5 ms·

Glad you enjoyed the book. And of course there's no reason you should care what I think. Can't think of a single reason. :-)

Tloewald 15y ago
I like your suggestions for a more tech savvy bio, but like the grandparent I think Isaacson has done a pretty good job. I totally agree that so much of the story has become rehearsed myth that it's kind of annoying to see it regurgitated here and there although, to give one example, I think Isaacson does a great job of dealing with the relationship between Woz and jobs when so many others simply accept Woz's evolving "standard version".
- jseliger 15y ago
  Right. To some extent, the review is criticizing something Isaacson pretty clearly didn't set out to do—explain technology. Isaacson wants to look at Jobs's contradictions and paradoxes—the kindness and cruelty in a single package, indifference tempered by sudden engagement, a frequently binary worldview, the lack of consistency from the outside, the habits that we'd normally dismiss as bizarre, like dietary ones, that might also be tied to success. Now, I can understand why someone might not be interested in those things, but to me that doesn't invalidate the book. BTW, I started it and wrote about the first 50 or so pages here: http://jseliger.com/2011/10/24/the-steve-jobs-biography http://jseliger.com/2011/10/24/the-steve-jobs-biography . Note that the book itself is actually nicely and well-made; it feels like a Jobesian artifact, instead of the usual publishing industry pablum.
- davewiner 15y ago
  I didn't say you shouldn't read it -- I didn't even say I wouldn't finish it myself. I just said why it was painful for me to read it. And why the story is so well-rehearsed, and how the myth has replaced the actual events. So many people are reading so much more into what I wrote than what I actually wrote (and think).
  - danso 15y ago
    Can you give any concrete example of where Issacson's apparently shoddy reporting has led to a well-rehearsed myth replaced the actual events? Instead of complaining about how non-insiders keep trumpeting up "bullshit", help shed light on the truth.
  - danilocampos 15y ago
    > And why the story is so well-rehearsed, and how the myth has replaced the actual events. Your post would be much more valuable had you provided even one concrete example of this.
tptacek 15y ago
Neither can I. Could you perhaps be a little clearer?
chugger 15y ago
You're just jealous no one's writing about you. :)
- davewiner 15y ago
  That's it! You figured it out. Give that man a cigar! :)

Tloewald 15y ago

I like your suggestions for a more tech savvy bio, but like the grandparent I think Isaacson has done a pretty good job. I totally agree that so much of the story has become rehearsed myth that it's kind of annoying to see it regurgitated here and there although, to give one example, I think Isaacson does a great job of dealing with the relationship between Woz and jobs when so many others simply accept Woz's evolving "standard version".

jseliger 15y ago
Right. To some extent, the review is criticizing something Isaacson pretty clearly didn't set out to do—explain technology. Isaacson wants to look at Jobs's contradictions and paradoxes—the kindness and cruelty in a single package, indifference tempered by sudden engagement, a frequently binary worldview, the lack of consistency from the outside, the habits that we'd normally dismiss as bizarre, like dietary ones, that might also be tied to success. Now, I can understand why someone might not be interested in those things, but to me that doesn't invalidate the book. BTW, I started it and wrote about the first 50 or so pages here: http://jseliger.com/2011/10/24/the-steve-jobs-biography http://jseliger.com/2011/10/24/the-steve-jobs-biography . Note that the book itself is actually nicely and well-made; it feels like a Jobesian artifact, instead of the usual publishing industry pablum.
davewiner 15y ago
I didn't say you shouldn't read it -- I didn't even say I wouldn't finish it myself. I just said why it was painful for me to read it. And why the story is so well-rehearsed, and how the myth has replaced the actual events. So many people are reading so much more into what I wrote than what I actually wrote (and think).
- danso 15y ago
  Can you give any concrete example of where Issacson's apparently shoddy reporting has led to a well-rehearsed myth replaced the actual events? Instead of complaining about how non-insiders keep trumpeting up "bullshit", help shed light on the truth.
- danilocampos 15y ago
  > And why the story is so well-rehearsed, and how the myth has replaced the actual events. Your post would be much more valuable had you provided even one concrete example of this.

tptacek 15y ago

Neither can I. Could you perhaps be a little clearer?

chugger 15y ago

You're just jealous no one's writing about you. :)

davewiner 15y ago
That's it! You figured it out. Give that man a cigar! :)