Honestly now, did you at any time get the impression from Apple's statements over the past 6 months that SJ was SO ill that he might require major surgery? I didn't. In fact, many people here were poo pooing the idea that he may be seriously sick, and using Apple's statements as proof.
I'm not sure what else a 6-month medical leave is supposed to mean. This isn't the flu or a bad case of the clap.
I don't doubt that people here played it down, but in retrospect that was rather silly.
Buffet and gates are great people TODAY for the 3rd world help they are giving. They are saving lives everyday.
shows how much you actually know. That television media can be pretty tricky. Ever hear of Eugenics? Thats what Gates and Buffet spend their money on. Has nothing to do with "helping" anyone.
shows how much you actually know. That television media can be pretty tricky. Ever hear of Eugenics? Thats what Gates and Buffet spend their money on. Has nothing to do with "helping" anyone.
Buffet and gates are great people TODAY for the 3rd world help they are giving. They are saving lives everyday. But I would guess that if STEVE JOBS worked with gates and buffet there charities would explode with great world shattering idea;s from steve and his crew . They need steve . They always needed steves visions ,
The point is he doesn't and has never put the charitable contributions back in place that he pulled in 1998 after Apple became profitable.
If they needed SJ's vision they wouldn't be the 1st & 2nd Richest people in the world even after giving billions to charity.
Quote:
Buffet and gates are great people TODAY for the 3rd world help they are giving
Are you implying they won't be great giving and caring people TOMORROW, NEXT YEAR OR NEXT DECADE?
I don't understand the point you're trying to make.
I love the iPhone and have had a 2g and now 3g but good god I am tired of dropped calls. It is almost to the point where I just use it for email and that is it.
I have lived in 4 different major cities too and it is basically the same in all of them, except maybe DC where it is solid
What are you trying to complain here? the iPhone or AT&T. By now 40 millions of iPhones have been sold worldwide and that number is increasing. The iPhone have the best rating ever in customer satisfaction (at least with the device, don't know about the carrier service) for a cellular phone. I do have a 3G and I can't imagine living without it right now. I do jailbrake it 'cause prices here are out of mind. Personally I think Apple should sell it unlocked.
Anyway, why are talking about that if this is a post about SJ???
Screw Buffett. What a ass hole. Some on tell him to mind his own bussiness and try and keep himself afloat stead of criticizing someone else for NO REASON!
Especially since any key company employee could be hit by a 4x4/bus/asteroid at any time and die.
Anyone buying shares based upon a personality at a company is an idiot.
Anyone that sold Apple shares in January is an idiot, given their current price. Therefore Apple did their shareholders a favour by not saying anything. Never mind HIPAA, the effect of media stress upon someone that could die within months if a liver didn't come along, and so on.
shows how much you actually know. That television media can be pretty tricky. Ever hear of Eugenics? Thats what Gates and Buffet spend their money on. Has nothing to do with "helping" anyone.
THE bill gates foundation will spend over the next 100 yrs over 60 billion dollars or more on charitable causes. People are so impressed with their foundation that they area also giving parts of there fortune's to said foundation. Warren buffet while i think is a one trick pony buffoon is giving a major part of his fortune to the gates foundation. Billions of dollars . Buffet made his investors very very rich so he does get away with alot.
Bill gates the private person after decades of doing scum of the earth computer repression with all the /nazi tactics you can imagine . Killing off whole industries that may threaten there strangle hold on the SW market . After all those years his saw the light and now does good stuff . EXACTLY like John D Rockerfeller good and bad ..
The point is he doesn't and has never put the charitable contributions back in place that he pulled in 1998 after Apple became profitable.
If they needed SJ's vision they wouldn't be the 1st & 2nd Richest people in the world even after giving billions to charity.
Are you implying they won't be great giving and caring people TOMORROW, NEXT YEAR OR NEXT DECADE?
I don't understand the point you're trying to make.
Sorry for my poor writing skills . I am not saying that TOMORROW they will change i meant before gates was not so giving . Also i meant that gates and buffet are both bereft for idea's that theier foundation would do great having steve at the helm .
I take exception to people who forget how gates got to where he is today. His billions came from a lot of cheating and grief / .
again we do not know id steve jobs give s money privately to charities
Apple by going green just blew every electronic maker out of the water . What ever gates or buffy does in the future apple going green with little money spend will spark a green cradle to grave revolution.
I don't see msft and the wintel world doing squat about poor children mining toxic metals from there computers ??
I know how you feel. I live in San Francisco and 3G has been unusable here. I can rarely make it to 5 minutes without dropping a call. Switching off 3G works great, though- I think I've had only one or two dropped calls ever with 2G. Unfortunately 2G is lower quality audio, slow internet, and that horrible GSM buzz (I spend most of my time around speakers).
Since OS 3.0 , I've tried 3G and it's working much better now. So far it seems safe to use for non-critical calls. Not sure how much is attributable to the OS or to AT&T's ongoing upgrades, but the phone actually works now.
i live and work in SF too, and noticed the same thing. due to work related issues I spent about 8 hours on conference calls this past weekend. didn't drop once. under 2.X firmware i KNOW i would have dropped the call(s) several times. it was so bad, especially in my office, that I would switch to EDGE when I knew I had to be on the phone for a while. i've also noticed better signal on the bus (i have to cross town to get to work) improvements happend to coincide with 3.0 firmware.
note to appleinsider: please stop putting more than one topic in a post. it mucks up the comments. I could care less about SJ's liver and WB's opinions.
Yes, but once he stepped aside to address medical issues he was no longer working. At that point, it is between shareholders and the Board or Directors about whether or not that is acceptable. If it were any other CEO, nobody would care.
You're just saying this without knowing. He was working. both he and Apple had made numerous statements that he was involved in all major decisions the company made. And as long as he hadn't given up his positions within the company, he was working for them. Only if he had resigned would you be correct.
One strange thing here the LACK of loyalty HERE for steve jobs amazes me .
9
I think the one thing that is being forgotten here is that Apple is a public company. SJ is the guy who runs that company (with a tight fist by all accounts), and who is responsible for where it is today.
The speculation of what Apple will be without him at the helm is a proper one. Therefor, concerns about his health are proper.
What has loyalty to SJ have to do with that? The company is worth about $100 billion. Many investors feel that much of that is due to him being there.
While I'm not a speculator in Apple's stock so much, because I buy it and hold it for a long time, that doesn't mean that investors shouldn't know information that may affect their investments. By law, companies are required to provide that information. That's a good thing.
How far should this information extend? Well, at least as far as the law requires.
That doesn't mean that they have to provide for popular discussion, everything involving its chief executive's health, but it could require that anything serious be released. It's done at other companies. Why not here?
We've discussed SJ privacy here several times already. The question is whether his personal quirks about this should trump bigger matters of corporate leadership.
For years, it was said that Apple hadn't provided any information about continuing leadership at Apple in case SJ was incapacitated. we now see that there is some very good leadership in place. but that doesn't mean that steady hands at the helm can substitute for someone with vision.
I remember very well, when Michael Spindler, elevated to Apple's leadership after Scully resigned, was asked about how the fact that he wasn't considered to be a visionary after Jobs and Scully's leadership would affect his running the company.
His response was that you didn't have to be a visionary to run Apple.
And he was right, he wasn't, and he ran it right into the ground!
Is Cook a visionary? I don't know, but he's considered to be a quiet guy who doesn't like to confront people. Well, maybe that's NOT what Apple needs as a leader, and possibly, that's what the investment community is afraid of.
And we have no right to discount what the investment community thinks, because it's because of them that Apple's stock is at $140 rather than at $20.
I don't know how much information Apple should have released, or when. I only have my own feeling about it, but we shouldn't let "loyalty" to one guy influence it. There's a lot more at stake. Perhaps if Jobs is so private, he shouldn't be doing something so public.
in fact apples plan was genius concerning steve . all the products got out
Steve survived the liver op.
Steve is back .
And all the possible hub bub is muted with mr Cook being great guy and the iphone being a major hit
peace dude
9
Well it was medical leave. I'm not disagreeing with you, I'd just like to emphaszie that obsessive fascination with Steve Jobs does not mean "Steve Jobs is Apple."
Investors were well aware back in January that he was taking medical leave. I don't see how a 6 month medical leave can be interpreted as something other than time taken off for something a lot more serious than a sore throat.
Steve Jobs took a 6 month medical leave, announced publicly in January.
Like, what did everyone think this meant, that he was going to hang out on some beach for six months sipping on margaritas???
I guess the whole 6 month medical leave thing means something entirely different, apparently. Maybe being that ill calls for a 12-month medical leave . . .
To top it all off I'm reading nonsense that "Steve Jobs IS Apple." I'm not even sure what that means. Unless Apple's HQ in Cupertino has suddenly sprouted arms and legs and is walking around town.
Steve Jobs is Apple's CEO. Nothing more, nothing less. He has no unique position. People just *think* he does and idolize him as such. That has nothing whatsoever to do with the law. It's fantasy.
Apple has done nothing illegal, nor has Steve Jobs.
I don't remember anyone here saying that Apple or SJ has done anything illegal. What most of us are saying, who are not totally in step with how Apple has handled this, is that they could have handled it better.
One strange thing here the LACK of loyalty HERE for steve jobs amazes me .
IMHO it's not a question of loyalty, although I do appreciate your enthusiasm and support for the man. As satisfied (most of us, anyway) Apple users, we do owe him a lot. Fair enough.
I'm not personally nor professionally loyal to Apple's CEO, however. My brand loyalty is with Apple for the time being (and has been) because they simply make products that I think are just excellent. And they're consistently doing this. That gives me a reason to stick around. I like the whole Apple ecosytem, I think it's sheer genius. I'm impressed by the way the organization is run, so that in some way inspires my confidence.
But let's face it, I'm loyal to Apple because of what they put on the shelves (and I assume most of us here are), and not because I idolize the CEO. I absolutely admire the man and respect his achievements, hell . . . he should be required reading in any MBA program. But I have no personal or public loyalties to him. I think it might be rather unhealthy to attach to much of a personal stake in tech company's CEO whom you probably have never met, etc.
melgross, thank you for the sensible and even handed posts. This is a slightly murky issue, as you stated. But if you open up a typical Finance textbook, you'll see much time spent on job titles and duties and conflicts of interest concerns.
SJ might be a lot of things - private, stingy, generous, mean, whatever. The law really doesn't care and Apple must operate within the law.
The hazy way SJ's health has been dealt with might open Apple up to lawsuits. This is precisely why these laws are in place.
I don't have an intense passion for how Apple has handled this but I do wish SJ the best health possible and many more years.
You're also right in that 'vision' thing. Very few people have it. Apple has a nice momentum but without Steve, over the long term......
I don't remember anyone here saying that Apple or SJ has done anything illegal. What most of us are saying, who are not totally in step with how Apple has handled this, is that they could have handled it better.
Fair enough, and I have no issue with that.
They might have indeed handled it better. Speaking for myself however, I'm of really no opinion on that. I'd like to first know some of the reasons (and not speculation) behind the board's decision. I'm under the impression that they probably knew beforehand that there might be some fallout from this, and that their decision followed a weighed strategy of some kind. I'm curious to see what it was.
Comments
Honestly now, did you at any time get the impression from Apple's statements over the past 6 months that SJ was SO ill that he might require major surgery? I didn't. In fact, many people here were poo pooing the idea that he may be seriously sick, and using Apple's statements as proof.
I'm not sure what else a 6-month medical leave is supposed to mean. This isn't the flu or a bad case of the clap.
I don't doubt that people here played it down, but in retrospect that was rather silly.
Buffet and gates are great people TODAY for the 3rd world help they are giving. They are saving lives everyday.
Hey who's this Eugene guy?? :P
...
Buffet and gates are great people TODAY for the 3rd world help they are giving. They are saving lives everyday. But I would guess that if STEVE JOBS worked with gates and buffet there charities would explode with great world shattering idea;s from steve and his crew . They need steve . They always needed steves visions ,
The point is he doesn't and has never put the charitable contributions back in place that he pulled in 1998 after Apple became profitable.
If they needed SJ's vision they wouldn't be the 1st & 2nd Richest people in the world even after giving billions to charity.
Buffet and gates are great people TODAY for the 3rd world help they are giving
Are you implying they won't be great giving and caring people TOMORROW, NEXT YEAR OR NEXT DECADE?
I don't understand the point you're trying to make.
Please
I love the iPhone and have had a 2g and now 3g but good god I am tired of dropped calls. It is almost to the point where I just use it for email and that is it.
I have lived in 4 different major cities too and it is basically the same in all of them, except maybe DC where it is solid
What are you trying to complain here? the iPhone or AT&T. By now 40 millions of iPhones have been sold worldwide and that number is increasing. The iPhone have the best rating ever in customer satisfaction (at least with the device, don't know about the carrier service) for a cellular phone. I do have a 3G and I can't imagine living without it right now. I do jailbrake it 'cause prices here are out of mind. Personally I think Apple should sell it unlocked.
Anyway, why are talking about that if this is a post about SJ???
Screw Buffett. What a ass hole. Some on tell him to mind his own bussiness and try and keep himself afloat stead of criticizing someone else for NO REASON!
Especially since any key company employee could be hit by a 4x4/bus/asteroid at any time and die.
Anyone buying shares based upon a personality at a company is an idiot.
Anyone that sold Apple shares in January is an idiot, given their current price. Therefore Apple did their shareholders a favour by not saying anything. Never mind HIPAA, the effect of media stress upon someone that could die within months if a liver didn't come along, and so on.
THE bill gates foundation will spend over the next 100 yrs over 60 billion dollars or more on charitable causes. People are so impressed with their foundation that they area also giving parts of there fortune's to said foundation. Warren buffet while i think is a one trick pony buffoon is giving a major part of his fortune to the gates foundation. Billions of dollars . Buffet made his investors very very rich so he does get away with alot.
Bill gates the private person after decades of doing scum of the earth computer repression with all the /nazi tactics you can imagine . Killing off whole industries that may threaten there strangle hold on the SW market . After all those years his saw the light and now does good stuff . EXACTLY like John D Rockerfeller good and bad ..
9
The point is he doesn't and has never put the charitable contributions back in place that he pulled in 1998 after Apple became profitable.
If they needed SJ's vision they wouldn't be the 1st & 2nd Richest people in the world even after giving billions to charity.
Are you implying they won't be great giving and caring people TOMORROW, NEXT YEAR OR NEXT DECADE?
I don't understand the point you're trying to make.
Sorry for my poor writing skills . I am not saying that TOMORROW they will change i meant before gates was not so giving . Also i meant that gates and buffet are both bereft for idea's that theier foundation would do great having steve at the helm .
I take exception to people who forget how gates got to where he is today. His billions came from a lot of cheating and grief / .
again we do not know id steve jobs give s money privately to charities
Apple by going green just blew every electronic maker out of the water . What ever gates or buffy does in the future apple going green with little money spend will spark a green cradle to grave revolution.
I don't see msft and the wintel world doing squat about poor children mining toxic metals from there computers ??
I hope I am clear. Post back if not .
9
I know how you feel. I live in San Francisco and 3G has been unusable here. I can rarely make it to 5 minutes without dropping a call. Switching off 3G works great, though- I think I've had only one or two dropped calls ever with 2G. Unfortunately 2G is lower quality audio, slow internet, and that horrible GSM buzz (I spend most of my time around speakers).
Since OS 3.0 , I've tried 3G and it's working much better now. So far it seems safe to use for non-critical calls. Not sure how much is attributable to the OS or to AT&T's ongoing upgrades, but the phone actually works now.
i live and work in SF too, and noticed the same thing. due to work related issues I spent about 8 hours on conference calls this past weekend. didn't drop once. under 2.X firmware i KNOW i would have dropped the call(s) several times. it was so bad, especially in my office, that I would switch to EDGE when I knew I had to be on the phone for a while. i've also noticed better signal on the bus (i have to cross town to get to work) improvements happend to coincide with 3.0 firmware.
note to appleinsider: please stop putting more than one topic in a post. it mucks up the comments. I could care less about SJ's liver and WB's opinions.
Hey who's this Eugene guy?? :P
Are you joking >???? Its a city in oregon where the eureka foundation works on time travel .
Frack Buffett and his opinions!
Or did everyone forget that the "Oracle of Omaha" had the worst year ever with his clients losing considerably more than a simple S&P 500 Index fund?
Is he going to give them a refund?
And he's blasting away at Jobs?
Sounds like he and Billy Boy got together to try to figure out a way to slow Apple's current and continuing momentum.
I'm not sure what else a 6-month medical leave is supposed to mean. This isn't the flu or a bad case of the clap.
I don't doubt that people here played it down, but in retrospect that was rather silly.
It is a hiatus .
Why was it silly ??
in fact apples plan was genius concerning steve . all the products got out
Steve survived the liver op.
Steve is back .
And all the possible hub bub is muted with mr Cook being great guy and the iphone being a major hit
peace dude
9
Yes, but once he stepped aside to address medical issues he was no longer working. At that point, it is between shareholders and the Board or Directors about whether or not that is acceptable. If it were any other CEO, nobody would care.
You're just saying this without knowing. He was working. both he and Apple had made numerous statements that he was involved in all major decisions the company made. And as long as he hadn't given up his positions within the company, he was working for them. Only if he had resigned would you be correct.
One strange thing here the LACK of loyalty HERE for steve jobs amazes me .
9
I think the one thing that is being forgotten here is that Apple is a public company. SJ is the guy who runs that company (with a tight fist by all accounts), and who is responsible for where it is today.
The speculation of what Apple will be without him at the helm is a proper one. Therefor, concerns about his health are proper.
What has loyalty to SJ have to do with that? The company is worth about $100 billion. Many investors feel that much of that is due to him being there.
While I'm not a speculator in Apple's stock so much, because I buy it and hold it for a long time, that doesn't mean that investors shouldn't know information that may affect their investments. By law, companies are required to provide that information. That's a good thing.
How far should this information extend? Well, at least as far as the law requires.
That doesn't mean that they have to provide for popular discussion, everything involving its chief executive's health, but it could require that anything serious be released. It's done at other companies. Why not here?
We've discussed SJ privacy here several times already. The question is whether his personal quirks about this should trump bigger matters of corporate leadership.
For years, it was said that Apple hadn't provided any information about continuing leadership at Apple in case SJ was incapacitated. we now see that there is some very good leadership in place. but that doesn't mean that steady hands at the helm can substitute for someone with vision.
I remember very well, when Michael Spindler, elevated to Apple's leadership after Scully resigned, was asked about how the fact that he wasn't considered to be a visionary after Jobs and Scully's leadership would affect his running the company.
His response was that you didn't have to be a visionary to run Apple.
And he was right, he wasn't, and he ran it right into the ground!
Is Cook a visionary? I don't know, but he's considered to be a quiet guy who doesn't like to confront people. Well, maybe that's NOT what Apple needs as a leader, and possibly, that's what the investment community is afraid of.
And we have no right to discount what the investment community thinks, because it's because of them that Apple's stock is at $140 rather than at $20.
I don't know how much information Apple should have released, or when. I only have my own feeling about it, but we shouldn't let "loyalty" to one guy influence it. There's a lot more at stake. Perhaps if Jobs is so private, he shouldn't be doing something so public.
It is a hiatus .
Why was it silly ??
in fact apples plan was genius concerning steve . all the products got out
Steve survived the liver op.
Steve is back .
And all the possible hub bub is muted with mr Cook being great guy and the iphone being a major hit
peace dude
9
Well it was medical leave. I'm not disagreeing with you, I'd just like to emphaszie that obsessive fascination with Steve Jobs does not mean "Steve Jobs is Apple."
Investors were well aware back in January that he was taking medical leave. I don't see how a 6 month medical leave can be interpreted as something other than time taken off for something a lot more serious than a sore throat.
Steve Jobs took a 6 month medical leave, announced publicly in January.
Like, what did everyone think this meant, that he was going to hang out on some beach for six months sipping on margaritas???
I guess the whole 6 month medical leave thing means something entirely different, apparently. Maybe being that ill calls for a 12-month medical leave . . .
To top it all off I'm reading nonsense that "Steve Jobs IS Apple." I'm not even sure what that means. Unless Apple's HQ in Cupertino has suddenly sprouted arms and legs and is walking around town.
Steve Jobs is Apple's CEO. Nothing more, nothing less. He has no unique position. People just *think* he does and idolize him as such. That has nothing whatsoever to do with the law. It's fantasy.
Apple has done nothing illegal, nor has Steve Jobs.
I don't remember anyone here saying that Apple or SJ has done anything illegal. What most of us are saying, who are not totally in step with how Apple has handled this, is that they could have handled it better.
YES a good post
One strange thing here the LACK of loyalty HERE for steve jobs amazes me .
IMHO it's not a question of loyalty, although I do appreciate your enthusiasm and support for the man. As satisfied (most of us, anyway) Apple users, we do owe him a lot. Fair enough.
I'm not personally nor professionally loyal to Apple's CEO, however. My brand loyalty is with Apple for the time being (and has been) because they simply make products that I think are just excellent. And they're consistently doing this. That gives me a reason to stick around. I like the whole Apple ecosytem, I think it's sheer genius. I'm impressed by the way the organization is run, so that in some way inspires my confidence.
But let's face it, I'm loyal to Apple because of what they put on the shelves (and I assume most of us here are), and not because I idolize the CEO. I absolutely admire the man and respect his achievements, hell . . . he should be required reading in any MBA program. But I have no personal or public loyalties to him. I think it might be rather unhealthy to attach to much of a personal stake in tech company's CEO whom you probably have never met, etc.
SJ might be a lot of things - private, stingy, generous, mean, whatever. The law really doesn't care and Apple must operate within the law.
The hazy way SJ's health has been dealt with might open Apple up to lawsuits. This is precisely why these laws are in place.
I don't have an intense passion for how Apple has handled this but I do wish SJ the best health possible and many more years.
You're also right in that 'vision' thing. Very few people have it. Apple has a nice momentum but without Steve, over the long term......
I don't remember anyone here saying that Apple or SJ has done anything illegal. What most of us are saying, who are not totally in step with how Apple has handled this, is that they could have handled it better.
Fair enough, and I have no issue with that.
They might have indeed handled it better. Speaking for myself however, I'm of really no opinion on that. I'd like to first know some of the reasons (and not speculation) behind the board's decision. I'm under the impression that they probably knew beforehand that there might be some fallout from this, and that their decision followed a weighed strategy of some kind. I'm curious to see what it was.
Do we know anything about this?