4 ms·

Actually in this case it sounds like the reporter wasn't to blame at all. Woz is simply saying "What I really meant was..." Personally I don't get why his thou

by ergo98 16y ago

Actually in this case it sounds like the reporter wasn't to blame at all. Woz is simply saying "What I really meant was..." Personally I don't get why his thoughts on things are given such importance. Each Apple release he appears at some fan line to go "Hey, everyone remember me! I'm the guy who was involved with Apple for a short period!". Not trying to be cynical, but seriously I suspect he's a major irritation for Jobs.

rdouble 16y ago
He was involved with Apple for a short period? He co-founded the company and was there for 12 years.
- ergo98 16y ago
  Ending 23 years ago (and saying "12 years" is grossly overgenerous). Of zero relevance to the modern Apple computers (edit: Sorry, it isn't even called Apple Computers anymore)
  - rdouble 16y ago
    "Short period" is still objectively false.
    - ergo98 16y ago
      No it isn't. 23 years ago Woz was a "motivational factor" at Apple for the preceding 4 years. The prior two+ years he was off after an accident. Before that he worked with Jobs for 4 years. His real contribution to Apple was for four years of the company's 34 year history.
      - rdouble 16y ago
        Ok, you win.
      - ecuzzillo 16y ago
        I have a feeling that those were by far the four most formative years for the company, and that his impact on the company's identity and so on was probably comparable to anyone other than Jobs's. If nothing else, he created the expectation that superhuman technical feats would be performed on a daily basis, which exists to this day, and might well have stayed true to some degree even during the between-Jobs years, even if said feats were not in particularly productive directions.
      - defen 16y ago
        > His real contribution to Apple was for four years of the company's 34 year history. ...during which he did things that no one else on the planet was capable of doing.
sp4rki 16y ago
Wow you dismiss Woz as non important when he not only made the product that placed Apple in the spotlight in 1976, but also made the first mass manufactured personal computer that could be attached to a display with no modifications. You could very well say he's the raison d'être of Apple as we know it. You call his involvement (12 years as a company, and I believe 5 before Apple Comps was incorporated) 'short' and his dismiss his opinion on a piece of tech when he's probably part of the elite who's opinion actually matter. Hell Steve Jobs was never a 'techy' so to speak, so if I had to take anyone's opinion seriously (regardless I agree or not) about a piece of technology such as this is Steve Wozniak.
- ergo98 16y ago
  This is the soppy romanticized garbage that is so boring to debate with. Yes, if you want to talk to someone about 1970s era personal computer innovations, the Woz is almost certainly the goto guy. Granted. Is he important? Sure, he is important to a certain era in Apple's history. The part before the company would have dissolved as an ongoing enterprise if it wasn't for some strategic rescuing by Microsoft. Are his comments about pretty much anything in the modern era even insightful or of particular relevance, beyond "this guy worked on the Apple I" colour commentary? I don't think so. I suspect that the Woz's primary reason for appearing in Apple lines and giving "grate on Steve Jobs" quotes is so the reporter can bring up that he works for FusionIO. But yeah, your Dyed in the Wool Woz fanclub membership card is in the mail.
  - sp4rki 16y ago
    So you think that the opinion (whatever it is) of a man that actually built a personal computer in a time they were none and influenced what has become today's commodity computer hardware has no value when discussing a piece of technology? I'm actually not a fan of Woz, far from it actually, but I give credit where credit is due. The man deserves respect, and let's be honest, if he gets coverage it's because people want to know what he has to say. I'm sorry but I'd rather take Woz opinion (which I a lot of time disagree with) and give it the weight it deserves because of what he's done, as opposed to giving some .NET wunderkind more credibility than he should have. But yeah whatever you have a bone to pick with Woz and that is your choice; however I'm not going to waste any more of my time trying to explain to you why Woz deserves respect and the fact that people want to hear his opinion, which means people see value in it, regardless of what dislike you might have with the man's persona.

by ergo98 16y ago

rdouble 16y ago

He was involved with Apple for a short period? He co-founded the company and was there for 12 years.

ergo98 16y ago
Ending 23 years ago (and saying "12 years" is grossly overgenerous). Of zero relevance to the modern Apple computers (edit: Sorry, it isn't even called Apple Computers anymore)
- rdouble 16y ago
  "Short period" is still objectively false.
  - ergo98 16y ago
    No it isn't. 23 years ago Woz was a "motivational factor" at Apple for the preceding 4 years. The prior two+ years he was off after an accident. Before that he worked with Jobs for 4 years. His real contribution to Apple was for four years of the company's 34 year history.
    - rdouble 16y ago
      Ok, you win.
    - ecuzzillo 16y ago
      I have a feeling that those were by far the four most formative years for the company, and that his impact on the company's identity and so on was probably comparable to anyone other than Jobs's. If nothing else, he created the expectation that superhuman technical feats would be performed on a daily basis, which exists to this day, and might well have stayed true to some degree even during the between-Jobs years, even if said feats were not in particularly productive directions.
    - defen 16y ago
      > His real contribution to Apple was for four years of the company's 34 year history. ...during which he did things that no one else on the planet was capable of doing.

sp4rki 16y ago

Wow you dismiss Woz as non important when he not only made the product that placed Apple in the spotlight in 1976, but also made the first mass manufactured personal computer that could be attached to a display with no modifications. You could very well say he's the raison d'être of Apple as we know it. You call his involvement (12 years as a company, and I believe 5 before Apple Comps was incorporated) 'short' and his dismiss his opinion on a piece of tech when he's probably part of the elite who's opinion actually matter. Hell Steve Jobs was never a 'techy' so to speak, so if I had to take anyone's opinion seriously (regardless I agree or not) about a piece of technology such as this is Steve Wozniak.

ergo98 16y ago
This is the soppy romanticized garbage that is so boring to debate with. Yes, if you want to talk to someone about 1970s era personal computer innovations, the Woz is almost certainly the goto guy. Granted. Is he important? Sure, he is important to a certain era in Apple's history. The part before the company would have dissolved as an ongoing enterprise if it wasn't for some strategic rescuing by Microsoft. Are his comments about pretty much anything in the modern era even insightful or of particular relevance, beyond "this guy worked on the Apple I" colour commentary? I don't think so. I suspect that the Woz's primary reason for appearing in Apple lines and giving "grate on Steve Jobs" quotes is so the reporter can bring up that he works for FusionIO. But yeah, your Dyed in the Wool Woz fanclub membership card is in the mail.
- sp4rki 16y ago
  So you think that the opinion (whatever it is) of a man that actually built a personal computer in a time they were none and influenced what has become today's commodity computer hardware has no value when discussing a piece of technology? I'm actually not a fan of Woz, far from it actually, but I give credit where credit is due. The man deserves respect, and let's be honest, if he gets coverage it's because people want to know what he has to say. I'm sorry but I'd rather take Woz opinion (which I a lot of time disagree with) and give it the weight it deserves because of what he's done, as opposed to giving some .NET wunderkind more credibility than he should have. But yeah whatever you have a bone to pick with Woz and that is your choice; however I'm not going to waste any more of my time trying to explain to you why Woz deserves respect and the fact that people want to hear his opinion, which means people see value in it, regardless of what dislike you might have with the man's persona.