Quote:
Originally Posted by
myapplelove 
@bigpics
Ok wtf should he disclose then anyway? Do you want daily announcements by his physicians? Weekly? Bi-weekly? Do you want blood exams, urine exams, mris? Do you want them mailed to you or posted online?
And do you maybe want to have your doctors examine him too? Which doctors opinion on SJ's would you consider reliable?
This whole discussion is ridiculous and nonsensical. A medical leave of absence is just that. End of story. We know about Steve's cancer in the past, an his liver transplant, the rest is for his family, close friends and doctors to know.
I know I'm not gonna get anywhere with you, but 1) it's not for HIM to disclose, it's for Apple, Inc., again, a publicly held corporation with millions of people having more or less of their prosperity depending on how Apple does, to keep us apprised of what THEY as an organization know about the overall state of their leadership team.
Again, as Dr. Milmoss points out you and others are simply making up what the real issue is here which is not second-by-second access to every medical detail of the man's life. In debate terms, you're dragging a "red herring" across the stage to distract from the real issue or building a "straw man" which you can knock down and look like you've made a point.
2) That the rest of the team is intact and doing fine is good news, but everyone in the world knows who's responsible for bringing Apple Computer from the brink of irrelevance to the hottest business organization in the world. Thus no one expects a press release that a junior engineer in the iPad division is out on maternity leave or that another employee at that level has been fired or hired.
But no other major company in the world is so currently tied to the actions and ideas of a single person as Apple is to Steve Jobs.
3) And if Apple actually knows nothing more that what it released, which seems absurd on its face, but if that's the case, then people who are a) owners, b) suppliers/dealers/partners and c) customers need to know that as well so we can make our own decisions about our a) Apple stock, b) contracts and c) product-buying plans accordingly.
4) This of course doesn't imply breathless daily press releases of every detail of his condition - which is confidential unless released by the patient or those personally acting on a patient's behalf when they cannot do so, but it does include Apple's (not Steve's) understanding of what the statement that Jobs "will be involved in "major strategic decisions" means (and how capable he is of fulfilling that role) and some estimate of when their CEO might be back and their confidence level that he will.
5) And this is not just my opinion in any way. As noted elsewhere there are SEC regulations and likely other legal or policy matters which apply here. I'm certain there's a whole body of developing precedent.
6) There will be a post Steve Jobs period to Apple's life as an organization. His successor will not be his clone (and e.g., just for one fact, will not be largest shareholder and a board member at Walt Disney, which has guaranteed strong Hollywood support for the company). The post SPJ exec. will constantly be facing new challenges as they arise from competitors, co-opetitioners, suppliers and within - and will be changing or seeking to change the team and strategic directions - in an atmosphere where that new exec. will be far more closely scrutinized than nearly any other, given the shoes he or she will be filling.
