Steve Jobs' childhood home could become protected historical site

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 39
    jungmark wrote: »
    Well it's the place where Apple I started.
    I don't mean to sound snarky or anything but generally when I think of a "Historic Place" I think of places like Gettysburg, Lexington&Concord, Washington's Birthplace etc.

    Don't get me wrong, I think it's pretty cool and all, it's generally just not something I would think of as "Historic" as of yet.

    Don't get me wrong, but I would think it's generally not just the case that your opinions are taken very seriously in this forum.
  • Reply 22 of 39

    Actually, Jobs would be very unhappy with this. He was completely focused on the future and had almost no sentimentality about the past. He would be against this. Check out his attitude about his own past and even the last house he lived in. No interest in preserving things for irrational / emotional reasons (for evidence just read the Walter Isaacson book).

  • Reply 23 of 39
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,922member
    I don't mean to sound snarky or anything but generally when I think of a "Historic Place" I think of places like Gettysburg, Lexington&Concord, Washington's Birthplace etc.

    Don't get me wrong, I think it's pretty cool and all, it's generally just not something I would think of as "Historic" as of yet.

    Something wonderful happened there: the dawn of the PC age. I get that it's only 37 years ago but it's still history.
  • Reply 24 of 39
    gtrgtr Posts: 3,231member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Lord Amhran View Post

     

    Why?


     

    Because Ashton Kutcher acted there.

     


    Can you think of anything more historic than that?
  • Reply 25 of 39
    froodfrood Posts: 771member

    Now that it is getting the attention I wonder how long before the owners put:

     

    "Steve Jobs' childhood crapper" on eBay

  • Reply 26 of 39
    That pieceofshit-looking house should not be worth $1.5M. I don't care if the pope married George and Martha Washington there followed by the signing of the Declaration of Independence, that house should not be a protected historical landmark.
  • Reply 27 of 39
    I'm being a bit picky I know but they weren't his "foster parents".
  • Reply 28 of 39
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by msuberly View Post



    That pieceofshit-looking house should not be worth $1.5M. I don't care if the pope married George and Martha Washington there followed by the signing of the Declaration of Independence, that house should not be a protected historical landmark.

    Surely you realize that it's not being done for architectural reasons.

     

    It really doesn't matter whether it was a Georgian mansion or a beach shack.

  • Reply 29 of 39
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Buzzz View Post



    I'm being a bit picky I know but they weren't his "foster parents".

     

    I think legally they were his foster parents. Steve never owned that house as far as I know, but it is sort of the Kitty Hawk of computer innovation. I still think Apple, Inc, should buy it and keep it out of the control of city hall.

  • Reply 30 of 39
    Well obviously should, I think Steve will be in history books one day...
  • Reply 31 of 39
    Originally Posted by Buzzz View Post
    I'm being a bit picky I know but they weren't his "foster parents".

     

    He didn’t think so. That’s good enough for me.

  • Reply 32 of 39
    malaxmalax Posts: 1,598member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mstone View Post

     

    Not really 'ironic'. It is the same exact thing. No one will even be able to install a compact fluorescent light bulb in that house without a permit from city hall.


     

    Well given that SJ was finally able to win in court to demolish the other building it's something close to ironic.  Guy who destroys historic houses has his own house tagged with that same label so some future owner will be limited in a way that guy found annoying.  Maybe it's Karma.

  • Reply 33 of 39
    mstone wrote: »
    Apple should buy it.

    I don't think shareholders would approve, and probably rightfully so. It wouldn't gain anything for Apple Inc.

    Still you make a good point, in terms of preserving. Maybe one of his children, or Laurene, Patricia Ann or Mona should buy it.
  • Reply 34 of 39
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Dave MacLachlan View Post

     

    Cue the idiots spewing about a "Realty Distortion Field," now :)


     

    LOL. That house is a "Reality Creation Field." It's where Woz built the first Apple I's for sale. From that house a dent in the universe was made.

  • Reply 35 of 39
    bigpicsbigpics Posts: 1,397member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

     

    Of course it should be. Just as Thomas Edison's home is.


     

    Only if the site where Woz appeared on "Dancing with the Stars" gets the same treatment....

     

    8-)

     

     

  • Reply 36 of 39
    zoetmbzoetmb Posts: 2,622member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Lord Amhran View Post

     

    I don't mean to sound snarky or anything but generally when I think of a "Historic Place" I think of places like Gettysburg, Lexington&Concord, Washington's Birthplace etc.

     

    Don't get me wrong, I think it's pretty cool and all, it's generally just not something I would think of as "Historic" as of yet.


     

     

    Yes, but if you don't preserve it now, it won't be available to be preserved 100 years from now.

     

    If Steve only lived in this house through high school, how can this be the house where the Apple I was built?  Steve was 21 when the Apple I was released.  He couldn't have been in high school.

     

    I have mixed feelings about this one.   The house itself doesn't seem to have any architectural merit.  If this isn't the house where the Apple I was created, what significance does it have?

     

    If anything is to be saved, it should be the garage used when the Steves created the Apple I, even if it's just the interior re-created in a museum somewhere.   But if it's already been changed, I don't really think the garage needs to be preserved - I think a sign recognizing the location would be more than enough.  After all, the specific house where it happened doesn't really matter (although I think it matters that it happened in Cupertino).  What matters is what happened and how it happened and the result.     It might actually make more sense to preserve (if it's still possible) where the Homebrew Computing Club took place.

     

    I don't know the specific preservation laws in California.   I know that in New York, it's extremely rare for anything to be declared a landmark based only on history and not on architecture.   And even for architecture, landmarking the exterior is much easier than landmarking the interior.   You can generally only do it if you have the owner's support, which is unlikely in this case.

     

    But I agree with the poster who wrote that Steve wouldn't have wanted this.   It's been documented that he claimed not to care about the past.   But I do have to wonder whether he would have changed his mind had he lived longer.    I think that as we age, nostalgia creeps in.   While I've done some culling, I have a hard time getting rid of samples of the products I've produced over the years, especially the ones that came in packaging.

  • Reply 37 of 39
    Only in California is that 1.5 million dollar house. sigh...
  • Reply 38 of 39
    I have only one question about Steve Jobs childhood home. While developing the first apple computers where did his parents park their car(s)?

    --calmchess
  • Reply 39 of 39
    calmchess wrote: »
    I have only one question about Steve Jobs childhood home. While developing the first apple computers where did his parents park their car(s)?

    --calmchess
    Driveway and street. Lots of folks use their garages as workspaces.
Sign In or Register to comment.