Did you read Steve Jobs bio?

[Tsuchiya]

Yeah I read it a couple of months ago.

It's actually really good, Walter Isaacson isn't just some schmuck they picked up off the street to write a hearts and flowers tribute to Jobs. He takes a good look at how Apple came to be, all it's major turning points etc. He interviews his family, friends, co-workers, rivals and people he had fallen out with to get a clear view of the man.

Jobs didn't have a say in how it was written, he gave the interviews and let Isaacson interview his family and colleagues, but he didn't edit out the bad bits. I didn't come away with some new found hero worship for Jobs, in fact some parts of the book highlight what an ******* he could be. However, there was genius there.

It's a good read.

 

[AhmedFaisal]

Yeah I read it a couple of months ago.

It's actually really good, Walter Isaacson isn't just some schmuck they picked up off the street to write a hearts and flowers tribute to Jobs. He takes a good look at how Apple came to be, all it's major turning points etc. He interviews his family, friends, co-workers, rivals and people he had fallen out with to get a clear view of the man.

Jobs didn't have a say in how it was written, he gave the interviews and let Isaacson interview his family and colleagues, but he didn't edit out the bad bits. I didn't come away with some new found hero worship for Jobs, in fact some parts of the book highlight what an ******* he could be. However, there was genius there.

It's a good read.

I read it and it was a very interesting read. My problem with it is that Walter Isaacson is not a very good biographer in the sense that he tends to let his personal opinions flow into his narrative which turns it more into an editorial than a biography.

If the idea was to create a balanced picture of Steve Jobs, the parts where he reports on each person's anecdotes and sticks to their narratives would have done the job nicely. I really don't give a flying **** about Walt's opinion of Steve Jobs though, he's a reporter and reporters are always superficial, judgemental schmucks.

 

[ixodes]

I do a tremendous amount of reading, but that's one I will happily ignore.

Not interested.

 

[Cartaphilus]

?.. I really don't give a flying **** about Walt's opinion of Steve Jobs though, he's a reporter and reporters are always superficial, judgemental schmucks.

Yeah, especially those superficial schmucks who graduated Harvard College, attended Oxford as a Rhodes scholar, who serve or served as Chairman of the Board for Teach for America, as Chairman and CEO of CNN, as Chairman of the U.S.-Palestinian Partnership (appointed by then-President G.W. Bush), on the Board of Directors of United Airlines, and of Tulane University, the Board of Overseers of Harvard, The Bloomberg Family Foundation, and The Society of American Historians, and who appear on Time Magazine's list of the 100 most influential people in the world.

Who cares about the thoughts of such a superficial, judgmental (sans "e") schmuck like that when we could just have some swell anecdotes?

 

[G51989]

I almost decided to, but realized a couple of things. That I was interested in the tech history behind Apple and all that.

And Steve Job's didn't know a damn thing about what he was selling, he was just a super good salesman, and a user who wanted things to be easy. Business tactics? That would be interesting, expect for the fact that Bill gates wiped the floor with him in the 80s. And again in the 90s.

 

[VPrime]

I read the first couple chapters.. I found that it was really boring and hard to get into.

Wasn't a fan of the writing style.

 

[dkersten]

I read it. If you are a general enthusiast on technology, you would read it as it sheds more light on one of the most important times in technological advancement. Its not just for Apple/Steve Jobs zealots.

 

[AhmedFaisal]

Yeah, especially those superficial schmucks who graduated Harvard College, attended Oxford as a Rhodes scholar, who serve or served as Chairman of the Board for Teach for America, as Chairman and CEO of CNN, as Chairman of the U.S.-Palestinian Partnership (appointed by then-President G.W. Bush), on the Board of Directors of United Airlines, and of Tulane University, the Board of Overseers of Harvard, The Bloomberg Family Foundation, and The Society of American Historians, and who appear on Time Magazine's list of the 100 most influential people in the world.

Who cares about the thoughts of such a superficial, judgmental (sans "e") schmuck like that when we could just have some swell anecdotes?

Then don't call it a biography, call it an editorial.

And as far as his accolades go, please, half of those you get by knowing the right people not because of your merit. And anyways, at a time Bernie Madoff was as revered. Or take Henry Kissinger. Doesn't make either of them less of an *******.

 

[SimonUK5]

I read it, although it tails off in the middle and becomes a bit of a slog.

But well worth a read...

 

[NZed]

I bought it and was disappointed. Not that I'm not interested, its that the writer's writing style is not my style. Steve Wozniak's bio was more interesting.

 

[twietee]

No. I never read biographies, except from Charlie Chaplin and Louis Sullivan. Both autobiographies were great by the way.

 

[NewAnger]

I bought it and read it. You can also get it from audible.com as audio book if you dont want to read the whole thing. They give you one free book if you sign up for some service.

Two free if you sign up with a link through Amazon. Still wouldn't waste one of those credits on this book.

 

[andalusia]

I'm not an Apple fanboy, and I wasn't really bothered by Steve's death. But I read his biography, and I found it absolutely fascinating. I would recommend it to most people, just because his story is so interesting. To me, anyway. I'm surprised by most of the responses in this thread towards it.

 

[Zombie Acorn]

No. Why would i? I like Apple products, but i couldn't care less about Apple's founder. Or Canon's. Or Panasonic's. etc.

Its not just about the founder. If you are interested in Personal Computing its a good window into that era as well.

 

[Cartaphilus]

Then don't call it a biography, call it an editorial.

And as far as his accolades go, please, half of those you get by knowing the right people not because of your merit. And anyways, at a time Bernie Madoff was as revered. Or take Henry Kissinger. Doesn't make either of them less of an *******.

Aside from your sophomoric dismissal of Issacson's impressive credentials, your notion of what constitutes a biography is mistaken. You are, of course, entitled to your own taste, but you are not entitled to your own facts. A biography, once you get past paraphrasing Wikipedia for a fourth grade homework assignment, is by necessity a subjective exercise. In choosing which sources to rely upon, which aspects of a person's life to highlight, and what themes to use to even organize the facts, a biographer makes decisions that are driven by his own analysis and point of view.

The Pulitzer Prize for Biography is instructive. Read any of the prize-winning biographies: Manning on Malcolm X; Chernow on George Washington; Stiles on Cornelius Vanderbilt, or; Meacham on Andrew Jackson. None of these subjects hasn't been written about before, and the bare facts have been well-known for decades or even centuries. Nonetheless, each of these well-regarded biographers has brought a unique perspective and insight to his subject which has been recognized by the Pulitzer jurors and appreciated by millions of readers. Walter Issacson's biography of Steve Jobs certainly relates many generally-accepted facts, but it also gives the reader the benefit of the author's analytical thinking about Jobs' life and identifies what he perceives to be the critical experiences and influences that shaped his life and personality. Many people find such observations to be illuminating and edifying, and certainly preferable to a recitation of names, dates and places, or a collection of anecdotes. You are, of course, perfectly entitled to prefer to read encyclopedia entries instead of biographies, but you are not entitled to criticize a biography because it is not an encyclopedia article.

 

[rhett7660]

I actually thought this was a better piece to be honest.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/30/opinion/mona-simpsons-eulogy-for-steve-jobs.html?pagewanted=all

 

[maflynn]

I actually thought this was a better piece to be honest.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/30/opinion/mona-simpsons-eulogy-for-steve-jobs.html?pagewanted=all

I read that when it first came out and was touched profoundly by what she wrote, but I do think as biographies go Isaacson's is great.

 

[numbersyx]

Read it and thought it was very interesting particularly the parts where Jobs came back to Apple and orchestrated the coup against Gil Amelio. Steve does not come out well in the book in personality terms. In fact, he is quite the egotistical ******. However, there is no doubt that he knew what innovation and the future was about. The creation of Pixar is very enlightening in the book...

 

[cMacSW]

Read it and liked it, but many of the stories were available in other books and online.

 

[Ariii]

I'd say Inside Steve's Brain is a way better biography. It explains things a lot better, and counterpoints a lot of the negative things that were said about Steve Jobs.