You know, I just want to say your attack on Cringely is kinda fucked up. The man has been in the game for a lot longer than any of us, and even had a relationship with Jobs and Apple when it was still a garage operation. I understand the need for objectivity, but this is a little over the top. Btw, his Triumph of The Nerds is an amazing doc so show some respect.
I get the point of discrediting this guy, because this is pretty ridiculous, but the sentence that has the bio excerpt, looks just thrown in the middle of the story haphazardly and made the whole article difficult to read.
So this comes from a guy who once predicted that pc's would be obsolete by the year 2000...give me a break! I don't think this guy knows anything.
I hope Steve Jobs makes a recovery from whatever he's suffering from and that he feels up to and wants to continue to lead one of the most unique companies in the last 100 years, and know that the Cringely's and Macalopes of the world make their bones on often half-assed hyperbole.
however, while he was off by a decade or a little more, PC's - in their 1990's roles - are already becoming obsolete with decreasing sales - and it IS more and more about "the software," for which - among the folk - AC-tethered PC's are already a niche product, and just as notebooks began to claim supremacy as the digital content delivery system kings of the hill, they're in the process already of being supplanted by smart phones, netbooks, and dedicated media browsing and viewing devices (Kindles, Apple TV's, Netflix boxes, etc., etc.).
for the uses and predelictions of most - especially in the hard times a'fallin' and which will be with us for some time - a $1500 MacBook (even the $999 model) is severe overkill.
especially when a $300 gee-gaw will do the jobs they want a connected digital device to do.
it's long been speculated this is behind Apple's delay in entering the wide product gulf between iPhone and MacBook, i.e., that their calculations are showing that fully OS X devices in this class might sell very well indeed, but would seriously cannabalize sales of their high-margin, high-gross revenue portables in a way the iPhone and Touch do not.
they can't roll back the trend for long, however, and with the iPhone are part of it, so they will enter this space once they feel they have a product that will (or can plausibly claim to) redefine the concept of an ultra-light, sub-$700 device.
Consumer and vertical market desktop PC's won't disappear (IBM still markets mainframes with roots in the 60's and earlier), and notebook sales may continue to even grow (with economic recovery) before leveling off and ultimately declining some, but the real growth segments for "software delivery" will absolutely be elsewhere.
I've never seen anybody doing anything in a coffee shop with a notebook they couldn't be doing with a lighter, cheaper machine, and once people fully recognize this and that they can do on-the-road presentation shows with something they can carry in their pocket or at least not much bigger than a legal pad, well then, by gum, that's what they'll do.
so it's not Cringely's original thought, surely, but it is all about the software. That is, the hardware of any era is merely the Trojan Horse, with the soldiers - the software - being carried along for the ride.
and guess what? it will only continue to be so, and these new icons of their time will be replaced too.....
Maybe he just has his iChat status setting on "Invisible"??
Or he switched to another service, or they are testing a new iChat, or, or, or ...
I think if Cringley is allowed to publish this kind of crap he should say exactly *how* he "checked it out." Does he just mean that others on the same chat group haven't seen Steve? Or that he has actual information that the reason for the absence is dire illness? What he has published is the equivalent of some idiot posting here and merely adding "I know this to be a fact!" at the end. Who says so?
That's violating one of the first rules of journalism. If you know something to be true and have checked it out, then you have to say what you checked and what the result was. Just adding "and this is absolutely true!!!" is as relevant as adding ZOMG!
... however, while he was off by a decade or a little more, PC's - in their 1990's roles - are already becoming obsolete with decreasing sales - and it IS more and more about "the software," ...
He said "obsolete" so he is off by more than a decade, since the decade has all but passed already and we are actually at the very *beginning* of this process. The PC industry lives on hype and unbridled Futurism true, but Cringley was still wrong, and by at least two decades, possibly three.
Since when he said that it was the 90's, this means he was off by something like a factor of four to six. Something taking four to six times longer than your prediction, is pretty bad by any standard.
I thought it was an interesting read. I agree with Cringely's assertion that as long as Jobs is CEO or is expected to return as CEO then the question of his health is a valid subject. I also agree that Jobs *likes* to be talked about.
I think Apple's handling of Steve's current health issues is suspicious to say the least. To frame it as simply a privacy issue is rather ridiculous; Apple executives know as well as anyone that any word of Jobs leaving Apple would cause a huge hit to their stock value (even though the company would be just fine either way). Clearly, the situation is such that they can't risk being transparent about it.
So if Jobs logs into chat less and less until he's not on at all, that's at least interesting. Cringely isn't suggesting anything more than that. He's not suggesting that Jobs is too ill to log into his computer, just that he's not using his computer. When you're taking a break, unplugging from the grid is a good thing to do.
It's interesting, and I'm glad Cringely reported it.
Word. I've switched to Skype for Video chats -- iChat lately has been just awful.
So far as Cringely and the stupid article -- no kidding -- AI should know better than to reprint this stuff. Maybe Mrs. Jobs grocked that Steve was still micromanaging Apple when he should be relaxing and banned his iChat use. The iChat datum, even if true, is meaningless without other info, which neither Cringely nor AI have.
Some of Cringely's interviews are good, but when it comes to rumors or gossip he is very often off the mark. I must say I don't give this report much weight at all.
Do you always want to bury your head in the sand when you don't want to see something? AppleInsider did not originate this article, it is reporting on the article. It is related to Apple, since there had to have been some sell off because investors live and breath this crap, thus it is relevant and appropriate.
I get it. AppleInsider should only post happy thoughts and articles, and if anyone in the world says anything about Apple you don't like it should just be ignored.
Kasper, please don't cave to this kind of group think pressure!
Or maybe the guy just took a vacation! I'm sure it took some transition time during which Steve would need to be in more frequent contact to make sure his duties were transferred to other employees. But once that is transferred, his need to be in constant contact would be reduced. Someone like Steve wouldn't just walk out the door and instantly be out of communcation. It takes time to make sure things are transferred properly.
"Steve came online each day and remained there for hours and hours as you'd expect a Silicon Valley mogul to do."
I wouldn't expect ANYONE to keep that up during an entire intensive treatment/recovery period. Heck, I gave up IM almost entirely a couple months ago because I just "didn't feel like it," and I'm not even sick.
We already know this is a serious treatment/recovery period and a cause for concern. IM habits (reported from questionable sources, no less) don't add any real information to that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kresh
Do you always want to bury your head in the sand when you don't want to see something? AppleInsider did not originate this article, it is reporting on the article. It is related to Apple, since there had to have been some sell off because investors live and breath this crap, thus it is relevant and appropriate.
I get it. AppleInsider should only post happy thoughts and articles, and if anyone in the world says anything about Apple you don't like it should just be ignored.
Kasper, please don't cave to this kind of group think pressure!
Avoid the group-think that makes you assume people aren't willing to hear anything bad about Apple There are all kinds on here of course, anti-Apple zealots and pro-Apple folks who annoyingly live on the bright side. But for the most part, you'll find that people on this site criticize POSITIVE rumors vehemently too. The criticism, in both cases, is legitimate when based on the quality of the source and the info. In this case, a questionable unknown source is relaying info that has no clear relevance. In short, the article is "someone MAY have said that Steve Jobs MAY be using IM less recently." That's little to do with anything beyond that, and that makes it not much of a story. Worth a mention, since it's a rumor after all, but I do expect people to discuss the quality of rumors. That's pretty important in fact.
I think Apple's handling of Steve's current health issues is suspicious to say the least. To frame it as simply a privacy issue is rather ridiculous; Apple executives know as well as anyone that any word of Jobs leaving Apple would cause a huge hit to their stock value (even though the company would be just fine either way). Clearly, the situation is such that they can't risk being transparent about it.
So if Jobs logs into chat less and less until he's not on at all, that's at least interesting. Cringely isn't suggesting anything more than that. He's not suggesting that Jobs is too ill to log into his computer, just that he's not using his compute...
Cringely never says that Jobs is "too ill" but clearly implies it. The subtext practically screams it.
So far as Apple hiding Jobs' health status because they are afraid that the stock will take a hit -- that's just absurd, they'd have to be insane. Forget about the consequences about lying about something like this when it comes to a public company, not to mention one that the SEC is already paying close attention to -- but Jobs not returning is already priced in to Apple's stock. In the medium term, Apple would probably be better off if they announced Jobs' retirement because it would force investors to look at Apple's VERY strong fundamentals and low P/E ratio and stop trading on gossip and rumors.
IMO, the most likely reason Apple is keeping mum is the most obvious one -- no one knows exactly what's wrong with Jobs including his doctors, and Jobs has absolutely vetoed the publication of daily medical bulletins -- and who could blame him.
And the reason why the story came out Saturday is not because the shareholders meeting is on Wednesday, right? Riiiight. Way to stoke the fire for hits, Mr Cringely. You sir got class.
It seems to me the market has already "priced in" the chance that Jobs may never return to Apple. The more pertinent question is, what is Apple going to do going forward, and are they delaying new product introductions (iMac, Mac mini) because of Steve's absence?
What a ridiculous gossip from someone that hasn't had one "right" for many years now...AI, you may please take it down, because it doesn't deserve space or pagehits at all..
To put it another way: The guy is being LESS NERDY and using less computers; so now THIS means he is in worse health? Go figure...and STFU, Cringely...SJ's no immortal anyway...
it would force investors to look at Apple's VERY strong fundamentals and low P/E ratio and stop trading on gossip and rumors.
I think you're wrong there. Stock prices rarely reflect what is, but rather reflect expectations of what will be.
With Jobs gone the expectation at best would be 'let's hope it continues as is' but more likely people will be hesitant assuming that without Jobs' input new ideas will become rarer and not as spot on and Apple will slowly lose its edge. With that expectation stock prices will dive - regardless of current fundamentals.
Woah Woah Woah, what is this a democracy? I hate to break it to ya, but AI is a privately owned website. Whats with all this "we" stuff? Kasper's got freedom of press here. I understand that some people might not like the content (myself included) but asking someone to relinquish their First Amendment Rights is pretty ballsy there guy.
I would never advocate dictating what should or should not be done with this site as was done by the previous poster, but the point here, and in a few other similar articles, is that this sort of story is so completely out there, and so meaningless, that it is just depressing to see as someone who really knows something about Apple. And for a true Apple site maintained by someone who surely knows Apple inside and out to be propagating filth like this is pretty bad.
I think all of us want to see real and meaningful articles. They're the reason why I have an account here. But these off-the-wall analyst attempts at, what, market manipulation? If I'm going to hear about them I'd prefer for it to be in the context of a market watch update of some sort, not reported as actual news.
That said, I was very happy to see that Kasper is taking this concern into consideration.
Comments
So this comes from a guy who once predicted that pc's would be obsolete by the year 2000...give me a break! I don't think this guy knows anything.
I hope Steve Jobs makes a recovery from whatever he's suffering from and that he feels up to and wants to continue to lead one of the most unique companies in the last 100 years, and know that the Cringely's and Macalopes of the world make their bones on often half-assed hyperbole.
however, while he was off by a decade or a little more, PC's - in their 1990's roles - are already becoming obsolete with decreasing sales - and it IS more and more about "the software," for which - among the folk - AC-tethered PC's are already a niche product, and just as notebooks began to claim supremacy as the digital content delivery system kings of the hill, they're in the process already of being supplanted by smart phones, netbooks, and dedicated media browsing and viewing devices (Kindles, Apple TV's, Netflix boxes, etc., etc.).
for the uses and predelictions of most - especially in the hard times a'fallin' and which will be with us for some time - a $1500 MacBook (even the $999 model) is severe overkill.
especially when a $300 gee-gaw will do the jobs they want a connected digital device to do.
it's long been speculated this is behind Apple's delay in entering the wide product gulf between iPhone and MacBook, i.e., that their calculations are showing that fully OS X devices in this class might sell very well indeed, but would seriously cannabalize sales of their high-margin, high-gross revenue portables in a way the iPhone and Touch do not.
they can't roll back the trend for long, however, and with the iPhone are part of it, so they will enter this space once they feel they have a product that will (or can plausibly claim to) redefine the concept of an ultra-light, sub-$700 device.
Consumer and vertical market desktop PC's won't disappear (IBM still markets mainframes with roots in the 60's and earlier), and notebook sales may continue to even grow (with economic recovery) before leveling off and ultimately declining some, but the real growth segments for "software delivery" will absolutely be elsewhere.
I've never seen anybody doing anything in a coffee shop with a notebook they couldn't be doing with a lighter, cheaper machine, and once people fully recognize this and that they can do on-the-road presentation shows with something they can carry in their pocket or at least not much bigger than a legal pad, well then, by gum, that's what they'll do.
so it's not Cringely's original thought, surely, but it is all about the software. That is, the hardware of any era is merely the Trojan Horse, with the soldiers - the software - being carried along for the ride.
and guess what? it will only continue to be so, and these new icons of their time will be replaced too.....
Maybe he just has his iChat status setting on "Invisible"??
Or he switched to another service, or they are testing a new iChat, or, or, or ...
I think if Cringley is allowed to publish this kind of crap he should say exactly *how* he "checked it out." Does he just mean that others on the same chat group haven't seen Steve? Or that he has actual information that the reason for the absence is dire illness? What he has published is the equivalent of some idiot posting here and merely adding "I know this to be a fact!" at the end. Who says so?
That's violating one of the first rules of journalism. If you know something to be true and have checked it out, then you have to say what you checked and what the result was. Just adding "and this is absolutely true!!!" is as relevant as adding ZOMG!
... however, while he was off by a decade or a little more, PC's - in their 1990's roles - are already becoming obsolete with decreasing sales - and it IS more and more about "the software," ...
He said "obsolete" so he is off by more than a decade, since the decade has all but passed already and we are actually at the very *beginning* of this process. The PC industry lives on hype and unbridled Futurism true, but Cringley was still wrong, and by at least two decades, possibly three.
Since when he said that it was the 90's, this means he was off by something like a factor of four to six. Something taking four to six times longer than your prediction, is pretty bad by any standard.
I think Apple's handling of Steve's current health issues is suspicious to say the least. To frame it as simply a privacy issue is rather ridiculous; Apple executives know as well as anyone that any word of Jobs leaving Apple would cause a huge hit to their stock value (even though the company would be just fine either way). Clearly, the situation is such that they can't risk being transparent about it.
So if Jobs logs into chat less and less until he's not on at all, that's at least interesting. Cringely isn't suggesting anything more than that. He's not suggesting that Jobs is too ill to log into his computer, just that he's not using his computer. When you're taking a break, unplugging from the grid is a good thing to do.
It's interesting, and I'm glad Cringely reported it.
Maybe he finally realized iChat doesn't work.
Word. I've switched to Skype for Video chats -- iChat lately has been just awful.
So far as Cringely and the stupid article -- no kidding -- AI should know better than to reprint this stuff. Maybe Mrs. Jobs grocked that Steve was still micromanaging Apple when he should be relaxing and banned his iChat use. The iChat datum, even if true, is meaningless without other info, which neither Cringely nor AI have.
I get it. AppleInsider should only post happy thoughts and articles, and if anyone in the world says anything about Apple you don't like it should just be ignored.
Kasper, please don't cave to this kind of group think pressure!
I wouldn't expect ANYONE to keep that up during an entire intensive treatment/recovery period. Heck, I gave up IM almost entirely a couple months ago because I just "didn't feel like it," and I'm not even sick.
We already know this is a serious treatment/recovery period and a cause for concern. IM habits (reported from questionable sources, no less) don't add any real information to that.
Do you always want to bury your head in the sand when you don't want to see something? AppleInsider did not originate this article, it is reporting on the article. It is related to Apple, since there had to have been some sell off because investors live and breath this crap, thus it is relevant and appropriate.
I get it. AppleInsider should only post happy thoughts and articles, and if anyone in the world says anything about Apple you don't like it should just be ignored.
Kasper, please don't cave to this kind of group think pressure!
Avoid the group-think that makes you assume people aren't willing to hear anything bad about Apple
I think Apple's handling of Steve's current health issues is suspicious to say the least. To frame it as simply a privacy issue is rather ridiculous; Apple executives know as well as anyone that any word of Jobs leaving Apple would cause a huge hit to their stock value (even though the company would be just fine either way). Clearly, the situation is such that they can't risk being transparent about it.
So if Jobs logs into chat less and less until he's not on at all, that's at least interesting. Cringely isn't suggesting anything more than that. He's not suggesting that Jobs is too ill to log into his computer, just that he's not using his compute...
Cringely never says that Jobs is "too ill" but clearly implies it. The subtext practically screams it.
So far as Apple hiding Jobs' health status because they are afraid that the stock will take a hit -- that's just absurd, they'd have to be insane. Forget about the consequences about lying about something like this when it comes to a public company, not to mention one that the SEC is already paying close attention to -- but Jobs not returning is already priced in to Apple's stock. In the medium term, Apple would probably be better off if they announced Jobs' retirement because it would force investors to look at Apple's VERY strong fundamentals and low P/E ratio and stop trading on gossip and rumors.
IMO, the most likely reason Apple is keeping mum is the most obvious one -- no one knows exactly what's wrong with Jobs including his doctors, and Jobs has absolutely vetoed the publication of daily medical bulletins -- and who could blame him.
To put it another way: The guy is being LESS NERDY and using less computers; so now THIS means he is in worse health? Go figure...and STFU, Cringely...SJ's no immortal anyway...
it would force investors to look at Apple's VERY strong fundamentals and low P/E ratio and stop trading on gossip and rumors.
I think you're wrong there. Stock prices rarely reflect what is, but rather reflect expectations of what will be.
With Jobs gone the expectation at best would be 'let's hope it continues as is' but more likely people will be hesitant assuming that without Jobs' input new ideas will become rarer and not as spot on and Apple will slowly lose its edge. With that expectation stock prices will dive - regardless of current fundamentals.
Woah Woah Woah, what is this a democracy? I hate to break it to ya, but AI is a privately owned website. Whats with all this "we" stuff? Kasper's got freedom of press here. I understand that some people might not like the content (myself included) but asking someone to relinquish their First Amendment Rights is pretty ballsy there guy.
I would never advocate dictating what should or should not be done with this site as was done by the previous poster, but the point here, and in a few other similar articles, is that this sort of story is so completely out there, and so meaningless, that it is just depressing to see as someone who really knows something about Apple. And for a true Apple site maintained by someone who surely knows Apple inside and out to be propagating filth like this is pretty bad.
I think all of us want to see real and meaningful articles. They're the reason why I have an account here. But these off-the-wall analyst attempts at, what, market manipulation? If I'm going to hear about them I'd prefer for it to be in the context of a market watch update of some sort, not reported as actual news.
That said, I was very happy to see that Kasper is taking this concern into consideration.