a) he did not change the world with the iPod. At the very least, Creative beat him to the market with the Jukebox, and even Creative were not first to market with MP3 players. It's just that the iPod was the first MP3 players that teenagers wanted to own on account of how it looked rather than what it did
b) Apple II was not unique, was not the first of its kind and was, technically, not even that much of a commercial success; at the very least it was shadowed by its Commodore64 and IBM counterparts, the former of which outsold the Apple II quite heavily
c) the Mac operating system, or more specifically the GUI multitasking environment, that Steve Jobs helped develop, came out a good few years after the first version of Windows did, and by the mere fact that they had to license rights to copy features created by Xerox, it's evident they did not, at the time, have the 'creative genius' to develop the operating system on their own
d) the original Macintosh operating systems were not by any means 'human' or 'friendly'; if anything, they were as clunky, annoying and oftentimes frustrating to use as its direct competitor, Windows 1.0
e) Apple's products do not inspire the whole high-tech world, the whole high-tech world inspires Apple. Multitouch is not an Apple innovation, and it is one of the most recent things they are apt to sue everyone and their dog for having something even remotely similar to it;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multitouch
f) reminder; brand-loyalty can and easily will make people blind to the absolute bullcrap associated with the brand they so adore and anything associated with it - I can guarantee you that the vast majority of Apple fans would be spouting the exact same baseless crap as that 'biography', singing the Jobs gospel as though the world would end without their support
g) I would like to see proof of just how much personal involvement Jobs had in the development of iTunes beyond telling his developers he doesn't like how it's working and that they must change 'it'. iTunes was, and may still be, one of the most counter-intuitive media management applications out there, too, with its aptitude to completely erase all of what's on your iPod, iPhone or iPad, without necessarily even informing you that it's planning on doing so
h) the iPhone hardly 'shook' the phone market; remember the brand-loyalty thing, again? If Palm had as many fans, they would have been able to bleed their customers of the funds they'd have needed to make their smartphones cheaper and thus more popular for people to use. Back in the day, people would say they'd
never have so large a slab next to their head. Now people are making calls from their iPads, many times larger than the Palm smartphones were. Success of a product does not determine how world-changing it was, and the world of the cellphone would have evolved and survived just fine without the iPhone ever coming to light
i) just because he was head of Pixar does not automatically mean CG-only films would not have taken off without him. CG driven special effects existed in films for a long time before Jobs founded Pixar
j) the iPhone is given far too much credit here, again. Palm was manufacturing PDAs and smartphones long before Apple even decided to stop being so stubborn and adopt a CPU architecture that wasn't going to sink them financially
Apple fans need to be educated as to who the person they so idolize really was, what he really did and what his company has truly given the world of its own creativity, not that of others.
