Submitting a review for consideration is easy; please first read Slashdot's book review guidelines. Updated: 2008114 by samzenpus
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.
Parts: The Clonus Horror (Score:5, Funny)
But even by Apple's standards, its handling of news about the health of its chief executive and co-founder, Steven P. Jobs, who has battled pancreatic cancer and recently had a liver transplant while on a leave of absence, is unparalleled.
Indeed, very little of the matter comprising Steve Jobs is still Steve Jobs. The man's like a rebuilt Delorian [delorean.com]. Am I the only person that shudders when he closes all of his speeches with "Remember, there's a little piece of all of you inside me"?
I guess if I ran a cult I'd be asking for new organs from my younger zealots too.
Re:Parts: The Clonus Horror (Score:4, Insightful)
I (sorta) see where you're coming from; the problem is one of "just because he's a CEO doesn't mean he's not entitled to privacy about medical matters." It was announced that he was having "medical problems;" past that I don't really see as it's the world's business. If it was, we'd not have things such as HIPAA in place.
Parent
Re:Parts: The Clonus Horror (Score:5, Insightful)
He has the right for privacy, but investors have the right to speculate -- that's what investors do.
Steve Jobs being at Apple must have some measurable financing impact on the company or else he wouldn't get paid his bonuses.
If Steve wants his privacy, that comes with a share price that's volatile on the basis of speculation. I don't think that's too high a price to pay personally, but he seems very irritable about that reality.
Parent
Re:Parts: The Clonus Horror (Score:5, Interesting)
By that argument we should probably require all employees of any publicly traded company to make their genetic sequence available publicly, plus briefs about any potentially dangerous hobbies they may have. Better throw in data about their relationships too. Nothing impairs performance like trouble at home.
This "publicly traded company" nonsense is used to justify too much. "Medical problems" is more than enough for the shareholders and the public.
Parent
Re:Parts: The Clonus Horror (Score:4, Insightful)
He did have a hormonal imabalnce, they said he had very serious health issues and would return to work in June. All of that is true. The press thinks it has a right to know everything about everyone. Apple provided all of the information any investor would need to make an informed decision.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Job's health is absolutely his business and no one else's. Who cares if it's a publicly traded company. Did he agree he and his families lives would be an open book to shareholders by virtue of them investing a few dollars? NO.
His professional actions are absolutely subject to scrutiny, after all a public company does not work for it's customers, it works for it's shareholders. This is established, especially in the US. But read that carefully, his PROFESSIONAL actions. It ends there.
If shareholders view hi
Re:Parts: The Clonus Horror (Score:4, Interesting)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Where I might slightly disagree with you is that the Apple, Inc. image is very closely tied to the public illusion that IS Steve Jobs... people don't wait with baited breath for the next press release from Apple... they wait for the next PR demonstration from Steve himself. And yes, to an extent, Steve (though not his family) did agree to be an open book when he allowed himself to become such a big part of Apple's advertising and promotions.
Because of this, I think the shareholders might be due more than "
Re:Parts: The Clonus Horror (Score:4, Interesting)
A share holder of a company that uses it's CEO as one of it's primary selling points does have a right to know if that PR asset is about to kack.
Really, a right? How exactly was that right bestowed upon them? What gave them that right? Is there some sort of shareholder's bill of rights that I haven't heard about which says that if a company uses its CEO as a PR asset then shareholders have the right to know if the CEO is having medical problems?
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Avoid the Osborne Effect (Score:5, Insightful)
One of the things Apple learned well by observing others was the Osborne Effect [wikipedia.org]. And its true: Would you buy a "new" iPhone if you were told a better one was 6 months away, and all the cool features it would have eventually?
Re:Avoid the Osborne Effect (Score:5, Interesting)
That's a somewhat interesting question. The fact is is that people know new things are coming out from Apple. Yet they buy the "old" stuff and then bitch and moan when the "new" stuff comes out!
Parent
Re:Avoid the Osborne Effect (Score:5, Insightful)
I bought the G1 months after it came out. I bought it knowing that Samsung, HTC, and about 7 other companies have already announced that they are making new Android phones. At least 1 of them will be better than the one I have, and it'll probably be within 6 months. I signed a 2 year contract with my provider to get the phone as cheap as possible.
So yes, even knowing that newer, better things were coming out, I did buy the current offerings.
With computers, this is -always- the case. Every computer will be replaced by a better model the next year. Cars, too. And just about everything that has to do with technology.
Yes, there are some people who will say 'oh, there's a better one coming' and wait 6 months for it... But most people won't wait more than a month.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Except that it isn't true. The "Osborne Effect" didn't even apply to the Osborne. If this WERE true the computer video card industry, with it's 6 month refresh cycles, would have collapsed years ago. In case you aren't familiar, in the video card industry you buy a $500 video card knowing, with absolute certainty, that a much cheaper and faster card will be available at the same price or lower in 6 months. Yet people still buy video cards.
And the cellphone market is an even better example of this. Some "ear
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The vast majority of those who bought the iPhone 3GS ALREADY HAD an iPhone. [citation needed] [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Remember when RAM was like $75 a gig? d:
I must be old - I remember when it was $25/meg.
Re:Avoid the Osborne Effect (Score:5, Interesting)
...Would you buy a "new" iPhone if you were told a better one was 6 months away, and all the cool features it would have eventually?
But there's more to it than the Osborne effect. Apple's innovations are often the sort that can be echoed by competitors, diluting the return on their initiative and investment if disclosed too early. In this respect they're no different from any other toy company. I remember it once being said that it was easier to enter the offices of the Pentagon than to acquire a visitors pass to Mattel, so the secrecy may be simply good business.
Parent
...so? (Score:4, Insightful)
[sarcasm]
SHOCK
HORROR
How DARE they keep secrets secret!!! I am entitled to know everything they do, when they do it, and if I don't like it, I am entitled to force them to change it because I am entitled!
[/sarcasm]
*rolls eyes*
Re: (Score:3)
This needs to be modded up :)
"Deliberate untruth"? (Score:5, Insightful)
In plain English, that's called a lie.
Or maybe it's a deliberate partial truth... (Score:4, Insightful)
Combine that with the fact that plenty of perfectly healthy CEOs have been raping and plundering their companies, destroying entire industries with practices ranging from questionable to outright fraudulent. Jobs' health is his own concern, and I wish him good health for its own sake, not the value of my share in Apple.
The SEC may be interested... (Score:4, Insightful)
It seems impossible to me to attribute All Things To Chairman Steve, and at the same time suggest that serious illness of the CEO, Chief Designer, Head Boffin, and the virtual Persona of Apple Inc is not a material event, and is something the company can glibly lie about. http://valleywag.gawker.com/5028508/steve-jobss-health-leads-top-apple-flack-to-contract-common-bug-with-the-truth [gawker.com]
If true that Jobs had liver replacement, why is this not a violation of reporting requirements?
Re:The SEC may be interested... (Score:4, Funny)
Don't worry, Microsoft are releasing shit all the time. I'm sure some of it is Ballmer's.
Parent
Better title would be... (Score:5, Insightful)
The culture of secrecy is not an Apple exclusive. Any company that has an inventory which needs to be sold would be foolish to open it's future product line to the public's eyes.
Any company which has a carefully crafted public image will not suffer just anyone to make public announcements about them. This goes double (well, a few billion times actually) for companies which are publicly traded.
Anyone who is upset about a so called "deliberate untruth" regarding someone's health is a total jackass. This article is almost too stupid to respond to.
Re:Better title would be... (Score:5, Insightful)
The point is that Apple decided to lie about Steve Jobs health to avoid a stock price crash.
There is a good reason why stockholders and the SEC should be angry
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I an go to Intel, Microsoft, Sun, Oracle, or IBM, and in return for signing a NDA, they will give a roadmap of what their product lines will be doing in the next 1-5 years. I then can go time equipment purchases around their model cycles.
Apple? No way to get that info. I don't know if the $500,000 I'm spending on Mac hardware will be obsolete and unsupported in 24 hours.
However, Apple knows this. To be honest, I am pretty sure they don't want into the enterprise. They are best served as being a toy mak
Personal Life (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
He is associated more strongly with Apple than perhaps any CEO is associated with any large company in America.
Not quite. Throughout history there have been CEOs who've been very strongly associated with their companies. Here's a short, non-exhaustive list (in no particular order):
Bill Gates - Microsoft
Warren Buffet - Berkshire Hathaway
Jack Welch - General Electric
Larry Ellison - Oracle
Andy Grove - Intel
Michael Bloomberg - Bloomberg
Charles Schwabb - Charles Schwabb
J.P. Morgan - J.P. Morgan and Co.
John D. Rockefeller - Standard Oil
Re:Personal Life (Score:5, Insightful)
It might not fold, but dramatic shrinkage (massive layoffs, etc.) is very likely.
What are you talking about? What about Steve Jobs dying would cause massive layoffs and dramatic shrinkage? Because he is the one designing ipods? Because no one else in the company can continue the music and computer business? It's not like Steve makes all this stuff, he approves it, and decides the general direction. And now the direction is pretty clear in the Mac, Phone, and music industries that Apple should have enough to go on for a while, even without any new revolutionary devices. Please explain how exactly Steve Jobs death would ruin Apple, why they can't just keep going on the momentum they have.
Parent
obsession of obsession (Score:5, Funny)
How about an article about the medias obsession over Apples obsession about secrecy?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
It's a secret.
Not just a deliberate untruth, possibly illegal (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Nonsense. The rights of shareholders of a corporation to be informed about materially relevant information about the enterprise do not in general override the privacy rights of its CEO, only in very specific instances (e.g., the CEO is forced to disclose his transactions on company stock, and other dealings with the corporations such as pay and benefits). The possibility that the CEO of a corporation you're investing in is secretly very sick and will die soon is, well, just a risk that you have to take.
Steve Jobs is dead (Score:5, Funny)
isn't the SEC going to come down hard on apple? (Score:4, Insightful)
Isn't this like withholding info from shareholders?
I would think that the health of Steve Jobs is quite important to the stock price of apple.
Re:isn't the SEC going to come down hard on apple? (Score:5, Insightful)
I would think that the health of Steve Jobs is quite important to the stock price of apple.
So fing what, are the greed of shareholders and the privileges they hold as shareholders more important than the rights to personal privacy held by Steve Jobs? Is that what this is about? Money money money money, tell me if your liver is shutting down because I need that information to make more money.
Listen, there are privileges, and there are rights. They are not the same. A lot of things that people go around spouting as "rights" are in fact "privileges", not rights. You have the right to gather with other people in public. You have the privilege, if applicable, to drive a car on public streets. You have the right to say whatever you want to say as long as it doesn't infringe upon someone else's right. You have the privilege to drink alcohol when you turn 21. You have the right to have your privacy protected. As a shareholder, you have the privilege to know what's going on with the company you invested in.
If you don't like what's going on in the company you invested in, the solution is pretty obvious. And it doesn't involve getting angry at the CEO because he didn't want to tell you about the biological processes going on in his body. It's his right not to have to do that.
Your privilege does not outweigh his right, and I'm sorry if you don't like that, and I'm sorry if you lose money because of it.
Christ.
Parent
A Company W/o Trade Secrets Isn't Competing (Score:3, Insightful)
Every business entity has something their coulda/woulda/shoulda done differently. And, every stock holder wants complete transparency for all business dealings and information but their own.
Apple feels it realizes a business advantage from playing its cards a bit closer to the vest than - say - Dell. The only difference, the only difference between the trade secrets Apple holds dear (starting from the very existence of an unreleased product, on down) to those for Dell (a US$0.02 price advantage on sata cables) is that Apple's are vastly more interesting to read about.
Therefore, what Apple considers a trade secret is of great financial interest to writers and publishers who are accustomed to knowing every corporate detail except how the execs are manipulating the company stock this week, and which subordinates they're dicking.
If the press, or more to the point the stockholders, don't think they're feeling enough love, they can sell the other owners on the Transparent Apple, Inc. concept at the next stockholders meeting, and vote a new board accordingly. Until I see signs of a nasty proxy fight over this, the whole thing is made up news, or in the word of the metatags, !news.
Re:Not everything is money (Score:5, Funny)
Yes, but according to a leak I heard from a top Apple exec, he will miraculously rise after 3 days and reveal a new iPhone unto his disciples!
Parent
Re:Comments on secrecy... (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
nytimes blogsafe links (Score:5, Informative)
New York Times link generator [blogspace.com]
For instance Apple's Obsession With Secrecy Grows Stronger [nytimes.com]
In this case, "?partner=rss&emc=rss&pagewanted=all" was appended, though at times, other magic keys have been required.
Parent
Re:Apple is not a tech company (Score:5, Insightful)
"Oh, and that whole ease of use thing."
Don't confuse the marketing tricks with the product. Miller Lite is beer (sort of). They're selling beer. They're suggesting you'll have a good time if you drink it, but they're selling beer.
Apple is selling a computer system. Not a computer, a computer system. They're an integration company. You're perfectly correct, the hardware is not particularly special. Rather, it's the way it's put together and runs. Like pretty much any other company, they use commercials that promise you'll have a good time and be popular if you buy the product.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Sure...
OK, we have a 1099 dollar MacBook here and a 799 HP laptop here. The Apple is more expensive, one less USB port, same size screen, and IEEE 1394 port on my Mac.
The HP that lacks "selling sex appeal, social status, and "having a good time"' hangs every couple hours, wifi drops hourly and reboots 3-5 times a week. My sexy, social status having a good time Mac has 9 days uptime right now.
I've been using computers for 30 years now, our first computer was a IBM PC XT in April '83, first laptop I used was
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Sounds like you picked up a crappy HP.
My £500 3 year old PC has never crashed, doesn't hang, doesn't drop WiFi (I've had disconnects, but only due to the router, not the laptop). It Just Works.
Actually tell a lie, I have had hangs - when I'm running Itunes (though the OS recovers fine when I close off the dodgy software).
Wow, 9 days. Obviously no one's ever had a PC on for that long.
USB and Wifi weren't Apple inventions, but no doubt like most mythical "Apple firsts", you are using some definition of
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If so, it didn't get them anywhere. Apple's stock price fell a bit in response to the "hormonal imbalance" thing, but it's up quite a bit above that now and holding fairly steady. Particularly so when compared to the rest of the market.
Personally (and as an Apple stockholder) I would have preferred they just said Steve was sick and taking some time off. I don't think owning stock in a company gives me the right to demand personal information about any of their employees.
Re:It's a funny kind of ship that leaks from the t (Score:5, Funny)
I was with Apple through the late 90's. Yes, that was an era of leaks -- but more often than not, they came from up top, not from the folks down in the trenches.
What was the difference? If I or a colleague said anything, it was a leak, and we'd be fried. But if someone on top said something, well, that was strategic.
See the difference?
At least you got to keep your job!
Parent
Re:It's a funny kind of ship that leaks from the t (Score:5, Funny)
mmMMmm...Delicious Apple Fritters.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
See the difference?
Despite your attempt at sarcasm, I DO see the difference. Generally people not in upper management making decisions that affect the whole company is frowned upon. Do you also get equally upset when upper management decides to develop some new product, and they don't let you make that decision?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Anything is better than Microsoft FUD and whini (Score:5, Informative)
Apple is pretty good in the sense that they don't appear to criticise the competition (or if they do it doesn't make the news). They get on with what they do best.
Never seen the "I'm a Mac - I'm a PC" advertising campaign?
Parent