Steve Jobs Resigns

[Amaris]

I'm not really surprised, since he had pancreatic cancer and that seems to be a particularly vicious form, but still:

The ramifications of Steve's departure:

(Reuters) - Silicon Valley legend Steve Jobs on Wednesday resigned as chief executive of Apple Inc in a stunning move that ended his 14-year reign at the technology giant he co-founded in a garage.
Apple shares dived as much as 7 percent in after-hours trade after the pancreatic cancer survivor and industry icon, who has been on medical leave for an undisclosed condition since January 17, announced he will be replaced by COO and longtime heir apparent Tim Cook.
Analysts do not expect Jobs' resignation -- which had long been foreseen -- to derail the company's fabled product-launch roadmap, including possibly a new iPhone in September and a third iteration of the iPad tablet in 2012.


"I have always said if there ever came a day when I could no longer meet my duties and expectations as Apple's CEO, I would be the first to let you know. Unfortunately, that day has come," he said in a brief letter announcing his resignation.
The 55-year-old CEO had briefly emerged from his medical leave in March to unveil the latest version of the iPad and later to attend a dinner hosted by President Barack Obama for technology leaders in Silicon Valley.


Jobs' often-gaunt appearance has sparked questions about his health and his ability to continue at Apple.

[LINK]

Also, one that focuses on the cancer itself:

Jobs, 56, who resigned today as Apple CEO, in January took his third medical leave since being diagnosed with a neuroendocrine tumor. He has undergone a variety of treatments since 2003, including a liver transplant in 2009.
Pancreatic cancers are generally some of the most lethal of all tumors, and the most common type often kills within six months. Jobs has battled a less common variety -- which accounts for only about 5% of the 43,000 pancreatic cancers diagnosed each year.

These neuroendocrine tumors, which develop in the pancreas' hormone-producing cells, tend to be grow more slowly than other kinds of pancreatic cancers, making them more curable, experts say.

Although Jobs was diagnosed in 2003, his illness was not disclosed until the following year, after he'd had surgery.
The fiercely private Jobs has said relatively little about his health problems, although he did acknowledge his bout with cancer during a commencement speech at Stanford University. "No one wants to die," he said. "And yet death is the destination we all share. No one has ever escaped it."
Many people wondered about Job's health after noticing that he had lost a great deal of weight.

[LINK]

So the question may be whether Apple survives the loss of it's CEO and visionary.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

J, please add some commentary to your post! Why do I have to tell people this?

Kind of surprised to see him resign now, of all times. I figured if he was going to resign due to his health issues it would've been some time ago.

 

[Amaris]

J, please add some commentary to your post! Why do I have to tell people this?

Kind of surprised to see him resign now, of all times. I figured if he was going to resign due to his health issues it would've been some time ago.

Oh, I was preparing commentary. I was just having trouble with the formatting and links and tried to get them out of the way first.
As for Jobs' resignation, the only thing I can think of is that he's heard word from his doctors that he should get his things in order.

 

[Jennyzoe]

hard to believe!

 

[Skellington]

This is worrying but not that unexpected. It would seem that based on some indications of a few months ago he's already doing better than projected. He seems to have a very positive spirit, though.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

I hope he continues to do well.

 

[Candlelight]

So the question may be whether Apple survives the loss of it's CEO and visionary.

Why wouldn't it? I never understand why people think Apple hinges on whatever Jobs believes in.

It's a company. CEOs come and go. They'll do fine.

 

[David cgc]

John Gruber put it best.

Apple’s products are replete with Apple-like features and details, embedded in Apple-like apps, running on Apple-like devices, which come packaged in Apple-like boxes, are promoted in Apple-like ads, and sold in Apple-like stores. The company is a fractal design. Simplicity, elegance, beauty, cleverness, humility. Directness. Truth. Zoom out enough and you can see that the same things that define Apple’s products apply to Apple as a whole. The company itself is Apple-like. The same thought, care, and painstaking attention to detail that Steve Jobs brought to questions like “How should a computer work?”, “How should a phone work?”, “How should we buy music and apps in the digital age?” he also brought to the most important question: “How should a company that creates such things function?”

Jobs’s greatest creation isn’t any Apple product. It is Apple itself.

I'm not worried about the company. The only people for whom this is bad news and not just news are Jobs and those close to him because he has to step away from his passion.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

So the question may be whether Apple survives the loss of it's CEO and visionary.

Why wouldn't it? I never understand why people think Apple hinges on whatever Jobs believes in.

It's a company. CEOs come and go. They'll do fine.

Because Apple was pretty much a disaster for the entire period Steve Jobs wasn't running the show.

 

[Yminale]

Steve Jobs is a legend.

He and Wozniack brought computers to the masses with the Apple II and Mac.

Starts Pixar

Develops the Next OS

And brought computers to the masses AGAIN with the Ipod, Iphone and Ipad.

I don't know any business leader that's achieved as much as he's done.

 

[Samurai8472]

Not really surprising. Hasn't Tim Cook been running Apple for a few years already?

He also steps in whenever Jobs has to take medical leave.

 

[Amaris]

So the question may be whether Apple survives the loss of it's CEO and visionary.

Why wouldn't it? I never understand why people think Apple hinges on whatever Jobs believes in.

It's a company. CEOs come and go. They'll do fine.

Because Apple was pretty much a disaster for the entire period Steve Jobs wasn't running the show.

Exactly. Steve is the power behind the company. Every time he's let control out of his hands, the company has trended downward.

 

[Sean Aaron]

Not really surprising. Hasn't Tim Cook been running Apple for a few years already?

He also steps in whenever Jobs has to take medical leave.

Absolutely and Tim Cook isn't just some guy off the street. In fact his knack for doing the right thing at the right moment as operations head is largely credited with Apple's meteoric rise of late. He was the one who pushed for Apple Stores, which Jobs opposed. I have no doubt the company will continue to succeed with him at the head.

It's also worth noting that Apple's product roadmap is in place for the next few years so we have a while to see whether Jobs' departure will have any serious long-term impact on the fortunes of the company. He will be missed, but I think Apple is in capable hands and he's likely been working behind the scenes to ensure there's an orderly transition. He's also staying on as Chairman so it's not like he'll be completely absent.

 

[Gepard]

And it should be further noted that Jobs is planning to stay involved with product development. So even if there is some X factor he brings to the table, it's not going away entirely.

 

[cardinal biggles]

Exactly. Steve is the power behind the company. Every time he's let control out of his hands, the company has trended downward.

There's a big difference between 1985, when Sculley and the board pushed him out, and this, where he's been gradually grooming Tim Cook as his successor. Jobs has been in control of the handover; the only thing he didn't really have a say in was the actual point at which his health would necessitate handing the reins to Cook.

 

[Timby]

Yeah, I think people are forgetting that Tim Cook was hand-picked and nurtured for more than a decade as Jobs' eventual replacement. I think it's more interesting that they created a position of "Chairman of the Board" (which in and of itself is a fairly meaningless position) out of thin air, and dissolved the position of COO (Cook's previous title). I'd guess that Apple's management has been structured like this for a while (2-3 years?), and they finally got around to updating the signs on their office doors.

Anything is possible, but if I had to bet money on it, I'd say Jobs is close to death. (MSNBC quoted a confidential source as saying that he's been homebound for a few weeks, now.) While, yes, he still remained chairman of the board, my guess is he did so to keep the markets relatively calm -- if the announcement just said, "later, bitches," the stock would have taken an absolute hammering. There's no way he'd give up control as CEO unless they didn't think he would ever return. This way, the market gets a little taste of a post-Jobs Apple before he's well and truly gone.

It's also cool that an openly gay man is now at the head of one of the most influential technology companies in the world.

All that being said ... we'll never know how many years Jobs took off his own life by trying to treat fucking pancreatic cancer with an adjusted diet.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

My grandmother died of pancreatic cancer at 55, a mere six months after she was diagnosed. I know he doesn't have the same type (his is somewhat more survivable), but it's still a hideous disease.

I didn't know he tried to treat it with an adjusted diet, though.

 

[Timby]

I didn't know he tried to treat it with an adjusted diet, though.

For the first several months, possibly up to a year, following his diagnosis, Jobs elected to attempt to treat his cancer with homeopathy. It was spectacularly stupid, and if he had had one of the nastier (basically any other) varieties, that choice certainly would have killed him long ago.

He's at the median survival period for his form of pancreatic cancer (particularly ones involving the Whipple procedure), so he's essentially on borrowed time by this point, anyway.

 

[ChristopherPike]

No need for us to organise a whip round. He's hanging onto the one job. Making his name technically inaccurate...

 

[BillJ]

He's not looking good...


Steve Jobs -- After the Resignation | TMZ.com