Total Posts:10|Showing Posts:1-10
Jump to topic:

Steve Jobs Resigns as CEO of Apple.

blackhawk1331
Posts: 4,932
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2011 8:12:10 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
http://money.cnn.com......

http://money.cnn.com......

I don't know how many of you are aware, but Steve Jobs has resigned as the CEO of Apple. Yesterday was definitely a cold day in Hell. Last I read, it isn't known who will have the herculean task of filling Jobs' shoes, but Jobs recommended Tim Cook. Hopefully Mr. Cook will do as well as Jobs, but only time will tell. Apple didn't release Jobs' reason for resignation, but I fear it may be health. He has already taken 3 medical leaves, and, unless I read wrong, will be taking another medical leave soon(ish). Hopefully he just wants to get someone new in to have time for them to warm up to the job in case he has to save Apple again.

Thoughts?
Because you said it was a waste, numb nuts. - Drafter

So fvck you. :) - TV

Use prima facie correctly or not at all. - Noumena
blackhawk1331
Posts: 4,932
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2011 8:18:25 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
I forgot, for any of you who don't know who Steve Jobs is, or worse yet, what Apple is, it's time to crawl out from under the rock you've been calling home.
Because you said it was a waste, numb nuts. - Drafter

So fvck you. :) - TV

Use prima facie correctly or not at all. - Noumena
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2011 11:35:17 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Tim Cook is going to replace Jobs, he was being groomed for it for years, ever since Jobs began having health issues.

This is the perfect time to buy their stock (well, wait for it to bottom out first).
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,325
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2011 11:42:05 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Good idea Oregon.

The public usually overestimates CEO as a figurehead of a dynamic corporation of many more hidden contributors.
blackhawk1331
Posts: 4,932
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2011 12:37:19 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/25/2011 11:35:17 AM, Ore_Ele wrote:
Tim Cook is going to replace Jobs, he was being groomed for it for years, ever since Jobs began having health issues.

This is the perfect time to buy their stock (well, wait for it to bottom out first).

I wonder how much more it will drop. Last I checked, it had dropped 5 more dollars.
Because you said it was a waste, numb nuts. - Drafter

So fvck you. :) - TV

Use prima facie correctly or not at all. - Noumena
blackhawk1331
Posts: 4,932
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2011 12:39:44 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/25/2011 11:42:05 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
Good idea Oregon.

The public usually overestimates CEO as a figurehead of a dynamic corporation of many more hidden contributors.

I don't think it's the position people care about so much as the fact that Jobs is beginning to relinquish control. This is a concern for two reasons I think. First, the last time Jobs left, the company went to hell. Second, with the state of his health, people are concerned he may be dying. Who knows what will happen when Jobs goes.
Because you said it was a waste, numb nuts. - Drafter

So fvck you. :) - TV

Use prima facie correctly or not at all. - Noumena
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2011 12:56:17 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/25/2011 12:39:44 PM, blackhawk1331 wrote:
At 8/25/2011 11:42:05 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
Good idea Oregon.

The public usually overestimates CEO as a figurehead of a dynamic corporation of many more hidden contributors.

I don't think it's the position people care about so much as the fact that Jobs is beginning to relinquish control. This is a concern for two reasons I think. First, the last time Jobs left, the company went to hell. Second, with the state of his health, people are concerned he may be dying. Who knows what will happen when Jobs goes.

That is why Jobs has spent more than 7 years preparing Cook to take over.

The first time Jobs left, it was because he was basically outted from the company. This is much different now.

Steve Jobs is practically the Thomas Edison of our time (without being a douche). He is both a brilliant inventor and thinker, as well as a wise businessman (This is the man that made the iPod, the iPhone, essentually the entire Apple inc company, Pixar, etc).

Heck, he bought Pixar for $10 million in 1986 and sold it for over $7 billion ($3.5 billion went to his own pocket since he owned 50.1% of shares) in 2006 (not a bad profit margin).
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
blackhawk1331
Posts: 4,932
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2011 1:18:27 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/25/2011 12:56:17 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 8/25/2011 12:39:44 PM, blackhawk1331 wrote:
At 8/25/2011 11:42:05 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
Good idea Oregon.

The public usually overestimates CEO as a figurehead of a dynamic corporation of many more hidden contributors.

I don't think it's the position people care about so much as the fact that Jobs is beginning to relinquish control. This is a concern for two reasons I think. First, the last time Jobs left, the company went to hell. Second, with the state of his health, people are concerned he may be dying. Who knows what will happen when Jobs goes.

That is why Jobs has spent more than 7 years preparing Cook to take over.

The first time Jobs left, it was because he was basically outted from the company. This is much different now.

Steve Jobs is practically the Thomas Edison of our time (without being a douche). He is both a brilliant inventor and thinker, as well as a wise businessman (This is the man that made the iPod, the iPhone, essentually the entire Apple inc company, Pixar, etc).

Heck, he bought Pixar for $10 million in 1986 and sold it for over $7 billion ($3.5 billion went to his own pocket since he owned 50.1% of shares) in 2006 (not a bad profit margin).

Steve Jobs DID build Apple. As for the Pixar thing, yeah that's a pretty good margin.
Because you said it was a waste, numb nuts. - Drafter

So fvck you. :) - TV

Use prima facie correctly or not at all. - Noumena
Indophile
Posts: 1,414
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2011 1:24:03 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/25/2011 12:56:17 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 8/25/2011 12:39:44 PM, blackhawk1331 wrote:
At 8/25/2011 11:42:05 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
Good idea Oregon.

The public usually overestimates CEO as a figurehead of a dynamic corporation of many more hidden contributors.

I don't think it's the position people care about so much as the fact that Jobs is beginning to relinquish control. This is a concern for two reasons I think. First, the last time Jobs left, the company went to hell. Second, with the state of his health, people are concerned he may be dying. Who knows what will happen when Jobs goes.

That is why Jobs has spent more than 7 years preparing Cook to take over.

The first time Jobs left, it was because he was basically outted from the company. This is much different now.

Steve Jobs is practically the Thomas Edison of our time (without being a douche). He is both a brilliant inventor and thinker, as well as a wise businessman (This is the man that made the iPod, the iPhone, essentually the entire Apple inc company, Pixar, etc).

Heck, he bought Pixar for $10 million in 1986 and sold it for over $7 billion ($3.5 billion went to his own pocket since he owned 50.1% of shares) in 2006 (not a bad profit margin).

When I see this, I'm reminded of something.

Why should the credit for building Apple go to Steve Jobs? Would Apple have been such a huge company if Microsoft had not dropped the ball? Motorola had let the advantage slip, after being so much ahead in the cell phone industry? Yada yada yada....

Why I'm saying this is, whenever I say that Gandhi had a huge hand in making the British leave India, I hear the argument that it's just because the British found out that it's not economical to keep the Indian colony, especially when they were hit so bad by the War, that they left. If such and such things had not happened, Gandhi would not have been successful in making the British leave.

Also, I apologize if this is derailing the thread.
You will say that I don't really know you
And it will be true.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2011 1:35:17 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 8/25/2011 1:24:03 PM, Indophile wrote:
At 8/25/2011 12:56:17 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 8/25/2011 12:39:44 PM, blackhawk1331 wrote:
At 8/25/2011 11:42:05 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
Good idea Oregon.

The public usually overestimates CEO as a figurehead of a dynamic corporation of many more hidden contributors.

I don't think it's the position people care about so much as the fact that Jobs is beginning to relinquish control. This is a concern for two reasons I think. First, the last time Jobs left, the company went to hell. Second, with the state of his health, people are concerned he may be dying. Who knows what will happen when Jobs goes.

That is why Jobs has spent more than 7 years preparing Cook to take over.

The first time Jobs left, it was because he was basically outted from the company. This is much different now.

Steve Jobs is practically the Thomas Edison of our time (without being a douche). He is both a brilliant inventor and thinker, as well as a wise businessman (This is the man that made the iPod, the iPhone, essentually the entire Apple inc company, Pixar, etc).

Heck, he bought Pixar for $10 million in 1986 and sold it for over $7 billion ($3.5 billion went to his own pocket since he owned 50.1% of shares) in 2006 (not a bad profit margin).

When I see this, I'm reminded of something.

Why should the credit for building Apple go to Steve Jobs? Would Apple have been such a huge company if Microsoft had not dropped the ball? Motorola had let the advantage slip, after being so much ahead in the cell phone industry? Yada yada yada....


Why I'm saying this is, whenever I say that Gandhi had a huge hand in making the British leave India, I hear the argument that it's just because the British found out that it's not economical to keep the Indian colony, especially when they were hit so bad by the War, that they left. If such and such things had not happened, Gandhi would not have been successful in making the British leave.


Also, I apologize if this is derailing the thread.

Apple didn't take off because of the iPhone, they took off because of the iPod, and when when Jobs came back in 97, he redid their computers so they actually become good (at least compared to what they were in the late 80's and early 90's).

The iPod was revolutionary. While it wasn't the first of its kind, it was the first that really caught on. It was the first to employ a 1.8 in HD rather than the typical 2.5 in HD (HD size found in most laptops) and still held 5 GB (the 2.5 in ranged about 4.5 GB to 5 GB in the 2 years that they proceeded the iPod).

This allowed it to be much smaller, while holding the same number of songs. It was also much more appealing visually. Compared to the very first, the Hango [1].

[1] http://www.google.com...
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"