There is some truth to what Dave is saying here. I felt the author made an attempt to romanticize Jobs life to appeal to a wider audience. Starting with the fir

There is some truth to what Dave is saying here. I felt the author made an attempt to romanticize Jobs life to appeal to a wider audience. Starting with the first chapter, where he says 'Abandonment, Special, Chosen' were three words that played a big role in defining Steve's character. And then he goes on to subtly downplay Steve insisting that it actually did not matter. What is wrong with Steve just making intelligent decisions about products, than attributing it to scars from his childhood? Nothing, except that it isn't as interesting. In Dave's article, what I really liked was when he said they weren't really all that special. That is so very true. Real life heroes in the tech industry may not be that heroic. They don't need to be, at least to some of us. Sometimes I feel some of the most successful people in our industry (like Steve, Zuck, BillG) are actually peers, who had somewhat better intuition, better timing, better business sense; they certainly did a few things better. But definitely not beyond the comprehension of some people (though, not me) who comment here. And there are of course people who are actually heroes to me, not merely peers who do a lot better. For example Scott Aaronson, though I understand very little of what he writes. I just know that even if I had chosen a different path in life, that stuff would still be way beyond me. Don't know if this made any sense. :)