Fake Steve Jobs Says 'Leave the Real One Alone'

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Fake Steve Jobs Says 'Leave the Real One Alone'

Posted by CmdrTaco on Tuesday January 18, 2011 @03:54AM from the vacation-sounds-nice dept.

Stoobalou writes "Dan Lyons, who has been lampooning Apple's Steve Jobs for many years, has posted his last item as Fake Steve Jobs and signed off. Lyons, who has been impersonating the messianic Apple supremo in the notorious tech blog since 2006 and even managed to maintain his anonymity for quite some time, despite being a well-known tech hack, has parked his vitriolic pen for the last time." Most people expect FSJ to return if RSJ does.

166 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Idle? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-18 03:58 · Score: 0

Think you miscategorized this one.
1. Re:Idle? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-18 04:03 · Score: 0
  
  idle will be notified when fake fake steve jobs appears in the wild...
seems familiar by Nialin · 2011-01-18 04:02 · Score: 5, Funny

"Leave Stevie alone!"
*applies extra eyeliner, sobbing*
Re:iJobs by MikeDirnt69 · 2011-01-18 04:03 · Score: 0, Troll

no, deprecated.

--
Am I eval()? - http://www.monst3r.com.br
We might stop making fun of him by Grapplebeam · 2011-01-18 04:04 · Score: 4, Interesting

If every Apple press conference thing wasn't really just about him in the end. He wouldn't get up there and tell people what they already know if he didn't want to be in the spotlight.

--
There is no -1 Disagree.
1. Re:We might stop making fun of him by Culture20 · 2011-01-18 04:12 · Score: 1, Interesting
  
  And why was there no press conference to announce he had sold $1.4 billion in Apple shares in the 3 days before his announcement.
  That's interesting if true. I suppose he figures he can't be thrown in jail if he's dead.
2. Re:We might stop making fun of him by mr100percent · 2011-01-18 04:15 · Score: 0
  
  Then you're not the target. Most of the world isn't geeks, so in 1999 when he showcased built-in WiFi in laptops, the audience gasped since they weren't as bleeding-edge as you.
3. Re:We might stop making fun of him by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-18 04:22 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  If true, I would suspect it was an automatic sale from a pre-existing stock divesting plan that's been in place for a year or more. At my old company, if you didn't use a long term plan for when to sell shares (either by naming certain times of year or certain stock prices, and amounts), you were limited by the company lawyers to a couple of weeks per year where you were allowed to sell.
4. Re:We might stop making fun of him by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-18 04:23 · Score: 1
  
  citation needed
  Sales by C-level execs are normally registered with the SEC 30 - 60 days before the sale takes place.
5. Re:We might stop making fun of him by Monkeedude1212 · 2011-01-18 04:32 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  In his defense, at least he didn't get all sweaty while clapping on stage for 20 minutes chanting nothing but "Developers".
  Steve Jobs looks pretty good when you compare him to other industry CEOs.
6. Re:We might stop making fun of him by Steauengeglase · 2011-01-18 04:53 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Ballmer is a pretty poor example. To his credit, he probably comes across as one of the few people in the tech arena who would be tolerable over a beer, but a less-than-stellar showman who at his best is a parody of himself. He inspires pity more than loathing.
  Now when will we get Fake Larry Ellison? That guy is just a comedy goldmine. The often attributed, arrogance of Jobs, greedy, self-serving, with a sense of self-denial and a twinge of bat-shit insane.
7. Re:We might stop making fun of him by Sulphur · 2011-01-18 04:59 · Score: 1
  
  Ballmer is a pretty poor example. To his credit, he probably comes across as one of the few people in the tech arena who would be tolerable over a beer, but a less-than-stellar showman who at his best is a parody of himself. He inspires pity more than loathing.
  Now when will we get Fake Larry Ellison? That guy is just a comedy goldmine. The often attributed, arrogance of Jobs, greedy, self-serving, with a sense of self-denial and a twinge of bat-shit insane.
  Bat-shit insane doesn't come in twinge; ultrasonic shriek perhaps.
8. Re:We might stop making fun of him by inpher · 2011-01-18 05:25 · Score: 1
  
  Now when will we get Fake Larry Ellison? That guy is just a comedy goldmine. The often attributed, arrogance of Jobs, greedy, self-serving, with a sense of self-denial and a twinge of bat-shit insane.
  We had him a few years ago: http://fakelarryellison.blogspot.com/
9. Re:We might stop making fun of him by grouchomarxist · 2011-01-18 05:29 · Score: 1
  
  Fake Steve Jobs did a few entries as Fake Larry Ellison. I think they're a pretty accurate impression of Larry.
10. Re:We might stop making fun of him by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-18 05:47 · Score: 0
  
  It's not difficult to check:
  http://finance.yahoo.com/q/it?s=aapl
11. Re:We might stop making fun of him by Steauengeglase · 2011-01-18 05:58 · Score: 2
  
  I like to imagine that he walks around his Japanese mansion dressed as a Batman villain, muttering the true, secret name of his estate; the one that only he can know, the special name, while reading and re-reading The Catcher in the Rye. Every other name is for the fakers, the phonies.
12. Re:We might stop making fun of him by RyuuzakiTetsuya · 2011-01-18 06:14 · Score: 1
  
  Or compare him to OPK.
  Steve Jobs: "Android isn't best for the customer."
  OPK: "Android is like peeing in your pants."
  
  --
  Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
13. Re:We might stop making fun of him by Caerdwyn · 2011-01-18 06:43 · Score: 1
  
  And why was there no press conference to announce he had sold $1.4 billion in Apple shares in the 3 days before his announcement.
  Look, Ma. No mention of the Great Satan at all. There was no announcement because it DIDN'T HAPPEN.
  
  --
  Everybody gets what the majority deserves.
14. Re:We might stop making fun of him by UnknowingFool · 2011-01-18 06:49 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Every press conference? I suppose you don't attend the earnings reports. He has participated in a few but most of the time it's Tim Cook, COO and Peter Oppenheimer, CFO that run them. Steve Jobs does lead the more public events like WWDC and very public announcements when they launch a new product. It's a double edge gripe: If he doesn't lead these things, people will complain how he's not involved and should do more for Apple. If he does lead them, people like you complain about it. You can't have it both ways.
  
  --
  Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
15. Re:We might stop making fun of him by Darinbob · 2011-01-18 07:00 · Score: 1
  
  Doesn't Ellison have a green goblin costume at home?
16. Re:We might stop making fun of him by icebike · 2011-01-18 07:08 · Score: 2
  
  Not if its already in is pre filed trading plan. Even those are not necessarily written with clarity in mind. But they do let you report after the trade just like everybody else.
  Trades by insiders are here?
  http://finance.yahoo.com/q/it?s=AAPL+Insider+Transactions
  And yes, they are all routinely cashing in shares, as are all insiders from all companies. Its part of their compensation, and you can't buy a Yacht or a Liver transplant with shares.
  That being said, Jobs does not appear on that list.
  
  --
  Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
17. Re:We might stop making fun of him by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-18 12:19 · Score: 0
  
  They gasped because they were ignorant point-and-drool Mac users.
18. Re:We might stop making fun of him by node+3 · 2011-01-18 12:30 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  In 1999, when he and Phil Schiller announced the iBook with built-in WiFi, the term WiFi hadn't even been invented yet, it was called AirPort by Apple, and 802.11b by everyone else, and Apple products were the first to have it built-in. Apple worked with Lucent in the development of 802.11b.
  (disregard if you were being ironic)
19. Re:We might stop making fun of him by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-18 15:22 · Score: 0
  
  In his defense, at least he didn't get all sweaty while clapping on stage for 20 minutes chanting nothing but "Developers".
  Yeah, lucky he wasn't like one other guy.
20. Re:We might stop making fun of him by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-21 09:13 · Score: 0
  
  Jobs took the credit for OS X forgetting that 9 happened under his watch. He takes the credit for things when they go right and blames someone else when things go wrong such a firing the ex-IBMer when the iPhone 4 was found to have quality issues because it was not tested properly. Yes he did not ruin Apple like he did first time around but it was not for the want of trying!
How important we make ourselves seem by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-18 04:05 · Score: 2, Insightful

Sorry, I have a problem who like to ape someone and then suddenly determine when enough is enough and act like they should have last say about who does what. You can't poke an animal with a stick and demand that others leave it alone when you've decided that enough is enough. The real world doesn't work that way.

While his blogging may have been mostly harmless it doesn't give him a free pass to crap on others for doing the same thing.
1. Re:How important we make ourselves seem by theshowmecanuck · 2011-01-18 05:05 · Score: 2
  
  Poke an animal with a stick while it is alive is one thing (even if I don't quite like this analogy). Keep poking and annoying it while it is dying is cruel, and at best in very poor taste.
  
  --
  -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
2. Re:How important we make ourselves seem by Galestar · 2011-01-18 05:13 · Score: 1
  
  I think the animal would happen to care a lot more while its alive rather than while its dead. Which one is the cruel one again?
  
  --
  AccountKiller
3. Re:How important we make ourselves seem by theshowmecanuck · 2011-01-18 05:26 · Score: 2
  
  I didn't know dying and dead were the same thing? Who has comprehension problems?
  
  --
  -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
4. Re:How important we make ourselves seem by turbidostato · 2011-01-18 07:28 · Score: 1
  
  "I didn't know dying and dead were the same thing?"
  Whoo-hoo-hoo, look who knows so much. It just so happens that your friend here is only MOSTLY dead. There's a big difference between mostly dead and all dead. Mostly dead is slightly alive. With all dead, well, with all dead there's usually only one thing you can do.
5. Re:How important we make ourselves seem by DrXym · 2011-01-18 08:15 · Score: 1
  
  Bad analogy. Steve Jobs is as rich as Croesus and a narcissist to boot. He's not some poor little animal getting poked with a stick. While I feel sorry for someone with an illness and wouldn't mock them for that I don't see why I should like the fucker, the monopolistic practices Apple engages in, or care if his ickle wickle feelings are hurt.
6. Re:How important we make ourselves seem by theshowmecanuck · 2011-01-18 08:23 · Score: 1
  
  Thank you.
  
  --
  -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
7. Re:How important we make ourselves seem by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-18 09:44 · Score: 0
  
  Translation: "I wouldn't know Steve Jobs if I backed over him in the parking lot."
  Jobs is paid $1/year, lives in a relatively modest house, and as someone pointed out upthread, the last time he sold a large amount of AAPL, he wasn't even in charge of the company.
  What's the matter -- shouldn't you be slagging companies you can spell with an '$'?
8. Re:How important we make ourselves seem by DrXym · 2011-01-18 11:09 · Score: 1
  
  Oh sure, he's a pauper I get it now.
9. Re:How important we make ourselves seem by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-18 11:19 · Score: 0
  
  And you've done ______ with your life?
10. Re:How important we make ourselves seem by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-18 12:30 · Score: 0
  
  Keep poking and annoying it while it is dying is cruel, and at best in very poor taste.
  Says who? You?
About time really.... by bazmail · 2011-01-18 04:05 · Score: 3, Informative

I thought that Fake Steve blog shut down 2 years ago. It was funny for a while but got stale real fast when he was unmasked and the whole book thing.
1. Re:About time really.... by TaoPhoenix · 2011-01-18 04:12 · Score: 1, Insightful
  
  I can't imagine how it lasted more than a week without RSJ's quiet approval. Either it somehow suited Apple's master plan, or just amused RSJ.
  If it didn't pass muster, about 4 hours into it the mag would have gotten a call. "Hi. This is Su Emharder from Apple Legal. We're Apple. We don't do fakes. Neither do you. You have twelve minutes to post a retraction on your site."
  
  --
  My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
2. Re:About time really.... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-18 04:52 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Parody is protected. There is nothing RSJ could do about it.
3. Re:About time really.... by ifiwereasculptor · 2011-01-18 04:59 · Score: 1
  
  That's now how I envision Apple's legal dept. at all. For me, both Apple and Sony have a few ED-209s calling people on the phone. "You are in violation of our intellectual property. Please cease and desist. You have fifteen seconds to comply. I am authorized to use legal procedures."
4. Re:About time really.... by grouchomarxist · 2011-01-18 05:31 · Score: 2
  
  A one point RSJ said that FSJ was pretty funny.
5. Re:About time really.... by hedwards · 2011-01-18 06:13 · Score: 1
  
  Which was a smart move. Whether or not he thought it was funny, it was the smart way of handling it. He's not going to be able to win a lawsuit anyways, may as well take advantage of the opportunity to appear grounded.
6. Re:About time really.... by dbIII · 2011-01-18 12:24 · Score: 1
  
  I was pretty stale when he used it to push his anti-linux agenda that was his day job for SCO. If it was done in a way that was remotely funny it would be forgivable but instead it was mindless insults and just flinging shovelfuls of shit. That part wasn't remotely close to anything Steve Jobs would do and not written in a way that looked like it was Steve Jobs - just pure Lyons venom. I hope he was well paid for that because otherwise it would be a complete waste of time for all.
7. Re:About time really.... by node+3 · 2011-01-18 12:37 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  In other words, Steve Jobs is an evil mastermind and any time he does something non-evil, it's just an evil ploy to appear non-evil...
8. Re:About time really.... by TaoPhoenix · 2011-01-19 06:05 · Score: 1
  
  There's plenty of people!
  Feature!
  "Choose your own flavor of getting sued!
  You are in violation of Apple rights. Please choose the form of delivery.
  ED-209
  MCP - back in dev, not seen in Tron 2.0
  Christopher Walken
  Jack Nicholson"
  
  --
  My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by BadAnalogyGuy · 2011-01-18 04:11 · Score: 5, Interesting

Steve Jobs breathed life back into a dying Apple. It was his management that turned the company from a third-rate HW vendor into a juggernaut of ideas, concepts, products, and customer satisfaction. Sculley, Amelio, and the rest never could have done that.
But if Steve goes, whence Apple? I'm sure he has a large cadre of lieutenants who can make good decisions in his stead, but can they get along? Can they drive the teams and call BS on half-assed engineering like Jobs? Do they have his business acumen?
The problem of building a company around a single person means that person is the weakest link. When Steve decides to give up the mantle, will Apple be able to adjust to the absence and still succeed in the same ways?
I doubt it, and that's why I've shorted Apple stock. Frankly, I suggest you all do likewise.
1. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by dingen · 2011-01-18 04:20 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  I do think however that Jobs' ideas of what Apple should do to stay in the lead are a lot clearer now than the first time he was in charge.
  
  --
  Pretty good is actually pretty bad.
2. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by Amorymeltzer · 2011-01-18 04:25 · Score: 1
  
  Yes. Well, mostly.
  
  --
  I live in constant fear of the Coming of the Red Spiders.
3. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by qengho · 2011-01-18 04:35 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  ... I've shorted Apple stock. Frankly, I suggest you all do likewise.
  Um, yeah. Some folks might beg to differ.
  I view this as a one-day-only 5% discount sale.
4. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-18 04:39 · Score: 0
  
  This post contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. All forward-looking statements are inherently uncertain as they are based on current expectations and assumptions concerning future events or our future performance. You are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which are only predictions and speak only as of the date of this prospectus. Forward-looking statements usually contain the words "estimate," "anticipate," "believe," "expect," "plan," or similar expressions, and are subject to numerous known and unknown risks and uncertainties. In evaluating these statements, prospective investors should carefully review various risks and uncertainties before investing.
5. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by robmv · 2011-01-18 04:39 · Score: 1
  
  The problem that I see in the future of Apple without Steve Jobs is that no matter how good his future replacement could be, people will always say that things are not the same, that Jobs times were better, and will be their fault for taking advantage of that cult of personality
6. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by gnasher719 · 2011-01-18 04:53 · Score: 2
  
  Steve Jobs breathed life back into a dying Apple. It was his management that turned the company from a third-rate HW vendor into a juggernaut of ideas, concepts, products, and customer satisfaction. Sculley, Amelio, and the rest never could have done that.
  But if Steve goes, whence Apple? I'm sure he has a large cadre of lieutenants who can make good decisions in his stead, but can they get along? Can they drive the teams and call BS on half-assed engineering like Jobs? Do they have his business acumen?
  It is not so much the person of Steve Jobs, it is the direction the company is taking. When Sculley threw Steve Jobs out, the company then went _intentionally_ into a different direction than Steve Jobs wanted. That's why he had to go. We also may assume that the Steve Jobs who left back then was less experienced and less good at what he was doing than the Steve Jobs that returned many years later. Amelio on the other hand did an excellent job. He came to an Apple company that was in deep shit and figured out exactly what to do to make it survive and make it great again: Some emergency measures to keep the ship from sinking, hiring Steve Jobs back, and getting himself fired in the process. Nobody could have handled the situation better than he did. He did what was best for Apple, not what was best for his reputation.
  
  Anyway, the difference between back then and today is that Apple today knows that Steve Jobs' direction is exactly the direction they should be aiming at. So whether Steve Jobs is there or not, they won't change their direction this time.
  
  And you are supposed to short a stock before it drops, not after.
7. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-18 05:18 · Score: 1
  
  I doubt it, and that's why I've shorted Apple stock. Frankly, I suggest you all do likewise.
  Has Steve Jobs died?
  Has he even quit Apple?
  Has the years of planning ahead Jobs has done for Apple expired yet?
  Has Apple even done something un-Jobs like yet?
  Has Apple even hinted about a poor choice in their future?
  Has Apple posted anything but stellar results last time you checked?
  Let's go deeper now...
  Do you think the people in Apple have not learned anything last time Jobs quit?
  Do you think Jobs has not selected people who understand his strategy?
  Do you think Jobs single-handedly came up with the marketing, design, ideas of the products Apple sells?
  So, you're shorting and advising us to short based on your superficial amateur analysis, and based on your eager gambling hunch, tuned for blood.
  Have you stopped to realize that we buy shares to *support* a company, and that shorting against it *hurts* it? It's not just about you and your meager speculation profits.Do you realize that a million of gullible, easily scared speculators following advice similar to yours, would turn Apple's failure into a self-fulfilling prophecy?
  I find it fascinating that in this forum on Slashdot, every time something happens with Jobs, we have these to reoccurring flocks of commenters:
  1) one that repeatedly asks "why is the stock moving every time something happens with Jobs"
  2) the other that repeatedly spreads FUD about Apple going down without Jobs and talking about shorting
  And somehow that question "why" never seems answered, as if they don't see each other. And it's simple: the investors are a simple, ill-informed, easily scared bunch, that's there to bet on the easiest most visible probable trends in business, and make a buck, with completely no regard as to what is the effect of their actions. They sit in an echo chamber and reinforce their own beliefs, and sure enough if they try hard enough, their delusions turn into a reality.
8. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by vux984 · 2011-01-18 05:20 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  Um, yeah. Some folks might beg to differ.
  The same folks that were in denial about the housing bubble right up until it burst?
9. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by Stregano · 2011-01-18 05:28 · Score: 0
  
  You are correct, with Steve in play, nothing but High Quality Engineering
  
  --
  The world is how you make it
10. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by nordah · 2011-01-18 05:32 · Score: 2
  
  [T]hat's why I've shorted Apple stock. Frankly, I suggest you all do likewise.
  How to get rich of Apple and other stocks:
  Step 1. Give dubious investment advice on Slashdot.
  Step 2. Take a market position counter to your own advice.
  Step 3. ??
  Step 4. Profit!!!
11. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by Eil · 2011-01-18 05:38 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Steve Jobs breathed life back into a dying Apple. It was his management that turned the company from a third-rate HW vendor into a juggernaut of ideas, concepts, products, and customer satisfaction. Sculley, Amelio, and the rest never could have done that.
  It's true that Steve turned Apple around when he rejoined. But let's not forget that he was originally ousted from his own company because his impulsive decisions, empty showmanship, and abusive management style threatened to rip Apple apart right when it should have been concentrating on building a long-term strategy. Those other CEOs and executives who ran Apple during Jobs' exile wouldn't have produced the superstar corporation that Apple is today, but at least they knew how to keep the company afloat long enough for Jobs to mature on both a business and behavioral level. (Even if they didn't realize that's what they were doing.)
12. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-18 05:41 · Score: 0
  
  Apple stock is only down 8.75 points at the current moment in time, and it is slowly creeping back from the 14 points it was down at the opening of the market...
13. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by stinkbomb · 2011-01-18 05:43 · Score: 1
  
  If Apple didn't want to have their bottom-line affected by the vagaries of an irrational stock market, they shouldn't have gone public. Simple as that. Public companies know the risks they take - it isn't all IPOs and piles of investor cash; sometimes investors are going to take advantage of your weaknesses.
14. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by noidentity · 2011-01-18 05:46 · Score: 2
  
  "I've shorted Apple stock. Frankly, I suggest you all do likewise."
  ...so later when its price falls, you can buy it back up and make a profit?
15. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by elbles · 2011-01-18 06:00 · Score: 0
  
  Oh, come on. Yes, Steve Jobs helped Apple recover from the brink of bankruptcy, but from all I've read (and I've read a lot), I've gotten the distinct impression that Apple was so poorly run from the early 90s on that anyone would have been a huge improvement. That said, I also read in Apple Confidential (great book, for those who haven't read it) that Amelio's efforts near the end of his tenure helped pave the road for the turnaround Jobs orchestrated, but I don't have the book handy to see if that was something Amelio said himself, or if it was some a (relatively) independent observer. Jobs streamlined their terribly bloated product line, providing clear delineation between consumer and professional products, scraped numerous and bloated OS development projects, et cetera. You could argue that with hindsight, they were clear decisions, but I think they would have been clear to anyone worthy of managing a company of that size. This isn't to say that Jobs isn't great at what he does, but rather that Apple's success isn't dependent upon him. Jobs is a polisher and perfectionist, traits that aren't necessarily common, but they aren't hard to find either. And let's face it: over the past three years or so, Apple hasn't released a single revolutionary product. Everything's been an evolution over existing products, and it's worked well, but it can only work for so long, with or without Jobs at the helm (and no, I don't believe Jobs is the ultimate difference maker in Apple's ability to create great products).
16. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by ColdWetDog · 2011-01-18 06:00 · Score: 2
  
  The problem that I see in the future of Apple without Steve Jobs is that no matter how good his future replacement could be, people will always say that things are not the same, that Jobs times were better, and will be their fault for taking advantage of that cult of personality
  Yeah, like all the whining around here about how things were 'better in the old days". Borland / DEC / Compaq / IBM (well, maybe in the Selectric days). What's the tech equivalent for 'rose colored glasses'?
  
  --
  Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
17. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by gnasher719 · 2011-01-18 06:10 · Score: 1
  
  If Apple didn't want to have their bottom-line affected by the vagaries of an irrational stock market, they shouldn't have gone public. Simple as that. Public companies know the risks they take - it isn't all IPOs and piles of investor cash; sometimes investors are going to take advantage of your weaknesses.
  Apple's bottom line isn't affected by the stock market at all. The only time when the stock price affects the bottom line is when the company needs to borrow money, and a high share price makes that easier than a low share price. There have been many occasions in the past where Apple has made announcements that predictably made the share price go down. For a short time. Like saying "we just had a record quarter, but the next quarter will likely not be quite as good".
18. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by Mister+Whirly · 2011-01-18 06:13 · Score: 2
  
  Apple got rid of the great Steve a long while back. Now all they have is the good Steve. Apple has survived with and without Jobs before, and I am sure they will survive when Jobs is no longer with Apple anymore. Will it be the same company? Not so sure about that, time will tell. I am pretty sure the "Apple Formula"* can be carried on with or without Jobs though.
  
  *Take existing technology, put it in a very pretty box, market the hell out of it. Repeat.
  
  --
  "But this one goes to 11!"
19. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-18 06:14 · Score: 0
  
  Yeah, talking heads don't know shit about the market. They are usually days and weeks behind what the market is actually doing.
  Not that I think shorting AAPL is a good idea right now. It will almost certainly waiver, possibly for years, even if Jobs leaves permanently.
20. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by AliasMarlowe · 2011-01-18 06:39 · Score: 1
  
  ... I've shorted Apple stock. Frankly, I suggest you all do likewise.
  I view this as a one-day-only 5% discount sale.
  Ancient wisdom: "The market can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent". The price and daily change in AAPL may be utterly irrational, but it's still a courageous bet to trade it either way in quantity.
  
  --
  Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
21. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by Locke2005 · 2011-01-18 06:46 · Score: 1
  
  Frankly, it wasn't hard to outperform someone whose only experience was with selling soft drinks. Who the hell thought that marketing computers was exactly the same as marketing Coke?!? Anybody with experience in consumer electronics and computers should be able to do better than John Sculley.
  
  --
  I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
22. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by nyctopterus · 2011-01-18 06:59 · Score: 0, Troll
  
  And let's face it: over the past three years or so, Apple hasn't released a single revolutionary product.
  Look, I know it's popular here on Slashdot to act like there's nothing new under the sun, but this statement is wrong and disingenuous. Firstly, I note that you chose your period very carefully to leave out the iPhone. The iPhone really did change phones and handheld computers, Slashdot whinging notwithstanding. However, I suspect you are willing to concede that. In the last three years... well there's the fucking iPad (2010) for one. I mean, look guys, you can deny all you like, but this shit is changing the whole computing landscape. It's going to pretty much usher in the end of desktop computing as we know it for most people. The App Store (2008), was a revolutionary, microsoftware for the masses.
  You may think these aren't revolutions because they aren't revolutionary enough for you on a technological level. But they are business and social revolutions.
23. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by Wyatt+Earp · 2011-01-18 07:02 · Score: 1
  
  Difference between then and now is Steve Jobs.
  When Sculley was given the reigns it was to keep Steve Jobs in check because the board feared and didn't trust Steve, then Steve left.
  In 1997 they (the board) brought Steve Jobs back when they bought NeXT, then he took the whole show over and has had 13 and a half years to remodel the company, the corporate culture and groom successors.
24. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-18 07:11 · Score: 1
  
  Look, both of you are basically playing roulette, so stop arguing and see who's right when the ball stops rolling in a year or so.
25. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by thetoadwarrior · 2011-01-18 08:10 · Score: 1
  
  Steve Jobs doesn't do everything in Apple. I'm sure he's been an excellent driver but I think they can live without him providing he is replaced with another decent leader and not someone like Ballmer for instance.
26. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by 21mhz · 2011-01-18 09:10 · Score: 0
  
  Can they drive the teams and call BS on half-assed engineering like Jobs?
  Oh, now I understand... He went to a doctor the day they were reviewing the alarm clock implementation on iPhone.
  
  --
  My exception safety is -fno-exceptions.
27. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-18 09:31 · Score: 0
  
  The iPhone didn't have any features that phones already out on the market had, in some cases, years before the iPhone ever came out. What Apple did is market an expensive niche "tech toy" for the masses successfully. Ask your average iPhone user why they needed an Apple iPhone over any other device and 9 times out of 10 they can't give you an logical answer. The iPad - I still don't see a lot of practical uses that couldn't be replaced by a decent netbook for half the price. Please give me any reason that Apple's tablet offering is superior to any other tablet out there. (Besides the fact it is pretty and people think it is "cool".) The main reason most people buy Apple products is becasue they think the products are "cool".
  I think the problem is you are confusing "selling well" with "revolutionary product". If you are old enough, you may remember Zubaz sweat pants. They sold a ton, were considered to be a "revolutionary fashion product" at the time. I notice I don't see a lot of people wearing them now, and that the only people who got a fashion change out of them were in serious fashion trouble to begin with.
28. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by Mister+Whirly · 2011-01-18 09:41 · Score: 1
  
  No Coke, Pepsi. Sculley was the President of PepsiCo. He was hired becasue of his marketing experience in the "Great Cola Wars". (His #2 company was trying to go after the #1 company in the field. Sound familiar at all?) And yes - marketing is marketing - the product isn't really that relevant. Knowledge of your own product does not make you a great businessman, knowledge of how the business world works as a whole is what does.
  
  --
  "But this one goes to 11!"
29. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-18 09:47 · Score: 0
  
  Hey joker, read this: http://techcrunch.com/2010/10/18/apple-q4-2010-earnings/
  You're either screwing with everyone in order to aid in lowering the price share and buy... or if you're for real, you my friend, is where my profits are coming from.
  Thank ya!
30. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by Belial6 · 2011-01-18 09:57 · Score: 0
  
  No kidding, without Jobs' brilliance, Apple might start shipping phones that lose signal if held wrong. They might ship products without cut and paste. They might ship an OS that sometimes shrinks the window when you press a green plus. They might even lose the ability to engineer a battery door in their battery operated products.
  
  Really, Steve Jobs doesn't call BS on half-assed engineering.
31. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by StikyPad · 2011-01-18 09:59 · Score: 0
  
  Jobs' main asset isn't so much his business acumen as it is his charismatic RDF generation. Without a piper to follow, the children may well become lost and disillusioned.
  The iPhone is a good product (or is it?) and I own one, but without the drool-inducing promotional talents of Steve, it almost certainly wouldn't have achieved the level of success it enjoys today. And even though that level has been dizzying, it's all too easy to become the next MySpace, Napster, or TiVo in the tech sector, especially when your target market is the consumer segment where tastes and fashion can and do change on a whim. As for the "Apple formula," if you can define it, then so can Apple's competition, which is a good reason to be cautious about Apple's future. And if you *can't* define it, then I wouldn't be so quick to assume Steve isn't a huge part of it, which is yet another reason to be cautious. Any way you look at it, Steve Jobs leaving Apple has lots of potential downsides and essentially zero potential upsides.
  
  --
  https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
32. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by vijayiyer · 2011-01-18 10:26 · Score: 1
  
  I think way too many Slashdotters think that Steve's RDF extends beyond geekdom. My mom doesn't watch his keynotes or product announcements, and neither do most iphone users.
33. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by elbles · 2011-01-18 10:50 · Score: 2
  
  I don't think there was anything wrong or disingenuous about that statement.
  
  And, actually, I meant to specifically *include* the introduction of the iPhone in that time period, so my apologies for that, as that's the last Apple product that could be considered revolutionary (I still tend to think of it as evolutionary, as there were functional touch screen phones long before the iPhone, but I also realize most would disagree with my saying that). I really did mean to include the 2007 release of the iPhone there, I'm just still adjusting to the fact it's 2011. :-)
  
  The iPad is nothing more than an evolution of the iPhone. Hell, you could even argue that it's nothing more than a large iPhone, minus the whole phone part. And I'd certainly argue it "changing the whole computing landscape." Yes, it's sold a lot of units, but is it really changing anything? Out of everyone I know who has one, no one has given up their computer for one. Even the most ardent Apple fan in my office claims to use his iPad all the time, but only for web surfing (admittedly a large part of modern day computing, but certainly not all of it). It's much less of a game changer than the iPhone was, and my belief is that tablets will fizzle sooner or later. There's a time and place for smartphones, there's a time and place for laptops, but the niche where tablets apparently fit between the two is just that: a niche. We can talk about the sales figures as much as we want, but until tablets are as ubiquitous as either of the other two types of devices, it's wrong and disingenuous (in my opinion) to say they've changed the computing landscape.
  
  They aren't revolutions on a technical level, that's for sure. On a business level, the Apple app store has been a success, but I have to wonder what the landscape would look like if the traditional app sales model had been applied instead. I'm not saying it would have done better, but I'm not saying it would have done worse either. It's an honest question that I wish could be answered.
  
  On a societal level, it's certainly revolutionized things, but not necessarily for the better. (And I'm only 25, so it's not like I'm an old guy who doesn't understand how easy smartphones and the like have made things). Now get off my lawn! :-)
34. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by Bing+Tsher+E · 2011-01-18 10:55 · Score: 1
  
  They might even lose the ability to engineer a battery door in their battery operated products.
  To be fair, there are only a handful of engineering teams in the world who can do that one 'right.' It's one of the hardest design tasks out there.
35. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by elbles · 2011-01-18 11:21 · Score: 1
  
  I somewhat agree with this. But the iPhone *was* an improvement (in general) over the smartphones available at the time. It did no more (and often less) than phones at the time it first became available, but almost everything it did, it did very well. Apple just *does* polish things to a very high standard, but at the same time, they aren't anywhere near as advanced--compared to their competition--today as they were 3 years ago. As I said in another post, I'd say the iPhone is revolutionary in the minds of most. I think it blurs the line between evolutionary and revolutionary. Everything ever since has been a rehash of some prior product, with increasingly minor advances. And I say all this as someone who got back into the Apple game with a PowerBook in 2004 (for college), and I'm still in the Apple game with a 2008 MBP. I'm not anti-Apple, I'm just against the conventional wisdom that Apple is *still* a revolutionary company.
36. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by StikyPad · 2011-01-18 11:38 · Score: 0
  
  I think way too many Slashdotters think that Steve's RDF extends beyond geekdom. My mom doesn't watch his keynotes or product announcements, and neither do most iphone users.
  On the contrary -- you know it's a powerful RDF when you don't even need to watch him to be affected!
  
  --
  https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
37. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by mrxak · 2011-01-18 11:49 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Personally I think Cook and Schiller will keep the trains running, and Ives will be spokesman (he's got that watchable quality). Forstall will probably also have an increasing public profile, but in terms of products he'll probably remain with iOS stuff. Steve put so many good people in place around him, that Apple in the long run will be just fine no matter what. Obviously a succession plan in a company like Apple will have been in place for a long time, and with Steve Job's health problems in the past, he's definitely had more people in the spotlight with him recently, to get the public used to some of these guys.
  
  --
  -mrxak
  Onions Will Kill You
38. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-18 12:27 · Score: 0
  
  Terminator vision.
39. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by dbIII · 2011-01-18 12:42 · Score: 2
  
  Is it really built around a single person or is that just the public face? I know, it's the USA, land of heroes and all that, but you guys forget he has a huge company behind him. He didn't design the iPod, iMac, iPad etc and may not even have come up with the naming system. IMHO Apple slumped last time because it was being run by a guy with a background in drinks instead of computers and he shut down everything that looked like it might be a risk if he couldn't understand the possibilities. It succeeded under Jobs because he knew what he was selling. Apple is full of people that know what it's selling. Remember that Apple has still been a success story while Steve Jobs has been sick. Somebody has been running the place.
  Apple will decline for years and eventually die if a random career CEO like Sol Trujillo is put in to run the place. If it's run by someone that understands what Apple sells and understands the benefits and risks of new technology (just like Steve Jobs) it will continue to succeed. You don't need a guy everyone cheers at trade shows to sell millions of mid-range mp3 players at a huge profit. While it helps many people that buy the things have never actually heard of him. Advertising, design and software sold them, thus Apple and not Steve Jobs himself. Personally I wish him better health and long life, however Apple is a lot bigger than Steve Jobs.
40. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by node+3 · 2011-01-18 12:47 · Score: 1
  
  But if Steve goes, whence Apple? I'm sure he has a large cadre of lieutenants who can make good decisions in his stead, but can they get along? Can they drive the teams and call BS on half-assed engineering like Jobs? Do they have his business acumen?
  I dunno. Why not ask 2009 Apple how it did without Steve Jobs? Tim Cook has been doing a great job.
  
  When Steve decides to give up the mantle, will Apple be able to adjust to the absence and still succeed in the same ways?
  Why not? Apple won't be identical without Jobs, but he righted a wayward ship and has been piloting it for the past decade. Apple will do fine with another competent (even if not as capable as Jobs) pilot. What you're describing is that the only thing keeping the Apple ship on course is Jobs' constant hand on the wheel. I don't think there's any reason to think the ship is going to go astray with a different leader.
  
  I doubt it, and that's why I've shorted Apple stock. Frankly, I suggest you all do likewise.
  How amusing. What you are saying is that Apple (and specifically, AAPL) will never be as successful or as valuable as it is right now. That's a mighty bold statement, and based on a single, tenuous assumption. We'll see shortly how things pan out, but I'm quite confident Wall Street won't come to the same conclusion as you have.
41. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by dbIII · 2011-01-18 12:48 · Score: 2
  
  But let's not forget that he was originally ousted from his own company because his impulsive decisions
  He was kicked because the original Mac looked a bit too risky instead of just making Apple ][s forever. It's a textbook example of a board not having a clue what sort of company they were running.
42. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by node+3 · 2011-01-18 12:53 · Score: 0
  
  Um, yeah. Some folks might beg to differ.
  The same folks that were in denial about the housing bubble right up until it burst?
  Correct. When someone makes a mistake, they are then destined to make mistakes forever, and will never again able to be right about something.
43. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by LodCrappo · 2011-01-18 13:03 · Score: 1
  
  perhaps a small point, but wasn't he fired by Apple's board for sucking the life out of Apple during his first shot at running the place? Expensive failures like the Apple III and Lisa, overspending on advertising for the Mac that didn't generate any sales, etc?
  
  --
  -Lod
44. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by Daniel+Phillips · 2011-01-18 13:20 · Score: 1
  
  No kidding, without Jobs' brilliance, Apple might start shipping phones that lose signal if held wrong. They might ship products without cut and paste. They might ship an OS that sometimes shrinks the window when you press a green plus. They might even lose the ability to engineer a battery door in their battery operated products.
  And they might start kicking in the front doors of journalists.
  
  --
  Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
45. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by wesleyjconnor · 2011-01-18 13:32 · Score: 1
  
  I struggle to believe that one man had all the ideas, fore-site and drive to push all those products into our lives
  this is teams of peoples with good ideas and great planning in an environement that allows and encourages good ideas, thats where jobs comes.
  
  for the record I loath apples products, they are a cancer and go against everything FOSS has worked so hard to produce
  
  --
  http://www.awfullybigmoustache.com
46. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by vux984 · 2011-01-18 16:27 · Score: 0
  
  Correct. When someone makes a mistake, they are then destined to make mistakes forever, and will never again able to be right about something.
  Correct. They may be even often be right about guessing which way the stock market will go over any given single event. But a magic 8 ball can make the same claim.
47. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-18 17:43 · Score: 0
  
  It was his ideas that nearly killed the company in the first place
  Apple III
  Lisa
  and then "well fuck the apple II the only thing making us money, here is my next failure!", which it was, the Macintosh 128K could barley boot its own os without shitting itself the 512 and pluses are what started selling the laughably underpowered, retard price machine, but by then he was gone
  Apple is a company that should have died in the 80's, just like every other proprietary fuck you over every single minor revision computer maker of the time, IBM pc standards held on (for worse) cause even in 2011 I can take a brand new pc with a floppy disk, fire up dos and run wordstar on it, not cause it was hip 30 years ago
48. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by Shadowmist · 2011-01-18 17:51 · Score: 1
  
  Steve Jobs breathed life back into a dying Apple. It was his management that turned the company from a third-rate HW vendor into a juggernaut of ideas, concepts, products, and customer satisfaction. Sculley, Amelio, and the rest never could have done that.
  But if Steve goes, whence Apple? I'm sure he has a large cadre of lieutenants who can make good decisions in his stead, but can they get along? Can they drive the teams and call BS on half-assed engineering like Jobs? Do they have his business acumen?
  The problem of building a company around a single person means that person is the weakest link. When Steve decides to give up the mantle, will Apple be able to adjust to the absence and still succeed in the same ways?
  I doubt it, and that's why I've shorted Apple stock. Frankly, I suggest you all do likewise.
  I doubt that you've done ANYTHING with Apple stock. Personally Jobs has set up a good cadre of people who've already been running things since he took extended leave last year. I do think that he can't be replaced, but just as Microsoft will survive beyond Gates, Apple has a good shot to continue in a post-Jobs era.
49. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by Osgeld · 2011-01-18 17:51 · Score: 1
  
  it looked risky cause he had 2 VERY expensive colossal failures right before the mac (which the 128K machines were never a true sucess, cause they are darn near useless and for the money underpowered) or does apple fans forget the Apple /// and Lisa?
  the Apple ][ made money from the late 70's to the early 90's, it was a good bet vs strike #3 (which almost was due to the high price and low power / ram of the original macintosh)
50. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-18 23:06 · Score: 0
  
  it looked risky cause he had 2 VERY expensive colossal failures right before the mac (which the 128K machines were never a true sucess, cause they are darn near useless and for the money underpowered) or does apple fans forget the Apple /// and Lisa?
  the Apple ][ made money from the late 70's to the early 90's, it was a good bet vs strike #3 (which almost was due to the high price and low power / ram of the original macintosh)
  Ahh, so Apple shouldn't have done anything but make Apple IIs until 1990, and then close shop.
51. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by intheshelter · 2011-01-19 02:32 · Score: 1
  
  Actually he does, it's just that the things you are trying to characterize as engineering are really conscious design decisions that you don't agree with, or don't understand.
52. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by intheshelter · 2011-01-19 03:39 · Score: 1
  
  "over the past three years or so, Apple hasn't released a single revolutionary product."
  - iPhone
  - iPad
  If you're trying to say they were just an evolution over existing products then you obviously have your head stuck up your ass and you're deep in denial. These two products alone were THE revolutionary products of the last 3 years, both of which turned the existing market upside down and sent EVERYONE scrambling. Saying those two products were only evolutions of existing products is utter bullshit. There was nothing like them before (don't give me the smartphones and tablets existed before argument either, that is beyond stupidity) and Apple has rattled the cages of the world with both of these products.
53. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by intheshelter · 2011-01-19 03:45 · Score: 1
  
  Right on. I mean other phones used electricity before the iPhone, so there's no way the iPhone was revolutionary. And let's face it, if someone can't answer why they needed an iPhone over another device then it's obvious that it's not a revolutionary product, right?
  Seriously? Do you read the drivel you write, or just spout it. These are the stupidest denial arguments I've ever seen. I think the problem is YOU don't understand why it's been selling so well (because it IS a revolutionary product) and so your inability to comprehend it leads to disingenuous arguments. Then you devolve into arguing about sweatpants? Why did you even bother to post if you can't make an ounce of sense.
54. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by intheshelter · 2011-01-19 03:52 · Score: 1
  
  If you make a comparison of the iPhone with another touch phone, and thus they aren't different, then maybe you aren't seeing the big picture?
  They were huge revolutions on a technical level. The hardware and software together made a user interface that was natural, easy to use, intuitive for your average user, almost a joy to use in comparison to those pre-existing smartphones you mention. They were so revolutionary that people gasped in the room when he demoed the phone. They were so revolutionary that all other manufacturers changed their focus to create an "iPhone killer" because it was instantly known to be the pinnacle of phones.
  If you can't see the reality of how the iPhone and iPad have revolutionized their markets then I assume it's more a case of blindness or denial on your part.
55. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-19 04:48 · Score: 0
  
  I believe the tech equivalent is 'rose colored glasses'
56. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by nyctopterus · 2011-01-19 05:20 · Score: 1
  
  Seems to me you're suffering, like a many of the sort of Slashdotians, with a case of technological myopia. Feature X was already available here, feature Y could be could there, etc. Look, I get that this seems like a reasonable way of arguing the point, but when it comes down to it, NO revolutions are completely sparkly and new. It's the way it all comes together that counts, and touch screen phones and tablets were unpopular (and generally rubbish, yes I played with some of those phones) before the the iPhone and the iPad.
  Here's a challenge for you: name some other "revolutionary" tech that's been brought to market in that period. I'm curious to see what sorts of high standards you have in mind.
  There are strong arguments for not using Apple products: legitimate concerns about their openness, price, and some legitimate concerns about functionality, but the typical slashdot attitude of "marketing", "reality distortions fields", "shiny", and "sheeple" just goes to show how out-of-touch the Slashdot bubble is. Acknowledge your opponents strengths, otherwise people think that you're just a delusional fool.
57. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by Osgeld · 2011-01-19 12:58 · Score: 1
  
  they did exactly what they needed to, remove the loose cannon that was going to take the company down over a mood swing
  Apple did not start to get into trouble until the mid 90's when they started mixing and matching computer models for each store, they were doing just fine for nearly a decade without ol steve, which has never brought anything to the table other than the final external design
58. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by elbles · 2011-01-19 15:05 · Score: 1
  
  Revolutionary technology in the past three or four years? I can't think of any. You're exactly right, my standards for revolutionary technology are high. I expect revolutionary technologies to change people's lives, the way they go about their daily business. I just don't see the iPhone/iPad as having done that. Cell phones did that long before the iPhone and iPad came along. Smartphones before the iPhone were an evolved combination of cell phones and PDAs. The iPhone was the next evolution of that. Revolutionary? As I said elsewhere, most would consider it so, I'm not denying that. I just disagree with the general notion is all. It's not right, it's not wrong, it's an opinion.
  
  You're right, no revolution is completely sparkly and new. But at what point does something become revolutionary, as opposed to evolutionary? Ultimately, it's a subjective thing. And as I said elsewhere in this thread, I *own and use* many Apple products (two laptops, iPod Touch, iPod Shuffle, AirPort Express, etc). I'm not hating on Apple, necessarily, I'm just making a point that the iPhone and iPad were logical evolutions of long-existing products. Don't be so quick to assume that I must be the stereotypical Slashdotter simply because I don't agree with the notion that the iPhone and iPad have changed everything.
59. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by elbles · 2011-01-19 15:31 · Score: 1
  
  I certainly wasn't claiming that other smartphones on the market at the time the iPhone was introduced were on par with the iPhone, from a casual user's perspective. The iPhone was incredibly polished compared to what else was out there, and countless amounts of work went into it, but does that alone make it revolutionary? It was still mostly polish (along with a web browser that made it possible to view desktop web pages, while helping to hinder the mobile web movement, kind of, but that's another story).
  
  It's not blindness, nor is it denial. It's bewilderment. I have a Mac, and I get it. I love all the little things that they polished long before Microsoft or the Linux community started even trying to pay attention to the same things (and they're still not quite to the point where Apple is). I also have an iPod Touch and a BlackBerry. And there, I just don't get it. I use my BlackBerry far more than the iPod (yes, even for web browsing), which mostly sits in my car, plugged into the stereo. The iPhone and iPad have helped changed things, but again, I just don't think the jumps they made are as big as so many have made them out to be.
60. Re:Can Apple survive without Jobs again? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-21 10:56 · Score: 0
  
  But let's not forget that he was originally ousted from his own company because his impulsive decisions
  He was kicked because the original Mac looked a bit too risky instead of just making Apple ][s forever. It's a textbook example of a board not having a clue what sort of company they were running.
  He got rid of one computer because it was Woz's creation and people preferred it to "his" dearer mac putting Apple out of a market (even if it did have more than the 64K which he thought was enough because engineers went behind his back to put it in and make it workable (what is it with Jobs and selling stuff that is unworkable such as the iPhone4?)) which compromised Aple's profitability. It was a textbook example of a board being in the thrall of a charlatan.
ORLY by nicholas22 · 2011-01-18 04:14 · Score: 1

This a yawn-story (== ranked a little bit above a non-story)
1. Re:ORLY by ColdWetDog · 2011-01-18 06:04 · Score: 2
  
  This a yawn-story (== ranked a little bit above a non-story)
  That's what Firehose is for. Once the story escapes, you're supposed to disparage the editor and the submitter. Preferably with pithy grammar related comments.
  
  Please Read The Manual.
  
  --
  Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
When you buy AAPL you are buying the leadership by i_want_you_to_throw_ · 2011-01-18 04:15 · Score: 1

I agree that personally people should leave Jobs alone. Large investors in AAPL can make the argument that there is an interest in Jobs health because when you buy AAPL you are buying the leadership and I agree with that completely.
Jobs Not Long for this World by QuincyDurant · 2011-01-18 04:16 · Score: 2

I think he's sicker than sick. To bail before the shareholder's meeting --where he has performed both effectively and with great personal gusto--tells me that he is simply unable to do it.
I am an Apple fanboy of 30+ years duration. I am saddened by this development and applaud Fake Steve Jobs for his tact and judgment in this case. The company itself, however, may well prosper under new leadership as Apple continues to morph into an IBM-style megacorporation focused on efficiency and customer service. Their retail stores have a huge upside for growth and widespread consumer acceptance will no doubt drive more corporate IT acceptance as users demand it.
I feel that this observation about Jobs's health and imminent departure, while perhaps in poor taste, needs to acknowledged as well
1. Re:Jobs Not Long for this World by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-18 04:30 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  The company itself, however, may well prosper under new leadership as Apple continues to morph into an IBM-style megacorporation focused on efficiency and customer service.
  
  You are aware that the company's secondary image — second only to Steve Jobs himself — revolves entirely around them not being an IBM-style megacorporation, right*? Given that, if you completely remove the image, the flashiness, and the "we're not a heartlessly efficient megacorporation, honest!" corporate persona that was the entire cornerstone of the Mac vs. PC ads (not to mention their current advertising), what you're left with is an overpriced hardware manufacturer with paranoid fears of compatibility?
  *: Regardless of what they actually ARE; I'm talking about the image they have, one which will become harder and harder to maintain the more they fall in that direction.
2. Re:Jobs Not Long for this World by DoofusOfDeath · 2011-01-18 04:31 · Score: 1
  
  IBM customer service? Are you kidding me? I think you must have never dealt with IBM.
  They won't even fart at you unless you have a $50 million support contract with them.
3. Re:Jobs Not Long for this World by goombah99 · 2011-01-18 04:37 · Score: 1
  
  I felt exactly the opposite. I was ready to dump apple stock till I heard about the shareholder meeting. I think that him not announcing record sales is exactly the time to step out. Apple is going to have a huge profits on the verizon deal. Comdex showed the ipad has another year to advance without any viable competition. In a year, if they play their cards right, the app store may make this thing an unbeatable device like the ipod was once itunes came along. In fact I think apple is going to make so much money off the Verizon deal they will have to jigger the earnings to book them in future years.
  Consider if steve jobs were exiting when it looked like apple was headed for a rough patch?
  You want this shareholder meeting on the heir apparent's shoulders. it will be easy and he will shine.
  
  --
  Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
4. Re:Jobs Not Long for this World by sglewis100 · 2011-01-18 05:01 · Score: 1
  
  I think he's sicker than sick. To bail before the shareholder's meeting --where he has performed both effectively and with great personal gusto--tells me that he is simply unable to do it.
  That's one school of thought. The other is, to announce a leave on a non-workday (market closed) JUST before announcing another record quarterly profit was timed very well to ensure that any spike from the bad news will be cancelled out by the good news.
5. Re:Jobs Not Long for this World by sglewis100 · 2011-01-18 05:03 · Score: 2
  
  Comdex showed the ipad has another year to advance without any viable competition.
  COMDEX? Now you're just showing your age. :)
6. Re:Jobs Not Long for this World by cerberusss · 2011-01-18 05:27 · Score: 1
  
  applaud Fake Steve Jobs for his tact and judgment in this case
  In this particular case, yes. Unfortunately, his second-to-last blog post compared pictures of Steve Ballmer and Jared Loughner.
  
  --
  8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
7. Re:Jobs Not Long for this World by hedwards · 2011-01-18 06:20 · Score: 1
  
  The Mac vs PC ads were always puzzling. Sure to the people who have already drank of the flavor aid, I'm sure they were compelling. The rest of us wanted to beat the crap out of the Mac and hang out with the PC.
8. Re:Jobs Not Long for this World by Reservoir+Penguin · 2011-01-18 07:50 · Score: 1
  
  I agree, he looks terrible. I would not give him more than 2-3 months. Hopefully enough to get his affairs in order.
  
  --
  US-UK-Israel: The real Axis of Evil
9. Re:Jobs Not Long for this World by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-18 08:11 · Score: 0
  
  IBM customer service? Are you kidding me? I think you must have never dealt with IBM.
  They won't even fart at you unless you have a $50 million support contract with them.
  As opposed to Apple, which won't even sell you a $50 million support contract if you want one.
10. Re:Jobs Not Long for this World by intheshelter · 2011-01-19 02:34 · Score: 1
  
  Actually they were very well done and they pointed out annoyances in the PC world that most users were used to dealing with and which did not exist on the Mac. The "rest of us" that you refer to are full of shit and just blindly hate Macs.
Cooke by goombah99 · 2011-01-18 04:31 · Score: 4, Interesting

It's a measurable fact that Apple's market cap grew under Tim Cooke more than under Steve Jobs. One can question if he kept the idea pipeline stocked or was just a steward of an existing process. But the former is fact and the latter is speculation.
It is likely that Steve has hired people who are great with ideas but not with the type-A self confidence he has. It's a common trait for uber egotists to drive other egotist out of their circle. I'm not saying that is a bad thing. I'm saying it is a common thing. It has been the dominant management style for most of human history.
Thus the trouble is not replacing steve jobs but imagining who in his inner circle is capable of stepping up to be him. THat person may in fact not be in his inner circle. But maybe they alos don't need to replace him with someone just like him. they need a new leader with a new style. THey just might not find it right away till steve is truly gone.

--
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
1. Re:Cooke by initdeep · 2011-01-18 04:36 · Score: 2
  
  yeah, i bet it was real hard to keep that train going for less than a year.......
  come back when he's had to do it for 3 or 4 years and see where the company is.
  I'm not saying he can't, but I am saying the time he was "the head" was so short as to not be statistically relevant.
2. Re:Cooke by Xtravar · 2011-01-18 04:37 · Score: 1
  
  This. I think about this a lot since my company is run similarly. The inner circle are smart, capable, but do not have the same spark. They can emulate the leader, think "what would the leader do?", but do not have the same X-factor that makes the leader successful.
  
  --
  Buckle your ROFL belt, we're in for some LOLs.
3. Re:Cooke by Fantom42 · 2011-01-18 07:46 · Score: 1, Informative
  
  Grew more? I guess it depends on how you measure this.
  Here is a chart that goes back to Mar 01:
  http://ycharts.com/companies/AAPL/market_cap#zoom=0
  - From Mar 01 (beginning of this chart) to Jun 04, Apple's market cap grew from $7.64B to $12.37B. This represents about $4B a rate of 14.8%/year.
  - From Jun 04 to Sep 04 (roughly the time Cook took over, Apple's market cap grew to $15.04B. This is $3B at a rate of 77.6%/year. The rate is impressive, but the total amount is less.
  Similarly, From Jun 04 to Jan 09, market cap went to $75.87B This is about $60B under Jobs' leadership at a rate of 37.3%. For the 6 months after that Cook had the reins, market cap increased to $127.06B. This is a phenomenal rate of 124.7%, but again a smaller number, about $50B.
  So maybe you are right if you look at the percentages, but you are not right if you look at the straight values. Also, look at the shape of the curve in the figure and think about the history of Apple. While you can't see a clear jump in market cap from the iPod, you do see profitability in that time period and people generally consider that to be a huge factor in Apple's success. Clearly, the iPhone was a great decision in 2008, as the market cap started exploding after the iPhone release.
  Now I have no doubt that Cook is a competent business person. But can you really say (with a straight face) that his brief running of the ship in those 8 months total are the reason for Apple's success?
  The latter half of your post I agree with. They will need to find someone with the confidence and vision that Jobs has, and the thing about Jobs is he seems to be the only one capable serving the market he's served. Most solid engineering/integration companies serving this market gradually have all their substance hollowed out with style until the whole thing collapses. This happens because it works in the short term. My biggest fear, if Jobs doesn't come back, is that whoever takes over for him will eventually hollow Apple out to nothing.
  That said maybe its a good thing, because I've not been a huge fan of what Apple has been doing lately to computing. Of course its not just them; everyone to a degree wants to make computers entertainment devices and not general purpose computers... It is just that Apple is so good at actually delivering that entertainment product I am a bit worried the other stuff which has lingered around for so long for us geeks/nerds to play with might actually be (finally) threatened.
4. Re:Cooke by node+3 · 2011-01-18 12:50 · Score: 1
  
  Sure, three or four years is more difficult than just one year, but he did well for the one year, so it's a bit absurd to conclude that he will fail over a longer term.
5. Re:Cooke by Em+Adespoton · 2011-01-18 13:00 · Score: 1
  
  Added to this, Sculley was also type-A, and even in good economic times was not able to do what Jobs did both before and after. And Amelio... well, he was no type-A, and it showed.
  I generally think of Steve Jobs as being to computers as Walt Disney was to Family entertainment... and yes, you can take that many different ways.
The real Jobs needs to get with the 'bitch Cheney' by Super+Dave+Osbourne · 2011-01-18 04:32 · Score: 1, Funny

I'm not sure why or how the world still spends time listening to or having to listen to Dick Cheney, but he seems to have heart attack over and over. Whatever they have him on, put Steve on immediately.
Leave Britney Alone by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-18 04:33 · Score: 0

I'm serious.
Leave Britney Alone.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHmvkRoEowc
Bullshit by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-18 04:36 · Score: 4, Insightful

Here are the insider trades for the last year or so.
I don't see Jobs there.
1. Re:Bullshit by jcr · 2011-01-18 08:16 · Score: 1, Informative
  
  The last time he sold any AAPL shares, it was to cover the taxes for his most recent share grant. The last time he actually sold a significant number to cash out, Gil Amelio was still running the place.
  -jcr
  
  --
  The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Sounds ominous by GodfatherofSoul · 2011-01-18 04:40 · Score: 1

Not liking the tone surrounding him right now. Hoping for a full recovery.

--
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
Re:The real Jobs needs to get with the 'bitch Chen by chispito · 2011-01-18 04:44 · Score: 1

I'm not sure why or how the world still spends time listening to or having to listen to Dick Cheney, but he seems to have heart attack over and over. Whatever they have him on, put Steve on immediately.
Because pancreatic cancer and a heart attack are basically the same thing.

--
The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
$50 million no bad thing by QuincyDurant · 2011-01-18 04:48 · Score: 1

I am looking back as far as 1928. In IBM's early days -- which are the best comparison to those of Apple's current comparative youth --customer service was job one.
And by your own account, it's a huge profit center.
Yes, in the past five years, esp. since Lenova, there has been a big surge in customer complaints.
As I said, I've been an Apple booster for years and cut my teeth on the "Apple vs. IBM" wars. I've no reason to praise IBM except for the facts.
You mean like this Fake Larry? by rsborg · 2011-01-18 05:21 · Score: 2

http://fakelarryellison.blogspot.com/

--
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
Stevevision by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-18 05:25 · Score: 0

unbeatable device like the ipod was once itunes came along
iTunes, both the store and the software, is a flaming pile of bloated crapware. The iPod is an unbeatable device because, despite its many and varied flaws, the competition to it is somehow certifiably retarded.
The good short term news for Apple is their competitors are indeed more often than not completely retarded. You can see a repeat of the iPod hilarity happening in the tablet space. iPad? Not that good. Competing devices? Hilariously WTF.
The bad news is, unless they get a replacement Jobsian-level tyrant who can hold brutal executions in Cupertino, they're done for. Apple is doing well currently because you get the Steve Jobs(tm) experience with any Apple product. If they can't get someone in with big enough balls to rule over design and UX with an iron fist, well, they've got nothing.
memories! like shorted stock inside your mind! by Gary+W.+Longsine · 2011-01-18 05:28 · Score: 2, Interesting

You've been shorting AAPL since it was what, something like $13 bucks a share? You must have a lot of money to waste, shorting AAPL.

--
If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine.
Re:iJobs by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-18 05:29 · Score: 0

u mad
Re:Steve Jobs by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-18 05:43 · Score: 0

I Phone
I Phoneie
I phony
Stephen Jobs
stephan jobs
stiph han jobs
siff han jabs
stiff hand jabs
I phony stiff hand japs
Apple
Appole
Aphole
p in your a hole
I phony stiff hand jabs pee in your a hole.
Illegal? by WillyWanker · 2011-01-18 05:49 · Score: 2

Isn't it now illegal for FSJ to exist? Didn't California pass a law making it illegal to impersonate a celebrity?
1. Re:Illegal? by e4g4 · 2011-01-18 06:01 · Score: 2
  
  Like many other laws, intent is key. It's clear that Dan Lyons' intent has no malice. He would therefore be in the clear (if he decides to restore his FSJ mantle should RSJ return).
  
  --
  The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources. - Albert Einstein
2. Re:Illegal? by pavon · 2011-01-18 06:01 · Score: 1
  
  I think the First Amendment trumps whatever stupid law California passed. Parodies have a long history of being protected speech, and no reasonable person would mistake the Fake Steve Jobs blog as the real Steve Jobs, so it doesn't satisfy the precedent for libel.
3. Re:Illegal? by Anubis+IV · 2011-01-18 06:09 · Score: 1
  
  No.
  There needs to be intent to defraud or mislead (of which there is no evidence here), and the law also phrases it as "credibly impersonate" (i.e. that it would fool a reasonable person), which should easily be dismissed in the case of FSJ due to the presence of the word "Fake" in his name.
4. Re:Illegal? by hedwards · 2011-01-18 06:23 · Score: 1
  
  Doesn't matter what they passed, it would have to pass the courts, and it wouldn't. Parody is definitely a legitimate 1st amendment right.
  
  Also, is FSJ even in California?
5. Re:Illegal? by Cro+Magnon · 2011-01-18 06:23 · Score: 1
  
  I seriously doubt that there would be any problem with FSJ. The only problem would be if he tried to pass himself off as RSJ.
  
  --
  Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
6. Re:Illegal? by timeOday · 2011-01-18 07:42 · Score: 1
  
  Isn't it now illegal for FSJ to exist? Didn't California pass a law making it illegal to impersonate a celebrity?
  According to the juvenile activist slashdot exaggeration of the law, yes. Otherwise, no.
7. Re:Illegal? by Stoobalou · 2011-01-18 11:09 · Score: 1
  
  I think the word FAKE might have given you a clue.
8. Re:Illegal? by gilbert644 · 2011-01-18 11:10 · Score: 1
  
  it's a parody and therefor protected speech.
9. Re:Illegal? by JohnnyBGod · 2011-01-19 07:12 · Score: 1
  
  How are you impersonating a celebrity when you're saying you're a fake right in your blog's title?
Re:memories! like shorted stock inside your mind! by hedwards · 2011-01-18 06:17 · Score: 2

That's why I don't recommend people short. The worst case scenario is a company like APPL which is vastly overpriced, but yet finds a way of growing to fit the market cap. Or where the delusion takes years to bust, in which case you're out a shitload of interest, assuming that the price ever does come down far enough to justify covering on price alone.

If you really think that the price is going to tank, you're much better off going with options. As much as I despise the way they distort the market, they are the way of handling this sort of scenario where you believe the price to be too expensive.
Holiday Announcement by QuincyDurant · 2011-01-18 06:40 · Score: 1

Good point. But why not Friday afternoon and use the whole holiday weekend to spin backwards. Obviously, I know nothing. He may come pole-vaulting back onto the stage, tanned and rested. I sure as hell don't want to be right about a fatal illness.
There is no limit to the risk when shorting by Max+Hyre · 2011-01-18 06:56 · Score: 1

That's why I don't recommend people short.

To be more detailed, there is literally no limit to how much you can lose by shorting.
When you simply buy a stock, the most you can lose is what you paid for it. If the company goes bankrupt, the stock price can't go below $0.00.
If you short a stock, you're borrowing shares to sell now, betting that the replacements you need to return later will be cheaper, and you get to keep the difference. But, if the price goes up, there's no limit. You still need to buy the replacement shares, at whatever they cost then—there is no way to know how much you might lose if you bet wrong.

--
I refuse to believe corporations are people until Texas executes one. -- desert rain on http://www.dailykos.com/user/
1. Re:There is no limit to the risk when shorting by StikyPad · 2011-01-18 09:33 · Score: 1
  
  To be more detailed, there is literally no limit to how much you can lose by shorting.
  Not literally, just theoretically. Buyers literally have a finite supply of money, therefore there must be a limit somewhere, however vaguely defined that limit might be.
  
  --
  https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
2. Re:There is no limit to the risk when shorting by Max+Hyre · 2011-01-20 14:05 · Score: 1
  
  True—there is literally no limit[1] to how much you can be in debt by shorting; you can only lose everything you own, less what the bankruptcy court leaves you.
  —————
  [1] Yeah, there's a limit to the double-precision variable holding the account's value, but let's not go there.
  
  --
  I refuse to believe corporations are people until Texas executes one. -- desert rain on http://www.dailykos.com/user/
Celebrity has no ON/OFF switch by mschaffer · 2011-01-18 07:22 · Score: 1

Being a celebrity has no ON/OFF switch, and most "news" is not newsworthy.
Third times a smarm by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-18 09:25 · Score: 0

I'm pretty sire he quit at least one other time if not twice. He just comes back saying the FCC tried to shut him up or some other reentry joke. I used to like him until he got all serious and sentimental. Should have stuck to his schtick.
Jobs is Gone for Good by bill_mcgonigle · 2011-01-18 09:51 · Score: 0

I doubt it, and that's why I've shorted Apple stock. Frankly, I suggest you all do likewise.
Based on previous mis-representations, it's clear that Apple can't be trusted to be straight with Jobs' story. Do they risk a shareholder suit this way? Sure, but the damages are going to be lower than announcing, "Steve Jobs has resigned as CEO." Instead, they'll show four strong quarters under Cook before having to come clean.
Based on his previous medical history and the timing relative to the Verizon iPhone deal, he's done. He's succeeded in integrating easy-to-use computers into daily life, with the user as the penultimate beneficiary. I suspect we'll see the real fruits of this with the Verizon LTE iPhone (i.e. data-only, portable plans).
Mission accomplished. Now he'll spend his remaining time with those he loves, and where he wants to be. He deserves it. Namaste, Jobs.

--
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Re:The real Jobs needs to get with the 'bitch Chen by dilvish_the_damned · 2011-01-18 09:58 · Score: 1

I'm not sure why or how the world still spends time listening to or having to listen to Dick Cheney, but he seems to have heart attack over and over. Whatever they have him on, put Steve on immediately.
Because pancreatic cancer and a heart attack are basically the same thing.
Same symptom.

--
I think you underestimate just how much I just dont care.
Meh, like the commedians who claimed 9/11 by Anonymous Coward · 2011-01-18 15:13 · Score: 0

Remember 9/11? Where some satirists claimed that satire was dead and they were done?
A year later they were all back at work.
The only gent of note who quit when he said he would was Tom Leher after Kissinger won the peace prize.
Re:memories! like shorted stock inside your mind! by Man+On+Pink+Corner · 2011-01-18 20:20 · Score: 1

The worst case scenario is a company like APPL which is vastly overpriced, but yet finds a way of growing to fit the market cap
I think I see the problem