Doesn't deserve the same respect as Dennis Ritchie.
He only did three things worth respecting. And there's a certain man who died a few days later who deserved far more recognition than Steve Jobs.
1. Jobs helped propogate the idea of the PC to the everyman (Alongside IBM and Bill Gates.)
2. Jobs got Pixar going.
3. Jobs pulled a few open source projects out of development limbo and is pretty much the only reason BSD hasn't completely lost its user base.
One big thing against Jobs: He was not a revolutionary, no matter how much people liked to paint him up as one. Apple is just as bad as Microsoft with the "not-invented-here" syndrome. They're just worse because of the cult worship Jobs gets.
Also, I should note, especially in the early days of Apple: Steve Jobs wasn't even creating or designing the stuff Apple was selling. It took him getting fired in 1986 and struggling to get NeXT a success to get him any sort of technical competence. It was Steve Wozniak we have to credit for Apple's prooducts up to the Macintosh. And frankly I never saw any sign that Jobs had even that much technical knowledge when he came back to Apple in 1997. He clearly wouldn't have had the know-how to even recognize the potential of Unix back in 1986. More than likely he rode on the back of competent engineers in NeXT. And it was actually, believe it or not, thanks to Microsoft he ever got back to Apple, likely bringing those same engineers with him.
Not that I am saying Apple riding on the power of Unix is bad. It's actually very good. My point is that I have my doubts Steve Jobs himself ever had the know-how to actually say what Unix was or what it represents. This can be evidenced by the fact that while Unix may have definitely improved Mac OS X, it still seems wasted on it since Apple is big on hiding any technical features from its users anyway, almost completely crippling the full potential a Unix system could have. This is partly why I dislike Ubuntu is well, so don't think I'm just picking on Apple here.
Good accomplishments, but compared to Dennis Ritchie he was a nobody in the tech sector:
1. Ritchie invented C, a language that shaped every language devised after its creation, and is one of the most powerful compiled languages in computing history. Even Apple's own Objective-C owes its existence to C.
2. Ritchie co-created Unix, an advancement without which computers would never be where they are today. Every operating system in the world owes its design and theory to this operating system. Even Windows. I might add also that OS X is Unix, and it was Unix that saved Apple, not Jobs.
3. Ritchie and company are responsible for a lot of research and development projects that gave Steve Jobs any sort of career. Without the work at Bell Labs, we wouldn't have microprocessors, the transistor, Unix, C, C++, or any other number of genuine innovations without which modern computing just wouldn't be possible. Not all of it can be credited to Ritchie, but a heck of a lot of software advancements can. Basically, to sum up, Ritchie is one of the people responsible for pulling the operating system and programming languages out of inefficient time share systems and into real-time multi-user systems as well as low-level compiled languages ideal for any task, but those especially fit for a need of power or close-to-the-metal programming that doesn't need architecture-dependent code (In the form of assembly.).
4. Ritchie really was a revolutionary. Whereas Steve Jobs was basically selling products people already had seen before but in shiny packages with less features, Ritchie and company were basically INVENTING the stuff Jobs would sell over a decade later. What makes him go from inventor to revolutionary is that he created stuff that actually did revolutionize the entire tech industry through the creation of Unix and C, as well as his other research projects. Steve Jobs can't lay claim to a single innovation on that scale, not even the PC, which was invented years before Apple was even founded.