My apologies to @Joe Rossignol and the rest of the writers/editors. I forgot to thank you all, as well.
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.
Steve Jobs Would Have Been 62 Today While MacRumors Turns 17
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Can't
Steve Jobs, born on February 24, 1955, would have celebrated his 62nd birthday today. The late Apple co-founder, who passed away on October 5, 2011 following a lengthy battle with cancer, is remembered not only as a visionary and marketing genius, but also as a friend, father, and husband.
Jobs, who co-founded Apple in 1976 with Steve Wozniak and Ronald Wayne, introduced three of Apple's most iconic products in its history: the Macintosh in 1984, and after a twelve-year absence from the company, the iPod in 2001 and iPhone in 2007. His iconic career had its fair share of highs and lows.
In 1985, following a power struggle with then-CEO John Sculley, Jobs resigned from Apple. He went on to found NeXT later that year, and while its hardware business was largely unsuccessful, Apple acquired the company in 1997 to use its NeXTSTEP operating system as the foundation of Mac OS X.
Jobs would become Apple CEO again later that year and guide it from the brink of bankruptcy in the late 1990s to become the world's most valuable company just two months prior to his death. His legacy lives on at Apple, which recently said the theater on its new Apple Park campus will be named after him.
Apple CEO Tim Cook:Coincidentally, today also marks the 17th anniversary of MacRumors.com, founded by Arnold Kim on February 24, 2000 during his fourth year of medical school. Kim stopped practicing medicine in 2008 to focus on this website full time, and the community now reaches millions of Apple fans around the world.
As always, we express our gratitude to our readers, forum members, contributors, volunteers, sponsors, and all those who allow us to continue sharing the latest Apple news and rumors.
Article Link: Steve Jobs Would Have Been 62 Today While MacRumors Turns 17
[doublepost=1487963832][/doublepost]
[doublepost=1487963901][/doublepost]Can't help thinking if he could have got with the right medical person he likely could have been cured of his cancer.
Steve Jobs, born on February 24, 1955, would have celebrated his 62nd birthday today. The late Apple co-founder, who passed away on October 5, 2011 following a lengthy battle with cancer, is remembered not only as a visionary and marketing genius, but also as a friend, father, and husband.
Jobs, who co-founded Apple in 1976 with Steve Wozniak and Ronald Wayne, introduced three of Apple's most iconic products in its history: the Macintosh in 1984, and after a twelve-year absence from the company, the iPod in 2001 and iPhone in 2007. His iconic career had its fair share of highs and lows.
In 1985, following a power struggle with then-CEO John Sculley, Jobs resigned from Apple. He went on to found NeXT later that year, and while its hardware business was largely unsuccessful, Apple acquired the company in 1997 to use its NeXTSTEP operating system as the foundation of Mac OS X.
Jobs would become Apple CEO again later that year and guide it from the brink of bankruptcy in the late 1990s to become the world's most valuable company just two months prior to his death. His legacy lives on at Apple, which recently said the theater on its new Apple Park campus will be named after him.
Apple CEO Tim Cook:Coincidentally, today also marks the 17th anniversary of MacRumors.com, founded by Arnold Kim on February 24, 2000 during his fourth year of medical school. Kim stopped practicing medicine in 2008 to focus on this website full time, and the community now reaches millions of Apple fans around the world.
As always, we express our gratitude to our readers, forum members, contributors, volunteers, sponsors, and all those who allow us to continue sharing the latest Apple news and rumors.
Article Link: Steve Jobs Would Have Been 62 Today While MacRumors Turns 17
Tim Cook was hand selected by Steve Jobs himself to succeed him as CEO. I'm not sure how you could be any more worthy than being chosen by the man himself. Most of the Tim Cook hating brigade seem to forget that key distinction. So if you're going to criticize anyone, criticize your God who selected him. Tim Cook is just doing the best he can to replace a legendary visionary who is irreplaceable. Easy right?
Happy Birthday Mac Rumors Team and Arn, thanks for the site and forum and for Touch Arcade too, both good sites, couldn't care less about Jobs because he could have been cured, if he let modern medicine help him, his choice though but not exactly a very visionary one to take.
We would however have a better Apple now though if he was still boss I think... and the keynotes would be much better too, apart from the awful music at the end. The products would be updated a damn site quicker too!
We would however have a better Apple now though if he was still boss I think... and the keynotes would be much better too, apart from the awful music at the end. The products would be updated a damn site quicker too!
Last edited:
First of a CEO should NOT be popping off, the companies legal team should:
You want solid results:
Microsoft Wins Appeal on Overseas Data Searches
JULY 14, 2016
Microsoft sues U.S. government over data requests
Apr 15, 2016
MICROSOFT WINS PARTIAL VICTORY, CAN PURSUE LAWSUIT AGAINST U.S. GOVERNMENT
Saturday, 25 February 2017
Besides that same terrorists iPhone got hacked a week or so later anyhow so Tim lied, so it was a joke basically (and Tim trying to sound tough and sell more Iphones) all they did was anger America's population and delay an ongoing terrorist incident where people died investigation. He endangered Americans by delaying the inevitable. Your phone has zero rights, despite what Apl says to sell more. Apl global share after ? went from 20% to 12% great job Tim
Last edited:
Happy Birthday, MacRumors. Your site, and all the hard work that your staff puts in every day, is very much appreciated.
It all depends on what Jobs' purpose was, in choosing Cook.
Perhaps he wanted Apple to continue financially, but with someone at the helm who would not quickly eclipse his legacy and reputation.
After all, Jobs also told Cook not to try to do what he would've done. Sounds like a setup for failure to me
(half tongue in cheek)
He made lots of mistakes. He had a few hits. Also lots of misses.[/QUOTE]
Shh you can't speak like this around here.
[doublepost=1487966035][/doublepost]
Shh you can't speak like this around here.
[doublepost=1487966035][/doublepost]
I bet if you met jobs at a coffee shop he would tell you to F off and leave him alone.
As a use case , Steve Ballmer proves that you can choose the successor to have almost no vision but maximise profits . Tim has maximised profits and I stand by the fact that he has about as much personality and vision as Steve Ballmer. At least Steve stayed out of politics
Steve Balmer gets an unecessarily bad rap, he too had "vision" and "execution" :
He started Office 365 for Businesses/Home/Students (Best productivity : Apl@work killer)
He started Windows Azure (Best cloud; Google/IBM killer)
He started Xbox Live (Best gaming:" Nintendo Killer)
He launched The Surface Bet (RT and Pro) (Best new device category: Mac/iMac killer)
He launched Windows Server 2012 and Hyper-V (Best Enterprise tools: VMware/Linux/apl server killer)
What has Tim done?
Many of Steve Balmer's initiatives are thriving and doubled down under Nadella
He also started the Microsoft Reorginization initiative, to stop the corporte malaize an infighting (One Microsoft)..you could argue he started the PIVOT (necessary for corporate survival) , Nadellla finished it.
Microsoft has only ever had three CEO's: Gates, Balmer and Nadella
Dominate in every decade of their existence at #1 or #2 in nearly every sector (except mobile currently at #3)...thats pretty darn impressive.
Check the chart..see the pivot.
Pretty much set for next 40-50 years with "Cloud first", Next up "Mobile" (not good news for iPhone) "WoA"
"Mobile FIRST, Cloud FIRST"
Nadella? Is a mastermind "Google and Apls worst nightmare" they're baaack.
Last edited:
To be fair the poster didn't say if your life would be changed in a positive way.
But yeah, painting Steve in this way is just going waaaay to far.
True, but the current MS CEO is doing great, he did have to cut the fat though, which is a shame, but it's doing very well. Likewise with Xbox, they had that prat Don Mattrick running it into the ground, who thankfully they sacked and replaced with the brilliant Phil Spencer who has done brilliantly getting it back up to being a great competitor, I guess that was a good example of execs getting it wrong? Balmer is just on a different planet....
"Besides that same terrorists iPhone got hacked a week or so later anyhow so Tim lied,"
How did Tim lie? Be specific.
Like that's the only thing Apple have released from 2012-2017...
[doublepost=1487979854][/doublepost]
Are you basing this on anything more than how good Tim is at giving keynotes compared to Steve?
Honestly wondering. I've seen comments here saying Craig should be CEO. People seem to think stage presence = good CEO.
The lie: FBI wants Apl to create a "backdoor" to its own security systems. Compromising ALL iPhones.
The FBI simply asked simply for a disable of the automatic lock after bad entries.
Tim turned that around and came up with They want a "Backdoor"blah blah blah rather than what they really wanted was simply disabling a phones lockout policy not in their presence , and letting the FBI have multiple guesses to crack/guess it without a backdoor and without fear of destroying terrorist evidence by triggering the lockout policy..big difference so he lied. Basically to stir peoples emotions towards Apl viewpoint : "Apl security/privacy claims sell more Iphones"
At that time Apl was and still is struggling with DIFFERENTIATION .so they planted the "super duper security flag" as selling point. Trying to play off of Androids lousier security.
Tim was worried more about iPhone future unit sles than helping to do what they could to help an ongoing terrorist investigation all without compromosing Iphone security for anyone and basically being a whiney CEO trying to buld sympathy and endangering Americans... for that many will never forgive him. He deserves no sympathy.
I suggested at the time Tim worry less about a terrorist Iphone and more about fixing ITunes. He chose the former.
You don't hear them doing the super duper security thing anymore, they know its not resonating. they got a lot of flack from that foolish and dangerous publicity stunt.
Phones are no different that safes ..remember that, they have no inherent protections or rights above a safe. Apl tries to differentiate that, they are wrong.
I hear some obviusly uneducated Apl pundits procliam an Iphone is your "second brain" what a crock its simply a device like safe is device, they want in they get in. End of story, don't blow up people OK and perhaps don't store EVERYTHING on a phone ya think?
I have arguably the most secure phone a Lumia 950 runnning W10M, I dont have anything not backed up (or illegal) on it and don't log into any uneccesasry personal sites, I use my SP4/Desktop for that stuff. Phones are not a "second brain" people.
Last edited:
Happy Birthday MacRumors. Not sure when I started reading but I signed up for a forum account 15 years ago. The Mac world was very different then.
"The lie: FBI wants Apl to create a "backdoor" to its own security systems. Compromising ALL iPhones."
Again, be specific. Provide a link where TC said the FBI requested a backdoor. Never happened. TC said the FBI wanted Apple to create and then install a version of iOS on the seized phone (not all phones) to disable the phone's security features so its contents could be accessed through brute-forcing the passcode.
Last edited:
What's the point?
Eventually, time will tell as to whether Tim Cook was right or not.
Time will tell.
Apple chief executive Tim Cook accused the US government of asking his firm to engineer the “software equivalent of cancer” to help investigators unlock a terrorist’s iPhone.
“This is not about one phone,” Cook told ABC multiple times in an interview, which aired 24 February. “This case is about the future. Can the government compel Apple to write software that we believe would make hundreds of millions of customers vulnerable around the world?”
Another set of LIES
Before
-------------
After
Apple refused to comply with the court order and has always claimed its inability to unlock phones anymore, the FBI so cleverly proved that Apple does have a technical way to help feds access data on a locked iOS device.And this is the first time when Apple has not denied that it can not unlock iPhones, rather it simply refused to build the FBI a Backdoor for the iPhone, in an attempt to maintain its users trust So, now we know that Apple is not doing so, but it has the ability to do so.
Lie..they could do it without compromising all iPhones,all just a big fat dangerous sales show for the public
Last edited:
Jeez... Where do I start.
So far you have STILL not shown where TC has lied saying the government wanted Apple to create a backdoor. It didn't happen. You're just obfuscating in an attempt to walk back what you claimed.
Apple has never claimed it could not unlock the seized phone. Apple asserted the government should not be able to compel Apple to comply, setting a dangerous precedent.
One more time, please provide a credible link quoting TC saying what you originally claimed.