Please. Don't try to defend your abhorrent attitude towards human life. "let them die?" Seriously? Disgusting. And any further commentary about this particular subject on this forum won't elicit a response from me because to me - you aren't worth it.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Bono Defends Steve Jobs Against Criticism Over Lack of Public Philanthropy
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Please. Don't try to defend your abhorrent attitude towards human life. "let them die?" Seriously? Disgusting. And any further commentary about this particular subject on this forum won't elicit a response from me because to me - you aren't worth it.
Right, but you have to remember that this guy's at best a barely-functioning moron.
We get it. You're old. Born in 1965. Congrats.
What's the point of stopping someone from putting a bullet in your brain when you're just going to die of old age in 30 years anyway? Your outlook is so horrifically provincial it makes me want to drink myself to the point of being on your level (somewhere around 20 drinks).
As for Jobs' liver transplant potentially killing someone else, and their family being proud... how's about if I ever get any kind of illness, and you and I both need a transplant (this is pretend, of course, as I'm not cursed with ****** genetics, and have hardly ever been sick a day in my life), yours goes to me. I promise I'll piss on the statue of liberty and throw a rock through the iconic Apple store. That'll be my contribution to the world.. and who are you to argue that it's any less significant than Steve's?
Fanbois always have a way to make everyone else look stupid.
Back in 1997 MS was responsible for helping keep Apple from going bankrupt by investing $150 million and I'll use a portion of your quote...
Yes, they did. And the world got . . . Windows.
i wonder if we were being punished for something.
Of course, it took Apple to come back and once again show the also-rans how to do an OS.
It isn't that hard to do around here.
Yes, Microsoft did "help."
MS "helped" Apple because Apple had them over a barrel. MS, as usual in those days, was caught with their hand in the cookie jar. Caught with Apple's Quicktime code. Before they stole that, movies and other video wouldn't play properly in Windows. They would be jerky from frame to frame.
Apple threatened to sue.
They came to a settlement (wisely) in which Apple and MS would share patents in various bits of software, and also that MS would buy $150,000,000 in non voting Apple stock and announce support for Apple by continuing development of Office for at least 5 years.
This wasn't done out of the goodness of Gates' heart. Apple in effect used extortion on MS due to the latter's act of theft. It was in Billy's best interest to play Apple's game or face worse penalties. That $150 million investment in Apple was probably going to be a lot cheaper than a lawsuit with Apple.
Last edited:
Uh-huh..
If Apple thought they had an iron clad case I doubt they would have settled for such a palty amount as well as agreeing to put IE on every Mac as the default browser.
As for what actually happened: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Canyon_Company
Looks like a win for BillyG reading that to be honest. Microsoft got Apple to drop ALL their lingering cases, agree to make IE the default browser and cross license a bunch of patents. All for a paltry $150m and the promise of five years more Office development.
Last edited:
Well using CWT1965's logic. Steve shouldn't have gotten the liver anyway. He was going to die regardless. Why bother, right?
Note: This is CWT1965's logic as presented in this thread - not mine. He believes that there's no point in trying to improve the quality of life - particularly if you're in a 3rd world country.
I should have pointed that out. LOL!
It would have been rather difficult for Microsoft to implement Apple-specific code in their operating system.
This wasn't 2011. PowerPC RISC 60x-based code specifically designed for the Classic Mac OS didn't play nice on x86-based machines running Windows code. You're dumb.
The code came from the 'San Francisco Canyon Company' who ported QuickTime to Windows.
You should become a politician.
and it will forever easy to troll on MacRumors, as long as you don't say the T or F word. Makes great nibble sized foruming between babysitting a computer.
The wonders of the class system.
Last edited:
I think your credibility has dropped to less than zero. Keep up the good work.
Actually the fanboys do a great job of making themselves look stupid.
None of what you wrote actually leads to that inference.
MS' $150m stock investment was the result of a settlement of a lawsuit. It was, in fact an INITIAL payment of a much larger sum that would be paid out to Apple over the course of a few years. At the time this is what then Apple CFO Fred Anderson said. The exact amount of the settlement is still unknown.
Both companies would cross-license all existing patents and any new ones over the following five years. As we know, Apple would make IE the default Mac browser, which in the context of the period isn't a strange thing.
Apple had leverage over MS, arising from, as you quoted, the Apple Computer vs. San Francisco Canyon Co. lawsuit.
Apple charged San Fran Canyon Co with copyright infringement and wrongdoing. And they filed an IP suit accordingly. These guys were a 3rd party contractor for Apple. However, the action also included MS and Intel. Canyon worked on video software for Apple's QuickTime for Windows and Intel's DCI. Apple claimed their copyrighted code was used in the shipping version of MS' Video for Windows and will be used by both companies in the future.
Apple claimed that after seeing demos of Quicktime for Windows and Video for Windows at the 1992 expo in Vegas, Intel's upper management asked Canyon to provide software to them that would make the speed of Video for Windows as fast as Quicktime. Months later, Canyon sent Intel its code and Video for Windows got the performance boost with Quicktime For Windows. Apple added Intel and MS to the action, and Apple showed that thousands of lines of code for video used in Windows came direct from Apple's Quicktime for Windows (Apple's software.)
As we know, some years later at the Boston Macworld Expo, the companies were like best friends.
MS and Intel got caught red-handed and paid for it. MS hired former Apple guys and finally made Office into usable Mac apps.
Not quite a win for MS. Apple simply took full advantage of MS' typical behaviour (the sort of behaviour that came to light later in antitrust court.)
Interestingly enough, had MS not acted like a thief at the time, Apple might not be where they are today.
Last edited:
What about all the jobs he has created for people even in tough times of recession? Think of the trickle effect to, the products Apple makes opens the doors for countless other companies to also profit for example manufacturers of cases, accessories, cables etc...
Sure, that is not directly charity related, but because of Steve Jobs a lot of people are wealthy and can therefor do good in the world. Think of all the money he has helped others generate either directly or indirectly, all the food that money has helped put on tables. Besides that, not all wealthy people like their charitable donations to be made public. I can't stand people who have to judge and criticize especially when they have such narrow minds and don't know all the facts. Mind you, some people just write stories like this to be controversial in order to get exposure, it's a common and well known tactic because it sparks discussion and therefor makes their magazine or publishing company money, who's the greedy one now?
Sure, that is not directly charity related, but because of Steve Jobs a lot of people are wealthy and can therefor do good in the world. Think of all the money he has helped others generate either directly or indirectly, all the food that money has helped put on tables. Besides that, not all wealthy people like their charitable donations to be made public. I can't stand people who have to judge and criticize especially when they have such narrow minds and don't know all the facts. Mind you, some people just write stories like this to be controversial in order to get exposure, it's a common and well known tactic because it sparks discussion and therefor makes their magazine or publishing company money, who's the greedy one now?
He gives jobs
He might not publicly give charity, but directly and indirectly he is responsible for millions of jobs worldwide. Not only this but while at Apple he has encouraged progressive social and political changes in the workplace and redefined and inspired how many businesses operate internally and publicly, without really positing any adgenda.
He might not publicly give charity, but directly and indirectly he is responsible for millions of jobs worldwide. Not only this but while at Apple he has encouraged progressive social and political changes in the workplace and redefined and inspired how many businesses operate internally and publicly, without really positing any adgenda.
Foxconn make goods for a lot more than Apple, hundreds of electronics companies so the same claim could be levelled at Sony, Panasonic and others.
Plus we are talking about China here, if those people were not making iPad's and iPhone 4's they would be starving in the street living off a bowl of rice a day if they were lucky but instead they have an income, accomodation and an ok lifestyle, way better lifestyle than if they were unemployed, there is no welfare state in China so these companies putting business Foxconn's way are keeping Chinese people from starving to death by giving them work
----------
Big difference between Steve Jobs and some African that crawls hundreds of miles a week covered in flies searching for a bit of dirty water to drink, Steve is more deserving being kept alive than them.
----------
If I had a choice of dying of malaria or dying of starvation slowly wasting away to death it really is a no brainer, I would choose the malaria any day of the week, malaria is a quicker exit from their wretched existences
I really could care less how much or how little Steve donates to charity.
And I will still continue Apple products if I ever need them.
If you don't like it, then stop buying.
That's really all there is to that.
What he does with his money is really his own business, why are we even here trying to justifying or villanise his actions?
And I will still continue Apple products if I ever need them.
If you don't like it, then stop buying.
That's really all there is to that.
What he does with his money is really his own business, why are we even here trying to justifying or villanise his actions?
Those on here that seek to demonise Steve Jobs are not the sort that buy Apple products, they are likely android and windows fanboys who have a deep seated dare I say jealousy of Apple and Steve, no true Apple fan would criticise Steve Jobs
Hmm, so if we don't worship Steve Jobs and blindly follow and agree with everything Apple does without question, that automatically makes someone an android or windows fanboy and jealous of Apple and SJ...
In most cases I would say yes, some of the bile that has been written about Jobs in this thread and the one about his resignation could not have possibly come from people who queue up and buy his products, they were the most extreme hate imaginable, I even read posts wishing death on him, no way would someone who buys Apple products speak so disrespectfully about Jobs as some of the posters in these 2 threads so they have to be Apple haters so given they must also own a mobile phone and a tablet it is reasonable to assume they are blindly supporting Android or Windows
I think it is possible to both love apple products yet still have criticisms of Steve Jobs (assuming they are constructive, warranted and properly justified, say if he truly had some moral or character flaw left deeply wanting).
I just don't see the point of this article, or all the hoohaa over his supposed lack of philantrohpy. I thought the whole point is that this is meant to be a voluntary act. Since when it become "law" that all millionaires had to donate so much to charity or risk being publicly shamed?
You want something to be done for charity, heck, go and do it yourself, and stop whining about how others presumably are not doing enough!
I think it is possible to both love apple products yet still have criticisms of Steve Jobs (assuming they are constructive, warranted and properly justified, say if he truly had some moral or character flaw left deeply wanting).
I just don't see the point of this article, or all the hoohaa over his supposed lack of philantrohpy. I thought the whole point is that this is meant to be a voluntary act. Since when it become "law" that all millionaires had to donate so much to charity or risk being publicly shamed?
You want something to be done for charity, heck, go and do it yourself, and stop whining about how others presumably are not doing enough!
Constructive criticism is fine, that was not my target of my previous post, no one is perfect not even me or Steve Jobs, my "windows/android" fanboy post was about those that way cross the line in how they criticise Steve Jobs
Universally Licensing their OS isn't what made Windows the dominant OS for Home Computers or Servers. If that were true you would probably see some *nix OS being dominant. The tactics that early Microsoft used are worthy of China.
You want something to be done for charity, heck, go and do it yourself, and stop whining about how others presumably are not doing enough!
Plus I don't believe in charity
Only charity that I support is animal welfare or cancer research
I am utterly opposed to the principle of welfare and have long called for the abolition of the welfare state as it takes away peoples sense of personal responsibility and their self reliance, end all unemployment benefits and give people a choice of work or starve.
My country has one of the lowest work ethics and sense of personal responsibility on the planet and at the same time one of the most over generous welfare systems, can't be a coincidence, the hardest working people in the UK are the indians, the chinese, the poles and the thais, what do they have in common ? none of them have a welfare state so the people develop a strong work ethic and a sense of personal responsibility.
Charity is more often than not a crutch for those that will not live up to their responsibilities.