One thing is to be kept in the loop vs doing the same work he did before taking medical leave. Major organ transplantation, health issues? Doesn't ring a bell?
Make up your mind and don't ge back to us.
Sorry but that was a direct quote from you. That Steve Jobs was not involved while on medical leave.
So you want to go with being keep in the loop now? We can go with that.
One thing is to be kept in the loop vs doing the same work he did before taking medical leave. Major organ transplantation, health issues? Doesn't ring a bell?
Make up your mind and don't ge back to us.
are you a window licker? skater said "apple has a history of doing badly when jobs was not at the company"
That a lot different than having some has-been leftist politician sitting on your board dictating questionable environmental policies resulting in glass screens for the last 3 years to appease Greenpeace.
You say that like it's a bad thing.
And, to call Al Gore a has-been politician is like calling Jim Lovell a has-been astronaut. Gore made it to the top and was denied the presidency only because of the arbitrary way the system resolved a virtual tie.
Who has said its going to be the end of Apple? My comment before was history has proven that Apple has done poorly without Steve Jobs.
Your reading skills are very poor. Do you know who Gil Amelio is?
Quote:
During Amelio's tenure Apple's stock continued to slump and hit a 12 year low and Q2 1997 because of a run on the stock that had been caused. Apple lost another $708 million. However, Apple did report a $25 million dollar profit prior to Amelio leaving. Apple had a multi-billion dollar loss the year before. On the 4 July 1997 weekend Jobs convinced the directors to oust Amelio in a boardroom coup; Amelio submitted his resignation less than a week later; and Jobs then became interim CEO on 16 September. In 2007, Jobs summed up his predecessor's tenure with a quote that he attributed to Amelio
I wouldn't call this poor performance I would call this THE END. So the point is that Apple had a lot of CEOs and all were bad, except Steve. Apple could have done much better with any good CEO. Steve has a lot of good ideas, but he is not a GOD and there are people that can do tha job just fine.
are you a window licker? skater said "apple has a history of doing badly when jobs was not at the company"
First define window licker. Second do you believe that company X can only be successful with that one specifi CEO? Don't be ridiculous. Apple has a histroy of doing badly not because Steve wasn't around, but because he was replaced with bad people.
Your reading skills are very poor. Do you know who Gil Amelio is?
I wouldn't call this poor performance I would call this THE END. So the point is that Apple had a lot of CEOs and all were bad, except Steve. Apple could have done much better with any good CEO. Steve has a lot of good ideas, but he is not a GOD and there are people that can do tha job just fine.
1. Yes
2. We don't know if Apple could have done better with another CEO. We also don't know how Apple will do without Steve Jobs. We have to wait for that event to happen. However sometimes we do a little thing calling looking back a history. When we do that we see that Apple was in bad shape without Steve Jobs.
Until something else happens to prove history incorrect we use history as a possible indicator or what might happen if Steve Jobs was no longer with Apple.
You can tell me what might have happend or what could have happened all day long but that doesn't trump what has happened.
First define window licker. Second do you believe that company X can only be successful with that one specifi CEO? Don't be ridiculous. Apple has a histroy of doing badly not because Steve wasn't around, but because he was replaced with bad people.
1) google it. its really not hard.
2) then his statement would be correct. bad CEOs were at apple when jobs was not there, therefore apple did poorly.
And, to call Al Gore a has-been politician is like calling Jim Lovell a has-been astronaut. Gore made it to the top and was denied the presidency only because of the arbitrary way the system resolved a virtual tie.
OMG- it's a TOTAL bad thing! Gore is the most inept politician ever. He should have rolled over Bush with Clinton's record but wimped away from Bill because of his extra-marital touchy fealies. Then he couldn't even put up a respectable fight in Florida in the courts, He rightfully deserved to loose exactly because of his inneptness. Also he's a hypocrite as documented with all his enviro preachiness yet doesn't practice what he preaches.
2. We don't know if Apple could have done better with another CEO. We also don't know how Apple will do without Steve Jobs. We have to wait for that event to happen. However sometimes we do a little thing calling looking back a history. When we do that we see that Apple was in bad shape without Steve Jobs.
Until something else happens to prove history incorrect we use history as a possible indicator or what might happen if Steve Jobs was no longer with Apple.
You can tell me what might have happend or what could have happened all day long but that doesn't trump what has happened.
You need to read what happened when SJ left the company previously, there were no innovative people onboard. You can not use 1997 to predict what will happen, If SJ left the company that is called paranoid my friend.
You learn from your past, you live in present and plan for future!
your company set a record for 1992 in terms of record losses (http://www.nytimes.com/1993/01/20/bu...-business.html), does that mean it will happen again, I doubt it, BIG blue chip companies usually never make the same mistake twice (exception to the rule a certain software company).
it's called the ignore list- you can surely figure out how to use it and ease your pain.
But then I would never get the chance to "match wits" with you. Unfortunately, in order for it to be a fair battle for you, I only get to use a small portion of mine, ..... say about half? That would almost be a break even point.
Comments
it's called the ignore list- you can surely figure out how to use it and ease your pain.
I looked around for this, must not be all that easy. Where can I set this up?
Of course he's a troll. Does anyone really doubt that?
Gald to see yet again your not making any real contribution to yet another thread. Oh mouse thats such a perfect name for you.
One thing is to be kept in the loop vs doing the same work he did before taking medical leave. Major organ transplantation, health issues? Doesn't ring a bell?
Make up your mind and don't ge back to us.
Sorry but that was a direct quote from you. That Steve Jobs was not involved while on medical leave.
So you want to go with being keep in the loop now? We can go with that.
One thing is to be kept in the loop vs doing the same work he did before taking medical leave. Major organ transplantation, health issues? Doesn't ring a bell?
Make up your mind and don't ge back to us.
are you a window licker? skater said "apple has a history of doing badly when jobs was not at the company"
That a lot different than having some has-been leftist politician sitting on your board dictating questionable environmental policies resulting in glass screens for the last 3 years to appease Greenpeace.
You say that like it's a bad thing.
And, to call Al Gore a has-been politician is like calling Jim Lovell a has-been astronaut. Gore made it to the top and was denied the presidency only because of the arbitrary way the system resolved a virtual tie.
are you a window licker? skater said "apple has a history of doing badly when jobs was not at the company"
This is the only Apple Forum I know where people will argue with you when you comment that Steve Jobs has done a great job with Apple. Its amazing.
I looked around for this, must not be all that easy. Where can I set this up?
Found it, under userCP.
Who has said its going to be the end of Apple? My comment before was history has proven that Apple has done poorly without Steve Jobs.
Your reading skills are very poor. Do you know who Gil Amelio is?
During Amelio's tenure Apple's stock continued to slump and hit a 12 year low and Q2 1997 because of a run on the stock that had been caused. Apple lost another $708 million. However, Apple did report a $25 million dollar profit prior to Amelio leaving. Apple had a multi-billion dollar loss the year before. On the 4 July 1997 weekend Jobs convinced the directors to oust Amelio in a boardroom coup; Amelio submitted his resignation less than a week later; and Jobs then became interim CEO on 16 September. In 2007, Jobs summed up his predecessor's tenure with a quote that he attributed to Amelio
I wouldn't call this poor performance I would call this THE END. So the point is that Apple had a lot of CEOs and all were bad, except Steve. Apple could have done much better with any good CEO. Steve has a lot of good ideas, but he is not a GOD and there are people that can do tha job just fine.
Gald to see yet again your not making any real contribution to yet another thread. Oh mouse thats such a perfect name for you.
Found it, under userCP.
OK bye- nice meeting you.
are you a window licker? skater said "apple has a history of doing badly when jobs was not at the company"
First define window licker. Second do you believe that company X can only be successful with that one specifi CEO? Don't be ridiculous. Apple has a histroy of doing badly not because Steve wasn't around, but because he was replaced with bad people.
Your reading skills are very poor. Do you know who Gil Amelio is?
I wouldn't call this poor performance I would call this THE END. So the point is that Apple had a lot of CEOs and all were bad, except Steve. Apple could have done much better with any good CEO. Steve has a lot of good ideas, but he is not a GOD and there are people that can do tha job just fine.
1. Yes
2. We don't know if Apple could have done better with another CEO. We also don't know how Apple will do without Steve Jobs. We have to wait for that event to happen. However sometimes we do a little thing calling looking back a history. When we do that we see that Apple was in bad shape without Steve Jobs.
Until something else happens to prove history incorrect we use history as a possible indicator or what might happen if Steve Jobs was no longer with Apple.
You can tell me what might have happend or what could have happened all day long but that doesn't trump what has happened.
First define window licker. Second do you believe that company X can only be successful with that one specifi CEO? Don't be ridiculous. Apple has a histroy of doing badly not because Steve wasn't around, but because he was replaced with bad people.
1) google it. its really not hard.
2) then his statement would be correct. bad CEOs were at apple when jobs was not there, therefore apple did poorly.
You say that like it's a bad thing.
And, to call Al Gore a has-been politician is like calling Jim Lovell a has-been astronaut. Gore made it to the top and was denied the presidency only because of the arbitrary way the system resolved a virtual tie.
OMG- it's a TOTAL bad thing! Gore is the most inept politician ever. He should have rolled over Bush with Clinton's record but wimped away from Bill because of his extra-marital touchy fealies. Then he couldn't even put up a respectable fight in Florida in the courts, He rightfully deserved to loose exactly because of his inneptness. Also he's a hypocrite as documented with all his enviro preachiness yet doesn't practice what he preaches.
It's great that he's giving a lot of his fortune away now, but even so, the foundation is run with a lot of his control freak tendencies.
It is of course possible that people change, even Bill Gates. It is possible that the influence of his wife made him a better person.
1) google it. its really not hard.
2) then his statement would be correct. bad CEOs were at apple when jobs was not there, therefore apple did poorly.
So you agree that Apple could have done much better job with good CEO even if that CEO wasn't JOBS?
1. Yes
2. We don't know if Apple could have done better with another CEO. We also don't know how Apple will do without Steve Jobs. We have to wait for that event to happen. However sometimes we do a little thing calling looking back a history. When we do that we see that Apple was in bad shape without Steve Jobs.
Until something else happens to prove history incorrect we use history as a possible indicator or what might happen if Steve Jobs was no longer with Apple.
You can tell me what might have happend or what could have happened all day long but that doesn't trump what has happened.
You need to read what happened when SJ left the company previously, there were no innovative people onboard. You can not use 1997 to predict what will happen, If SJ left the company that is called paranoid my friend.
You learn from your past, you live in present and plan for future!
your company set a record for 1992 in terms of record losses (http://www.nytimes.com/1993/01/20/bu...-business.html), does that mean it will happen again, I doubt it, BIG blue chip companies usually never make the same mistake twice (exception to the rule a certain software company).
it's called the ignore list- you can surely figure out how to use it and ease your pain.
But then I would never get the chance to "match wits" with you. Unfortunately, in order for it to be a fair battle for you, I only get to use a small portion of mine, ..... say about half? That would almost be a break even point.
Ddo you believe that company X can only be successful with that one specifi CEO? Yes or No?
no, but i am citing history, just like skater. sorry you're too blind to see that.
it must suck you have to avoid the statement as much as you do. hurts to be so wrong doesnt it?