Gadget blog juices fears over Steve Jobs' health

123457

Comments

  • Reply 121 of 157
    these sites are a new form of media..yes..



    rumors are to be taken as rumors...yes



    the way Jizmodo handed this though is totally out of line..and i am sure they are making sure they have their lawyers lined up.



    You dont post a rumor and then spend the rest of the blog post trying to distance yourself from the rumor..



    A proper journalist would post a "rumor" only knowing that the source (unbiased third source) has first-hand evidence that this is true...and knowing this subject is so sensitive and prone to stock price movements...you would want a second source to back up the claims...I'm sure Jizmodo didnt do that...Instead they post a rumor with the catchy headline "Steve Jobs' Health Declining Rapidly, Reason for Macworld Cancellation" and then say how their "source" has been 100% right. wooo.. so if i correctly guessed that product pictures were in fact real..that makes me the source of the truth.....





    With any other rumor..i wouldnt care...but knowing jizmodo's corporate connections and such...i am really worried people had some cruel intentions by posting that rumor and watching apple's stock price fall. why post the story during the middle of a trading day. and not at 4pm when the market closes?





    also...not sure if it's just me but jizmodo censors all of their comments pretty rigoursly...i still haven't been able to post anything to their site..





    third class group of web searchers....
  • Reply 122 of 157
    It's not what you know. It's what they can prove that you know.



    This is what I assume will be Apple's defense strategy in the event they are eventually investigated by the Feds for failing to report pertinent information regarding the financially relevant matter of their CEO's health.



    I, for one, am quite amazed that so few people (based on comments I've read here and elsewhere) have connected all the dots. To me, The Elephant In The Room is not the latest posting of speculation about Steve's potentially worsening health condition but rather how Apple thinks we are all fools by hiding The Truth behind what I perceive to be A Cloak Of Cleverly Conceived Misrepresentations.



    Are we all supposed to be stupid enough to believe that there is not a deliberately undisclosed reason that Apple would wait this close to Macworld 2009 to announce that the keynote address next month will be handled by Steve's understudy and then go on to disclose their sudden change in promotional strategy that will unfortunately result in their conspicuous Macworld absence beginning in 2010?!



    And even if you do take them at their word on their modified position regarding their lack of participation in future Macworlds, Apple's response (or lack thereof) still does not offer anything even vaguely resembling a logically sound explanation that attempts to reasonably justify why there will be no keynote address by Steve Jobs at Macworld 2009!



    From the very beginning, I have believed that Steve's deteriorating health is the real reason he won't be delivering the keynote address at Macworld 2009 and I also believe that this is the foundational basis behind the "why" Apple won't be attending future Macworlds after this one (since they believe Steve probably won't be around to speak live at those either).



    Anyone who claims to know anything about Apple or Steve Jobs, historically speaking, should know that they would NOT wait until the last minute to dash the fondest hopes of the many MW attendees keenly anticipating Steve's prominent presence at Macworld 2009...UNLESS it is not for lack of will that Steve won't be blazing the stage with his unique brand of techno-enthusiasm this time around but rather because his body has a different idea on the matter.
  • Reply 123 of 157
    Oh dear, this will never abate will it!? And why does even AI and Macrumors consistently fail to disclose the facts around Jobs cancer whenever it is brought up??



    Let me repeat this for the 50th time. MOST metastatic pancreatic cancer is extremely fatal, with a very small chance of 5 year survival, usually under 10%. In Steve's case, he had a very rare form of pancreatic cancer, which, while malignant, was nothing like the most common form. In fact, his condition only required surgery, he didn't need to undergo ANY chemotherapy or radiation. From that fact alone it would appear that his doctor's believed the chances of it reoccurring were near zero.



    Now, he did have a major procedure done (the whipple), and of course there can always be complications with that, especially related to digestive/G.I. problems, but it would have to be something rare to actually threaten his life years after the surgery.
  • Reply 124 of 157
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Murphster View Post


    In the US they are just about to report the worst Christmas shopping figures for 40 years!!



    I haven't seen that statistic, but obviously it does NOT mean that sales will be at levels comparable to 1968. What it may mean is that this is the biggest year to year drop in 40 years. Was '68 a bad year?



    At any rate, the worst case scenarios I've seen suggest that overall Christmas sales may be 15% lower this year than last. By many measures that's an extraordinary decrease, but one bad season does not make a trend. More importantly, there will be companies that do well. Without a downturn Apple would have been up by as much as 30%, with the downturn we'll only see a small increase. I don't see the disaster.
  • Reply 125 of 157
    Note for the record, most of the people supporting this rumour as true registered this month and/or have only posted in this thread.



    There's more going on with these rumours than mere lack of journalistic integrity.
  • Reply 126 of 157
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacJello View Post


    I haven't seen that statistic, but obviously it does NOT mean that sales will be at levels comparable to 1968. What it may mean is that this is the biggest year to year drop in 40 years. Was '68 a bad year?



    At any rate, the worst case scenarios I've seen suggest that overall Christmas sales may be 15% lower this year than last. By many measures that's an extraordinary decrease, but one bad season does not make a trend. More importantly, there will be companies that do well. Without a downturn Apple would have been up by as much as 30%, with the downturn we'll only see a small increase. I don't see the disaster.



    In does indeed mean that sales are down on last year, by 2% analysts are predicting. That makes it the first ever decline since holiday spending was first tracked in 1969. You may think that 2% is a blip but to most observers it is a serious sign of a continued slide in the US economy throughout the next two years at least. 240,000 people are losing their jobs every month, 2008 has seen the biggest house price decline in 100 years.



    And more importantly, while 2% does not seem much, to many business already operating on borrowed time it will be enough to push them over the edge. Many national chains are in trouble, more than you probably realize.



    Companies like Chanel are cutting staff and making changes to their business, these are manufacturers of luxury items that previously seemed to be untouched by the slump, i.e. the very rich are still very rich. This should be a sign to Apple as they are positioned in that "luxury end of the market" (as so many people on this site take great delight in calling Apple the Lexus of the market).



    It is going to be a tough year for Apple, like for everyone. I think you are being far too optimistic about the state of the global economy.
  • Reply 127 of 157
    "STEVE JOBS HEALTH?"



    http://blogs.computerworld.com/what_...comment-123696



    For me, these were the most revealing parts of this anonymous comment posted on December 21, 2008 at 8:50 P.M. at the above URL:



    "I do know that SJ and his spouse have declined all holiday invitations this year, including some from various charities they've supported generously for years. Supposedly they declined an invitation to the Obama inauguration as well. And they supported the Democratic party generously during the campaign. Sounds to me like he's sick again. Or just sick of being sick."



    "SJ has been seen at Apple's campus on occasion. But less than he used to be. He has always traveled a great deal and apparently he's not doing that much any longer, either. The infamous plane he was given by the grateful Apple Board has been sitting on the runway more and more lately. When he does show up at Apple's campus, he's in his office, meeting with his assistants and his lieutenants and then out of the building and home again. All this takes place in the space of a couple of hours... or three at the outside. On many occasions spouse type is with him - or his trainer - or a friend. And they're seen driving rather than him piloting that MBZ himself like he used to. Everyone who has seen him face to face says he looks far worse than he did a few months ago. The weight is further down and his coloring is NOT robust or healthy at all in spite of some liberal use of self-tanners in an attempt to hide the paleness of his skin and the gray undertones. Any Apple Employee who has seen him and who dared to talk directly about it would probably be out on their ass in a heartbeat. The secrecy is serious. Very serious. My guess is that he's going to announce he's stepping down after the first quarter and his succession plan is already being put in place. He will stay on as the CEO Emeritus until he passes away or gets better. But chances of a meaningful recovery are probably slim at this point. He may have decided to take what is left of his time on earth and spend it with the family and friends that are closest to him. THAT would certainly be a very human decision. He'll also try to minimize the damage to Apple Stock as he exits. I would guess there's already a few world changing products in the pipeline that will roll out at the ADC in the spring... and beyond. It's fairly certain that MacWorld isn't going to see anything major other than what it's already seen by virtue of Apple calling it quits and the myriad of ramifications from that decision. A "Mac World" without Apple is nearly unthinkable. Yet it is happening! Wow.



    For the record - we lived in the bay area (Los Gatos Hills) for many years and we know several "top of the heap" Apple execs and their families as friends and neighbors. My "speculation" is largely fueled by the bits and pieces both my wife and I have heard from people much closer to SJ than we are. Just my thoughts based on what we all know of the man - with a little extra thrown in via recent observation at the corporate and personal level.



    Above all, Apple nor STEVE JOBS is NOT STUPID. They know full well the impact their silence is having and they would avoid it if there were something, anything, positive to announce and get the focus on his health shifted elsewhere. Sadly, there is not such a thing. Now the team must convince the world that Apple will go on long after Steve Jobs is not a part of it on a daily basis. I suspect that his spirit and intensity of personality will be there long after his body has left this earth - at least I like to think so..."
  • Reply 128 of 157
    Note to Steve*

    Firstly, i hope your well.

    Secondly, if you knew this was going to be Apple's last MacWorld why don't you just do the keynote like you've always done.



    It would save us from coming across and reading all the garbage written in these and other forums on the build up to MW09.



    Happy new year!!
  • Reply 129 of 157
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by OriginalMacRat View Post


    He's also a hard core Vegan. Hard to maintain any real body weight when you don't eat real food.



    Ignorant remark. You have obviously never heard of the following vegans:



    bodybuilder Kenneth Williams.

    http://veganmusclepower.org/



    Carl Lewis (Olympic athlete) who admits that it was being a vegan that helped him become the fastest runner in the world.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOTETXwfIaY



    Or Mac Danzig, Ultimate Fighter champion, who is also an ethical vegan.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_Danzig



    or Keith Holmes former World Middleweight boxing champion.

    http://www.boxrec.com/media/index.php/Keith_Holmes



    I'm not exactly skinny or weak either and I've been vegan for many years.

    Besides Steve jobs is apparently a pescetarian (a vegetarian who also consumes fish), I also heard that second hand from someone after he visited Japan.



    But on a personal note, there are many cases where a low fat vegan diet has cured certain cancers so I believe Steve could be and probably is much healthier than most of you guys discussing his health.
  • Reply 130 of 157
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacJello View Post


    ...The real issue is this depression you mention. The media would have you think we are all doomed. I don't buy it. Sure, there will be more bad news, but we're not headed for years of stagnation. Indeed, I think most of us have seen the worst of things. There is too much money out there, and society is too wealthy and humanity too greedy, for commerce as we know it to evaporate. We are experiencing a hiccup in a long term trend of increased production and consumption. I'm not saying that's a good thing, and some day it will come crashing down disastrously, but the cause will be more profound- something like war or disease or climate catastrophe. Moreover, since the 30's, time has sped up. Buisness cycles that may have taken a decade to work themselves out back then, speed by in a flash today. I predict that Apple will not only survive, but thrive.



    I agree this economic hullabaloo is pretty bad, but this ain't the "End of the Mayan calendar 2012" kind of global event. It sucks for a lot of people, but another world war, don't forget the climate, energy and population crisis. Apple can make it through. It would be nice if Steve was with us and active for another few years, but... well, I wish him well, whatever his journey through this or other existence(s).
  • Reply 131 of 157
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2 View Post


    I also think that Gizmodo should be in some serious legal trouble for promulgating this irresponsible junk when it's finally proven false.



    Not really. Gizmodo is free to report on such an issue, its known as freedom of the press. They are reporting a source's actual, unedited words, so Gizmodo itself is not being malicious in their reporting. Steve Jobs is also a public figure, not private, and the law holds public figures to more stringent standards. Its more difficult to convict on grounds of public defamation if you're a public figure because, as the thinking goes, public figures willingly insert themselves into the public spotlight, and so they are thus open to a higher level of scrutiny. This explains why many shareholders believe that Jobs' health should be a public matter. It would be hard to convict Gizmodo of any wrong-doing in the eyes of a court.
  • Reply 132 of 157
    adjeiadjei Posts: 738member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Murphster View Post


    I know that some of you fanboys do not leave your bedroom very much, but if you take a look outside you might notice that we are in the early stages of what many people now see as being the worst depression since the 1930's and things are going to get a hell of a lot worse before they get any better.



    I guarantee you that Mac sales have stopped increasing by 20-30% and would probably wager we will see the first decrease for a while in the next reportings.



    There have been recent stories of iPod sales declining, iPhone sales declining and I am sure that Mac sales will be declining. The whole industry will be in decline but some companies will manage it better than others. When there are $400 netbooks flying off the shelves how many people are actually buying overpriced MacBooks?



    It is not just an Apple thing, it is a economy thing but some companies can survive a recession better than others. Apple's products in my mind are just far too expensive, they made great Hay during the boom years but then again who didn't?



    And you Apple haters don't step out of that hole that is your parents basement, what is your point?
  • Reply 133 of 157
    adjeiadjei Posts: 738member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacOldTimer View Post


    Your quote on number 5 is completely without merit.

    Rumor sites and blogs are what the youth read their news with. To be honest I didn't bother to read the rest of your VERY long reply.



    But I clearly can't understand #1. Steve Jobs and Apple owe the stock holders a press release (video) with Steve giving it.



    The subject in the room is not ProTouch or AppleTV it is the "RUMOR" that Steve Jobs is incapable of running the business any longer.



    Steve Jobs (in person on video) or Apple NEEDS to make a Press Release for the sake of the shareholders.



    It seems that only Apple has made money and the share holders have lost 57% in the last year.

    Yes, I'm talking about the cash reserve from all the people in the room that don't mind paying an APPLE TAX along with all the other taxes you'll be payintg in 2009.




    Steve Jobs, you're rich and so is APPLE. DO WHAT IS SO UNLIKE YOU AND DO THE RESPONSIBLE THING FOR THE SHAREHOLDERS.



    I've done considerable research and can't find one Charity that Steve has given to. Yes he gave Apple employee's 12 Million dollars worth of iPhones but his take will be considerably more than that and it was Apple not Steve Jobs that gave the "GIFT".



    Steve Jobs doesn't need to name the charities he gives to but you'd think the press would have at least 1 that didn't benefit himself.



    How many charities have you given to yourself to be criticizing someone else, how do you know the man doesn't give to charity, do you live with him..
  • Reply 134 of 157
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,951member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by iReality85 View Post


    Not really. Gizmodo is free to report on such an issue, its known as freedom of the press. They are reporting a source's actual, unedited words, so Gizmodo itself is not being malicious in their reporting. Steve Jobs is also a public figure, not private, and the law holds public figures to more stringent standards. Its more difficult to convict on grounds of public defamation if you're a public figure because, as the thinking goes, public figures willingly insert themselves into the public spotlight, and so they are thus open to a higher level of scrutiny. This explains why many shareholders believe that Jobs' health should be a public matter. It would be hard to convict Gizmodo of any wrong-doing in the eyes of a court.



    So you would have no problem with this even if the "source" turned out to be dead wrong and had malicious intentions? And you would have no problem with this situation if it turned out that Gizmodo did nothing to corroborate this with an independent source?



    I really don't see how it's a good thing to let this sort of thing off the hook so casually, especially given the high risk of it just being pranking or stock manipulation.
  • Reply 135 of 157
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,951member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacOldTimer View Post


    Your quote on number 5 is completely without merit.

    Rumor sites and blogs are what the youth read their news with. To be honest I didn't bother to read the rest of your VERY long reply.



    But I clearly can't understand #1. Steve Jobs and Apple owe the stock holders a press release (video) with Steve giving it.



    The subject in the room is not ProTouch or AppleTV it is the "RUMOR" that Steve Jobs is incapable of running the business any longer.



    Steve Jobs (in person on video) or Apple NEEDS to make a Press Release for the sake of the shareholders.



    It seems that only Apple has made money and the share holders have lost 57% in the last year.

    Yes, I'm talking about the cash reserve from all the people in the room that don't mind paying an APPLE TAX along with all the other taxes you'll be payintg in 2009.




    Steve Jobs, you're rich and so is APPLE. DO WHAT IS SO UNLIKE YOU AND DO THE RESPONSIBLE THING FOR THE SHAREHOLDERS.



    I've done considerable research and can't find one Charity that Steve has given to. Yes he gave Apple employee's 12 Million dollars worth of iPhones but his take will be considerably more than that and it was Apple not Steve Jobs that gave the "GIFT".



    Steve Jobs doesn't need to name the charities he gives to but you'd think the press would have at least 1 that didn't benefit himself.



    You talk about someone else being without merit, but you're not really explaining why your statement has merit.



    You're not making any sense, at least to me. I don't see you bothering to take a look at the big picture. Apple is still doing well, even if their share prices are down. All the markets are down. I'd like to see you point out a stock that isn't down from a year ago. They're probably out there, but I don't think there are a lot of them. That's just the nature of the stock market, Apple shares trend along with the market, but their actual product sales don't



    Unless Jobs is being hypocritical about telling people to give to charity when he himself does not, I don't see how that's any of our business.
  • Reply 136 of 157
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post


    So you would have no problem with this even if the "source" turned out to be dead wrong and had malicious intentions? And you would have no problem with this situation if it turned out that Gizmodo did nothing to corroborate this with an independent source?



    I really don't see how it's a good thing to let this sort of thing off the hook so casually, especially given the high risk of it just being pranking or stock manipulation.



    I wasn't offering my personal opinion, I was merely disecting Virgil's statement and providing a counter-point based on the 1st amendent. In any case, you offer a lot of presumptions there; a lot of "ifs" both pertaining to the reality of the situation and of my personal beliefs, which I don't entirely appreciate. If it turns out that Gizmodo's source did indeed have malicious intent, yes I would have a problem with that, because I believe its wrong to willfully seek to destroy a person's or company's credentials for whatever motive. But there is no proof of malicious intent either by Gizmodo or their source; I cannot provide any, nor can you, yet you yourself casually dismiss it as something of a prank or stock manipulation (ironic, since you state that this sort of thing should not be "let off the hook" so casually). I'll take Gizmodo's reporting at face value, which is just that- a report of someone's testimonial on the state of Job's health and Apple's usual tendency to be secretive about such matters. I'll reserve from injecting personal bias (either by presuming malicious intent or that the rumor is true) until further time goes by.
  • Reply 137 of 157
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Adjei View Post


    Where in Steve Job's job description does it state he has to give a weekly appearance or broadcast his private health.



    you need to check back a bit.. I gave you a link and a quote..!
  • Reply 138 of 157
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Adjei View Post


    So if he has a cold he should hold a press conference stating he hasn't cold, that will you make you happy.



    usually having a cold wouldn't impair his ability to run the company, at least longterm.
  • Reply 139 of 157
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post


    You talk about someone else being without merit, but you're not really explaining why your statement has merit.



    You're not making any sense, at least to me. I don't see you bothering to take a look at the big picture. Apple is still doing well, even if their share prices are down. All the markets are down. I'd like to see you point out a stock that isn't down from a year ago. They're probably out there, but I don't think there are a lot of them. That's just the nature of the stock market, Apple shares trend along with the market, but their actual product sales don't



    Unless Jobs is being hypocritical about telling people to give to charity when he himself does not, I don't see how that's any of our business.



    Jobs vs. Gates: Who's the Star? In regards to your charity rant.

    http://www.wired.com/gadgets/mac/com.../2006/01/70072



    a 2 second search gave me. I'm not wasting my time on doing any other research.

    See a patern. Most are companies that are good on the pocket book.



    Marvel (NYSE: MVL)

    $30.09

    12.7%



    NetEase.com (Nasdaq: NTES)

    $21.48

    13.4%



    JetBlue (Nasdaq: JBLU)

    $6.59

    11.7%



    Hasbro (NYSE: HAS)

    $28.30

    13.3%



    Wal-Mart (NYSE: WMT)

    $55.11

    18.0%



    Panera Bread (Nasdaq: PNRA)

    $49.17

    37.3%



    Netflix (Nasdaq: NFLX)

    $27.93

    4.9%
  • Reply 140 of 157
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MatrixMan View Post


    "STEVE JOBS HEALTH?"



    http://blogs.computerworld.com/what_...comment-123696



    For me, these were the most revealing parts of this anonymous comment posted on December 21, 2008 at 8:50 P.M. at the above URL:



    "I do know that SJ and his spouse have declined all holiday invitations this year, including some from various charities they've supported generously for years. Supposedly they declined an invitation to the Obama inauguration as well. And they supported the Democratic party generously during the campaign. Sounds to me like he's sick again. Or just sick of being sick."



    "SJ has been seen at Apple's campus on occasion. But less than he used to be. He has always traveled a great deal and apparently he's not doing that much any longer, either. The infamous plane he was given by the grateful Apple Board has been sitting on the runway more and more lately. When he does show up at Apple's campus, he's in his office, meeting with his assistants and his lieutenants and then out of the building and home again. All this takes place in the space of a couple of hours... or three at the outside. On many occasions spouse type is with him - or his trainer - or a friend. And they're seen driving rather than him piloting that MBZ himself like he used to. Everyone who has seen him face to face says he looks far worse than he did a few months ago. The weight is further down and his coloring is NOT robust or healthy at all in spite of some liberal use of self-tanners in an attempt to hide the paleness of his skin and the gray undertones. Any Apple Employee who has seen him and who dared to talk directly about it would probably be out on their ass in a heartbeat. The secrecy is serious. Very serious. My guess is that he's going to announce he's stepping down after the first quarter and his succession plan is already being put in place. He will stay on as the CEO Emeritus until he passes away or gets better. But chances of a meaningful recovery are probably slim at this point. He may have decided to take what is left of his time on earth and spend it with the family and friends that are closest to him. THAT would certainly be a very human decision. He'll also try to minimize the damage to Apple Stock as he exits. I would guess there's already a few world changing products in the pipeline that will roll out at the ADC in the spring... and beyond. It's fairly certain that MacWorld isn't going to see anything major other than what it's already seen by virtue of Apple calling it quits and the myriad of ramifications from that decision. A "Mac World" without Apple is nearly unthinkable. Yet it is happening! Wow.



    For the record - we lived in the bay area (Los Gatos Hills) for many years and we know several "top of the heap" Apple execs and their families as friends and neighbors. My "speculation" is largely fueled by the bits and pieces both my wife and I have heard from people much closer to SJ than we are. Just my thoughts based on what we all know of the man - with a little extra thrown in via recent observation at the corporate and personal level.



    Above all, Apple nor STEVE JOBS is NOT STUPID. They know full well the impact their silence is having and they would avoid it if there were something, anything, positive to announce and get the focus on his health shifted elsewhere. Sadly, there is not such a thing. Now the team must convince the world that Apple will go on long after Steve Jobs is not a part of it on a daily basis. I suspect that his spirit and intensity of personality will be there long after his body has left this earth - at least I like to think so..."



    A suspect commenter quoting another suspect commenter quoting John Doe 3rd parties. That's quite a paper trail of unreliable sources using nothing but hearsay, it comes across as an orchestrated attempt to create a grassroots panic.



    Whoever is behind all this will clearly go to some lengths to spread their lies...But what for? That's the question we need to be asking. There is no merit to these rumours, we know that. So for what purpose are they being propagated.
Sign In or Register to comment.