (like the personality and antics of Steve Jobs).

You claim that the "interview scene" I linked from YouTube was fiction. How do you know this? Or, perhaps the question should be... why do you suspect this? Are you the one person in the world who doesn't realize that Jobs is very capable of berating a person (and generally acting like a lunatic)?

I made no such claim. My other opinions were stated clearly enough, and I don't think they need repetition.

You seem to be at the point of trying to make this personal. I'm happy to discuss this topic, but not on those terms. Okay?

protozoa

Feb 16, 2008, 01:55 PM

I made no such claim. My other opinions were stated clearly enough, and I don't think they need repetition.

You seem to be at the point of trying to make this personal. I'm happy to discuss this topic, but not on those terms. Okay?

You're right, it was the other person who claimed the scene was fictional. My apologies. However, I categorically deny that I have posted anything in this thread that has "made it personal."

So.... what are you trying to say then?

So you agree that it's quite possible that the scene in the movie was not fiction. Okay. What's your beef with my decision to boycott the products of a guy who behaves in a way that disgusts me?

People do it all the time. My grandfather was at Pearl Harbor when the Japanese attacked. As a result, he will not ride in my Mazda. The Religious Right hates the fact that Disney World has some fairly pro-Gay policies, so they don't go to Disney World.

I don't always agree with their reasoning, but I certainly wouldn't care enough to drag it into a multi-page forum debate. It's a fundamental freedom that every consumer has.

IJ Reilly

Feb 16, 2008, 02:41 PM

You're right, it was the other person who claimed the scene was fictional. My apologies. However, I categorically deny that I have posted anything in this thread that has "made it personal."

When you approach a discussion with statements such as, "or you the only person in the world who believes," then this is making it personal, in my book. It certainly doesn't qualify as a constructive comment.

I really have said what I am going to say. You think Jobs is a terrible person and this is a good enough reason for you to not buy Apple products. I think that reasoning is weak, but you are entitled to it.

It does make me wonder what you are doing here, in a Mac forum, though.

protozoa

Feb 16, 2008, 02:52 PM

When you approach a discussion with statements such as, "or you the only person in the world who believes," then this is making it personal, in my book.

In my book, that's having very thin skin.

I really have said what I am going to say. You think Jobs is a terrible person and this is a good enough reason for you to not buy Apple products. I think that reasoning is weak, but you are entitled to it.

And there aren't any implied personal attacks in this quote? :rolleyes:

It does make me wonder what you are doing here, in a Mac forum, though.

I showed up before I had formed my opinions about Steve Jobs.

IJ Reilly

Feb 16, 2008, 03:20 PM

In my book, that's having very thin skin.

Whatever. All I can say is that you'll get nowhere useful by personalizing.

And there aren't any implied personal attacks in this quote? :rolleyes:

Certainly not. I'm saying that I don't find your reasoning persuasive. It is not a personal attack on you, not even an implied one, to disagree.

I showed up before I had formed my opinions about Steve Jobs.

I'm not sure what you mean, but I'm pretty sure it doesn't much matter any longer. This discussion has disappeared down a blind alley, from which I can see it probably will not return.

protozoa

Feb 16, 2008, 06:05 PM

What's really funny* is that I haven't believed a word of what I have typed following my initial post. I have been planning to purchase a Mac for some time, and the movie didn't change my mind (it did make me realize that Jobs is a thorough jerk, but it didn't seriously impact on my plans).

I just wanted to see how strong they mix the koolaid here at MacRumors. Apparently.... pretty darn thick. I figured I'd outlast you in this thread, but you win... I'd have to disembowel myself if I'm forced to post up any more responses to your Macin-washed chatter. I did enjoy the part where you got all indignant about my "personalization" of the debate while you were busy impugning my comments as mythological "weak reasoning" and suggesting I live in a cave. That was awesome!

Looking forward to getting my :apple:
peace out

*caveat: well.... it was funny to me