Wow.. care to explain how? teckstud can accuse SJ of lying, and play doctor on a forum, but I am not allowed to express my views in reaction to such a post, since it might be distasteful to someone like you?
Eat it, anantksundaram. I'm not the onlyone on here that thinks there are a lot of unanswered questions with this "disclosure".
Express whatever you like- no matter how bullying and hypocritical you care to be.
And for the record- I never accused SJ of lying- we all know that's impossible and never happens.
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.
Hey DocMAc- just curious, what kind of "sophisticated" blood tests are we talking here that would have taken this long for a doctor to adminster them and find out this diagnosis?
And why would it take until late spring to gain the weight back? That's like 6 months from now.
Please enjoy some much-deserved rest with your family and focus on getting healthy, strong and whole.
The creativity, daring, determination and endless attention to detail with which you pursue your work is an inspiration to me. However, it's the simple joy that is so evident when you release something new, that inspires me most. It's clear to me that you genuinely do love what you are doing and that is the real key to your success. That is what sets you apart and what people intuitively respond to. Here is to many more years of the same.
They didn't say "Jobs' health is poor and won't be better until Spring 2009."
They basically said "Jobs is on his deathbed and he won't be around any more come Spring 2009."
BIG DIFFERENCE between those two things.
Oh, and "one more thing," Gizmodo has been known to go back and edit articles after the fact, ESPECIALLY if they were wrong. If the article you're reading today says "won't be better until Spring 2009," that is NOT what it said originally.
Got any more unsubstantiated references pertaining to Gizmodo's article that you'd like to share?
Their article is still there at the link above and to the best of my recollection, it has the same wording that it had when I read it on the day it was first posted. And contrary to your claims regarding that article's content, they never "said" what you quoted them as "saying" namely that "Jobs is on his deathbed and he won't be around any more come Spring 2009." unless there is another article of theirs that I have not seen and that contains your quoted content verbatim in which case I will gladly apologize to you for my critical remarks (once you hyper-textually link me to it).
I can't help but wonder if you're confusing posted comments ABOUT the article with the article itself.
You even kinda contradicted yourself in the sentence where you quoted the above by using the word "basically" as a conditional qualifier of what was to come next and then went ahead and used quotation marks anyway. If you're gonna paraphrase, then by all means paraphrase (preferably a semi-accurate paraphrasing) but please don't hint at an upcoming paraphrase and then put your personal paraphrasing in quotes (as if your imperfect recollection is actually what Gizmodo or their source "said" in their article). If you are unable to produce the exact content you quoted them as saying (especially if it does not exist), then perhaps you should minimally consider how easy it is to either prove or disprove a quoted reference (could that be why you forgot to link to this Gizmodo article since it immediately disproves your exaggerated perceptions if not fictional fabrications?).
"In law, defamation (also called calumny, libel, slander, and vilification) is the communication of a statement that makes a false claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government or nation a negative image. Slander refers to a malicious, false, and defamatory spoken statement or report, while libel refers to any other form of communication such as written words or images."
Oh yeah. I almost forgot what your defensive posturing is. According to you, "Gizmodo has been known to go back and edit articles after the fact, ESPECIALLY if they were wrong." So since I still cannot find anything that is even close to what you quoted as being in Gizmodo's article, that must mean that those mischievous malcontents over at Gizmodo apparently removed only the parts you incorrectly quoted them as saying right after you read those parts, right?
Did you hear the rumor that Gizmodo's stock went down by 5 points right after your first negative posting about them here? You're not buying short on them today, are you?
:-)
By the way, the main premise of Gizmodo's article is contained in their first two sentences:
"According to a previously reliable source, Apple misrepresented the reasons behind Macworld and Jobs' keynote cancellation. Allegedly, the real cause is his rapidly declining health."
Based on the revelations posted online today by Steve Jobs himself about "a hormonal imbalance", it appears to me that Gizmodo's source was closer to the truth than initially perceived by the legion of those whose angry words I do vividly recall. In fact, were it not for the recent Gizmodo article and subsequent suspicions about the health of Apple's CEO, who knows if this open letter from Steve Jobs would have materialized at all.
What offends me the most about your unjustified remarks is that Gizmodo properly qualified their article by including "RUMOR" at the top of the page and even expressed personal concerns that they hoped their source was wrong this time (even though this source had been right in the past about other Apple matters).
I actually have a counter-intelligence theory that goes like this:
Gizmodo's source was approved by both Apple and Steve Jobs to speak openly to Gizmodo without fear of retaliation but was also given a script to strictly adhere to. This way, Apple could (and did) monitor the aftermath to determine whether the timing was right for Steve Jobs to openly address this matter now (before Macworld) or later on.
And as cygnusrk727 said (and summed it up best)...
"the larger truth still remains that Apple lied about the real reason Jobs backed out of Macworld."
The latest words of Steve Jobs himself seem to support this position rather than contradict it.
But when all is said and done, in my opinion, Steve's gut-wrenchingly honest disclosure has turned what might have been an Apple-initiated public relations nightmare of historic proportions into a cordial invitation TO DREAM THE MAGICAL DREAM that this week offers to everyone and forgot about all this hormonal stuff to have some memorable Macworld fun!!!
You mean like the first time that Steve left in the 1980's? If Apple could do so well without Steve, why did anyone want him back at all?
And how about the opinion that getting Steve out of Apple might be a good thing? Maybe with new leadership, Apple might start making computers that people want to buy, with features that people want, rather than just what Steve wants you to buy.
And how do you know people don't want to buy their computers or don't like the features that don't come with it?
Unless you are claiming that: (i) SJ is lying (despite the fact that it could create problems for him with the regulators) and (ii) You're a doctor, you should shut your mouth on this topic.
If he really wanted to stop the speculation once and for all, he should have given the exact name of the condition and what treatment he is taking. People only speculate when there's info missing.
That said, he is clearly a man who values his privacy and I wish him well.
No he should have made it better and included his medical history for all to see, that would stop the speculation.
While the Gizmodo story read more like an opinion piece (a bad one at that), the larger truth still remains that Apple lied about the real reason Jobs backed out of Macworld. This is Apple's second lie about his health if you remember the "common bug." The fact is, by Steve's own words now, he is unhealthy. Perhaps not at death's door, but hardly "fit as a fiddle" as some were saying who bashed the Gizmodo story.
How did they lie about the real reason he won't be at Macworld when they gave no reason, as for some of you.
Hey DocMAc- just curious, what kind of "sophisticated" blood tests are we talking here that would have taken this long for a doctor to adminster them and find out this diagnosis?
And why would it take until late spring to gain the weight back? That's like 6 months from now.
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.
How did they lie about the real reason he won't be at Macworld when they gave no reason, as for some of you.
I addressed that in an early post. I stand corrected that Apple did not give a reason in the official Apple press release. I still believe though that the statement was purposefully misleading as it went on and on talking about not doing trade shows. Look back through the threads. People cited this as the reason that Jobs was healthy and cited the trade show stance as the reason he was not giving the keynote. The true fact came out today; health is the real reason Jobs will not be giving the keynote.
I addressed that in an early post. I stand corrected that Apple did not give a reason in the official Apple press release. I still believe though that the statement was purposefully misleading as it went on and on talking about not doing trade shows. Look back through the threads. People cited this as the reason that Jobs was healthy and cited the trade show stance as the reason he was not giving the keynote. The true fact came out today; health is the real reason Jobs will not be giving the keynote.
I have reported on this too (about it being his health) as well as things like, Apple removing firewire = not allowing Pro users to use the macbooks, but lack of firewire also affects thousands of musicians (firewire far outweighs USB audio devices), mom and pop cam corder users, and target disc mode users.
That said, I and hope everyone else, prays that Steve is not in any pain - have been in pain and still suffer from pain, have tried everything from dilaudid, morphine IR, hydromorphone, morphine ER, hyrdocodone and everything under the sun. When you are in pain, everything else is secondary, its amazing how much we can go on and on, never taking into consideration health, pain. One really does have it all when he or she has their health and pray for everyone suffering today, may you all be healed and find relief. In other words, get well soon everyone, you too Steve.
Now release a mini with FIREWIRE, dual core, killer machine, 16 core mac pro's and cut prices. :-)
I say cut prices as a i7 can be had for $350, add motherboard, $100, tera drive ($100), GPU, $80 and a decent one at that, some old memory lying around=FREE, Power supply, $60 for a decent one, case (free for some, I have a few), that's $700 dollars for a state of the art system and need to start seeing Apple adopt price points from Intel price reductions, not to mention the reduced cost it is for MB vs MBP as they both use same UNI body, therefore further reducing costs. Sure, I understand Apple keeping prices up makes it seem more a better product, but only the Mac Pro, being PRO and all, should be their flag ship and the AIR is way over priced. It's worth more like $699. Just my .02 cents.
Hey DocMAc- just curious, what kind of "sophisticated" blood tests are we talking here that would have taken this long for a doctor to adminster them and find out this diagnosis?
And why would it take until late spring to gain the weight back? That's like 6 months from now.
Before I get into this, let me first state that i have no idea what Steve has wrong with him, or what tests were done. However, it is possible that he has Addison's disease, a deficiency of a cortisol production. A simple cortisol level is often done as a screening test, but this can sometimes be in the normal range even in someone with the disorder. A more sophisticated test is a ACTH-stimulation test, in which hormone levels are measured before and after an additional hormone (which is supposed to boost coritsol levels) is administered. There are tests that are more elaborate still.
The diagnosis could have been missed based on initial testing, and more definitive testing could have brought it out. Many endocrine (hormone) conditions have both simple and more sophisticated tests available.
Eat it, anantksundaram. I'm not the onlyone on here that thinks there are a lot of unanswered questions with this "disclosure".
Express whatever you like- no matter how bullying and hypocritical you care to be.
And for the record- I never accused SJ of lying- we all know that's impossible and never happens.
Why don't you just get it over and done with and ask for his entire medical record. Of course that'd probably be misinformation too, to cover up the real issue, right?
The true fact came out today; health is the real reason Jobs will not be giving the keynote.
It did? Could you, perhaps, point us to that revelation?
I read the letter Steve Jobs wrote and posted on the Apple website, but it does not say that. Doesn't directly deny it, either, but that doesn't justify using the word "fact." Unless you're trying to drive the stock price down. Are you?
"While a hormone imbalance might be unrelated to his cancer, pancreatic dysfunction would be the top suspicion, said Dr. Richard Auchus, an endocrinologist at UT-Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas.
"The pancreas makes digestive enzymes, and if the pancreas doesn't make enough of those, then people can't digest foods and getting nutrients is a problem," Auchus said. The solution could be as simple as taking pills to replace or augment the enzyme, as is commonly done to treat pancreatic insufficiency in children with cystic fibrosis, Auchus said"
Associated Press Writer Stephanie Nano, AP Medical Writer Marilynn Marchione and AP Technology Writer Jessica Mintz contributed to this report.
"Fortunately, after further testing, my doctors think they have found the cause?a hormone imbalance that has been 'robbing' me of the proteins my body needs to be healthy. Sophisticated blood tests have confirmed this diagnosis."
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.
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.
Probably because they don't feel his health has anything to do with the business. Sure he plays a very important role but Apple isn't a one-man-band. It's a massive international company and despite him being CEO, his duties are probably pretty flexible.
Constantly pressuring for updates on Jobs is like interfering with every medical checkup Bill Gates gets. There's no point doing that and there's no point bothering Jobs about his personal life.
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.
He doesn't need thousands of people bloating his inbox every day with complaints about how one of the millions of products they ship is upsetting someone.
Just leave the poor guy alone and let him live out his life like you would expect if you were him.
It did? Could you, perhaps, point us to that revelation?
I read the letter Steve Jobs wrote and posted on the Apple website, but it does not say that. Doesn't directly deny it, either, but that doesn't justify using the word "fact." Unless you're trying to drive the stock price down. Are you?
I don't own stock period. The fact that people keep tying his health to Apple's stock is to me what is truly sickening. I've never met the man but I have watched him for years. In that sense, I care about him and his health. Look, you nay-sayers didn't want to believe before that he was unhealthy, and you seemed more worried about your stock then the truth. All I was after was the truth. It came out today.
Comments
Wow.. care to explain how? teckstud can accuse SJ of lying, and play doctor on a forum, but I am not allowed to express my views in reaction to such a post, since it might be distasteful to someone like you?
Eat it, anantksundaram. I'm not the onlyone on here that thinks there are a lot of unanswered questions with this "disclosure".
Express whatever you like- no matter how bullying and hypocritical you care to be.
And for the record- I never accused SJ of lying- we all know that's impossible and never happens.
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.
Hey DocMAc- just curious, what kind of "sophisticated" blood tests are we talking here that would have taken this long for a doctor to adminster them and find out this diagnosis?
And why would it take until late spring to gain the weight back? That's like 6 months from now.
Please enjoy some much-deserved rest with your family and focus on getting healthy, strong and whole.
The creativity, daring, determination and endless attention to detail with which you pursue your work is an inspiration to me. However, it's the simple joy that is so evident when you release something new, that inspires me most. It's clear to me that you genuinely do love what you are doing and that is the real key to your success. That is what sets you apart and what people intuitively respond to. Here is to many more years of the same.
Thank you and Be Well!
But that's not what Gizmodo said.
They didn't say "Jobs' health is poor and won't be better until Spring 2009."
They basically said "Jobs is on his deathbed and he won't be around any more come Spring 2009."
BIG DIFFERENCE between those two things.
Oh, and "one more thing," Gizmodo has been known to go back and edit articles after the fact, ESPECIALLY if they were wrong. If the article you're reading today says "won't be better until Spring 2009," that is NOT what it said originally.
Got any more unsubstantiated references pertaining to Gizmodo's article that you'd like to share?
http://gizmodo.com/5120687/steve-job...d-cancellation
Their article is still there at the link above and to the best of my recollection, it has the same wording that it had when I read it on the day it was first posted. And contrary to your claims regarding that article's content, they never "said" what you quoted them as "saying" namely that "Jobs is on his deathbed and he won't be around any more come Spring 2009." unless there is another article of theirs that I have not seen and that contains your quoted content verbatim in which case I will gladly apologize to you for my critical remarks (once you hyper-textually link me to it).
I can't help but wonder if you're confusing posted comments ABOUT the article with the article itself.
You even kinda contradicted yourself in the sentence where you quoted the above by using the word "basically" as a conditional qualifier of what was to come next and then went ahead and used quotation marks anyway. If you're gonna paraphrase, then by all means paraphrase (preferably a semi-accurate paraphrasing) but please don't hint at an upcoming paraphrase and then put your personal paraphrasing in quotes (as if your imperfect recollection is actually what Gizmodo or their source "said" in their article). If you are unable to produce the exact content you quoted them as saying (especially if it does not exist), then perhaps you should minimally consider how easy it is to either prove or disprove a quoted reference (could that be why you forgot to link to this Gizmodo article since it immediately disproves your exaggerated perceptions if not fictional fabrications?).
FROM:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation
"In law, defamation (also called calumny, libel, slander, and vilification) is the communication of a statement that makes a false claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government or nation a negative image. Slander refers to a malicious, false, and defamatory spoken statement or report, while libel refers to any other form of communication such as written words or images."
Oh yeah. I almost forgot what your defensive posturing is. According to you, "Gizmodo has been known to go back and edit articles after the fact, ESPECIALLY if they were wrong." So since I still cannot find anything that is even close to what you quoted as being in Gizmodo's article, that must mean that those mischievous malcontents over at Gizmodo apparently removed only the parts you incorrectly quoted them as saying right after you read those parts, right?
Did you hear the rumor that Gizmodo's stock went down by 5 points right after your first negative posting about them here? You're not buying short on them today, are you?
:-)
By the way, the main premise of Gizmodo's article is contained in their first two sentences:
"According to a previously reliable source, Apple misrepresented the reasons behind Macworld and Jobs' keynote cancellation. Allegedly, the real cause is his rapidly declining health."
Based on the revelations posted online today by Steve Jobs himself about "a hormonal imbalance", it appears to me that Gizmodo's source was closer to the truth than initially perceived by the legion of those whose angry words I do vividly recall. In fact, were it not for the recent Gizmodo article and subsequent suspicions about the health of Apple's CEO, who knows if this open letter from Steve Jobs would have materialized at all.
What offends me the most about your unjustified remarks is that Gizmodo properly qualified their article by including "RUMOR" at the top of the page and even expressed personal concerns that they hoped their source was wrong this time (even though this source had been right in the past about other Apple matters).
I actually have a counter-intelligence theory that goes like this:
Gizmodo's source was approved by both Apple and Steve Jobs to speak openly to Gizmodo without fear of retaliation but was also given a script to strictly adhere to. This way, Apple could (and did) monitor the aftermath to determine whether the timing was right for Steve Jobs to openly address this matter now (before Macworld) or later on.
And as cygnusrk727 said (and summed it up best)...
"the larger truth still remains that Apple lied about the real reason Jobs backed out of Macworld."
The latest words of Steve Jobs himself seem to support this position rather than contradict it.
But when all is said and done, in my opinion, Steve's gut-wrenchingly honest disclosure has turned what might have been an Apple-initiated public relations nightmare of historic proportions into a cordial invitation TO DREAM THE MAGICAL DREAM that this week offers to everyone and forgot about all this hormonal stuff to have some memorable Macworld fun!!!
from tasmania
You mean like the first time that Steve left in the 1980's? If Apple could do so well without Steve, why did anyone want him back at all?
And how about the opinion that getting Steve out of Apple might be a good thing? Maybe with new leadership, Apple might start making computers that people want to buy, with features that people want, rather than just what Steve wants you to buy.
And how do you know people don't want to buy their computers or don't like the features that don't come with it?
Unless you are claiming that: (i) SJ is lying (despite the fact that it could create problems for him with the regulators) and (ii) You're a doctor, you should shut your mouth on this topic.
Well said.
If he really wanted to stop the speculation once and for all, he should have given the exact name of the condition and what treatment he is taking. People only speculate when there's info missing.
That said, he is clearly a man who values his privacy and I wish him well.
No he should have made it better and included his medical history for all to see, that would stop the speculation.
While the Gizmodo story read more like an opinion piece (a bad one at that), the larger truth still remains that Apple lied about the real reason Jobs backed out of Macworld. This is Apple's second lie about his health if you remember the "common bug." The fact is, by Steve's own words now, he is unhealthy. Perhaps not at death's door, but hardly "fit as a fiddle" as some were saying who bashed the Gizmodo story.
How did they lie about the real reason he won't be at Macworld when they gave no reason, as for some of you.
Then all will be right with the world.
LOL...thats right!
Hey DocMAc- just curious, what kind of "sophisticated" blood tests are we talking here that would have taken this long for a doctor to adminster them and find out this diagnosis?
And why would it take until late spring to gain the weight back? That's like 6 months from now.
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.
How did they lie about the real reason he won't be at Macworld when they gave no reason, as for some of you.
I addressed that in an early post. I stand corrected that Apple did not give a reason in the official Apple press release. I still believe though that the statement was purposefully misleading as it went on and on talking about not doing trade shows. Look back through the threads. People cited this as the reason that Jobs was healthy and cited the trade show stance as the reason he was not giving the keynote. The true fact came out today; health is the real reason Jobs will not be giving the keynote.
I addressed that in an early post. I stand corrected that Apple did not give a reason in the official Apple press release. I still believe though that the statement was purposefully misleading as it went on and on talking about not doing trade shows. Look back through the threads. People cited this as the reason that Jobs was healthy and cited the trade show stance as the reason he was not giving the keynote. The true fact came out today; health is the real reason Jobs will not be giving the keynote.
I have reported on this too (about it being his health) as well as things like, Apple removing firewire = not allowing Pro users to use the macbooks, but lack of firewire also affects thousands of musicians (firewire far outweighs USB audio devices), mom and pop cam corder users, and target disc mode users.
That said, I and hope everyone else, prays that Steve is not in any pain - have been in pain and still suffer from pain, have tried everything from dilaudid, morphine IR, hydromorphone, morphine ER, hyrdocodone and everything under the sun. When you are in pain, everything else is secondary, its amazing how much we can go on and on, never taking into consideration health, pain. One really does have it all when he or she has their health and pray for everyone suffering today, may you all be healed and find relief. In other words, get well soon everyone, you too Steve.
Now release a mini with FIREWIRE, dual core, killer machine, 16 core mac pro's and cut prices. :-)
I say cut prices as a i7 can be had for $350, add motherboard, $100, tera drive ($100), GPU, $80 and a decent one at that, some old memory lying around=FREE, Power supply, $60 for a decent one, case (free for some, I have a few), that's $700 dollars for a state of the art system and need to start seeing Apple adopt price points from Intel price reductions, not to mention the reduced cost it is for MB vs MBP as they both use same UNI body, therefore further reducing costs. Sure, I understand Apple keeping prices up makes it seem more a better product, but only the Mac Pro, being PRO and all, should be their flag ship and the AIR is way over priced. It's worth more like $699. Just my .02 cents.
Hey DocMAc- just curious, what kind of "sophisticated" blood tests are we talking here that would have taken this long for a doctor to adminster them and find out this diagnosis?
And why would it take until late spring to gain the weight back? That's like 6 months from now.
Before I get into this, let me first state that i have no idea what Steve has wrong with him, or what tests were done. However, it is possible that he has Addison's disease, a deficiency of a cortisol production. A simple cortisol level is often done as a screening test, but this can sometimes be in the normal range even in someone with the disorder. A more sophisticated test is a ACTH-stimulation test, in which hormone levels are measured before and after an additional hormone (which is supposed to boost coritsol levels) is administered. There are tests that are more elaborate still.
The diagnosis could have been missed based on initial testing, and more definitive testing could have brought it out. Many endocrine (hormone) conditions have both simple and more sophisticated tests available.
Eat it, anantksundaram. I'm not the onlyone on here that thinks there are a lot of unanswered questions with this "disclosure".
Express whatever you like- no matter how bullying and hypocritical you care to be.
And for the record- I never accused SJ of lying- we all know that's impossible and never happens.
Why don't you just get it over and done with and ask for his entire medical record. Of course that'd probably be misinformation too, to cover up the real issue, right?
The true fact came out today; health is the real reason Jobs will not be giving the keynote.
It did? Could you, perhaps, point us to that revelation?
I read the letter Steve Jobs wrote and posted on the Apple website, but it does not say that. Doesn't directly deny it, either, but that doesn't justify using the word "fact." Unless you're trying to drive the stock price down. Are you?
"The pancreas makes digestive enzymes, and if the pancreas doesn't make enough of those, then people can't digest foods and getting nutrients is a problem," Auchus said. The solution could be as simple as taking pills to replace or augment the enzyme, as is commonly done to treat pancreatic insufficiency in children with cystic fibrosis, Auchus said"
Associated Press Writer Stephanie Nano, AP Medical Writer Marilynn Marchione and AP Technology Writer Jessica Mintz contributed to this report.
"Fortunately, after further testing, my doctors think they have found the cause?a hormone imbalance that has been 'robbing' me of the proteins my body needs to be healthy. Sophisticated blood tests have confirmed this diagnosis."
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.
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.
Probably because they don't feel his health has anything to do with the business. Sure he plays a very important role but Apple isn't a one-man-band. It's a massive international company and despite him being CEO, his duties are probably pretty flexible.
Constantly pressuring for updates on Jobs is like interfering with every medical checkup Bill Gates gets. There's no point doing that and there's no point bothering Jobs about his personal life.
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.
He doesn't need thousands of people bloating his inbox every day with complaints about how one of the millions of products they ship is upsetting someone.
Just leave the poor guy alone and let him live out his life like you would expect if you were him.
It did? Could you, perhaps, point us to that revelation?
I read the letter Steve Jobs wrote and posted on the Apple website, but it does not say that. Doesn't directly deny it, either, but that doesn't justify using the word "fact." Unless you're trying to drive the stock price down. Are you?
I don't own stock period. The fact that people keep tying his health to Apple's stock is to me what is truly sickening. I've never met the man but I have watched him for years. In that sense, I care about him and his health. Look, you nay-sayers didn't want to believe before that he was unhealthy, and you seemed more worried about your stock then the truth. All I was after was the truth. It came out today.