>>I actually think Jobs is probably the most charitable guy on the planet. Rather than focus on which mosquitoes to kill in Africa (Bill Gates is already focusing on that), Jobs has put his energy into massively improving quality of life with all of his inventions.

I love apple as much as the next fanboy but that was waaaay over the top. I find it scary that someone actually believes that.

Another over the top comment:

"He denied paternity on his first child, claiming he was sterile. The other had to initially raise the kid using welfare checks. I have no judgment on this at all."

What, how can you defend that.

And he parks on handicapped parking at Apple campus, I'm sure the OP has a good justification for that, too.

And this...

"He lied to Steve Wozniak. When they made Breakout for Atari, Wozniak and Jobs were going to split the pay 50-50. Atari gave Jobs $5000 to do the job. He told Wozniak he got $700 so Wozniak took home $350. Again, no judgment. Young people do things. Show me someone who says he’s been honest from the day he was born and I’ll show you a liar. "

Less over the top than the others but still.

(Oh and for the record Steve Jobs DID NOT make the game Breakout. Jobs and Wozniak only designed the circuit board for the already conceived of game and that board wasn't actually used: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakout_(arcade_game))

The article is doing a lot of apologizing for Steve's behavior instead of just letting it stand for what it is.

I agree, that is a delusional statement.

The most popular Apple products primarily revolve around entertainment, and entertainment only marginally contributes to ones quality of life.

That threw me too. Why can't the author appreciate Steve Jobs and respect his decision to not give to charity while also recognizing that solving first-world "problems" isn't at all comparable to what real philanthropists are focusing on?

(The assertion itself is ludicrous enough without needing to mention it, but "either MacBooks and Disney or mosquitoes" is a false dilemma.)

I agree it's delusional.

Yup. I'll totally acknowledge that sometimes you need someone who's a little bit sociopathic to accomplish the extraordinary, but let's celebrate their accomplishments, not their sociopathy. Same goes for Robert Moses. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Moses

Are you afraid of your shadow also?

This has to be satire.

"Making iPods is better than giving to charity." "Making iPods is more important than caring for your children." "I want to be a pescetarian just because Steve is one." "He stole from his partner, no problem though. He still is the greatest." "He became so cool by doing drugs and getting into eastern religions."

Really, this HAS to be satire. What really helped me understand the way Steve Jobs (probably) is was reading the memories of early Apple employees at http://folklore.org/.

This is so sycophantic as to cause nausea. I'm honestly not sure if this is meant to be satire or not.

"He denied paternity {snip} Raising kids is hard {snip} enormous energy and creativity you have for the world is going to get misdirected into a … little baby". Wait. So, he's TOO AWESOME to be tied down looking after another human, even though he could've chosen not to create that human? 'I'm TOO CREATIVE to be RESPONSIBLE!'

"Jobs is probably the most charitable guy on the planet. {snip} massively improving quality of life." Yeah, they're fun. But they don't make anyone live longer. They don't prevent wars and cure disease and make people fundamentally happier in ways they couldn't have been otherwise. Oh, and 'giving back' by working? I think he did that to become fabulously wealthy. That's not really giving, that's... getting.

Drugs... Yeah, this is all too easy. Reading this article is like when interview candidates answer "What is your biggest weakness" with "I'm too dedicated to work!". It just makes you queasy and comes off as being full of shite.

I think there's a great danger of your fanboy-projected image becoming conflated with your real image. I'll admit I avoid Apple when possible because I don't want to deal with either the pro or anti fanboys related to it. Some things are too emotional to be totally logical about. Like having children. FFS.

Most of this stuff is quite interesting, but towards the end it becomes rather stretched out. Especially point 10, which amounts to

LSD + (Zen Buddhism) + (a touch of genius) = (the next Steve Jobs)

The point is that "think different" isn't some stupid focus grouped crap from a bunch of IBM MBAs who haven't had a different thought in their lives.

It's actually about thinking differently.

While I didn't know many of those things, I'm not inclined to believe you without (reliable) sources.