Daniel Eran Dilger
Random header image... Refresh for more!

The Street: Steve Jobs Health Fears Key to Our Stock Manipulation Game

is Jim Cramer Sick?
Daniel Eran Dilger
The Street’s Jim Cramer, looking close to imminent death as colleague Farnoosh Torabi watched in concerned horror, recently talked about Steve Jobs’ health in the context of Apple’s future viability as a company. Torabi set up a clever stock manipulation scam conversation with Cramer entitled, “Without Steve Jobs, There is No Apple,” where she introduced her boss by insisting that the iPhone 3G introduction was overshadowed by worries about Jobs’ lack of obesity. “Most of the attention right now is going on the health of the founder and the CEO of Apple!” she intoned.

Cramer cited Eric Savitz, the blogger behind Barrons’ Tech Trader Daily, as the linchpin source of his concerns that Jobs might possibly pose significant risks for Apple were his health to prevent him from performing his daily work. Savitz is best known as the carbon copy publisher of any negative sounding rumors about Apple, with one recent example being the regurgitation of Toni Sacconaghi’s concerns that Apple was selling too many iPhones overseas, and therefore wouldn’t be able to sell enough iPhones. Yes, that does make no sense.

On the subject of not making sense, Cramer said he hasn’t even met Jobs, but insisted that “people that have seen him have said there is something wrong.” There are also reports that Cramer himself is showing signs of advanced problems. In addition to looking worn out and tired (but not really thin), Cramer has also suffered a series of hysterical fits on camera (“they have NO IDEA, NO IDEA!”) and speaks with more than a hint of dementia.

Cramer’s rambling comments about Jobs’ health leave some room for skepticism of his message. “This is a company that thrives on innovation, and the innovation is all being driven by one man.” Cramer said of Apple. “That’s okay, the one man is not a stock. I mean, you can’t. The multiple of one person is zero. Well, one. But I would warn people that this company… I don’t want to call it nothing without him, but it is not investible without him, because he is the driver of ideas. Now behind anybody there’ll be other ideas, but I remember the original Apple, and it was all him, too.” Cramer clearly has some bad soldering in his circuits.

 Wp-Content Uploads 2008 02 200802251946-3

Toni Sacconaghi Alert: Excessive iPhone Demand Reason to Panic

Why Cramer’s Remarks are Ridiculous.
There are a couple key problems with Cramers’ rant, apart from the completely nonsensical bulk of his sputtering. Apple’s innovation is not leaping fully formed from the forehead of Jobs. Certainly, Jobs has contributed an incredible vision and direction for Apple over the last decade. But as Jobs himself is quick to point out, he is the orchestrator of a lot of extremely talented people, not the main source of Apple’s innovation.

The iPhone doesn’t look nice because Jobs sketched it out from a midnight vision after being touched by God, but because he brought in Jonathan Ive as a talented lead designer who has himself hired artists to work on perfecting its design. It doesn’t have an intuitive interface because Jobs sketched out an entire new HIG in his spare time, but because his executives and UI design team has invested in a tightly collaborative effort to define how to rethink the mobile interface.

Jobs’ greatest contributions at Apple have likely been to kill or sideline a lot of good projects in order to focus the company’s efforts and resources on only the most exceptional ones. In contrast, Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer have apparently thrown every product concept within Microsoft at the market to see which will make a splash. The result has been a sky-darkening volley of absurd failures from Redmond, and an impressive series of home runs from Cupertino.

CES: Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas
Innovation: Apple at Macworld vs Microsoft at CES

Early Apple Historical Revisionism.
Cramer said the original Apple was “all about Steve Jobs, too”. Not according to anyone who was there, and certainly not according to Apple’s management. Jobs was regarded as a pariah in the business community, a maverick that drove down profits to advance technology and the state of the art. Had Cramer been anything of note in the mid 80s, he would have been slamming Apple for not acting quicker to rid itself of Jobs.

It’s easy to argue today that the Macintosh Office concept of targeting businesses that Jobs was working to advance within Apple in the mid 80s would have been a much better direction for the company than John Sculley’s “Apple II Forever” talk and his musings about the Personal Digital Assistant. At NeXT, Jobs developed ideas into technologies that were far in advance of the market and nearly unpalatable to consumers until he was able to again pair them with Apple’s brand over a decade later as Mac OS X.

Jobs has been quick to spot trends and recognize their value. He identified graphical computing and laser printing as strategic technologies for Apple; Unix, object oriented development frameworks, and visual programming at NeXT; and was again correct in keeping Apple a hardware company, killing clones, developing new software titles, promoting the iPod, and developing a new mobile platform. Apple has certainly enjoyed a tremendous track record under Jobs.

 Wp-Content Uploads 2007 10 Rd-Techq307-Entries-2007-8-18-Sco-Linux-And-Microsoft-In-The-History-Of-Os-1990S-Files-Unixworld

Steve Jobs and 20 Years of Apple Servers
SCO, Linux, and Microsoft in the History of OS: 1990s

The Old Apple without Jobs: 1986 to 1996.
At the same time, the old Apple continued along successfully (and initially quite profitably) on autopilot for nearly a decade after Jobs left. More than just surviving on autopilot, Apple actually had a series of rabid monkey CEOs jumping about the cockpit causing problems.

Speaking about his 1983 to 1993 tenure at Apple last year, Sculley admitted, “I’m a terrible manager.” So why was he running the company? “When I went to Apple — and I take no credit for any of the vision at Apple, this was purely Steve Jobs’ vision — my job,” Sculley said, “was to help bring big brand marketing to Silicon Valley” and to get people to think of a computer as something they needed.

Sculley was a marketing man. His disastrous impact on Apple left it with ads that were more clever than its hardware, and a software portfolio that had made minimal progress, particularly in comparison to the software advances happening in parallel at NeXT. Sculley didn’t push things forward, he worked to sell and brand Apple’s existing products.

His replacement was an easily flustered operations manager, Michael Spindler, who thought Apple’s best bet was to get bought out by another big corporation and get filed away as a technology portfolio. He was replaced by Gil Amelio, who was charged with cutting programs and firing unnecessary workers to stop the losses.

Recalling Apple’s Early Days – Technology – redOrbit

An Apple with Jobs: 1997 to 2008.
When Jobs returned to Apple with the acquisition of NeXT, he didn’t merely cut programs that weren’t making money and spin off projects that were breaking even as Amelio was doing. Jobs had a real vision for what would work down the road. Newton appeared to be near profitability, but Jobs dissembled disassembled the group.

In its place, Jobs plotted out a device that would really sell, not just a device that could be sold and which required massive investment and maintenance. That enabled Apple to springboard with the iPod rather than being dragged down by Newton in the way that Microsoft was by its own imitative WinCE platform.

Jobs’ Apple invested in promising, short term technologies that could be bound together to create value greater than the sum of its parts. He also invested in retail development to sell products and design that resurrected Apple’s corporate stature and polished its brand. He also focused on fundamentals, hiring operational genius Tim Cook as one of his first priorities. Cook is now Jobs’ right hand man and his obvious successor.

Apple’s No. 2 Has Low Profile, High Impact – WSJ.com

Today’s Apple Without Jobs.
So will Apple fall apart once Jobs moves on to other things? Apple is in a very different place today than it was in 1986. It has not just been broadsided by IBM and leached from by Microsoft. It isn’t desperately trying to identify the right platform to market between the cheap Apple II and the expensive Macintosh. And it isn’t growing into awkward adolescence in a relatively fresh and uncharted tech industry. It isn’t waiting to see how its Look and Feel lawsuit pans out.

Today’s Apple has been fiercely competing against Microsoft for twenty years, making increasing progress against its larger rival and demonstrating an ability to outpace, outmarket, and outdeliver Microsoft in a number of strategic areas from media to mobiles to hardware integration. It has clear platforms with stellar branding, from the Mac to the iPod to the iPhone. It is a mature company in a mature market. This isn’t 1986.

Apple is not going to be handed off to an ad man by a board of directors fearful of the future. It won’t be transformed into a think tank charged with creating (but not patenting) silly PDA products and raw technologies that can be used against it by its competitors. Its executives aren’t trying to bail out in a sale to a larger corporation. This isn’t 1994.

When asked about Jobs’ continued leadership at Apple, the company has made it clear that considerations have already been made about how to keep Apple moving in the right direction. Apple could conservatively coast on its existing technologies for a decade with only incremental progress. But there’s no reason to think that would happen, as the innovation in Apple isn’t coming from one man as Cramer insists, but rather from many pools of very talented people.

Investors probe Apple’s Jobs on successor, games, future products

Jobs without Apple.
If anything, Apple might benefit from taking a breather after being pushed relentlessly by Jobs to affect change in the state of the art. A number of employees have reported being burned out by Jobs’ tenacious pacing and drive, and some have left the company primarily for that reason. Jobs himself might welcome a reduced role as his executive team assumes more of his regular functions. Over the last couple years, Jobs has even turned his keynotes into tag team presentations.

While frequently portrayed as the deified embodiment of Apple, Inc., Jobs has worked to avoid the limelight of personality cults and soap opera websites. At a Product (RED) party held last winter, ValleyWag reported a converstion between Jobs, charity chairman Bobby Shriver, and venture capitalist Steve Jurvetson.

On the subject of wearing TV makeup for interviews, Jobs said, “I have never worn makeup.” Shriver replied, “Really?”

“I don’t give a shit what I look like,” Jobs responded. “But some people do,” Shriver answered.

“Yeah, like Schwarzenegger,” Jurvetson said. “Boy, does he layer it on. Have you ever seen him close up?”

Shriver laughed. “Have I ever seen him close up? I can’t believe you asked me that.”

Jobs’ lack of preoccupation with his surface appearance has no doubt played into the recent media circus trying to portray him as deathly ill, and working to advance that as a reason to be fearful of Apple’s market performance. If Jobs got too skinny to run Apple, would people stop flocking to the company’s retail stores? Would they start buying Vista, solely because it ships from a company with a portly CEO? Would they dump their iPhones to buy less capable mobiles running a horrible interface in Flash Lite? That’s all highly unlikely.

Would Jonathan Ive draw a complete blank on how to develop new designs? Would Tim Cook forget how to manage inventory? Would Phil Schiller start advertising like Microsoft? Would Apple’s engineers and software developers be at a complete loss as to what to do next? Apple desperately needs Jobs like a blazing forest fire needs a match.

There’s certainly a lot Jobs can still do for Apple because of who he is. He can pitch hardball deals and prioritize products, chart out new strategies and invest in totally new directions. But the Apple Jobs has created will continue long after he steps down, and may even benefit from growing in different ways under the unique vision of his successor.

Steve Jobs: “I don’t give a s–t what I look like”

Cramers’ Dirty Motives.
So why is the Street diligently advancing Jobs’ health as a front running concern? It’s because Cramer is working hard to set up an irrational variable he can manipulate to drive Apple’s stock up and down and profit from the fears of misled investors.

Cramer made no bones about his willingness (and that of his hedge fund colleagues) to manipulate news to foment the market. That’s illegal, but the SEC has shown no willingness to enforce the law, resulting in the American securities market being dominated in the media by Cramer’s ridiculous trash TV style hysterics and angry clown act.

Something else to consider: has Cramer ever been right about Apple? He insisted that Apple would subsidize service for the iPhone to the tune of thousands of dollars per user. He was behind Scott Moritz’ story that Apple had failed to meet its secret plans to sell a million iPhones in the first two days, a physical impossibility that did not correlate with Apple’s inventory supply. He encouraged investors to sell Apple stock before it reported Q3 earnings last summer, advice that would have been expensive for anyone who listened.

Cramer and the Street are consistently wrong, not because they occasionally overstate facts or make minor errors, but because they knowingly state the opposite of the truth. It would be statistically impossible to be as consistently wrong as the Street is without purposely lying.

The Street’s Flaccid Campaign Against the iPhone
10 FAS: 3 – Apple’s iPhone Kickbacks vs RIM, and Verizon vs AT&T
Analysts, Investors Take Apple to Task For its Best Quarter Ever

Read My Lying Lips.
Cramer has even outlined how he intentionally seeds false information and speculation into the news. “You got to control the market. You can’t let it lift,” he said in a recorded segment in 2006. “This is actually blatantly illegal, but when you have six days and your company may be in doubt because you are down, I think it is really important to foment. If I were one of these guys, foment an impression that Research In Motion isn’t any good, because Research In Motion is the key today. […] It’s important to get people talking about it as if something is wrong with RIM.”

Speaking about Apple prior to the release of the iPhone, Cramer said, “It is very important to spread the rumor that both Verizon and AT&T have decided they don’t like the phone. It’s a very easy one to do. You also want to spread the rumor that it’s not going to be ready for Macworld [Expo]. And this is very easy, because the people who write about Apple want that story. And you can claim that it is credible because you spoke to someone at Apple, because Apple isn’t in [a position to comment on unannounced products]. It is an ideal short.”

Cramer is a proud liar. He intentionally seeds false information with the intent to mislead the market and profit from that. When he talks, he sometimes says things that sound good, and sometimes says things that sound scary, but it’s almost always very calculated lies designed to manipulate his position as a media personality and deceive the public.

Having said that, I hope the guy is okay, because he looks terrible and sounds like he’s gone completely bonkers.

More on Scott Moritz and the Jim Cramer Street Misinformation Engine

10 FAS: 3 – Apple’s iPhone Kickbacks vs RIM, and Verizon vs AT&T
More on Scott Moritz and the Jim Cramer Street Misinformation Engine

I really like to hear from readers. Comment in the Forum or email me with your ideas.

Like reading RoughlyDrafted? Share articles with your friends, link from your blog, and subscribe to my podcast! Submit to Reddit or Slashdot, or consider making a small donation supporting this site. Thanks!

Technorati Tags: , , ,

  • nat

    It pains me Cramer has a such a large stage to blab on and you don’t Dan. But considering The Daily Show and The Colbert Report are now more credible news sources than the “official” news networks, I’m not surprised. And you didn’t even go to J School, yet you do more investigative journalism on this website in one day than CNN or Fox do in months. No, ever.

  • Brau

    While I do feel the latest media attention to Steve Jobs’ health is mostly based on trolling for hits, there is one recent occasion I can think of where the outcome might have been very different were he not at the helm:

    Steve himself said one of the few times he has had to make a truly executive decision was regarding the iPhone. Apple designed and built a prototype phone without OSX and Steve tested it out, but after few weeks he said he just could not convince himself to love that phone so he sent them back to the drawing board … the result was the iPhone we see today; a true marvel.

    If someone else were at the helm without Steve’s innate sense of what truly makes a product great, and the personal conviction to follow those instincts, we might all be looking at a very mediocre iPhone today. Another simply rational CEO would likely have been easily swayed by anecdotal exhortations or market studies to produce it.

    Steve Jobs is a remarkable blend of a realist who can recognize true creativity, and when he does, he doesn’t let those same realistic facts sway his opinions. That’s a very rare personality mix. And Apple is definitely benefitting from it at this time.

  • Metryq

    Whoa! Is that video for real? To quote HAL, “I think you should sit down calmly, take a stress pill and think things over.”

  • marsviolet

    Cramer is definitely a loose canon, but having closely followed Apple since about ’87 when I bought my first Mac, I think it’s true that in the end Apple really is all about Jobs. With Jobs gone Apple would be able to coast for a few years on momentum, but all that creative power in Apple would spiral out of control just as it did in the 90s, and clueless suits would drive the company back into the ground. Without Jobs Apple is just another tech company. If Jobs died tomorrow the stock would tank in a matter of hours and probably would not recover. And we’d see these things happen: Flash on the iPhone. Leopard for Intel. Music subscriptions. Everything that Jobs resists because he is a unique visionary would come to be almost overnight. And Steve Ballmer would, fatly and ape-like and with much chair-throwing, attempt to buy Apple.

  • lmasanti

    From AppleInsider:

    Jobs’ thin frame the result of treatment: report

    Apple co-founder Steve Jobs’ “common bug” and resulting gaunt appearance at this year’s WWDC may have been compounded by the steps taken to eliminate his pancreatic cancer years ago, Fortune magazine’s Philip Elmer-DeWitt explains.

    Jobs is believed to have received a special treatment, known as a Whipple, that cuts off the tumorous part of the pancreas and reattaches the rest to the small intestine while also connecting the bile duct and stomach in a new manner.

    This allows the remaining pancreas to perform normally but has a number of potential side effects, according to doctors, including the tendency to lose between five and 10 percent of body mass regardless of the patient’s diet.

    Crucially, however, the loss is not a sign of a worsening condition. Proper exercise and diet can let these cancer survivors “live a normal life,” according to Dr. Dilip Parekh of the University of Southern California.

    Apple has never publicly described how Jobs’ cancer was cured or whether it would produce adverse reactions.”


  • Pingback: Focusing Innovation vs. Fostering Innovation » Karl Katzke | PHP, Puppies, and other Geekery()

  • Lee R.

    Daniel, great article. You and the Munster seem like the only good sources for AAPL I can find.

    You mention Cook as an inventory genious. Considering this, how did we (as investors) end up with roughly two months of no iPhone sales as we wait the new arrival?

    Were there parts delays, technical difficulties at the last minute, great 1st generation sales near the end of the product life….

    I don’t think I’ve read anything but speculation in the press on this topic.

    Keep up the good work!

  • geoffrobinson


    The difference this time is that Jobs has molded the entire Apple culture for about 11 years now. And if you add the continuity from Next, you are looking at about 20 years of culture building.

    Did he ever have that impact during his first time in Apple?

  • BigDan

    “You mention Cook as an inventory genious. Considering this, how did we (as investors) end up with roughly two months of no iPhone sales as we wait the new arrival?”

    Considering that Apple has had no difficulty whatsoever in satisfying a far larger demand for iPods over the years, I think the running down of the iPhone supply was intentional.

    Apple was severely stung by the $200 reduction reaction earlier and didn’t want the same kind of story happening again.

    Also, they didn’t have to give any discounts and put clear air between the two different pricing structures the model will have. Simple.

  • lmasanti

    “Did he ever have that impact during his first time in Apple?”

    Apple was founded in 1996 and Jobs left it in 1985… just 9 years (a little more if you take the previous years before been a company).

    OTOH, I think you cannot pick just the NeXT/Apple2 years. He learnt at NeXT what he did wrong in Apple1’s days.

    He made the original Pirate’s Culture in Macintosh group. Good or bad, he always was doing “culture”.

  • marsviolet

    @ geoffrobinson

    Doesn’t matter. The first thing to happen when a king dies is his kingdom is ransacked from within. There’s no hope for Apple without Jobs. He’s a once in a lifetime visionary.

  • NormM

    I agree that Jim Cramer is crazy/lying when he says that Jobs is like Edison and all the creativity comes from him (I loved your comment about bad soldering in Cramer’s circuits!). I do think, though, that there is really something Jobs adds that is very hard to come by in a CEO personality: good taste combined with the courage of his convictions. Also vital in a CEO (but less unique) he seems to be good at recognizing genuine talent, and listening to it. The value of all of this is greatly enhanced by a track record that provides him with immunity from second guessers.

    Of course he also has weaknesses, and some of the strengths that got him this far are bound to turn into obstacles in the future. But right now Steve is on a roll and if he were to die anytime soon, the stock price would drop precipitously and there would be considerable uncertainty. I believe, though, that the market would be wrong. Steve Jobs has put his imprint on this company and created an entity that has a strong creative soul that will abide long after he’s gone.

  • Lee R.

    “Considering that Apple has had no difficulty whatsoever in satisfying a far larger demand for iPods over the years, I think the running down of the iPhone supply was intentional. ”

    I have some difficulty thinking that 2 months was intentional.

    Also, why cut off the “pirate” market? Why not let them buy 2G iPhones to unlock at the full price?

    Even a pirate deserves a good phone!! The 3G phone doesn’t appear to fit the need if you have to activate via ATT and give a credit card to pay the monthly plan.

    What about our friends in Russia, etc who need a good phone (unlocked) that will lead to their buying future iMac’s, etc??

    I hate to cut out a blossoming, new oil rich economy from our products!

  • Mike in Helsinki

    Never mind about Cramer. Focus.

    If Jobs were to leave Apple suddenly, it would have a crippling affect on the stock price. Period.

    Also, Cramer was right in saying that he is the visionary that to those following the company can see no replacement for.

    Lose the vision and you can expect a strong reaction in the value of the company.

    OK to rail on about Cramer et al over-dramatizing things here. And if you want to thread Schwartzenegger into your blog using whatever mechanism you can conjure up (makeup? really, are you that pathetic?) to pacify your liberal reactions, its your website.

    But keep perspective about Jobs. I thought for a minute in your blog you referred to what actually happened when he did leave.

  • AdamC

    Here’s the lowdown on that cheap a** Cramer – http://www.deepcapture.com/
    and the uselessness of the SEC – http://www.investigatethesec.com/drupal-5.5/StockgateToday

  • tehawesome

    “Newton appeared to be near profitability, but Jobs dissembled the group”
    Erm, Dan, dissembling and disassembling are somewhat different things: I think you wanted the latter verb there

  • gus2000

    I don’t give a shit what I look like, plus I got mediocre grades in school. Looks like I’m qualified to be CEO and President of the United States! Woo hoo!

    I don’t want Steve Jobs to die at all. At least not until Apple has patented the process of transferring human consciousness into a computer.

  • Pingback: What Would Apple Do : kupuk()

  • David Dennis

    I think Apple is much better off with Jobs in place – your piece sounds almost like it’s putting down his contribution to the company and really, that’s a bit out of line.

    That being said, I agree with the general premise that Apple seems to have a healthy depth of talent nowadays and so it will be able to continue without him.

    The “make great products” message has been seared into the minds of Apple workers and with the success the company has now achieved, I think that would be difficult to dislodge.

    Steve was essential in building the transformation to MacOS X, but it looks like there is now a great team behind it and that will continue. Likewise with iPhone and other products.

    The company will survive and indeed thrive without Steve, but Steve will always be remembered as a figure that made the impossible happen. Hopefully his legacy will inspire the upcoming generation of leaders for decades to come.


  • marsviolet

    Look, Cramer’s a nut, but in this case he is, like a stopped clock, actually right for once about how critical Jobs is to Apple’s success. All those artists and craftsmen would flounder without Jobs giving them direction. I can’t stress this strongly enough. It’s a terrible mistake to underestimate his importance. It’s like taking Disney out of Disney — when Walt died the company never recovered. They floundered for 20 years, and although Disney as a corporation eventually grew in size and the stock went up, the magic was gone. Disney hasn’t done anything truly great since.

  • Pingback: mac games()

  • drx1

    So Steve is gone (maybe he goes off the grid and lives in Boliva) … Apple’s stock goes down, yet the iPhone 3G goes nuts (in a good way) and they sell 35 million in 09. Apple’s stock goes up, but think overall Apple will slowly decline like they did in the ’90s…. maybe they have a Jobs2 in backup – maybe someone will rise to the occasion, but as we saw in the 90’s, nobody really did any better and most were far worse (even when Jobs was a rookie).

    I do think its funny about the Jobs never wearing makeup … it does prove a point – he’s not as much smoke & mirrors and people think … and it is important, since this whole issue of “how Steve looks” is front an center since WWDC keynote.

    Cramer is a nut.
    Jobs is a visionary.

    Certainly Jobs didnt design much (if any) of the new products, but he approved them and probably made them 100% better than they would have been … it is questionable if anyone else can do as good. Looks at B Gates/S Ballmer at MS … Gates is stepping out and MS is floundering (this may not be related, however it is interesting).

  • MikieV

    Jobs’ health is a legitimate concern for investors – sadly – only because so many “investors” would sell APPL in a panic if anything was perceived to reduce/impair his running of the company.

    But, -rational- investors took note of that when Jobs’ pancreatic cancer was announced, and factored it into their investment strategy… the same as they would for Michael Dell’s comings/goings at his namesake company. Or, the supposed exodus of creative people from Yahoo…

    I just can’t stand Cramer’s theatrics…

  • worker201

    Interesting discussion, but I think it’s all irrelevant. You’re kidding yourself if you think Jobs hasn’t laid out a 20 year plan, with product release dates and technology investment strategies already etched in stone. Much like God/Allah/etc, his plan is incomprehensible to most of us, but you know it’s there. If Jobs were to die or step down, it would be like a nuclear submarine – the safe containing the secret codes and executive orders would be opened, and the troops would keep on doing exactly what they are supposed to do.

    As an aside, I hope other companies are learning from Apple. While we can all agree that Steve Jobs is a creative visionary with an eerie 6th sense, he can’t be the only one of his kind out there. Yet no other companies seem to put guys like him in the driver’s seat. It’s all red ink and policy wankers. If more companies started valuing ideas over Dilbert-style micromanagement, the world would be a much better place.

  • marsviolet

    @ worker201

    A 20 year plan might say, “Enter the cell phone market,” but without a visionary guy like Jobs there to call the shots you’ll never end up with an iPhone. Look at the market today. A hundred million copycat piles of barely functional commodity crap . . . plus the iPhone. Take Jobs out of the equation and all you have are those hundred million copycat piles of barely functional commodity crap.

  • DoctorOtto

    Honestly, if I were Steve Jobs, I would get some of my Hollywood friends to do a makeup job on me the morning of the next big keynote, and I’d walk out on stage in a great big fat suit. Black mock turtleneck and jeans, and looking about 400, 450 lbs. Waddle out there like PC in that one bloatware commercial. I mean no offense to anyone out there who might be a few pounds over their ideal weight, but this idiocy has got to stop. Plus, “There’s a big difference between all dead and mostly dead.”

  • Pingback: michael shriver()

  • Pingback: Bove’s Blips » Blog Archive » Steve Jobs Only Had a Hangover()

  • Pingback: #Jon #Stewart exposes #Apple #stock #manipulation | FW()