You and I must have went to different schools than TeckStud. What?s funny, is that initially wrote it incorrectly, but when I noticed Teckstud?s post was congruent with mine I realized I had made an error.
An excellent point, and one of the reasons why the Jobs story is so compelling. Few seem to recall that when he was booted out of Apple, he was widely seen as the source of the company's many problems. He was undisciplined and out of control, and so was the company. Then especially after his non-success with NeXT, which for all the world looked like little more than an ego project, he could easily have slipped under the waves, never to be heard from again.
So his return to Apple was by itself a surprising story. His personal transformation into a highly disciplined tech visionary was another. His taking Apple not just out of the wilderness but to a position of unquestioned industry leadership was another. Building a staggering amount of shareholder value was yet another.
If any story in business over the last ten years even comes close, I've never heard it. It's obviously early yet, but he's got a shot at CEO of the century. For certain no matter what comes next, people will be talking about the Jobs era at Apple for a long time to come. We've been watching history in the making.
You know, in retrospect getting booted out of Apple the first time was probably the best thing that could have happened to Jobs AND the best thing for Apple. It's hard to start over from scratch and few do unless they are forced to. By doing so, you learn a lot of excellent lessons. Jobs' NeXT and Pixar lessons set him up to transform Apple into what it is today.
"First all-in-one-computer" -- you mean other than the original Mac? Or the Mac Plus? Or the Mac Classic? Or the SE? Or the Color Classic? Or the Performa/LC 500-series? Or the Power Mac/Performa 5000 Series? Or the G3 All-in-one? Or their entire laptop line?
Those don't count because they don't start with "i".
Personally I don't have a problem with the 21st century starting on Jan 1, 2001 and, for example, "the 90s" starting on Jan 1, 1990 (I don't know what to call the current decade or the next one in any case. The aughts and the teens? Blech).
You know, in retrospect getting booted out of Apple the first time was probably the best thing that could have happened to Jobs AND the best thing for Apple. It's hard to start over from scratch and few do unless they are forced to. By doing so, you learn a lot of excellent lessons. Jobs' NeXT and Pixar lessons set him up to transform Apple into what it is today.
Quite possibly, but hardly everyone profits by their failures as Jobs seems to have done in such historic proportions. Most major business successes go pretty much straight up the ladder -- they hardly know what it really means to lose. Jobs came back far stronger for his defeats, which is rare.
This interview with SJ, from Fortune in 1998, is a must-read. It tells you just about everything you need to know about the guy, and his vision for Apple when he came back: http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortu.../11/09/250880/
Personally I don't have a problem with the 21st century starting on Jan 1, 2001 and, for example, "the 90s" starting on Jan 1, 1990 (I don't know what to call the current decade or the next one in any case. The aughts and the teens? Blech).
The nineties are from 1990—1999, but the 9th decade of the century is 1981-1990, the same way we call this the 21st century while it’s only 20xx. Maybe we do some additional terms to clarify it, but I think people probably understand it, sans the resident troll boy.
Quite possibly, but hardly everyone profits by their failures as Jobs seems to have done in such historic proportions. Most major business successes go pretty much straight up the ladder -- they hardly know what it really means to lose. Jobs came back far stronger for his defeats, which is rare.
On that point, during the interview (see link above), SJ makes this particularly poignant set of comments:
"I'll give you a perfect example. On vacation recently I was reading this book by [physicist and Nobel laureate] Richard Feynmann. He had cancer, you know. In this book he was describing one of his last operations before he died. The doctor said to him, "Look, Richard, I'm not sure you're going to make it." And Feynmann made the doctor promise that if it became clear he wasn't going to survive, to take away the anesthetic. Do you know why? Feynmann said, "I want to feel what it's like to turn off." That's a good way to put yourself in the present--to look at what's affecting you right now and be curious about it even if it's bad."
Just to have fun for a moment with your comment (which I agree with) Those of us that don't go along with mythology don't need a title (atheist) ... I am not lots of things and to have names for what you are not seems downright silly to me We are simply 'us' and others are 'them' plus believing in myths ...
Correct. (The turn of the millennium was celebrated a year to early as well, worldwide.)
Right, but have you noticed the correlation between those here in the US that refuse to accept this and also refuse to accept global warming as scientific fact ...
This is the number one reason why Apple is able to continue to operate as normal in these economic times where credit is hard to come by. Unlike many other companies, Apple's day-to-day operations aren't dependent on loans and credit (the American car companies being a prime example).
And I think more than a few individuals can learn from that, too. Both companies and individuals would be better off if we all relied a bit less on credit (buying houses and cars we can't afford) and focused less on quantity (food, cars, toys, square footage, etc) and more an quality.
On that point, during the interview (see link above), SJ makes this particularly poignant set of comments:
"I'll give you a perfect example. On vacation recently I was reading this book by [physicist and Nobel laureate] Richard Feynmann. He had cancer, you know. In this book he was describing one of his last operations before he died. The doctor said to him, "Look, Richard, I'm not sure you're going to make it." And Feynmann made the doctor promise that if it became clear he wasn't going to survive, to take away the anesthetic. Do you know why? Feynmann said, "I want to feel what it's like to turn off." That's a good way to put yourself in the present--to look at what's affecting you right now and be curious about it even if it's bad."
This interview with SJ, from Fortune in 1998, is a must-read. It tells you just about everything you need to know about the guy, and his vision for Apple when he came back: http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortu.../11/09/250880/
You and I must have went to different schools than TeckStud. What’s funny, is that initially wrote it incorrectly, but when I noticed Teckstud’s post was congruent with mine I realized I had made an error.
I have to disagree on two things. If Apple paid a dividend, say $1/share per year, that would only be $900M a year.
Acquiistion-wise, I see no need for Apple to buy Adobe. It would be crutch for Apple and in the short term Apple?s stock valuation would likely drop. Adobe would surely jump, affecting the purchase price. Apple has been overly conservative in this area but Adobe is not a smart buy, IMO. Buying small companies to obtain IP before your competitors do is smart and Apple has done this several times. Too often we see a company buy another to save their valuable but sinking ship. Apple did this when they bought NeXT, luckily that also bought them a new captain.
OK, fair enough, although I didn't mean Adobe specifically - you're probably right, it would not be the wisest purchase.
As for the dividend, it's always relative to performance obviously, but a 1% dividend could have cost Apple up to $10bn since 2000 (if you take into account the leverage they've had with such large coffers, and interest gained) which is fairly significant - and it's only part of the equation.
Steve's zen buddhism background is very evident here. That being in the here and now with acceptance of whatever is, because it is. What a stark contrast with that baboon Balmer.
Btw, does anyone think that it's a good option for apple to buy amd now? They can be bought for peanuts and they have still a lot of great talent working for them as well as some great products in need of development. Plus you get ati and you have a complete arsenal for desktop computers. My only qualm is that what with everything becoming more and more mobile and the traditional desktop computer becoming less and less relevant a company like pa semi is where it's at.
Still even solely for ati it will be a good option.
Comments
You and I must have went to different schools than TeckStud.
"gone," solipsism, "gone." Ah, the irony....
An excellent point, and one of the reasons why the Jobs story is so compelling. Few seem to recall that when he was booted out of Apple, he was widely seen as the source of the company's many problems. He was undisciplined and out of control, and so was the company. Then especially after his non-success with NeXT, which for all the world looked like little more than an ego project, he could easily have slipped under the waves, never to be heard from again.
So his return to Apple was by itself a surprising story. His personal transformation into a highly disciplined tech visionary was another. His taking Apple not just out of the wilderness but to a position of unquestioned industry leadership was another. Building a staggering amount of shareholder value was yet another.
If any story in business over the last ten years even comes close, I've never heard it. It's obviously early yet, but he's got a shot at CEO of the century. For certain no matter what comes next, people will be talking about the Jobs era at Apple for a long time to come. We've been watching history in the making.
You know, in retrospect getting booted out of Apple the first time was probably the best thing that could have happened to Jobs AND the best thing for Apple. It's hard to start over from scratch and few do unless they are forced to. By doing so, you learn a lot of excellent lessons. Jobs' NeXT and Pixar lessons set him up to transform Apple into what it is today.
"First all-in-one-computer" -- you mean other than the original Mac? Or the Mac Plus? Or the Mac Classic? Or the SE? Or the Color Classic? Or the Performa/LC 500-series? Or the Power Mac/Performa 5000 Series? Or the G3 All-in-one? Or their entire laptop line?
Those don't count because they don't start with "i".
"gone," solipsism, "gone." Ah, the irony....
hehe That is funny. I never said I was inflatable
You know, in retrospect getting booted out of Apple the first time was probably the best thing that could have happened to Jobs AND the best thing for Apple. It's hard to start over from scratch and few do unless they are forced to. By doing so, you learn a lot of excellent lessons. Jobs' NeXT and Pixar lessons set him up to transform Apple into what it is today.
Quite possibly, but hardly everyone profits by their failures as Jobs seems to have done in such historic proportions. Most major business successes go pretty much straight up the ladder -- they hardly know what it really means to lose. Jobs came back far stronger for his defeats, which is rare.
Personally I don't have a problem with the 21st century starting on Jan 1, 2001 and, for example, "the 90s" starting on Jan 1, 1990 (I don't know what to call the current decade or the next one in any case. The aughts and the teens? Blech).
The nineties are from 1990—1999, but the 9th decade of the century is 1981-1990, the same way we call this the 21st century while it’s only 20xx. Maybe we do some additional terms to clarify it, but I think people probably understand it, sans the resident troll boy.
Quite possibly, but hardly everyone profits by their failures as Jobs seems to have done in such historic proportions. Most major business successes go pretty much straight up the ladder -- they hardly know what it really means to lose. Jobs came back far stronger for his defeats, which is rare.
On that point, during the interview (see link above), SJ makes this particularly poignant set of comments:
"I'll give you a perfect example. On vacation recently I was reading this book by [physicist and Nobel laureate] Richard Feynmann. He had cancer, you know. In this book he was describing one of his last operations before he died. The doctor said to him, "Look, Richard, I'm not sure you're going to make it." And Feynmann made the doctor promise that if it became clear he wasn't going to survive, to take away the anesthetic. Do you know why? Feynmann said, "I want to feel what it's like to turn off." That's a good way to put yourself in the present--to look at what's affecting you right now and be curious about it even if it's bad."
Why do I partake?
Yeah we were wondering that as well.
I am an atheist ,so i agree
Just to have fun for a moment with your comment (which I agree with) Those of us that don't go along with mythology don't need a title (atheist) ... I am not lots of things and to have names for what you are not seems downright silly to me
Correct. (The turn of the millennium was celebrated a year to early as well, worldwide.)
Right, but have you noticed the correlation between those here in the US that refuse to accept this and also refuse to accept global warming as scientific fact ...
This is the number one reason why Apple is able to continue to operate as normal in these economic times where credit is hard to come by. Unlike many other companies, Apple's day-to-day operations aren't dependent on loans and credit (the American car companies being a prime example).
And I think more than a few individuals can learn from that, too. Both companies and individuals would be better off if we all relied a bit less on credit (buying houses and cars we can't afford) and focused less on quantity (food, cars, toys, square footage, etc) and more an quality.
excellent post.
On that point, during the interview (see link above), SJ makes this particularly poignant set of comments:
"I'll give you a perfect example. On vacation recently I was reading this book by [physicist and Nobel laureate] Richard Feynmann. He had cancer, you know. In this book he was describing one of his last operations before he died. The doctor said to him, "Look, Richard, I'm not sure you're going to make it." And Feynmann made the doctor promise that if it became clear he wasn't going to survive, to take away the anesthetic. Do you know why? Feynmann said, "I want to feel what it's like to turn off." That's a good way to put yourself in the present--to look at what's affecting you right now and be curious about it even if it's bad."
Interesting stuff, thanks for contributing it.
This interview with SJ, from Fortune in 1998, is a must-read. It tells you just about everything you need to know about the guy, and his vision for Apple when he came back: http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortu.../11/09/250880/
Cool, ta for posting that.
Although, it's a bit premature to be selecting the CEO of the decade, isn't it? There's still over a year to go, after all.
Right, Ballmer still has time to turn it around
You and I must have went to different schools than TeckStud.
So then go tell Fortune they're wrong.
I have to disagree on two things. If Apple paid a dividend, say $1/share per year, that would only be $900M a year.
Acquiistion-wise, I see no need for Apple to buy Adobe. It would be crutch for Apple and in the short term Apple?s stock valuation would likely drop. Adobe would surely jump, affecting the purchase price. Apple has been overly conservative in this area but Adobe is not a smart buy, IMO. Buying small companies to obtain IP before your competitors do is smart and Apple has done this several times. Too often we see a company buy another to save their valuable but sinking ship. Apple did this when they bought NeXT, luckily that also bought them a new captain.
OK, fair enough, although I didn't mean Adobe specifically - you're probably right, it would not be the wisest purchase.
As for the dividend, it's always relative to performance obviously, but a 1% dividend could have cost Apple up to $10bn since 2000 (if you take into account the leverage they've had with such large coffers, and interest gained) which is fairly significant - and it's only part of the equation.
This article about the Jeff Bezo?s Segway ?Ginger? gives a little insight into the way Jobs thinks. A worthy read?
Thank you for the link.
The article made me feel like I was there, as well as it brought back some great memories of our own interactions.
Interesting stuff, thanks for contributing it.
Steve's zen buddhism background is very evident here. That being in the here and now with acceptance of whatever is, because it is. What a stark contrast with that baboon Balmer.
Btw, does anyone think that it's a good option for apple to buy amd now? They can be bought for peanuts and they have still a lot of great talent working for them as well as some great products in need of development. Plus you get ati and you have a complete arsenal for desktop computers. My only qualm is that what with everything becoming more and more mobile and the traditional desktop computer becoming less and less relevant a company like pa semi is where it's at.
Still even solely for ati it will be a good option.
What does everyone think on that?