Apparently you believe you have a right to post about politics in this forum, but Steve Jobs should keep his mouth shut?
Yes!!!
Actors, Singers, Celebrities, you know, people in the public eye that make their living from 'the public at large' should make it their top priority to APPEAL to the greatest number of people (if they want to be / remain successful). National / International companies could also fall under this umbrella since they too need to appeal to its customer base (if they want to be successful).
Can we agree on that? (if not then stop reading and move on)
Why on Gods green earth would anyone want to become so publicly vocal on an issue that it would have the end result of pissing off a group of people that were previously fans (translation - FANS = INCOME).
If some celeb is so moved by a specific issue that they are willing to loose a percentage of their fans (translation: INCOME) then more power to em! They have EVERY RIGHT to do so. On the other hand they SHOULD NOT be SHOCKED when they start getting the NEGATIVE BACKLASH from their actions. Every ACTION has a REACTION.
When it comes to a company (especially one that has STOCK HOLDERS) I'm not sure the CEO truly has the RIGHT to take such actions. Well okay I guess they DO have the RIGHT but the STOCK HOLDERS would have every right to toss that CEO out on his ear!
Warning Totally Ridiculous Example: Steve Jobs does a public service announcement bestowing the virtues of NMBLA (the National Man Boy Love Association - freaks that they are) and the PSA ends with a black screen and the Apple Logo and the words 'Think Different'
Could Steve do this? Well yea (ICK!!) I guess so... but would the Apple sock holders have Steve's ass out of Apple faster then I could spit? Hell yea!
Actors, Singers, Celebrities, you know, people in the public eye that make their living from 'the public at large' should make it their top priority to APPEAL to the greatest number of people (if they want to be / remain successful). National / International companies could also fall under this umbrella since they too need to appeal to its customer base (if they want to be successful).
Can we agree on that? (if not then stop reading and move on)
Why on Gods green earth would anyone want to become so publicly vocal on an issue that it would have the end result of pissing off a group of people that were previously fans (translation - FANS = INCOME).
If some celeb is so moved by a specific issue that they are willing to loose a percentage of their fans (translation: INCOME) then more power to em! They have EVERY RIGHT to do so. On the other hand they SHOULD NOT be SHOCKED when they start getting the NEGATIVE BACKLASH from their actions. Every ACTION has a REACTION.
When it comes to a company (especially one that has STOCK HOLDERS) I'm not sure the CEO truly has the RIGHT to take such actions. Well okay I guess they DO have the RIGHT but the STOCK HOLDERS would have every right to toss that CEO out on his ear!
Warning Totally Ridiculous Example: Steve Jobs does a public service announcement bestowing the virtues of NMBLA (the National Man Boy Love Association - freaks that they are) and the PSA ends with a black screen and the Apple Logo and the words 'Think Different'
Could Steve do this? Well yea (ICK!!) I guess so... but would the Apple sock holders have Steve's ass out of Apple faster then I could spit? Hell yea!
Like I said - action - reaction
Dave
Right on Dave!!!!
Democrap, Republicrap, Libitarian (There are also the Independents)
Two of my favorite people working together? I love it! Go John Kerry! Go Steve Jobs! America WILL change!
You've got another thing coming if you think Kerry means real change for America-it's just a swing back to the other side, and out of everyone possible for the job, he's probably the most liberal. Which is quite funny, becaue when the liberals or the conservatives sweep Washington, it's always in the name of change, but what it really means is the continuance of the bickering, finger pointing, and nothing really happening. Even when people I like get in, and promise all sorts of good stuff that would actually help somebody, they always find the "machine" is just a little harder to tame than their four-year first term allows, and then we're right back to the same shift in power that will producer another fruitless four years-you never allow the time to let the tree grow, and then you complain when it's short and stumpy.
I'm not sure Kerry will want the advice. After all, Jobs may be very successful at what he does, but to be successful in politics you really do need more than 5% of the market...
I have to agree with DaveGee, every action has a reaction. I too think actors, singers & ceo's should keep their political views to themselves. Having said that though, they do have a right to their opinions and to voice them if they so please, but my thing is this: Just don't whine like a little baby when some people don't like what you're saying. If you're going to express your views/opinions about politicians be a man or woman about it and quit your whining! Don't cry censorship or rightwing conspiracy, we the paying public have a right to our opinions and the right not to spend our money on you.
Ok so back to the computer stuff, any idea how far off the dual 3ghz mac could be? 1yr?
Comments
Originally posted by radiospace
Apparently you believe you have a right to post about politics in this forum, but Steve Jobs should keep his mouth shut?
Yes!!!
Actors, Singers, Celebrities, you know, people in the public eye that make their living from 'the public at large' should make it their top priority to APPEAL to the greatest number of people (if they want to be / remain successful). National / International companies could also fall under this umbrella since they too need to appeal to its customer base (if they want to be successful).
Can we agree on that? (if not then stop reading and move on)
Why on Gods green earth would anyone want to become so publicly vocal on an issue that it would have the end result of pissing off a group of people that were previously fans (translation - FANS = INCOME).
If some celeb is so moved by a specific issue that they are willing to loose a percentage of their fans (translation: INCOME) then more power to em! They have EVERY RIGHT to do so. On the other hand they SHOULD NOT be SHOCKED when they start getting the NEGATIVE BACKLASH from their actions. Every ACTION has a REACTION.
When it comes to a company (especially one that has STOCK HOLDERS) I'm not sure the CEO truly has the RIGHT to take such actions. Well okay I guess they DO have the RIGHT but the STOCK HOLDERS would have every right to toss that CEO out on his ear!
Warning Totally Ridiculous Example: Steve Jobs does a public service announcement bestowing the virtues of NMBLA (the National Man Boy Love Association - freaks that they are) and the PSA ends with a black screen and the Apple Logo and the words 'Think Different'
Could Steve do this? Well yea (ICK!!) I guess so... but would the Apple sock holders have Steve's ass out of Apple faster then I could spit? Hell yea!
Like I said - action - reaction
Dave
Originally posted by DaveGee
Yes!!!
Actors, Singers, Celebrities, you know, people in the public eye that make their living from 'the public at large' should make it their top priority to APPEAL to the greatest number of people (if they want to be / remain successful). National / International companies could also fall under this umbrella since they too need to appeal to its customer base (if they want to be successful).
Can we agree on that? (if not then stop reading and move on)
Why on Gods green earth would anyone want to become so publicly vocal on an issue that it would have the end result of pissing off a group of people that were previously fans (translation - FANS = INCOME).
If some celeb is so moved by a specific issue that they are willing to loose a percentage of their fans (translation: INCOME) then more power to em! They have EVERY RIGHT to do so. On the other hand they SHOULD NOT be SHOCKED when they start getting the NEGATIVE BACKLASH from their actions. Every ACTION has a REACTION.
When it comes to a company (especially one that has STOCK HOLDERS) I'm not sure the CEO truly has the RIGHT to take such actions. Well okay I guess they DO have the RIGHT but the STOCK HOLDERS would have every right to toss that CEO out on his ear!
Warning Totally Ridiculous Example: Steve Jobs does a public service announcement bestowing the virtues of NMBLA (the National Man Boy Love Association - freaks that they are) and the PSA ends with a black screen and the Apple Logo and the words 'Think Different'
Could Steve do this? Well yea (ICK!!) I guess so... but would the Apple sock holders have Steve's ass out of Apple faster then I could spit? Hell yea!
Like I said - action - reaction
Dave
Right on Dave!!!!
Democrap, Republicrap, Libitarian (There are also the Independents)
Originally posted by ibook911
Two of my favorite people working together? I love it! Go John Kerry! Go Steve Jobs! America WILL change!
You've got another thing coming if you think Kerry means real change for America-it's just a swing back to the other side, and out of everyone possible for the job, he's probably the most liberal. Which is quite funny, becaue when the liberals or the conservatives sweep Washington, it's always in the name of change, but what it really means is the continuance of the bickering, finger pointing, and nothing really happening. Even when people I like get in, and promise all sorts of good stuff that would actually help somebody, they always find the "machine" is just a little harder to tame than their four-year first term allows, and then we're right back to the same shift in power that will producer another fruitless four years-you never allow the time to let the tree grow, and then you complain when it's short and stumpy.
Ok so back to the computer stuff, any idea how far off the dual 3ghz mac could be? 1yr?