or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Gadget blog juices fears over Steve Jobs' health
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Gadget blog juices fears over Steve Jobs' health - Page 4

post #121 of 157
these sites are a new form of media..yes..

rumors are to be taken as rumors...yes

the way Jizmodo handed this though is totally out of line..and i am sure they are making sure they have their lawyers lined up.

You dont post a rumor and then spend the rest of the blog post trying to distance yourself from the rumor..

A proper journalist would post a "rumor" only knowing that the source (unbiased third source) has first-hand evidence that this is true...and knowing this subject is so sensitive and prone to stock price movements...you would want a second source to back up the claims...I'm sure Jizmodo didnt do that...Instead they post a rumor with the catchy headline "Steve Jobs' Health Declining Rapidly, Reason for Macworld Cancellation" and then say how their "source" has been 100% right. wooo.. so if i correctly guessed that product pictures were in fact real..that makes me the source of the truth.....


With any other rumor..i wouldnt care...but knowing jizmodo's corporate connections and such...i am really worried people had some cruel intentions by posting that rumor and watching apple's stock price fall. why post the story during the middle of a trading day. and not at 4pm when the market closes?


also...not sure if it's just me but jizmodo censors all of their comments pretty rigoursly...i still haven't been able to post anything to their site..


third class group of web searchers....
post #122 of 157
It's not what you know. It's what they can prove that you know.

This is what I assume will be Apple's defense strategy in the event they are eventually investigated by the Feds for failing to report pertinent information regarding the financially relevant matter of their CEO's health.

I, for one, am quite amazed that so few people (based on comments I've read here and elsewhere) have connected all the dots. To me, The Elephant In The Room is not the latest posting of speculation about Steve's potentially worsening health condition but rather how Apple thinks we are all fools by hiding The Truth behind what I perceive to be A Cloak Of Cleverly Conceived Misrepresentations.

Are we all supposed to be stupid enough to believe that there is not a deliberately undisclosed reason that Apple would wait this close to Macworld 2009 to announce that the keynote address next month will be handled by Steve's understudy and then go on to disclose their sudden change in promotional strategy that will unfortunately result in their conspicuous Macworld absence beginning in 2010?!

And even if you do take them at their word on their modified position regarding their lack of participation in future Macworlds, Apple's response (or lack thereof) still does not offer anything even vaguely resembling a logically sound explanation that attempts to reasonably justify why there will be no keynote address by Steve Jobs at Macworld 2009!

From the very beginning, I have believed that Steve's deteriorating health is the real reason he won't be delivering the keynote address at Macworld 2009 and I also believe that this is the foundational basis behind the "why" Apple won't be attending future Macworlds after this one (since they believe Steve probably won't be around to speak live at those either).

Anyone who claims to know anything about Apple or Steve Jobs, historically speaking, should know that they would NOT wait until the last minute to dash the fondest hopes of the many MW attendees keenly anticipating Steve's prominent presence at Macworld 2009...UNLESS it is not for lack of will that Steve won't be blazing the stage with his unique brand of techno-enthusiasm this time around but rather because his body has a different idea on the matter.
post #123 of 157
Oh dear, this will never abate will it!? And why does even AI and Macrumors consistently fail to disclose the facts around Jobs cancer whenever it is brought up??

Let me repeat this for the 50th time. MOST metastatic pancreatic cancer is extremely fatal, with a very small chance of 5 year survival, usually under 10%. In Steve's case, he had a very rare form of pancreatic cancer, which, while malignant, was nothing like the most common form. In fact, his condition only required surgery, he didn't need to undergo ANY chemotherapy or radiation. From that fact alone it would appear that his doctor's believed the chances of it reoccurring were near zero.

Now, he did have a major procedure done (the whipple), and of course there can always be complications with that, especially related to digestive/G.I. problems, but it would have to be something rare to actually threaten his life years after the surgery.
post #124 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Murphster View Post

In the US they are just about to report the worst Christmas shopping figures for 40 years!!

I haven't seen that statistic, but obviously it does NOT mean that sales will be at levels comparable to 1968. What it may mean is that this is the biggest year to year drop in 40 years. Was '68 a bad year?

At any rate, the worst case scenarios I've seen suggest that overall Christmas sales may be 15% lower this year than last. By many measures that's an extraordinary decrease, but one bad season does not make a trend. More importantly, there will be companies that do well. Without a downturn Apple would have been up by as much as 30%, with the downturn we'll only see a small increase. I don't see the disaster.
post #125 of 157
Note for the record, most of the people supporting this rumour as true registered this month and/or have only posted in this thread.

There's more going on with these rumours than mere lack of journalistic integrity.

MacBook Pro 15" | Intel Core2 Duo 2.66GHz | 320GB HDD | OS X v10.8
White iPad (3G) with Wi-Fi | 16GB | Engraved | Blue Polyurethane Smart Cover
White iPhone 5 | 64GB | On 3UK

Reply

MacBook Pro 15" | Intel Core2 Duo 2.66GHz | 320GB HDD | OS X v10.8
White iPad (3G) with Wi-Fi | 16GB | Engraved | Blue Polyurethane Smart Cover
White iPhone 5 | 64GB | On 3UK

Reply
post #126 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacJello View Post

I haven't seen that statistic, but obviously it does NOT mean that sales will be at levels comparable to 1968. What it may mean is that this is the biggest year to year drop in 40 years. Was '68 a bad year?

At any rate, the worst case scenarios I've seen suggest that overall Christmas sales may be 15% lower this year than last. By many measures that's an extraordinary decrease, but one bad season does not make a trend. More importantly, there will be companies that do well. Without a downturn Apple would have been up by as much as 30%, with the downturn we'll only see a small increase. I don't see the disaster.

In does indeed mean that sales are down on last year, by 2% analysts are predicting. That makes it the first ever decline since holiday spending was first tracked in 1969. You may think that 2% is a blip but to most observers it is a serious sign of a continued slide in the US economy throughout the next two years at least. 240,000 people are losing their jobs every month, 2008 has seen the biggest house price decline in 100 years.

And more importantly, while 2% does not seem much, to many business already operating on borrowed time it will be enough to push them over the edge. Many national chains are in trouble, more than you probably realize.

Companies like Chanel are cutting staff and making changes to their business, these are manufacturers of luxury items that previously seemed to be untouched by the slump, i.e. the very rich are still very rich. This should be a sign to Apple as they are positioned in that "luxury end of the market" (as so many people on this site take great delight in calling Apple the Lexus of the market).

It is going to be a tough year for Apple, like for everyone. I think you are being far too optimistic about the state of the global economy.
post #127 of 157
"STEVE JOBS HEALTH?"

http://blogs.computerworld.com/what_...comment-123696

For me, these were the most revealing parts of this anonymous comment posted on December 21, 2008 at 8:50 P.M. at the above URL:

"I do know that SJ and his spouse have declined all holiday invitations this year, including some from various charities they've supported generously for years. Supposedly they declined an invitation to the Obama inauguration as well. And they supported the Democratic party generously during the campaign. Sounds to me like he's sick again. Or just sick of being sick."

"SJ has been seen at Apple's campus on occasion. But less than he used to be. He has always traveled a great deal and apparently he's not doing that much any longer, either. The infamous plane he was given by the grateful Apple Board has been sitting on the runway more and more lately. When he does show up at Apple's campus, he's in his office, meeting with his assistants and his lieutenants and then out of the building and home again. All this takes place in the space of a couple of hours... or three at the outside. On many occasions spouse type is with him - or his trainer - or a friend. And they're seen driving rather than him piloting that MBZ himself like he used to. Everyone who has seen him face to face says he looks far worse than he did a few months ago. The weight is further down and his coloring is NOT robust or healthy at all in spite of some liberal use of self-tanners in an attempt to hide the paleness of his skin and the gray undertones. Any Apple Employee who has seen him and who dared to talk directly about it would probably be out on their ass in a heartbeat. The secrecy is serious. Very serious. My guess is that he's going to announce he's stepping down after the first quarter and his succession plan is already being put in place. He will stay on as the CEO Emeritus until he passes away or gets better. But chances of a meaningful recovery are probably slim at this point. He may have decided to take what is left of his time on earth and spend it with the family and friends that are closest to him. THAT would certainly be a very human decision. He'll also try to minimize the damage to Apple Stock as he exits. I would guess there's already a few world changing products in the pipeline that will roll out at the ADC in the spring... and beyond. It's fairly certain that MacWorld isn't going to see anything major other than what it's already seen by virtue of Apple calling it quits and the myriad of ramifications from that decision. A "Mac World" without Apple is nearly unthinkable. Yet it is happening! Wow.

For the record - we lived in the bay area (Los Gatos Hills) for many years and we know several "top of the heap" Apple execs and their families as friends and neighbors. My "speculation" is largely fueled by the bits and pieces both my wife and I have heard from people much closer to SJ than we are. Just my thoughts based on what we all know of the man - with a little extra thrown in via recent observation at the corporate and personal level.

Above all, Apple nor STEVE JOBS is NOT STUPID. They know full well the impact their silence is having and they would avoid it if there were something, anything, positive to announce and get the focus on his health shifted elsewhere. Sadly, there is not such a thing. Now the team must convince the world that Apple will go on long after Steve Jobs is not a part of it on a daily basis. I suspect that his spirit and intensity of personality will be there long after his body has left this earth - at least I like to think so..."
post #128 of 157
Note to Steve*
Firstly, i hope your well.
Secondly, if you knew this was going to be Apple's last MacWorld why don't you just do the keynote like you've always done.

It would save us from coming across and reading all the garbage written in these and other forums on the build up to MW09.

Happy new year!!
A reputation is not built upon the restful domain of one's comfort zone; it is made out of stalwart exposition of your core beliefs, for all challenges to disprove them as irrelevant hubris.- Berp...
Reply
A reputation is not built upon the restful domain of one's comfort zone; it is made out of stalwart exposition of your core beliefs, for all challenges to disprove them as irrelevant hubris.- Berp...
Reply
post #129 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by OriginalMacRat View Post

He's also a hard core Vegan. Hard to maintain any real body weight when you don't eat real food.

Ignorant remark. You have obviously never heard of the following vegans:

bodybuilder Kenneth Williams.
http://veganmusclepower.org/

Carl Lewis (Olympic athlete) who admits that it was being a vegan that helped him become the fastest runner in the world.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOTETXwfIaY

Or Mac Danzig, Ultimate Fighter champion, who is also an ethical vegan.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_Danzig

or Keith Holmes former World Middleweight boxing champion.
http://www.boxrec.com/media/index.php/Keith_Holmes

I'm not exactly skinny or weak either and I've been vegan for many years.
Besides Steve jobs is apparently a pescetarian (a vegetarian who also consumes fish), I also heard that second hand from someone after he visited Japan.

But on a personal note, there are many cases where a low fat vegan diet has cured certain cancers so I believe Steve could be and probably is much healthier than most of you guys discussing his health.
post #130 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacJello View Post

...The real issue is this depression you mention. The media would have you think we are all doomed. I don't buy it. Sure, there will be more bad news, but we're not headed for years of stagnation. Indeed, I think most of us have seen the worst of things. There is too much money out there, and society is too wealthy and humanity too greedy, for commerce as we know it to evaporate. We are experiencing a hiccup in a long term trend of increased production and consumption. I'm not saying that's a good thing, and some day it will come crashing down disastrously, but the cause will be more profound- something like war or disease or climate catastrophe. Moreover, since the 30's, time has sped up. Buisness cycles that may have taken a decade to work themselves out back then, speed by in a flash today. I predict that Apple will not only survive, but thrive.

I agree this economic hullabaloo is pretty bad, but this ain't the "End of the Mayan calendar 2012" kind of global event. It sucks for a lot of people, but another world war, don't forget the climate, energy and population crisis. Apple can make it through. It would be nice if Steve was with us and active for another few years, but... well, I wish him well, whatever his journey through this or other existence(s).
post #131 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2 View Post

I also think that Gizmodo should be in some serious legal trouble for promulgating this irresponsible junk when it's finally proven false.

Not really. Gizmodo is free to report on such an issue, its known as freedom of the press. They are reporting a source's actual, unedited words, so Gizmodo itself is not being malicious in their reporting. Steve Jobs is also a public figure, not private, and the law holds public figures to more stringent standards. Its more difficult to convict on grounds of public defamation if you're a public figure because, as the thinking goes, public figures willingly insert themselves into the public spotlight, and so they are thus open to a higher level of scrutiny. This explains why many shareholders believe that Jobs' health should be a public matter. It would be hard to convict Gizmodo of any wrong-doing in the eyes of a court.
post #132 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Murphster View Post

I know that some of you fanboys do not leave your bedroom very much, but if you take a look outside you might notice that we are in the early stages of what many people now see as being the worst depression since the 1930's and things are going to get a hell of a lot worse before they get any better.

I guarantee you that Mac sales have stopped increasing by 20-30% and would probably wager we will see the first decrease for a while in the next reportings.

There have been recent stories of iPod sales declining, iPhone sales declining and I am sure that Mac sales will be declining. The whole industry will be in decline but some companies will manage it better than others. When there are $400 netbooks flying off the shelves how many people are actually buying overpriced MacBooks?

It is not just an Apple thing, it is a economy thing but some companies can survive a recession better than others. Apple's products in my mind are just far too expensive, they made great Hay during the boom years but then again who didn't?

And you Apple haters don't step out of that hole that is your parents basement, what is your point?
post #133 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacOldTimer View Post

Your quote on number 5 is completely without merit.
Rumor sites and blogs are what the youth read their news with. To be honest I didn't bother to read the rest of your VERY long reply.

But I clearly can't understand #1. Steve Jobs and Apple owe the stock holders a press release (video) with Steve giving it.

The subject in the room is not ProTouch or AppleTV it is the "RUMOR" that Steve Jobs is incapable of running the business any longer.

Steve Jobs (in person on video) or Apple NEEDS to make a Press Release for the sake of the shareholders.

It seems that only Apple has made money and the share holders have lost 57% in the last year.
Yes, I'm talking about the cash reserve from all the people in the room that don't mind paying an APPLE TAX along with all the other taxes you'll be payintg in 2009.


Steve Jobs, you're rich and so is APPLE. DO WHAT IS SO UNLIKE YOU AND DO THE RESPONSIBLE THING FOR THE SHAREHOLDERS.

I've done considerable research and can't find one Charity that Steve has given to. Yes he gave Apple employee's 12 Million dollars worth of iPhones but his take will be considerably more than that and it was Apple not Steve Jobs that gave the "GIFT".

Steve Jobs doesn't need to name the charities he gives to but you'd think the press would have at least 1 that didn't benefit himself.

How many charities have you given to yourself to be criticizing someone else, how do you know the man doesn't give to charity, do you live with him..
post #134 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by iReality85 View Post

Not really. Gizmodo is free to report on such an issue, its known as freedom of the press. They are reporting a source's actual, unedited words, so Gizmodo itself is not being malicious in their reporting. Steve Jobs is also a public figure, not private, and the law holds public figures to more stringent standards. Its more difficult to convict on grounds of public defamation if you're a public figure because, as the thinking goes, public figures willingly insert themselves into the public spotlight, and so they are thus open to a higher level of scrutiny. This explains why many shareholders believe that Jobs' health should be a public matter. It would be hard to convict Gizmodo of any wrong-doing in the eyes of a court.

So you would have no problem with this even if the "source" turned out to be dead wrong and had malicious intentions? And you would have no problem with this situation if it turned out that Gizmodo did nothing to corroborate this with an independent source?

I really don't see how it's a good thing to let this sort of thing off the hook so casually, especially given the high risk of it just being pranking or stock manipulation.
post #135 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacOldTimer View Post

Your quote on number 5 is completely without merit.
Rumor sites and blogs are what the youth read their news with. To be honest I didn't bother to read the rest of your VERY long reply.

But I clearly can't understand #1. Steve Jobs and Apple owe the stock holders a press release (video) with Steve giving it.

The subject in the room is not ProTouch or AppleTV it is the "RUMOR" that Steve Jobs is incapable of running the business any longer.

Steve Jobs (in person on video) or Apple NEEDS to make a Press Release for the sake of the shareholders.

It seems that only Apple has made money and the share holders have lost 57% in the last year.
Yes, I'm talking about the cash reserve from all the people in the room that don't mind paying an APPLE TAX along with all the other taxes you'll be payintg in 2009.


Steve Jobs, you're rich and so is APPLE. DO WHAT IS SO UNLIKE YOU AND DO THE RESPONSIBLE THING FOR THE SHAREHOLDERS.

I've done considerable research and can't find one Charity that Steve has given to. Yes he gave Apple employee's 12 Million dollars worth of iPhones but his take will be considerably more than that and it was Apple not Steve Jobs that gave the "GIFT".

Steve Jobs doesn't need to name the charities he gives to but you'd think the press would have at least 1 that didn't benefit himself.

You talk about someone else being without merit, but you're not really explaining why your statement has merit.

You're not making any sense, at least to me. I don't see you bothering to take a look at the big picture. Apple is still doing well, even if their share prices are down. All the markets are down. I'd like to see you point out a stock that isn't down from a year ago. They're probably out there, but I don't think there are a lot of them. That's just the nature of the stock market, Apple shares trend along with the market, but their actual product sales don't

Unless Jobs is being hypocritical about telling people to give to charity when he himself does not, I don't see how that's any of our business.
post #136 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

So you would have no problem with this even if the "source" turned out to be dead wrong and had malicious intentions? And you would have no problem with this situation if it turned out that Gizmodo did nothing to corroborate this with an independent source?

I really don't see how it's a good thing to let this sort of thing off the hook so casually, especially given the high risk of it just being pranking or stock manipulation.

I wasn't offering my personal opinion, I was merely disecting Virgil's statement and providing a counter-point based on the 1st amendent. In any case, you offer a lot of presumptions there; a lot of "ifs" both pertaining to the reality of the situation and of my personal beliefs, which I don't entirely appreciate. If it turns out that Gizmodo's source did indeed have malicious intent, yes I would have a problem with that, because I believe its wrong to willfully seek to destroy a person's or company's credentials for whatever motive. But there is no proof of malicious intent either by Gizmodo or their source; I cannot provide any, nor can you, yet you yourself casually dismiss it as something of a prank or stock manipulation (ironic, since you state that this sort of thing should not be "let off the hook" so casually). I'll take Gizmodo's reporting at face value, which is just that- a report of someone's testimonial on the state of Job's health and Apple's usual tendency to be secretive about such matters. I'll reserve from injecting personal bias (either by presuming malicious intent or that the rumor is true) until further time goes by.
post #137 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adjei View Post

Where in Steve Job's job description does it state he has to give a weekly appearance or broadcast his private health.

you need to check back a bit.. I gave you a link and a quote..!
post #138 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adjei View Post

So if he has a cold he should hold a press conference stating he hasn't cold, that will you make you happy.

usually having a cold wouldn't impair his ability to run the company, at least longterm.
post #139 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

You talk about someone else being without merit, but you're not really explaining why your statement has merit.

You're not making any sense, at least to me. I don't see you bothering to take a look at the big picture. Apple is still doing well, even if their share prices are down. All the markets are down. I'd like to see you point out a stock that isn't down from a year ago. They're probably out there, but I don't think there are a lot of them. That's just the nature of the stock market, Apple shares trend along with the market, but their actual product sales don't

Unless Jobs is being hypocritical about telling people to give to charity when he himself does not, I don't see how that's any of our business.

Jobs vs. Gates: Who's the Star? In regards to your charity rant.
http://www.wired.com/gadgets/mac/com.../2006/01/70072

a 2 second search gave me. I'm not wasting my time on doing any other research.
See a patern. Most are companies that are good on the pocket book.

Marvel (NYSE: MVL)
$30.09
12.7%

NetEase.com (Nasdaq: NTES)
$21.48
13.4%

JetBlue (Nasdaq: JBLU)
$6.59
11.7%

Hasbro (NYSE: HAS)
$28.30
13.3%

Wal-Mart (NYSE: WMT)
$55.11
18.0%

Panera Bread (Nasdaq: PNRA)
$49.17
37.3%

Netflix (Nasdaq: NFLX)
$27.93
4.9%
post #140 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by MatrixMan View Post

"STEVE JOBS HEALTH?"

http://blogs.computerworld.com/what_...comment-123696

For me, these were the most revealing parts of this anonymous comment posted on December 21, 2008 at 8:50 P.M. at the above URL:

"I do know that SJ and his spouse have declined all holiday invitations this year, including some from various charities they've supported generously for years. Supposedly they declined an invitation to the Obama inauguration as well. And they supported the Democratic party generously during the campaign. Sounds to me like he's sick again. Or just sick of being sick."

"SJ has been seen at Apple's campus on occasion. But less than he used to be. He has always traveled a great deal and apparently he's not doing that much any longer, either. The infamous plane he was given by the grateful Apple Board has been sitting on the runway more and more lately. When he does show up at Apple's campus, he's in his office, meeting with his assistants and his lieutenants and then out of the building and home again. All this takes place in the space of a couple of hours... or three at the outside. On many occasions spouse type is with him - or his trainer - or a friend. And they're seen driving rather than him piloting that MBZ himself like he used to. Everyone who has seen him face to face says he looks far worse than he did a few months ago. The weight is further down and his coloring is NOT robust or healthy at all in spite of some liberal use of self-tanners in an attempt to hide the paleness of his skin and the gray undertones. Any Apple Employee who has seen him and who dared to talk directly about it would probably be out on their ass in a heartbeat. The secrecy is serious. Very serious. My guess is that he's going to announce he's stepping down after the first quarter and his succession plan is already being put in place. He will stay on as the CEO Emeritus until he passes away or gets better. But chances of a meaningful recovery are probably slim at this point. He may have decided to take what is left of his time on earth and spend it with the family and friends that are closest to him. THAT would certainly be a very human decision. He'll also try to minimize the damage to Apple Stock as he exits. I would guess there's already a few world changing products in the pipeline that will roll out at the ADC in the spring... and beyond. It's fairly certain that MacWorld isn't going to see anything major other than what it's already seen by virtue of Apple calling it quits and the myriad of ramifications from that decision. A "Mac World" without Apple is nearly unthinkable. Yet it is happening! Wow.

For the record - we lived in the bay area (Los Gatos Hills) for many years and we know several "top of the heap" Apple execs and their families as friends and neighbors. My "speculation" is largely fueled by the bits and pieces both my wife and I have heard from people much closer to SJ than we are. Just my thoughts based on what we all know of the man - with a little extra thrown in via recent observation at the corporate and personal level.

Above all, Apple nor STEVE JOBS is NOT STUPID. They know full well the impact their silence is having and they would avoid it if there were something, anything, positive to announce and get the focus on his health shifted elsewhere. Sadly, there is not such a thing. Now the team must convince the world that Apple will go on long after Steve Jobs is not a part of it on a daily basis. I suspect that his spirit and intensity of personality will be there long after his body has left this earth - at least I like to think so..."

A suspect commenter quoting another suspect commenter quoting John Doe 3rd parties. That's quite a paper trail of unreliable sources using nothing but hearsay, it comes across as an orchestrated attempt to create a grassroots panic.

Whoever is behind all this will clearly go to some lengths to spread their lies...But what for? That's the question we need to be asking. There is no merit to these rumours, we know that. So for what purpose are they being propagated.

MacBook Pro 15" | Intel Core2 Duo 2.66GHz | 320GB HDD | OS X v10.8
White iPad (3G) with Wi-Fi | 16GB | Engraved | Blue Polyurethane Smart Cover
White iPhone 5 | 64GB | On 3UK

Reply

MacBook Pro 15" | Intel Core2 Duo 2.66GHz | 320GB HDD | OS X v10.8
White iPad (3G) with Wi-Fi | 16GB | Engraved | Blue Polyurethane Smart Cover
White iPhone 5 | 64GB | On 3UK

Reply
post #141 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacOldTimer View Post

Jobs vs. Gates: Who's the Star? In regards to your charity rant.
http://www.wired.com/gadgets/mac/com.../2006/01/70072

OK, where was the part where it's any of our business whether someone else donates money or not? Maybe I missed a line, but the story seems presume that it is.

Quote:
a 2 second search gave me. I'm not wasting my time on doing any other research.
See a patern. Most are companies that are good on the pocket book.

Exactly how did you find that?

OK, so fair enough, you found some that did beat the trend. The basic fact is that Apple is doing well as a business and stock holders don't seem to be noticing that. I only looked at Netflix, but it did have considerable volatility, it's down a lot from its peak but up a lot from its worst.
post #142 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by iReality85 View Post

But there is no proof of malicious intent either by Gizmodo or their source; I cannot provide any, nor can you, yet you yourself casually dismiss it as something of a prank or stock manipulation (ironic, since you state that this sort of thing should not be "let off the hook" so casually).

On counterpoint, there is no proof that this anonymous report is correct either. It's just some anonymous person making statements. It looks like the onus has been placed on Apple to prove that Jobs is fine when the original story works out to be hearsay at best. Couple that with speculations of conspiracy on Apple's part as well. The article on Gizmodo does not give me any impression that they vetted this story, it looks to be about as carefully vetted as the ireport debacle. At least iReport is user generated content, the gizmodo article looks to be more deliberate on the part of those that run the site to fan the fears.

The only other time that reported rumors of Jobs' health problems caused problems did turn out to be a prank, I don't yet see any reason to see why it isn't the case here too.

It is true that first amendment protections do exist and they are strong, but they aren't ironclad either.
post #143 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoVegan View Post

Ignorant remark. You have obviously never heard of the following vegans:

bodybuilder Kenneth Williams.
http://veganmusclepower.org/

Carl Lewis (Olympic athlete) who admits that it was being a vegan that helped him become the fastest runner in the world.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOTETXwfIaY

Or Mac Danzig, Ultimate Fighter champion, who is also an ethical vegan.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_Danzig

or Keith Holmes former World Middleweight boxing champion.
http://www.boxrec.com/media/index.php/Keith_Holmes

I'm not exactly skinny or weak either and I've been vegan for many years.
Besides Steve jobs is apparently a pescetarian (a vegetarian who also consumes fish), I also heard that second hand from someone after he visited Japan.

But on a personal note, there are many cases where a low fat vegan diet has cured certain cancers so I believe Steve could be and probably is much healthier than most of you guys discussing his health.

You're correct about Steve. He always eats sushi with raw fish when we had company parties at NeXT and Apple.
post #144 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

Why is that? You can't seriously believe the media was impartial during the last election can you?

I agree... the non-stop 'all Reverend Wright, All The Time' - fest was corporate right wing media at its best.
BTW, use of 'fanboi' immediately pegs you as an idiot. Just so you know.
post #145 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoVegan View Post

Ignorant remark. You have obviously never heard of the following vegans:

bodybuilder Kenneth Williams.
http://veganmusclepower.org/

Carl Lewis (Olympic athlete) who admits that it was being a vegan that helped him become the fastest runner in the world.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOTETXwfIaY

Or Mac Danzig, Ultimate Fighter champion, who is also an ethical vegan.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_Danzig

or Keith Holmes former World Middleweight boxing champion.
http://www.boxrec.com/media/index.php/Keith_Holmes

I'm not exactly skinny or weak either and I've been vegan for many years.
Besides Steve jobs is apparently a pescetarian (a vegetarian who also consumes fish), I also heard that second hand from someone after he visited Japan.

But on a personal note, there are many cases where a low fat vegan diet has cured certain cancers so I believe Steve could be and probably is much healthier than most of you guys discussing his health.

First of all , if you're a vegan and allow yourself to get or look malnourished then that's a sickness in itself. I believe its a form of anoroexia or manorexia.
Second, how do you know whether those vegans you mentioned didn't help themselves to a side dish of steroids?
post #146 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jensonb View Post

A suspect commenter quoting another suspect commenter quoting John Doe 3rd parties. That's quite a paper trail of unreliable sources using nothing but hearsay, it comes across as an orchestrated attempt to create a grassroots panic.

Whoever is behind all this will clearly go to some lengths to spread their lies...But what for? That's the question we need to be asking. There is no merit to these rumours, we know that. So for what purpose are they being propagated.

You allege that "There is no merit to these rumours" but do you actually possess any tangible evidence that contradicts them? If so, then perhaps here would be a great place to freely share such hypothetically non-existent information instead of cowardly throwing your accusatory stones at those who are neither afraid to embrace the truth or speak it.

All it would take is one live Steve Jobs interview in front of a video camera (that anyone but you is holding) to instantly and irrevocably dispel the rampant speculation regarding his declining health status that by the way, he does have a fiduciary responsibility to disclose to Apple's investors (it's not an option you see, as some of his less informed supporters appear to believe).

APPLE THEMSELVES WON'T EVEN DENY THESE ALLEGATIONS ABOUT STEVE JOBS' DETERIORATING HEALTH saying only:

"If Steve or the board decides that Steve is no longer capable of doing his job as CEO of Apple, I am sure they will let you know."

One thing that is conspicuously missing from this statement by Apple is precisely how do "they" define "doing his job as CEO" and does "their" definition differ from their stockholders' definition.

The other thing that is conspicuously missing from Apple's statement is a direct denial of these allegations about Steve Jobs being sicker than usual as of late. If you call me "a bird" and I am "a tree", I will boldly challenge your assertion along with an immediate presentation of evidence supporting my position...unless I really am "a bird" (perhaps one who's in denial or one who recently ate some funny-looking mushrooms).

So one train of thought about why there was no direct denial by Apple of what you claim to be "lies" about Steve's declining health condition is that they cannot truthfully proclaim something that they know to be true to be a lie (without suffering the dire consequences later on when perhaps it shall be revealed to the world that they knew more than they were leading others to believe that they knew but maintaining their disposition of silence was their chosen course of action). So apparently their PR guys drafted their casually committed statement that offers no enlightenment whatsoever as to whether or not Steve Jobs' health has gone from bad to worse lately and whether or not that could have anything to do with why he won't be delivering the keynote address at Macworld 2009.

In my opinion, Apple's statement (quoted above) already contains a public declaration that has the pungent aroma of untruth to it. Steve Jobs is NOT giving the keynote address at their last Macworld next month (or haven't you heard?)! And is not that part of being "capable" enough to do "his job as CEO of Apple"? I doubt I'm the only one who thinks so. But Apple's lawyers have probably told them (Apple) that as long as Steve Jobs is still breathing and is generally cognizant of himself, others and his surroundings, then he is still partially "capable" of handling some of the CEO's responsibilities and therefore in order to hopefully avoid the widespread panic that could create a devastating decline in the value of Apple's shares, saying little to nothing is the lesser of two evils (a legally questionable position though one minimally backed by a logically sound argument).

HERE ARE A FEW FACT-BASED THINGS THAT WE DO KNOW (not rumors to anyone who has an average or better level of functioning intelligence):

1) In mid-2004, Steve Jobs announced to his employees that he'd been diagnosed with a malignant tumor in his pancreas ("an islet cell neuroendocrine tumor"). And yes I do know that this is not the kind of pancreatic cancer that is the more aggressive version and although that's a good thing "the median survival duration from the time of diagnosis for patients with non-functioning metastatic islet cell tumors approaches five years" according to the "Pancreatic Cancer Frequently Asked Questions" found at:

http://www.pancreatica.org/faq.html#anchor2193376

2) Regarding his physical condition, Steve Jobs hasn't looked all that great in live appearances over the last year (and based on a little bit of Google research, I know I'm not the only one who thinks so). And I'm not talking about the occasional "bad-hair" day either.

3) Steve Jobs is NOT giving the keynote address at Macworld 2009.

4) Apple waited until December 16th of this year (still 2008 as of the time I am writing this) to announce that "Philip Schiller, Apples senior vice president of Worldwide Product Marketing, will deliver the opening keynote for this years Macworld Conference & Expo, and it will be Apples last keynote at the show."

So the real question I am asking myself tonight is:

"Why is it that some people can smell the iSmoke but can't see the iFire?"

For the record, I am NOT part of some stock-manipulation scheme (and shorting Apple stock is not all that common from what I've read at financial websites). I can't think of anyone who would really gain anything from significant drops in Apple's stock (not even their competitors). The optimistic long-term Apple investor might speculatively buy some additional Apple shares after these periodic declines in stock price in the hopes that they will appreciate in value over time (along with other Apple shares previously acquired) but with all of the recent roller-coaster fluctuations in the market as a whole and with Apple's stock in particular, I sincerely doubt anyone out there (with any discretionary income to play with) is attempting to derive any short-term capital gains using Apple as their bridge to what appears to me to be a Growing Mountain of Uncertainty.
post #147 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by MatrixMan View Post

You allege that "There is no merit to these rumours" but do you actually possess any tangible evidence that contradicts them? If so, then perhaps here would be a great place to freely share such hypothetically non-existent information instead of cowardly throwing your accusatory stones at those who are neither afraid to embrace the truth or speak it.

All it would take is one live Steve Jobs interview in front of a video camera (that anyone but you is holding) to instantly and irrevocably dispel the rampant speculation regarding his declining health status that by the way, he does have a fiduciary responsibility to disclose to Apple's investors (it's not an option you see, as some of his less informed supporters appear to believe).

APPLE THEMSELVES WON'T EVEN DENY THESE ALLEGATIONS ABOUT STEVE JOBS' DETERIORATING HEALTH saying only:

"If Steve or the board decides that Steve is no longer capable of doing his job as CEO of Apple, I am sure they will let you know."

One thing that is conspicuously missing from this statement by Apple is precisely how do "they" define "doing his job as CEO" and does "their" definition differ from their stockholders' definition.

The other thing that is conspicuously missing from Apple's statement is a direct denial of these allegations about Steve Jobs being sicker than usual as of late. If you call me "a bird" and I am "a tree", I will boldly challenge your assertion along with an immediate presentation of evidence supporting my position...unless I really am "a bird" (perhaps one who's in denial or one who recently ate some funny-looking mushrooms).

So one train of thought about why there was no direct denial by Apple of what you claim to be "lies" about Steve's declining health condition is that they cannot truthfully proclaim something that they know to be true to be a lie (without suffering the dire consequences later on when perhaps it shall be revealed to the world that they knew more than they were leading others to believe that they knew but maintaining their disposition of silence was their chosen course of action). So apparently their PR guys drafted their casually committed statement that offers no enlightenment whatsoever as to whether or not Steve Jobs' health has gone from bad to worse lately and whether or not that could have anything to do with why he won't be delivering the keynote address at Macworld 2009.

In my opinion, Apple's statement (quoted above) already contains a public declaration that has the pungent aroma of untruth to it. Steve Jobs is NOT giving the keynote address at their last Macworld next month (or haven't you heard?)! And is not that part of being "capable" enough to do "his job as CEO of Apple"? I doubt I'm the only one who thinks so. But Apple's lawyers have probably told them (Apple) that as long as Steve Jobs is still breathing and is generally cognizant of himself, others and his surroundings, then he is still partially "capable" of handling some of the CEO's responsibilities and therefore in order to hopefully avoid the widespread panic that could create a devastating decline in the value of Apple's shares, saying little to nothing is the lesser of two evils (a legally questionable position though one minimally backed by a logically sound argument).

HERE ARE A FEW FACT-BASED THINGS THAT WE DO KNOW (not rumors to anyone who has an average or better level of functioning intelligence):

1) In mid-2004, Steve Jobs announced to his employees that he'd been diagnosed with a malignant tumor in his pancreas ("an islet cell neuroendocrine tumor"). And yes I do know that this is not the kind of pancreatic cancer that is the more aggressive version and although that's a good thing "the median survival duration from the time of diagnosis for patients with non-functioning metastatic islet cell tumors approaches five years" according to the "Pancreatic Cancer Frequently Asked Questions" found at:

http://www.pancreatica.org/faq.html#anchor2193376

2) Regarding his physical condition, Steve Jobs hasn't looked all that great in live appearances over the last year (and based on a little bit of Google research, I know I'm not the only one who thinks so). And I'm not talking about the occasional "bad-hair" day either.

3) Steve Jobs is NOT giving the keynote address at Macworld 2009.

4) Apple waited until December 16th of this year (still 2008 as of the time I am writing this) to announce that "Philip Schiller, Apples senior vice president of Worldwide Product Marketing, will deliver the opening keynote for this years Macworld Conference & Expo, and it will be Apples last keynote at the show."

So the real question I am asking myself tonight is:

"Why is it that some people can smell the iSmoke but can't see the iFire?"

For the record, I am NOT part of some stock-manipulation scheme (and shorting Apple stock is not all that common from what I've read at financial websites). I can't think of anyone who would really gain anything from significant drops in Apple's stock (not even their competitors). The optimistic long-term Apple investor might speculatively buy some additional Apple shares after these periodic declines in stock price in the hopes that they will appreciate in value over time (along with other Apple shares previously acquired) but with all of the recent roller-coaster fluctuations in the market as a whole and with Apple's stock in particular, I sincerely doubt anyone out there (with any discretionary income to play with) is attempting to derive any short-term capital gains using Apple as their bridge to what appears to me to be a Growing Mountain of Uncertainty.

Your broken assumption is as follows:

The onus is on Apple, Inc. and Steve Jobs to disprove rumours of the latter's ill-health.

That is incorrect. The onus is on those alleging that Apple and Steve Jobs are covering up the latter's ill health to provide proof that what thy allege is indeed occurring. It's a little concept called Innocent until Proven Guilty, it's fairly conventional in this day and age, perhaps you've heard of it?

Your willingness to accept the word of bloggers citing John Doe sources, essentially hearsay, over repeated official denials of these rumours means that if you are not involved in spreading this misinformation, you are clearly either stupid or pursuing an agenda.

Steve Jobs has already publicly stated he is healthy. Please stop pretending he has not.

Incidentally: if Steve really was in such a bad way that he was unable to do the Keynote, or Apple unwilling to allow it, they would have far bigger problems and covering it up would only complicate matters.

MacBook Pro 15" | Intel Core2 Duo 2.66GHz | 320GB HDD | OS X v10.8
White iPad (3G) with Wi-Fi | 16GB | Engraved | Blue Polyurethane Smart Cover
White iPhone 5 | 64GB | On 3UK

Reply

MacBook Pro 15" | Intel Core2 Duo 2.66GHz | 320GB HDD | OS X v10.8
White iPad (3G) with Wi-Fi | 16GB | Engraved | Blue Polyurethane Smart Cover
White iPhone 5 | 64GB | On 3UK

Reply
post #148 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jensonb View Post

Your broken assumption is as follows:

The onus is on Apple, Inc. and Steve Jobs to disprove rumours of the latter's ill-health.

That is incorrect. The onus is on those alleging that Apple and Steve Jobs are covering up the latter's ill health to provide proof that what thy allege is indeed occurring. It's a little concept called Innocent until Proven Guilty, it's fairly conventional in this day and age, perhaps you've heard of it?

Your willingness to accept the word of bloggers citing John Doe sources, essentially hearsay, over repeated official denials of these rumours means that if you are not involved in spreading this misinformation, you are clearly either stupid or pursuing an agenda.

Steve Jobs has already publicly stated he is healthy. Please stop pretending he has not.

Incidentally: if Steve really was in such a bad way that he was unable to do the Keynote, or Apple unwilling to allow it, they would have far bigger problems and covering it up would only complicate matters.


I am not the person you wrote your reply to, but I have to step in here. The poster simply layed out his perception of the matter and the evidence he believes supports his position. Your assertion that this makes him "clearly stupid or pursuing an agenda" is childish and inappropriate. As to the merit of his arguments, I think the makes a convincing case even given the anecdotal and circumstantial nature of most of the information.

Steve has stated that he is cancer free and it was basically understood that he was simply experiencing some side effects of his surgery, but that was quite a while ago and who really knows what is going on. Perhaps he doesn't have a recurrence of cancer, but is experiencing other major health problems.
post #149 of 157
[QUOTE=AppleInsider;1355344]Gadget blog Gizmodo is causing a stir this afternoon with a new report alleging that Apple has misled the public about the reasons behind its exit from Macworld Expo, claiming Steve Jobs' deteriorating health is to blame for the matter."

I've been somewhat irritated with the repeated stirring of this rumor, because it just gets folks upset and does nothing to help. If folks have facts instead of second hand comments then post those with hard (checkable) references, otherwise let it go.

I found the following over on "The Mac Observer" forum I think it is relevant and present it here. It was written by the administrator of that forum.

"Weve all read or heard the latest rumors and gossip about SJs health. Good health or poor health, it doesnt matter. The gossip and rumor-mongering reveal the dank underbelly of amateurish Web journalism. While its obvious these rumors have an impact on the trading of AAPL shares (however brief the impact), theres no reason to illicitly support or condone the actions of those who choose to seek personal gain or notoriety through the propagation of rumors about SJs health.

Its hard to understand how anyone would actively participate in the proliferation of these stories. I consider these gossip reports to be obscene in nature and destructive in intent.

Thank you to everyone in the AFB for continuing to keep discussions about the rumors limited to the brief impact on the trading of AAPL shares. Im personally making note of the sites that are reporting these rumors as pseudo-fact and choosing not to visit them again and will avoid doing business with any enterprise that actively and knowingly sponsors those sites."
post #150 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTel View Post

No. A major Apple event would suffice to quell the shareholders from bailing and taking the stock down to the teens once more though.

here's the thing. every time he shows up at the events, folks have to make comment that he looks tired, thin, etc.

so it's dammed if he does, dammed if he doesn't.

personally I don't believe any of it. If it was health related they would have not announced he wasn't making the keynote so far in advance because they are smart enough to know that it would set off all this crap about his health, etc. they would have waited until Macworld and it would have been a total surprise but offset by whatever was announced so the two would cancel each other out in terms of the stock value.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #151 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacOldTimer View Post

Someone needs to email the SEC about the LA Times article. Off with their heads. The editor's should be fired.


on the contrary, the article is about how the blog posted a rumor, thinly reported as such and knocked down the stock price.

had they written it as "Well respected tech blog Gizmodo has uncovered sources that Apple's departure and Steve Jobs refusal to give his traditional keynote speech at the event is due to the CEOs declining health and imminent death, living the company in the hands of total morons who can't wipe their asses without Jobs there to tell them when and how" then they would be just as guilty.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #152 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by lightstriker View Post

A rumor site exasperating another rumor from another rumor site.....

Engadget.com RULES...over gizmodo

my fav are the folks screaming that Apple is legally required to report when the CEO is sick to the stock holders but can't reference any law to that point. you would think if these folks know this detail they can back it up with the appropriate law.

As for the whole Apple waiting until Dec whatever. Actually know, Apple announced ahead of time, probably because they figured if they didn't and somehow it leaked out later, everyone would be screaming that Steve is on his death bed. Over the past few events, Apple has been building up to this moment, likely because they want to show that Apple is not the same as Steve Jobs. that there are dozens of people that create each device, etc. in other words, the company would do just fine without Steve at the helm.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #153 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by winterspan View Post

Steve has stated that he is cancer free and it was basically understood that he was simply experiencing some side effects of his surgery, but that was quite a while ago and who really knows what is going on. Perhaps he doesn't have a recurrence of cancer, but is experiencing other major health problems.

anyone who understands what they did in that surgery would not be shocked that he's lost weight and has continued issues with it.

they took out half the guy's pancreas, a small hunk of his stomach and about half of his intestinal track. weight loss, GI upset (which can put you off eating for a day or two while things settle down) etc is going to happen and keep happening.

think of it like those folks that go and get their stomachs tied in half to lose weight. they can't eat large meals, fattier foods etc because it makes them violently ill. so it forces them to eat better and smaller amounts at a time.

only difference is that Steve didn't request the procedure so much as it was the last option to avoid dying.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #154 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by MatrixMan View Post

"STEVE JOBS HEALTH?"

http://blogs.computerworld.com/what_...comment-123696

For me, these were the most revealing parts of this anonymous comment


to me it is that it is anonymous.

all of these things have been unnamed insiders and supposed employees and such. but are they really. is someone risking their job to report something like this.

hell maybe so. I know for a fact (because I know folks that work at Apple Retail Stores) that Apple employees have a stock plan where they can buy stock in the company. they just had a buy in fact, within the last couple of weeks. one of my friends mentioned it at Christmas Dinner. thought he was only going to be able to buy 10 shares with his savings but since the price had dropped so much he got 20. (basically they pay in every paycheck for six months and at the end buy at the lower of the first or last days value).

I'm sure that everyone in the company has the same opportunity so maybe someone up at Apple Headquarters was revealing these private facts to drive down the price so then when Apple is forced to prove the rumors wrong and all the cool stuff post MacWorld hits the market the stock shares this yahoo just got will soar in value. the beauty is that he doesn't even have to be telling the truth. he can be making up everyone. it could even be someone that has no clue where Apple is other than near San Francisco pretending to be an Apple employee or 'friend of the family' for the same end result.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #155 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by winterspan View Post

I am not the person you wrote your reply to, but I have to step in here. The poster simply layed out his perception of the matter and the evidence he believes supports his position. Your assertion that this makes him "clearly stupid or pursuing an agenda" is childish and inappropriate. As to the merit of his arguments, I think the makes a convincing case even given the anecdotal and circumstantial nature of most of the information.

Steve has stated that he is cancer free and it was basically understood that he was simply experiencing some side effects of his surgery, but that was quite a while ago and who really knows what is going on. Perhaps he doesn't have a recurrence of cancer, but is experiencing other major health problems.

There is no reliable evidence of Steve's health deteriorating. All we have is hearsay from unknown people who often themselves have it secondhand from yet more unknown people and the subjective belief that Steve looks unwell because he has lost some weight. That is not hard evidence, especially since weight loss is quite easily caused by other far less dramatic means. In fact, Steve seemed healthier at the October event than he did over a year previously at WWDC 2007, where he was coughing and pausing for breath more than usual. Furthermore, it is unfair to demand Apple address these rumours when Steve has already done so. So it begs the question, what possesses people to put more faith in 3rd Parties whose names they do not even know, never mind the accuracy of their information, than in the man himself, who clearly knows better than any unknown sources cited by barely reputable blogs, who has twice told us he is fine.

MacBook Pro 15" | Intel Core2 Duo 2.66GHz | 320GB HDD | OS X v10.8
White iPad (3G) with Wi-Fi | 16GB | Engraved | Blue Polyurethane Smart Cover
White iPhone 5 | 64GB | On 3UK

Reply

MacBook Pro 15" | Intel Core2 Duo 2.66GHz | 320GB HDD | OS X v10.8
White iPad (3G) with Wi-Fi | 16GB | Engraved | Blue Polyurethane Smart Cover
White iPhone 5 | 64GB | On 3UK

Reply
post #156 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by tortlebow View Post

Thank you to everyone in the AFB for continuing to keep discussions about the rumors limited to the brief impact on the trading of AAPL shares.

I do understand your position very well but I do find it strange that people are attacking those who are talking about Steve's health in a forum unless it is about the effect on the trading of AAPL shares. To me, worrying about your AAPL shares more than Steve's health is the colder of the two. Many of us don't know Steve personally but have watched him for many years, as we also love Apple. We come here to talk about things we care about and Steve Jobs is inevitably one of those topics. You have to admit, when Apple states the common bug as the reason Steve looks extremely gaunt, then the rumors and concerns are going to fly. Regardless of the validity of the Gadget blog, many of simply don't buy the reason for Job's backing out of the keynote with less than a month away.
post #157 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by ronstark View Post

IF Mr. jobs is fine why wouldn't he simply hold a 10 minute news conference with a reporter of his choosing, at a location of his choosing, at a time of his choosing to calm fears of his being ill?!

Convention participation is one issue. Steve's health or well being is another.

This can be really easy and simple. Why hide or be absent?

If anything the manner in which this is all being managed does not bode well for Apple.

The more important the person the more his supporters need to know FROM HIM that his well being is good.

Something is not right. The truth always shows itself.

Patience!

The last time this came up (a few months ago) Steve personally called a repporter (NYT I think, but maybe Fortune or some other national pub) and talked to him at length about his health. Do you want to make him do that every time some idiot starts a rumour? If you're that concerned about his health, DON'T INVEST IN APPLE.

The thing about investing is, you never get all the answers - you take a chance. This whole health issue is BS. Apple and Jobs have disclosed everything they're required to under law. If you think that's not enough, sell your shares. But stop whining, and stop trying to invade Jobs' privacy. You have no right.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Gadget blog juices fears over Steve Jobs' health