You can love, hate, idolize, despise (insert favorite verb here) Steve Jobs. But there's one thing you absolutely, positively cannot do and that is ignore him. Even Steve Ballmer cannot ignore Steve Jobs, as much as he'd love to do so. The "rounding error" comments are proof of that. Jobs is in the heads of a lot of big business types like it or not.
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.
Your logic and math are faulty. First nobody suggested that Apple should have been offering a dividend ten years ago. Second, a 1% dividend back then would have been at most about $0.30 a share. Today it would be around $2.00. Third, unless Apple is supposed to be operating as a bank, earning interest from cash should not be goal.
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 ...
Adding an important clarification: I am referring specifically only to Table 1, with the data on Darwin, Ghosts, UFOs, witches, creationism and astrology. This is not a comment about/on religious beliefs!
But I think too many people place too much on this one man. Remember, he runs a company and surrounds himself with plenty of competent employees.
Faint praise, indeed.
If it was as easy as surrounding yourself with smart people there would be lots of other Apple success stories. No, Apples "secret sauce" is Steve and he deserves every accolade and then some.
If it was as easy as surrounding yourself with smart people there would be lots of other Apple success stories. No, Apples "secret sauce" is Steve and he deserves every accolade and then some.
I’m inclined to agree. If Jobs didn’t come back to Apple with NeXT in tow, then there would we have a lot to speculate about him a CEO and technical visionary, but his success with Apple’s comeback using NeXT’s IP makes it quite obvious that he knows WTF he’s doing.
There are some parallels to Jobs leaving Apple to learn to be a proper executive with the book Siddhartha, except replace the search for enlightenment with market cap, and so forth.
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.
Here Here!
Living debt free, or with as little debt as possible is something that should be the goal of everyone. I think these days people and companies are realizing it. Apple was smart to begin with and save up.
And to be honest (as my husband and I live debt free) its not that hard to do if you don't live outside your means. True, I can't afford a car and so take the bus and bike (keeps my slim figure and heart in shape I suppose) to work. I can't afford a new MacBook Pro (not that I'd want one) or other high priced computer. I budget for food for the week, cook often, and keep everything in check. Make goals, and keep to them. Don't purchase the new iPhone 4g if you really can't afford it... the 3gs works plenty fine. Save money each pay check, make it mandatory. Stuff like that. Its really not that hard.
Eh, I can go on, but I'm sure everyone is sick of economy stuff by now.
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.
Did you suffer from lack of attention earlier in life? Do you think we need your asinine explanation to figure out what a "decade" means? You go on and on and on like some sort of diahrea of the Internet .
Steve has done a wonderful job, but do you honestly think a CEO will have a following of billions two years after his 'death'? Atheist or not, you can't deny that Jesus' impact on history and society was and will be much bigger than Jobs'.
Certainly, in the possible but extraordinarily unlikely event that Jesus ever was a real person, he certainly did not have a following of billions of people two years after his death. The range of estimates for the world population at the time was 170 to 400 million.
It would be very depressing if Santa Claus, Jesus, the Easter Bunny, or the Tooth Fairy were to have a greater effect on the world than Steve Jobs. Steve Jobs has made the world a better place. Steve has not inspired tens of millions of people to kill each other in the name of a fictional ethereal despot.
Even the massive negative impact that Bill Gates has had on the world doesn't rank with inspiring tens of millions of murders and the rape of tens of millions of young boys.
Praise be to Steve!!! Hopefully he will be remembered by history long after all the fairy tales have been forgotten.
Did you suffer from lack of attention earlier in life? Do you think we need your asinine explanation to figure out what a "decade" means? You go on and on and on like some sort of diahrea of the Internet .
Could you please consider a self-ban, before it happens to you again?
Adding an important clarification: I am referring specifically only to Table 1, with the data on Darwin, Ghosts, UFOs, witches, creationism and astrology. This is not a comment about/on religious beliefs!
OMG! LOL... and on your addendum... what's the difference?
According to your logic above, what was the year that preceded AD 1? ("AD" for Anno Domini from Medieval Latin).
How many people have people explained to him that there was no year zero and yet he keeps on insisting that the there was. You can?t make this stuff up. He needs to be on Jay Walking. Absolute gold!
OMG! LOL... and on your addendum... what's the difference?
Religious beliefs are to be respected for what they are. It is when they conflict with our understanding of science that it becomes an issue (at least, for me). In a vast majority of instances, there is no necessary conflict between science and religion (at least, as interpreted by the informed and educated practitioners of that religion).
Comments
So then go tell Forbes they're wrong.
You really don’t get it, do you? Forbes isn’t wrong.
I thought your timeout might have done you some good, but I guess you just can’t fix…
Back to the ignore list with you.
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.
Your logic and math are faulty. First nobody suggested that Apple should have been offering a dividend ten years ago. Second, a 1% dividend back then would have been at most about $0.30 a share. Today it would be around $2.00. Third, unless Apple is supposed to be operating as a bank, earning interest from cash should not be goal.
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 ...
Touche!
You think that is bad? If you really want some sobering data, take a look at this: http://www.harrisinteractive.com/har...ex.asp?PID=982
Adding an important clarification: I am referring specifically only to Table 1, with the data on Darwin, Ghosts, UFOs, witches, creationism and astrology. This is not a comment about/on religious beliefs!
But I think too many people place too much on this one man. Remember, he runs a company and surrounds himself with plenty of competent employees.
Faint praise, indeed.
If it was as easy as surrounding yourself with smart people there would be lots of other Apple success stories. No, Apples "secret sauce" is Steve and he deserves every accolade and then some.
Faint praise, indeed.
If it was as easy as surrounding yourself with smart people there would be lots of other Apple success stories. No, Apples "secret sauce" is Steve and he deserves every accolade and then some.
I’m inclined to agree. If Jobs didn’t come back to Apple with NeXT in tow, then there would we have a lot to speculate about him a CEO and technical visionary, but his success with Apple’s comeback using NeXT’s IP makes it quite obvious that he knows WTF he’s doing.
There are some parallels to Jobs leaving Apple to learn to be a proper executive with the book Siddhartha, except replace the search for enlightenment with market cap, and so forth.
Right, Ballmer still has time to turn it around
Now THAT is some funny shiznitz.
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.
Here Here!
Living debt free, or with as little debt as possible is something that should be the goal of everyone. I think these days people and companies are realizing it. Apple was smart to begin with and save up.
And to be honest (as my husband and I live debt free) its not that hard to do if you don't live outside your means. True, I can't afford a car and so take the bus and bike (keeps my slim figure and heart in shape I suppose) to work. I can't afford a new MacBook Pro (not that I'd want one) or other high priced computer. I budget for food for the week, cook often, and keep everything in check. Make goals, and keep to them. Don't purchase the new iPhone 4g if you really can't afford it... the 3gs works plenty fine. Save money each pay check, make it mandatory. Stuff like that. Its really not that hard.
Eh, I can go on, but I'm sure everyone is sick of economy stuff by now.
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.
Did you suffer from lack of attention earlier in life? Do you think we need your asinine explanation to figure out what a "decade" means? You go on and on and on like some sort of diahrea of the Internet .
Steve has done a wonderful job, but do you honestly think a CEO will have a following of billions two years after his 'death'? Atheist or not, you can't deny that Jesus' impact on history and society was and will be much bigger than Jobs'.
Certainly, in the possible but extraordinarily unlikely event that Jesus ever was a real person, he certainly did not have a following of billions of people two years after his death. The range of estimates for the world population at the time was 170 to 400 million.
It would be very depressing if Santa Claus, Jesus, the Easter Bunny, or the Tooth Fairy were to have a greater effect on the world than Steve Jobs. Steve Jobs has made the world a better place. Steve has not inspired tens of millions of people to kill each other in the name of a fictional ethereal despot.
Even the massive negative impact that Bill Gates has had on the world doesn't rank with inspiring tens of millions of murders and the rape of tens of millions of young boys.
Praise be to Steve!!! Hopefully he will be remembered by history long after all the fairy tales have been forgotten.
Did you suffer from lack of attention earlier in life? Do you think we need your asinine explanation to figure out what a "decade" means? You go on and on and on like some sort of diahrea of the Internet .
Could you please consider a self-ban, before it happens to you again?
You really don’t get it, do you? Forbes isn’t wrong.
Forbes? It's Fortune first of all.
solipsism- you may be King
Let me assist you;
Year ending in
0=1
1=2
2=3
3=4
4=5
5=6
6=7
7=8
8=9
9=10
10 = a decade. (deci from the latin or deca from the greek for 10).
This is why this decade ends 12/31/09 and Fortune is calling Steve Jobs the CEO of the Decade.
Get it? JEESH.
END OF STORY ( I can put the spoon away now)
Touche!
You think that is bad? If you really want some sobering data, take a look at this: http://www.harrisinteractive.com/har...ex.asp?PID=982
Adding an important clarification: I am referring specifically only to Table 1, with the data on Darwin, Ghosts, UFOs, witches, creationism and astrology. This is not a comment about/on religious beliefs!
OMG! LOL... and on your addendum... what's the difference?
Could you please consider a self-ban, before it happens to you again?
NO.
Could you consider putting me on your ignore list as your mentor solipsism suggests?
And nothing I've written is as totally wrong as this and has been reported( I've been told privately) by others:
Originally Posted by solipsism
Dammit boy! Were you raised by orangoutangs with Down Syndrome?
Year ending in
0=1
1=2
2=3
3=4
4=5
5=6
6=7
7=8
8=9
9=10
10 = a decade. (deci from the latin or deca from the greek for 10).
(OK. One last try. Promise)
According to your logic above, what was the year that preceded AD 1? ("AD" for Anno Domini from Medieval Latin).
(OK. One last try. Promise)
According to your logic above, what was the year that preceded AD 1? ("AD" for Anno Domini from Medieval Latin).
How many people have people explained to him that there was no year zero and yet he keeps on insisting that the there was. You can?t make this stuff up. He needs to be on Jay Walking. Absolute gold!
OMG! LOL... and on your addendum... what's the difference?
Religious beliefs are to be respected for what they are. It is when they conflict with our understanding of science that it becomes an issue (at least, for me). In a vast majority of instances, there is no necessary conflict between science and religion (at least, as interpreted by the informed and educated practitioners of that religion).
(OK. One last try. Promise)
According to your logic above, what was the year that preceded AD 1? ("AD" for Anno Domini from Medieval Latin).
We're talking the year 2000 to 2009?
Why are you comparing Apples to Oranges?
Of course a decade could be 1-10 or 2-11 and so on but that's not how the term is used. Ask Fortune.
This is so stupid. Why do I partake?
It's never stopped you before. ....