Jobs chided, answers questions at shareholder meeting
By Ryan Block 
posted May 11th 2007 10:26AM
posted May 11th 2007 10:26AM
Yeah, we tend to think things like shareholder meetings are as boring as the next guy (well, the next guy who's not a stock broker, anyway), but Steve really took and dished out some heat at yesterday's get together.On Leopard's delay: "Leopard will be worth the wait. I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If so, then Microsoft would have great products." (Snap!)
On the iPhone: "A few of us have been using the iPhone a lot and if you wanted it back, you would have to pry it from our dead hands."
On iTunes movie rentals: "One never knows."
After being grilled by AFL/CIO on stock backdating: "I actually got my options at a higher price, but I didn't ask the company to reimburse me"
On Anderson's comments: "I've worked with Fred for many years and I think he's an awfully good guy, but I thought his comments were a little wrong."
Despite being lauded by Greenpeace reps for "A Greener Apple", he opined: "I think [Greenpeace] particularly depends too much on principle and not enough on fact. You guys rate people based on what people say their plans are in the distant future, not what they are doing today. I think you put way too much weight on these glorified principles and way too little weight on science and engineering. It would be very helpful if your organization hired a few more engineers and actually entered into dialog with companies to find out what they are really doing and not just listen to all the flowery language when in reality most of them aren't doing anything. That's my opinion."
It ain't easy being Steve.
Well, o rly, since the Zune's features didn't arouse my interest I haven't been following any debates about it.
While I am sure there will be iPod users mocking the Zune, I haven't seen any from the deep of their hearts "hating" Microsoft for just making the Zune, although as I admitted I haven't paid attention to any discussions around it and won't start with that now.
And saying that my argument can be extended to other debates only emphasizes its validity in this specific case, right?
Personally I like having the choice in computer and entertainment "universes", Apple just consistently makes products for my needs, others may have different priorities. I don't see any need trying to bash companies for making products that other people happily want to use, as long as I find someone who caters to my taste. /shrug
AJ
Alex Jacobson : "Well, o rly, since the Zune's features didn't arouse my interest I haven't been following any debates about it.
While I am sure there will be iPod users mocking the Zune, I haven't seen any from the deep of their hearts "hating" Microsoft for just making the Zune, although as I admitted I haven't paid attention to any discussions around it and won't start with that now."
If you "haven't paid attention to any discussions" then how can you make an argument or statement for one side of the group? Like I said before, read up on the posts from http://www.engadget.com/search/?q=zune and other sites for a vast amount of examples; you'll see how much they dislike Microsoft/Zune from the "deep of their hearts."
plaidpjs: MS bought $150M of Apple stock at the time. This inspired great confidence in the media a time where Michael Dell's proposed solution for Apple's problems was to "close shop and return the money to the shareholders".
I have heard though that MS secretly shorted $150M worth of stock at the same time. For non-traders, this means that this was a zero sum game for MS - they couldn't win or lose anything no matter what the stock did.
Okay... please review this article, it is the first in a list of many that you can find through a simple search.
Pay SPECIAL attention to the second paragraph that explains both Microsoft and Apple had agreed to this influx as a settlement to their long existing litigation over Windows infringements.
http://news.com.com/MS+to+invest+150+million+in+Apple/2100-1001_3-202143.html
plaidpjs : "LOL....Show me the lies and inaccuracies. Prove what you say. Everything in that post is fact, the only exception being where the respective markets and technologies would be today without Apple doing what they did.
So, stfu or actually prove me wrong. Simply claiming I am means nothing."
Hello again plaidpjs,
"no facility to access TV or MP content over the web"
Incorrect, both CinemaNow & Movielink offered these services as far back 1999.
"no legal facility to buy music off the web."
Incorrect, Cductive did this as far back as 1996, with prices at 99 cents a song (sound familiar?) while others such as mp3.com, Goodnoise (now called eMusic) and even SONY did this in 2000.
"no HDD based PMPs..."
Remember the Creative Nomad? The same one Apple paid $100 MILLION to Creative to settle their dispute regarding the iPod stealing their interface.
A crap load of the rest of your "facts" start with "little to no integration" so I won't even need to bother with it, as you prove that Apple "borrows" existing technologies and packages it up in a pretty enclosure for simpletons such as yourself.
You can stfu now, biased iDiot.
First, you are angry and need to lay off the caffeine.
Second, let's review your little conundrum of facts.
- in reference to TV and MP content over the web: CinemaNow, while established in 1999, didn't bring any tangible service to market until 2002 and that was as a pay-per-view facility, it wasn't until 2004 that they brought "buy" content to their service and has not, to-date, sold as much as has the iTMS. MovieLink similarly, established in 2001, didn't bring buyable content to their service until late 2005. And, neither of the services allow for the content you pull off their respective sites to be used in any manner other than on your computer or a TV connected to your computer (except for the relatively recent edition of burning content to a DVD now allowed at CinemaNow).
The point, however, is that both of these companies have lingered in relative obscurity over the last several years. Most consumers have no concept that they actually exist, or at the very least a passible understanding of what they truly offer. That is not the case when it comes to iTMS and what Apple has been able to achieve in just the last two years with regard to TV and MP downloads (and they don't yet have ALL the studios on board in their endeavor, as opposed to MovieLink which was initially subsidized and owned by several major studios, or CinemaNow that has had studio support since the day they began)
Simply because these services exist does not invalidate my point, without Apple, those markets would still be lingering in obscurity and would still be trying to pass off the pure subscription/rental based model they both had up until Apple started making entry into the market. Amazing how that works, huh?
- Cductive, MP3.com, and the other music purchase/sharing sites that existed prior to Apple entering the market had nothing to do with the major record labels. They were strictly populated by the indie market, self-publishers, or illegally distributed content. Say whatever you want, but it wasn't until Apple brought the big five to the legal download table that that market was truly created. But, even if you want to give them some credit, where the hell are they now? Failing or failed... miserably!
- as to the Creative Nomad and Creative's case against Apple... well, I suggest you learn to read and go back and review what happened because it had nothing to do with HDD players. It was a patent ifringement case based on a patent that wasn't awarded to Creative until well after Apple had already captured the market and it was on a menuing/navigation system.
Oh noes, look who's really stupid... why, it's o rly!
And, as for your last block of text... hell yes they borrow technologies, every tech company does, but they also innovate and create new technologies which, unfortunately, several other companies do not. And, as for packaging for Simpletons, at least it's better then packaging for a@@ hats like yourself... because god forbid they did that and most of the technologies I mentioned wouldn't be where they are now.
802.11, bluetooth, GUIs, the mouse, WYSIWYG, typography... Microsoft didn't want to know about these things until well after Apple established their viability and that consumers really, really liked them. Whether or not they were in-house projects or not, without Apple, computing would be a much uglier landscape with less than wonderful advances in a lot of what defines general day-to-day existence as we know it!
Also, be sure to check out the document exhibits from the same time period in the Comes v. Microsoft trial, many of which detail the company's efforts to manipulate/misinform Apple and destroy Sun (and, by proxy, Java). A deal with Microsoft has, historically, never proven to be a good idea.
Jobs is an asshat.
Well plaidpjs, you wrote quite a long response, but it was pretty vacuous.
One minute it's "no facility to access TV or MP content or buy music off the web" the next it's "well X doesn't count because it doesn't satisfy Y," that's lame and trite.
You're the typical iDiot plaidpjs, when proven wrong, you start changing your tune and original connotation to help with your points (or lack there of.)
Enjoy writing another useless biased novel, or save yourself the embarrassment and stfu; then again, it was an entertaining read, no matter how devoid it is.
I have yet to change any tune, o rly. My original points are still valid.
What is truly vacuous is your attempt to negate an argument by throwing around insults. Funny enough, that is also the sign of a truly WEAK mind.
So, keep up the good work... it's truly entertaining to read someone's posts who is so unbelievably angry! :)
You have a wonderful day now!
Hmm, writing checks huh? Like MS did when they wrote a check to Apple to save them from death as the Steve took the helm again back in '97? He is awful cocky to MS when he owes the existance of his company to their ability to write a check.
Hello plaidpjs,
You are a simpleton, even when reading your own posts. Your original post insinuated that "no " was possible or existed before Apple presented it to you, then in your attempt at a rebuttal, you state "Most consumers have no concept that they actually exist" and "Simply because these services exist..." so you indeed have changed your tune and your points are no longer valid in their original connotation. You can revise your post if you'd like, but it doesn't change your original statement.
"Okay, I was gonna stay out of this one..." it seems you should have iGnoramus.
hahahahahaha... there's your insult stick again.
Too bad this board doesn't have an a@@hat ejector.
As for your "simpleton" reading of my original post. It was addressed at the markets as we now conceive them, not as they might have existed before Apple entered the mix. So, I'm sorry to tell you, but I've been saying the same thing then as I am now.
But, trust me... your screams of inadequacy are not going unheard. It's okay, o rly... let out the frustrated teenager that you harbor in your soul.
Buh-bye, now... have a nice day!
Plaidpjs,
Please be balanced.
- no Firewire or major move to digital video for the average consumer... this is an Apple technology after all
Apple didnt exactly drive USB, or Sata - and retained a royalty for Firewire that impeded its market penetration for too long - but a nice technology.
- little to no forward progress in bringing digital entertainment creation to the masses... iPhoto, iMovie, and GarageBand have all been widely acclaimed applications that have led to the virtual verbatim copying of their features and interfaces by Microsoft (the quality of those copies, of course, are subject to interpretation - mine is, they aren't very good).
Microsoft and others brought living room integration of media long before Apple TV.
Media Centre?
- little to no integration of Lucent's infant technology 802.11, thus no Wi-Fi movement of the modern day... it was Apple that proved it's viability in consumer computer systems 3 years before it was ever an option in a mainstream PC, let alone in a PC as a standard feature
Most PCs started with pretty standard 802.11 - not a bastardised standard.
- no WYSIWYG, no typography
Xerox anyone?
- no GUI... let us remember, while not strictly an Apple advance, Xerox was ready to scrap the project altogether and warehouse its results before Apple showed up to buy it and then adapt it to consumer computing
Dont confuse innovation and commercialisation - How many PCs exist?
For every example there are counterexamples - true, Apple make beautiful vertically integrated systems, but the PC ecosystem has provided diverse choice - and at a lower price point that Apple
Just be a little balanced.
Thanks.
Hello plaidpjs,
In reference to "It was addressed at the markets as we now conceive them, not as they might have existed before Apple entered the mix," where in your original post did you say that? Once again, you're changing your tune in a manner to assist with your point of view and lack of facts, albeit with slightly different wording now.
Also, Pete has addressed you here ( http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/11/jobs-chided-answers-questions-at-shareholder-meeting/comments/4928501/ ) don't forget to respond to him as well, but make sure you get it right this time, so you don't have to change your "meaning" later.
btw, adolescent plaidpjs, you may be able to get away with saying bad words like "ass" and not worry about getting the ruler.