or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Steve Jobs suffering from a hormone imbalance, will remain CEO
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Steve Jobs suffering from a hormone imbalance, will remain CEO - Page 3

post #81 of 123
It's hogwash to think Apple's success is dependent entirely on Steve Jobs. For the last decade Job's has set Apple in motion for success and this momentum that has been built will continue long after Job's leaves the helm. The quality of leadership and talented employees all have to be taken into account. Take for example, Jony Ive, who helped design the new unibody AL-luminum frame for the new line of portables. With talent like that, who can question the direction Apple would take, even without Job's leadership. Job's will leave a great legacy, but it's premature to even speculate at this time. Let's be optimistic for Job's, Apple and the country's economy, in general and stop investing in hogwash. Let's step up to the plate, as consumers,investors or everyday fans with the same fervor, enthusiasm and innovation an Apple employee under Job's leadership would. Stop the hogwash now with the right attitude.
post #82 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Wow.. care to explain how? teckstud can accuse SJ of lying, and play doctor on a forum, but I am not allowed to express my views in reaction to such a post, since it might be distasteful to someone like you?

Eat it, anantksundaram. I'm not the onlyone on here that thinks there are a lot of unanswered questions with this "disclosure".
Express whatever you like- no matter how bullying and hypocritical you care to be.
And for the record- I never accused SJ of lying- we all know that's impossible and never happens.
post #83 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by PersonMan View Post

I am a doctor, yes. I am not a lawyer, but I do know what the law states in this case. (And why would Jim Goldman, a writer who works for CNBC, which deals with business issues, say what he says about the law if it is not the case). I trust Mr. Goldman more than I trust someone else on the internet whose opinion is that the law states that he has to disclose everything.


Hey DocMAc- just curious, what kind of "sophisticated" blood tests are we talking here that would have taken this long for a doctor to adminster them and find out this diagnosis?
And why would it take until late spring to gain the weight back? That's like 6 months from now.
post #84 of 123
Steve,

Please enjoy some much-deserved rest with your family and focus on getting healthy, strong and whole.

The creativity, daring, determination and endless attention to detail with which you pursue your work is an inspiration to me. However, it's the simple joy that is so evident when you release something new, that inspires me most. It's clear to me that you genuinely do love what you are doing and that is the real key to your success. That is what sets you apart and what people intuitively respond to. Here is to many more years of the same.

Thank you and Be Well!
post #85 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by PersonMan View Post

But that's not what Gizmodo said.

They didn't say "Jobs' health is poor and won't be better until Spring 2009."

They basically said "Jobs is on his deathbed and he won't be around any more come Spring 2009."

BIG DIFFERENCE between those two things.

Oh, and "one more thing," Gizmodo has been known to go back and edit articles after the fact, ESPECIALLY if they were wrong. If the article you're reading today says "won't be better until Spring 2009," that is NOT what it said originally.


Got any more unsubstantiated references pertaining to Gizmodo's article that you'd like to share?

http://gizmodo.com/5120687/steve-job...d-cancellation

Their article is still there at the link above and to the best of my recollection, it has the same wording that it had when I read it on the day it was first posted. And contrary to your claims regarding that article's content, they never "said" what you quoted them as "saying" namely that "Jobs is on his deathbed and he won't be around any more come Spring 2009." unless there is another article of theirs that I have not seen and that contains your quoted content verbatim in which case I will gladly apologize to you for my critical remarks (once you hyper-textually link me to it).

I can't help but wonder if you're confusing posted comments ABOUT the article with the article itself.

You even kinda contradicted yourself in the sentence where you quoted the above by using the word "basically" as a conditional qualifier of what was to come next and then went ahead and used quotation marks anyway. If you're gonna paraphrase, then by all means paraphrase (preferably a semi-accurate paraphrasing) but please don't hint at an upcoming paraphrase and then put your personal paraphrasing in quotes (as if your imperfect recollection is actually what Gizmodo or their source "said" in their article). If you are unable to produce the exact content you quoted them as saying (especially if it does not exist), then perhaps you should minimally consider how easy it is to either prove or disprove a quoted reference (could that be why you forgot to link to this Gizmodo article since it immediately disproves your exaggerated perceptions if not fictional fabrications?).

FROM:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation

"In law, defamation (also called calumny, libel, slander, and vilification) is the communication of a statement that makes a false claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government or nation a negative image. Slander refers to a malicious, false, and defamatory spoken statement or report, while libel refers to any other form of communication such as written words or images."

Oh yeah. I almost forgot what your defensive posturing is. According to you, "Gizmodo has been known to go back and edit articles after the fact, ESPECIALLY if they were wrong." So since I still cannot find anything that is even close to what you quoted as being in Gizmodo's article, that must mean that those mischievous malcontents over at Gizmodo apparently removed only the parts you incorrectly quoted them as saying right after you read those parts, right?

Did you hear the rumor that Gizmodo's stock went down by 5 points right after your first negative posting about them here? You're not buying short on them today, are you?

:-)

By the way, the main premise of Gizmodo's article is contained in their first two sentences:

"According to a previously reliable source, Apple misrepresented the reasons behind Macworld and Jobs' keynote cancellation. Allegedly, the real cause is his rapidly declining health."

Based on the revelations posted online today by Steve Jobs himself about "a hormonal imbalance", it appears to me that Gizmodo's source was closer to the truth than initially perceived by the legion of those whose angry words I do vividly recall. In fact, were it not for the recent Gizmodo article and subsequent suspicions about the health of Apple's CEO, who knows if this open letter from Steve Jobs would have materialized at all.

What offends me the most about your unjustified remarks is that Gizmodo properly qualified their article by including "RUMOR" at the top of the page and even expressed personal concerns that they hoped their source was wrong this time (even though this source had been right in the past about other Apple matters).

I actually have a counter-intelligence theory that goes like this:

Gizmodo's source was approved by both Apple and Steve Jobs to speak openly to Gizmodo without fear of retaliation but was also given a script to strictly adhere to. This way, Apple could (and did) monitor the aftermath to determine whether the timing was right for Steve Jobs to openly address this matter now (before Macworld) or later on.

And as cygnusrk727 said (and summed it up best)...

"the larger truth still remains that Apple lied about the real reason Jobs backed out of Macworld."

The latest words of Steve Jobs himself seem to support this position rather than contradict it.

But when all is said and done, in my opinion, Steve's gut-wrenchingly honest disclosure has turned what might have been an Apple-initiated public relations nightmare of historic proportions into a cordial invitation TO DREAM THE MAGICAL DREAM that this week offers to everyone and forgot about all this hormonal stuff to have some memorable Macworld fun!!!
post #86 of 123
Steve: Best wishes and speediy recovery

from tasmania
Happy DiNo ***MAC Pro*** 2X 3.2GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon 32GB RAM Mac Pro RAID Card 2 X 300GB 15,000-rpm SAS 2 X 1TB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3GB/s NVIDIAQuadro FX 5600 1.5GB 2X 16x S-Drives AirPort...
Reply
Happy DiNo ***MAC Pro*** 2X 3.2GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon 32GB RAM Mac Pro RAID Card 2 X 300GB 15,000-rpm SAS 2 X 1TB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3GB/s NVIDIAQuadro FX 5600 1.5GB 2X 16x S-Drives AirPort...
Reply
post #87 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar View Post

You mean like the first time that Steve left in the 1980's? If Apple could do so well without Steve, why did anyone want him back at all?

And how about the opinion that getting Steve out of Apple might be a good thing? Maybe with new leadership, Apple might start making computers that people want to buy, with features that people want, rather than just what Steve wants you to buy.

And how do you know people don't want to buy their computers or don't like the features that don't come with it?
post #88 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Unless you are claiming that: (i) SJ is lying (despite the fact that it could create problems for him with the regulators) and (ii) You're a doctor, you should shut your mouth on this topic.

Well said.
post #89 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

If he really wanted to stop the speculation once and for all, he should have given the exact name of the condition and what treatment he is taking. People only speculate when there's info missing.

That said, he is clearly a man who values his privacy and I wish him well.

No he should have made it better and included his medical history for all to see, that would stop the speculation.
post #90 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by cygnusrk727 View Post

While the Gizmodo story read more like an opinion piece (a bad one at that), the larger truth still remains that Apple lied about the real reason Jobs backed out of Macworld. This is Apple's second lie about his health if you remember the "common bug." The fact is, by Steve's own words now, he is unhealthy. Perhaps not at death's door, but hardly "fit as a fiddle" as some were saying who bashed the Gizmodo story.

How did they lie about the real reason he won't be at Macworld when they gave no reason, as for some of you.
post #91 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Then all will be right with the world.

LOL...thats right!

Mac Mini (Mid 2011) 2.5 GHz Core i5
120 GB SSD/500 GB HD/8 GB RAM
AMD Radeon HD 6630M 256 MB

Reply

Mac Mini (Mid 2011) 2.5 GHz Core i5
120 GB SSD/500 GB HD/8 GB RAM
AMD Radeon HD 6630M 256 MB

Reply
post #92 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Hey DocMAc- just curious, what kind of "sophisticated" blood tests are we talking here that would have taken this long for a doctor to adminster them and find out this diagnosis?
And why would it take until late spring to gain the weight back? That's like 6 months from now.

nothing you ask makes any sense... not all hormone problems can be found from blood tests, since many hormones never even enter the blood... some have secondary indicators in the blood, but not direct.. and some you just cant get anything from the blood... and healthy weight gain does take a long time, 6 months is a pretty normal time, depends how much he needs to gain, and the exact hormone and other issues he has.
post #93 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adjei View Post

How did they lie about the real reason he won't be at Macworld when they gave no reason, as for some of you.

I addressed that in an early post. I stand corrected that Apple did not give a reason in the official Apple press release. I still believe though that the statement was purposefully misleading as it went on and on talking about not doing trade shows. Look back through the threads. People cited this as the reason that Jobs was healthy and cited the trade show stance as the reason he was not giving the keynote. The true fact came out today; health is the real reason Jobs will not be giving the keynote.
post #94 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by cygnusrk727 View Post

I addressed that in an early post. I stand corrected that Apple did not give a reason in the official Apple press release. I still believe though that the statement was purposefully misleading as it went on and on talking about not doing trade shows. Look back through the threads. People cited this as the reason that Jobs was healthy and cited the trade show stance as the reason he was not giving the keynote. The true fact came out today; health is the real reason Jobs will not be giving the keynote.


I have reported on this too (about it being his health) as well as things like, Apple removing firewire = not allowing Pro users to use the macbooks, but lack of firewire also affects thousands of musicians (firewire far outweighs USB audio devices), mom and pop cam corder users, and target disc mode users.

That said, I and hope everyone else, prays that Steve is not in any pain - have been in pain and still suffer from pain, have tried everything from dilaudid, morphine IR, hydromorphone, morphine ER, hyrdocodone and everything under the sun. When you are in pain, everything else is secondary, its amazing how much we can go on and on, never taking into consideration health, pain. One really does have it all when he or she has their health and pray for everyone suffering today, may you all be healed and find relief. In other words, get well soon everyone, you too Steve.

Now release a mini with FIREWIRE, dual core, killer machine, 16 core mac pro's and cut prices. :-)

I say cut prices as a i7 can be had for $350, add motherboard, $100, tera drive ($100), GPU, $80 and a decent one at that, some old memory lying around=FREE, Power supply, $60 for a decent one, case (free for some, I have a few), that's $700 dollars for a state of the art system and need to start seeing Apple adopt price points from Intel price reductions, not to mention the reduced cost it is for MB vs MBP as they both use same UNI body, therefore further reducing costs. Sure, I understand Apple keeping prices up makes it seem more a better product, but only the Mac Pro, being PRO and all, should be their flag ship and the AIR is way over priced. It's worth more like $699. Just my .02 cents.
post #95 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Hey DocMAc- just curious, what kind of "sophisticated" blood tests are we talking here that would have taken this long for a doctor to adminster them and find out this diagnosis?
And why would it take until late spring to gain the weight back? That's like 6 months from now.

Before I get into this, let me first state that i have no idea what Steve has wrong with him, or what tests were done. However, it is possible that he has Addison's disease, a deficiency of a cortisol production. A simple cortisol level is often done as a screening test, but this can sometimes be in the normal range even in someone with the disorder. A more sophisticated test is a ACTH-stimulation test, in which hormone levels are measured before and after an additional hormone (which is supposed to boost coritsol levels) is administered. There are tests that are more elaborate still.

The diagnosis could have been missed based on initial testing, and more definitive testing could have brought it out. Many endocrine (hormone) conditions have both simple and more sophisticated tests available.
infobhan
http://www.infobhan.com
Twitter: @infobhan
Reply
infobhan
http://www.infobhan.com
Twitter: @infobhan
Reply
post #96 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud View Post

Eat it, anantksundaram. I'm not the onlyone on here that thinks there are a lot of unanswered questions with this "disclosure".
Express whatever you like- no matter how bullying and hypocritical you care to be.
And for the record- I never accused SJ of lying- we all know that's impossible and never happens.

Why don't you just get it over and done with and ask for his entire medical record. Of course that'd probably be misinformation too, to cover up the real issue, right?
post #97 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by cygnusrk727 View Post

The true fact came out today; health is the real reason Jobs will not be giving the keynote.

It did? Could you, perhaps, point us to that revelation?

I read the letter Steve Jobs wrote and posted on the Apple website, but it does not say that. Doesn't directly deny it, either, but that doesn't justify using the word "fact." Unless you're trying to drive the stock price down. Are you?
post #98 of 123
"While a hormone imbalance might be unrelated to his cancer, pancreatic dysfunction would be the top suspicion, said Dr. Richard Auchus, an endocrinologist at UT-Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas.
"The pancreas makes digestive enzymes, and if the pancreas doesn't make enough of those, then people can't digest foods and getting nutrients is a problem," Auchus said. The solution could be as simple as taking pills to replace or augment the enzyme, as is commonly done to treat pancreatic insufficiency in children with cystic fibrosis, Auchus said"


Associated Press Writer Stephanie Nano, AP Medical Writer Marilynn Marchione and AP Technology Writer Jessica Mintz contributed to this report.
post #99 of 123
Quote:
"Fortunately, after further testing, my doctors think they have found the causea hormone imbalance that has been 'robbing' me of the proteins my body needs to be healthy. Sophisticated blood tests have confirmed this diagnosis."


At long last, Steve Jobs has given us the beginning of an explanation for his deteriorating physical appearance and the decision to cancel his presentation at MacWorld Expo 2009.

An explanation is the beginning of honesty. But a complete explanation with the name of his medical condition was required for Steve Jobs to be completely honest with us.

The facts are quite simple:

1- Steve Jobs was awarded more than $1 billion in direct payments and backdated illegal stock options to discharge his duties as Apple CEO;

2- Steve Jobs underwent pancreas cancer surgery in 2004, but waited 9 months for the surgery because he truly believed that natural medicines and a special diet would cure him from pancreas cancer (Steve Jobs was convinced that He had discovered the cure for cancer, no less!);

3- Steve Jobs would have undergone a second surgery in early 2008 following which he started to loose weight massively, but neither Steve Jobs nor the Apple Board of directors would go on record to state the nature and the outcome of that secret surgery;

4- Steve Jobs cancelled his MacWorld 2009 trademark presentation, but didn't give any explanation.


Both Steve Jobs and the Apple Board of directors seem surprised that Apple investors, developpers and customers would ask questions on Steve Jobs' health and his ability to discharge his duties as Apple CEO.


post #100 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan View Post

Both Steve Jobs and the Apple Board of directors seem surprised that Apple investors, developpers and customers would ask questions on Steve Jobs' health and his ability to discharge his duties as Apple CEO.

Probably because they don't feel his health has anything to do with the business. Sure he plays a very important role but Apple isn't a one-man-band. It's a massive international company and despite him being CEO, his duties are probably pretty flexible.

Constantly pressuring for updates on Jobs is like interfering with every medical checkup Bill Gates gets. There's no point doing that and there's no point bothering Jobs about his personal life.

He didn't invent the iphone technology, he didn't design it, all he did was tell people about the work that Apple are doing. He's just a friendly face that people are familiar with.

He doesn't need thousands of people bloating his inbox every day with complaints about how one of the millions of products they ship is upsetting someone.

Just leave the poor guy alone and let him live out his life like you would expect if you were him.
post #101 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by RCO3 View Post

It did? Could you, perhaps, point us to that revelation?

I read the letter Steve Jobs wrote and posted on the Apple website, but it does not say that. Doesn't directly deny it, either, but that doesn't justify using the word "fact." Unless you're trying to drive the stock price down. Are you?

I don't own stock period. The fact that people keep tying his health to Apple's stock is to me what is truly sickening. I've never met the man but I have watched him for years. In that sense, I care about him and his health. Look, you nay-sayers didn't want to believe before that he was unhealthy, and you seemed more worried about your stock then the truth. All I was after was the truth. It came out today.
post #102 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

He didn't invent the iphone technology, he didn't design it, all he did was tell people about the work that Apple are doing. He's just a friendly face that people are familiar with.

Have you read any of the biographies around? He is a lot more hands on than that. I expect he had beta iPhones for a long time and his feedback went to the top of the project TODO list.
post #103 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan View Post

At long last, Steve Jobs has given us the beginning of an explanation for his deteriorating physical appearance and the decision to cancel his presentation at MacWorld Expo 2009.

An explanation is the beginning of honesty. But a complete explanation with the name of his medical condition was required for Steve Jobs to be completely honest with us.

The facts are quite simple:

1- Steve Jobs was awarded more than $1 billion in direct payments and backdated illegal stock options to discharge his duties as Apple CEO;

2- Steve Jobs underwent pancreas cancer surgery in 2004, but waited 9 months for the surgery because he truly believed that natural medicines and a special diet would cure him from pancreas cancer (Steve Jobs was convinced that He had discovered the cure for cancer, no less!);

3- Steve Jobs would have undergone a second surgery in early 2008 following which he started to loose weight massively, but neither Steve Jobs nor the Apple Board of directors would go on record to state the nature and the outcome of that secret surgery;

4- Steve Jobs cancelled his MacWorld 2009 trademark presentation, but didn't give any explanation.


Both Steve Jobs and the Apple Board of directors seem surprised that Apple investors, developpers and customers would ask questions on Steve Jobs' health and his ability to discharge his duties as Apple CEO.



Let me see how simply I can put this, given the nonsense you are spouting.

Apple is a US company with primarily US shareholders, regulated by the SEC. Unless AAPL is traded in Canada, given that you live in Quebec (and on top of that, unless you are a shareholder in Canada), the company and its board owes you diddley-squat.

The same goes for developers and customers regardess of where they live: There is nothing in their contracts, implied or otherwise, that links their work or their purchase to a company's CEO, let alone his/her health. They too are owed diddley-squat.

Get over it, and take your angst out against some Canadian company in which you own stock. And if you are not an investor, assuming you have a problem with all this as a developer or customer, the solutions are obvious: develop for someone else, or go buy something else.
post #104 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by PersonMan View Post

I am a doctor, yes. I am not a lawyer, but I do know what the law states in this case. (And why would Jim Goldman, a writer who works for CNBC, which deals with business issues, say what he says about the law if it is not the case). I trust Mr. Goldman more than I trust someone else on the internet whose opinion is that the law states that he has to disclose everything.

But think about it. If the law said that CEOs had to disclose everything about their health, then CEOs would have to grant public access to their medical records. Or put out press releases like, "XYZ CEO John Smith has a cold." We would literally be inundated with stuff like that. But, just because the media puts its spotlight on Apple does not mean that Apple is an exception to the law as written.

And I have been known to get a little hot under the collar on teh Internets from time to time.

No offense intended.

But, if you would prefer, I can talk to my colleague who *IS* both a doctor and a lawyer...

I entrust every word you said.... sounds very logical to me and I agree with it.
post #105 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by doh123 View Post

nothing you ask makes any sense... not all hormone problems can be found from blood tests, since many hormones never even enter the blood... some have secondary indicators in the blood, but not direct.. and some you just cant get anything from the blood... and healthy weight gain does take a long time, 6 months is a pretty normal time, depends how much he needs to gain, and the exact hormone and other issues he has.

If it makes no sense than why are you answering it!
SJ said "sophisticated " blood tests confirmed this- not me. What are "sophisticated" blood tests that would pinpoint a hormonal inbalance that a normal blood test couldn't and detect this earlier?
Unfortunately this "nutritional prroblem" sounds like yet another disease.
Get well SJ.
post #106 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adjei View Post

No he should have made it better and included his medical history for all to see, that would stop the speculation.

And while he's at it- he should show us his tax returns-right?
post #107 of 123
This thread is unbelievable.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #108 of 123
For the love of crimeny, it's bad enough we get armchair lawyers, now there's armchair doctors that think they know more about finding and diagnosing things than actual ones.
post #109 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by esXXI View Post

For the love of crimeny, it's bad enough we get armchair lawyers, now there's armchair doctors that think they know more about finding and diagnosing things than actual ones.

NEWSFLASH - Apple Store now carries rubber gloves and tongue depressors so that all the AppleInsider posters can play virtual doctor and perform their own examinations of ol' Steve.

I admit to being a Fanatical Moderate. I Disdain the Inane. Vyizderzominymororzizazizdenderizorziz?

Reply

I admit to being a Fanatical Moderate. I Disdain the Inane. Vyizderzominymororzizazizdenderizorziz?

Reply
post #110 of 123
Apple shareholders should still be very cautious. When Jobs did have cancer before, he went weeks or months without disclosing it, and tried to cure himself by eating tofu or something. This time around, he initially said he lost weight because of a cold... and then left it at that for weeks. He is simply not as above board and forthcoming as a responsible CEO with stockholders trusting him should be. he says his health is his private business.... wrong. His marriage, his kids, etc. are private, but major health problems affect the business. That's even more true when the company's image and reputation and creative ideas depend to such an unusual extent on one guy... and Jobs has certainly not been shy about cultivating his glamor image. He now has a history of being less than forthcoming about serious health problems which will affect your money if you own stock in the company. Caveat emptor.
post #111 of 123
Sure, many of the folks that have participated in this thread will contribute to the AAPL stock volatility... but, in the long run, it doesn't matter.

What matters is Apple's posture as a company.

Steve is great, but I don't think he's on the cutting edge anymore.

I love him, but I think the company is due for change.
post #112 of 123
djbeta, I think Apple needs Steve more than ever for the next few years to ride out the economic storm. That said Steve needs to continue to groom successor(s) and get others to step up to the Boom! plate.
post #113 of 123
"I'm feeling better now Oh!"
post #114 of 123
Just a reminder for the MacWorld keynote. Open iChat, and then go to chat room "appleinsider" (without the quotes). Let's chat there! Also in case AppleInsider forums goes down as it gets slammed with traffic.
post #115 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by jowie74 View Post

I am so relieved to hear that it is not cancer-related and can be treated easily. I wish him a speedy recovery

Unfortunately, prostate and pancreas cancer may cause hormonal imbalance.
Let's hope not in Steve Job's case, but it remains a possibility.
Cross fingers.
post #116 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quantz View Post

Unfortunately, prostate and pancreas cancer may cause hormonal imbalance.
Let's hope not in Steve Job's case, but it remains a possibility.
Cross fingers.

Exactly - I think the point the point of the API article - there was no direct refutation that the cancer (or return of cancer) was the cause of the issue.
post #117 of 123
I think the focus on Steve Jobs's health is a result of the Apple board not being specific about what they would do, and how and when they would communicate, if their CEO could no longer do the job. I know they have made some statements during this time, but they have always been a bit vague.

Given the secrecy over Steve Jobs's previous health issues, and the 'common bug' statement about his current weight loss, plus his image as the driver of success at Apple, there was naturally going to be a lot of worry and even distrust.

I think the board should have responded by parameterizing the conditions under which they would announce a change (they did this), and the timeframe that they would be looking at (they didn't do this). Steve should never have said a word about his health. It's the board's job to have that oversight and to reassure the market (they were weak at this).

Then if people want to speculate that Steve may leave in 18 months, then so what? Not much of a story since that could happen any time for any reason !

Many of the most important software concepts were invented in the 70s and forgotten in the 80s.

Reply

Many of the most important software concepts were invented in the 70s and forgotten in the 80s.

Reply
post #118 of 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

This thread is unbelievable.



I'm not sure that some guy's health is any business of anyone who does not know him personally. It's not like he's asking for sympathy, so respect that and keep the posts of this type minimal. I've never met the guy, I only really care about the products his company builds. He may play an important role in the company he works for, they'll go on without him for a while.
13" MacBook (2008, black): 2.4GHz, 2Gb RAM, 300Gb his
13" MacBook Pro (2009): 2.53GHz, 8Gb RAM, 500Gb hers
Quicksilver G4: dual 1GHZ, Leopard Server
13" MacBook (2006): HDTV Media Mac
Reply
13" MacBook (2008, black): 2.4GHz, 2Gb RAM, 300Gb his
13" MacBook Pro (2009): 2.53GHz, 8Gb RAM, 500Gb hers
Quicksilver G4: dual 1GHZ, Leopard Server
13" MacBook (2006): HDTV Media Mac
Reply
post #119 of 123
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...203181_pf.html

Compare Jobs's recent recklessness to the way Microsoft managed the delicate hand-over of the company from Bill Gates to Steve Ballmer. Gates, you'll recall, was every bit as synonymous with Microsoft as Jobs is with Apple.

Yet Gates managed to slide out of his company with virtually no disruption. He accomplished this by setting up the transition years in advance, giving Ballmer the CEO post and letting him get more exposure even while Gates stayed on as the figurehead and official outside representative of the company. By the time Gates did step down officially, in June 2008, his departure was practically a non-event.

Jobs, in contrast, seems determined to hang on at Apple no matter what. See, in the world of Steve, it's all about Steve. When he does go, he will be remembered as a tremendous genius -- but also as a petulant narcissist with a grandiose sense of his importance and a sadly limited view of the world around him.

Ironically, it is Gates, his archnemesis, who will likely go down in history as the classy one: the one who knew how to exit gracefully, the one who is devoting the later years of his life, and all of his billions, to helping the world's poorest people -- and not clinging to his CEO job
while he [Jobs] plays petty cat-and-mouse games with Apple shareholders and fanboys.
ADS
Reply
ADS
Reply
post #120 of 123
Steve Jobs is taking a medical leave of absense until the end of June, 2009. Tim Cook will handle day to day operations until then.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Steve Jobs suffering from a hormone imbalance, will remain CEO