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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 !
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.
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.
Comments
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 !
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.
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.