Woz on Ashton Kutcher’s ‘Jobs’: Young Steve was no saint

“The first trailer of the incoming Steve Jobs’ biopic starring Ashton Kutcher is here,” Jesus Diaz reports for Gizmodo. “I asked Steve Wozniak, close friend of Steve Jobs and Apple co-founder about it.”

I have a little bug in me that says that this movie will portray Steve as a saint who was ignored, rather than one of the key people who led Apple through failure after failure (Apple ///, LISA, Macintosh) while the revenues poured in from the Apple ][ that Jobs was trying to kill. It’s nice to have the luxury to fail. The Macintosh market was created in the 3 years after Jobs left, with a lot of effort, by some who Jobs disdains.

Jobs came back as the saint and god we now recognize and did then head the creation of other products as great as the Apple ][, like the iTunes store, the iPod, the retail stores, the iPhone and the iPad. But he was a different person, more experienced and more thoughtful and more capable of running Apple in those later years.

We truly could have used the later Jobs in earlier years at Apple, is what I feel.

Many more thoughts from Woz in the full article here.

Related articles:
‘Jobs’ theatrical trailer released (with video) – June 21, 2013
Ashton Kutcher, Josh Gad: Steve Jobs biopic ‘was done with the utmost love, admiration, and respect’ – January 31, 2013
Following Steve Jobs’ ‘fruitarian’ diet put method actor Ashton Kutcher in the hospital
Ashton Kutcher: Playing Steve Jobs was ‘terrifying’ (with video) – January 26, 2013
Woz blasts scene in Kutcher’s ‘jOBS’ biopic: ‘Not close; totally wrong’ – January 25, 2013
First footage of Steve Jobs biopic ‘jOBS’ starring Ashton Kutcher (with video) – January 24, 2013
First official photo of Ashton Kutcher as Steve Jobs released – December 3, 2012
‘Method actor’ Ashton Kutcher taking Steve Jobs role too far, accused of being ‘mean’ – July 27, 2012
Matthew Modine to play John Sculley, Josh Gad to play Woz in Ashton Kutcher ‘jOBS’ bioflick – June 6, 2012
Sorkin: ‘Steve Jobs’ actor ‘will have to be intelligent’ – May 30, 2012
Which actor should play Steve Jobs in Sony’s biopic? – May 24, 2012
Ashton Kutcher ‘jOBS’ movie begins filming in original Apple garage – May 18, 2012
Aaron Sorkin hires Woz as advisor, says ‘Steve Jobs’ movie won’t be straight bio – May 18, 2012
Aaron Sorkin to pen Sony’s ‘Steve Jobs’ screenplay based on Walter Isaacson bio – May 16, 2012
Ashton Kutcher believes the role of Steve Jobs was meant for him – April 22, 2012
Ashton Kutcher to play Steve Jobs in ‘Jobs’ biopic – April 1, 2012
Aaron Sorkin ‘strongly considering’ writing screenplay for Sony’s Steve Jobs biopic – November 23, 2011
‘Steve Jobs’ bio becomes fastest-selling book since President George W. Bush’s ‘Decision Points’ – November 3, 2011
Sony Pictures acquires rights to Walter Isaacson’s Steve Jobs bio for major feature film – October 7, 2011
Photos of Ashton Kutcher as Steve Jobs from ‘jOBS’ bioflick hit Twitter – July 20, 2012


    1. Steve knew so well, about Woz’s unhappiness over how things went at Apple, through the years. I think this kind of relationship is inevitable. Two “kids” start out, and as time passes, they diverge. The point being, they used each other, as a-posed to having truly the same vision.

      Steve could never say anything about it. He was stuck. Woz has the luxury to jab at Steve, a little bit, and no one would blame him. However if Steve jabbed back…

      So we get to see these little statements now and then.

  1. They didn’t kick Steve out of Apple, in ’85, because he was an *ss H*le. He was ahead of his time, and not in sync with culture and commerce. Woz had a healthier perspective, in the early days, and was fundamental to Apple’s early developments.

    The truth is, the Apple // days were numbered. Had they stuck with the single platform, Apple would have not gone much further than Commodore. So they needed something better, something to compete with IBM, which already had outperformed Apple in sales and computational power.

    I think Steve’s failures in the early days, were more or less like a fish, gasping at air. Boom, boom, boom, nothing penetrated the business market, despite the premium product and pricing.

    When the Mac, was re-released at a lower price point, much in the same fashion, as the iPhone was repriced at $199 – explosion, sales through the roof.

  2. Let’s face the truth. Jobs hired the sugar water salesman. Steve was indirectly responsible for his firing and the poor Apple performance after his firing.

    He was an asshole when he was fired. He was a different man when he came back.

    Woz is right.

    1. I know that MDN loves to rewrite this history, but the fact is that after Steve was pushed out of Apple, the company did rather well for the next six or seven years. Sculley was not a dolt (again, MDN’s constant trashing of the man may have some regulars here confused) and he boosted sales through the successful introduction of the Macintosh II, the LC and the first Powerbooks (under Sculley, Apple was the most profitable PC company in the world). He was also the champion of the Newton, which is a direct predecessor of the iPhone. Apple didn’t begin to crash and burn until Sculley was replaced by Spindler, and after that, Amelio in the early 1990s. The return of Jobs in 1997 was almost five years after Sculley’s departure.

      Yes, yes, I know that this is not the story you normally hear at MDN, but these are the facts and it is time for the Sculley bashing to stop.

      1. I see no rewritten history. MDN scours the web for  relevant news with an occasional astute opinion. The reality is that Scully nearly destroyed , Steve Jobs, the visionary, recreated it. In the future, Ralph, STFU.

      2. Dude, Sculley singlehandedly gave the Mac OS to Microsoft and caused the Windows 95 avalanche that damn near killed Apple. I don’t even have to mention the Newton disaster.

        1. Sculley was gone from Apple YEARS before Win95 was released. And it was Jobs – not Sculley – that invited Microsoft to take advantage of the Mac OS and provided advance access to MS so it could develop software like Excel. And it was Jobs, as one of his first acts upon return to Apple, who brokered a détente with MS entered into a broad cross-licensing agreement.

          Again, the facts can be pesky things…

    2. So it’s Steve’s fault that scullery pretended to agree with him long enough to get the job, then sided with idiots who claimed there ” was no such thing as a home computer market”??

      That’s bullshit. Sculley was on the side of the suits at apple who were totally against what Steve wanted to do with the Mac. It was sculley that jacked the price up $500 higher than Steve’s team had designed it for.

  3. I don’t doubt that in terms of financial stability, the Apple II was vital. In fact, I’d say “duh.”

    But the Mac was vital to the iPod, and the iPod vital to the iPhone, the iPhone vital to the iPad, and really of them eventually vital to the Mac.

    The point is Steve Jobs recognized that if Apple were to rest on its laurels with the Apple II, it would eventually be surpassed by the industry. So you create, build and milk technology but you never sit still.

  4. …And YET Woz has known Jobs better then any of you, folks!
    SJ was a good guy and a genius, of course… But as any of us: he certainly wasn’t perfect.

  5. Well c’mon, they were both in their twenties knee deep in new product territory. For what they did in their twenties, is far more than people do in their lifetimes. Woz now just sounds bitter. I think by now we all know Steve was an major A-hole in his younger years, and somewhat less of one in his later years. Such is life.

  6. I think what you have here is the brilliant creative right brain “musician”. One that will, on occasion, forget to fully engage the brain before the mouth. Maybe the color of his “glasses” are different than most. Blowhard? Bad guy? Full of Crap? Hardly. Imagine for the better part of your life, virtually the entire tech world blew warm air up your rump and stood in awe in your presents. He dang sure is no Steve Jobs but he is after all, “The Woz”. I’ll never forget the tearful interview he gave after the passing of his friend. That spoke volumes.

    BTW – he could stand to back away from the feed bag now and again. Just sayin’

  7. Woz conveniently omits the fact that, despite his brilliant design for the Apple II, that only Jobs was able to bring the thing to market. Steve Jobs had to drag Woz along kicking and screaming. Woz never even thought building a PC was a good idea. He would have been perfectly happy (and has said so) remaining at HP for the rest of his life. Without Jobs, there would be no Apple. On the other hand, Jobs would have eventually found some other Silicon Valley computer hobbyist. They were a dime a dozen in the early 70s. Woz realizes his role is emerging as minimal. And, after the Apple II, it certainly was.

    1. “Bring to market” is only the peak of the iceberg… What can a marketing genius do if the product hasn’t been created?
      Many geniuses are unknown… This doesn’t make them less genius.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.