The “Steve Jobs” movie written by Soorkin does such a good job examining this question by having the two of them fight over the relative importance of their con

The “Steve Jobs” movie written by Soorkin does such a good job examining this question by having the two of them fight over the relative importance of their contributions. Since one of character-Woz’s strongest lines is “you can be decent and brilliant at the same time,” I assume you’ve seen it. If not, you should! Everybody here should, it’s a brilliant film. One of the things that character-Jobs says is (something along the lines of) “you’d be the easiest A at Palo Alto highschool right now if it wasn’t for me.” What he’s getting at is that Woz didn’t know how to channel his engineering talent into successful ambition. This makes the question a lot more complex: it’s not “can you be talented & kind,” it’s “can you be talented & kind & successfully ambitious.” Character-Jobs is asserting that his ruthlessness, his faults, were a necessity for these things to happen with Apple. The film probes at these questions from just about every angle. Perhaps not coincidentally, it portrays his greatest success at the time when character-Jobs is most able to be at peace with himself and work other people.