digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Steve Jobs Calls NYT Columnist a "Slime Bucket"

alleyinsider.com — Apple lied about Steve Jobs' health when it tried to quash concerns about his appearance at the WWDC conference last month, Joe Nocera of the New York Times says. Steve himself also finally weighed in on the matter last week, calling Joe Nocera a "slime bucket."

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • imjohn, on 07/26/2008, -31/+91You gotta admit Steve is right. Reporter = slime bucket.
    • 1longtime, on 07/27/2008, -20/+49A much-forgotten history lesson about Steve Jobs...

      The man refused to accept his own daughter, despite paternity DNA tests, and forced his girlfriend to live in poverty by refusing to pay child support despite the fact that he was a multi-millionaire. He is well known to be a horrible boss. Aside from his only true work, the first Apple computer, he has gotten rich off of intellectual property that he has essentially stolen.

      I will not weep for him any time soon.
      • alx1507, on 07/27/2008, -3/+14Can I have some links if you don't mind?
        I would love to read up about that.
      • alx1507, on 07/27/2008, -7/+35Okay, so I did a little research. You also forgot to mention the fact that years after the paternity test he welcomed this daughter into his life. And years before he accepted her as his daughter, he named one of his revolutionary products after her. The Lisa. So I feel as though there is more to the story than he just denied her as his.

        source: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/ ...
      • punkcat, on 07/27/2008, -8/+2***** give me a billionaire dad who shows little interest, pass me the dough and i'll stay outta your life for good.
        im not going to weep either but for different reasons.
      • CoreyTamas, on 07/27/2008, -3/+16Well, some of us get our information by reading and watching news. Some of us get it by renting Pirates of Silicon Valley.
      • huggybarrel, on 07/27/2008, -7/+10"he has gotten rich off of intellectual property that he has essentially stolen."

        sure you're not talking about bill gates?
      • johndi, on 07/27/2008, -4/+5Child support is for the child, not the mother.
      • 1longtime, on 07/27/2008, -1/+1Yeah, I admit it, I had no idea about this until I saw "Pirates of Silicon Valley." After I did see it, I googled around and found enough articles to make me believe it is true.. and yes, he a) named a computer after his daughter ("The Lisa") while simultaneously rejecting her as his daughter (wtf??) and b) accepted her as his daughter later in life.

        As for "child support is for the child," the mother was not asking for extra money, she was asking for basic child support. Steve refused to pay it for two years. We're not talking luxury, we're talking about $385 per month. By this time, Jobs was already driving a sports car to work. He wanted to make his baby-mama suffer, as far as I can tell.

        Also, both Bill Gates and Steve Jobs ripped off most of their successful products from Xerox, but that's just common knowledge.

        RE: "Steve Jobs child support" and you can find more yourself.

        http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/ ...

        FTA:

        "In 1978, as Apple blossomed, something else happened that showed Jobs' darker side: His longtime girlfriend gave birth to a baby girl whom Jobs refused to acknowledge as his own. According to published accounts, paternity tests showed a 94 percent probability that he was the father. But it required a court order, just before Apple's 1980 initial public offering, before he would begin paying $385 a month in child support.

        Years later, he would welcome this daughter into his life. She attended Palo Alto High School as Lisa Brennan-Jobs.

        Curiously, before he ever acknowledged her as his own, Jobs adopted her name for his new baby at Apple, a new kind of computer that he called "a revolutionary product" in a 1983 Time magazine article."
    • homercles337, on 07/27/2008, -14/+10Jobs == money-grubbing, lying, marketer, masquerading as a preacher that is will to fleece his share holders.
      Nocera == honest, investigative reporter looking out for the people Jobs wants to fleece.

      Im sure all the mactards in the Church of Apple are going to say just the opposite.
      • dn11, on 07/27/2008, -3/+6i love when the world is black and white. it makes things so much easier and doesn't require me to use an critical thinking at all.
      • neonfunk, on 07/27/2008, -3/+6"money-grubbing, lying, marketer, masquerading as a preacher that is will to fleece his share holders."
        so... he's making so much money for his company that he's fleecing his shareholders. right.
    • dysonlu, on 07/27/2008, -1/+6And that's coming from someone who's not exactly Mr. Nice Guy.
    • rpgmaker, on 07/27/2008, -4/+2Anything coming out of Steve Job's mouth must be true, stupid fanboy.
    • chillypacman, on 07/27/2008, -3/+5Steve Jobs is a salesman, sure he's the CEO but really, the CEO of what? He takes things that have been around for years, ads glammer to them and markets it as all new.

      I dunno about the reporter, but Steve Jobs is certainly a slime bucket.
    • LeeSoong, on 07/29/2008, -0/+1In related news, Buckets of Slime expressed outrage for being compared to NYT Columnists.

      One bucket of stagnant pond slime expressed its disgust and frustration:

      'Gurgle blurb bubble glrub !!'

      English Translation:
      {We're protozoan life forms, not Journalists !}

      Not even slime can sink so low . . .
  • Oldsmobile, on 07/26/2008, -10/+73He called the columnist a slime bucket to his face, but then explained to him what his ailment was. Apparently it wasn't "a common bug" but it's not cancer either.

    Good to hear Jobs is okay.
    • streak, on 07/26/2008, -2/+14Apple didn't lie. It was a common bug. Steve is just more sensitive to bacterial and viral infections of the gastrointestinal tract, following his radical, curative surgery 4 years ago. The fact that he had corrective surgery earlier this year didn't help, but it was the "bug" that almost caused him to skip WWDC, not the surgery. Remember how you last looked after your last bout with "intestinal flu"?

      Take it from an expert:
      http://digg.com/apple/A_Surgical_Oncologist_specul ...
  • reddikilowatt, on 07/26/2008, -15/+40He had an upgrade to the reality distortion field installed.
  • PouyaZ, on 07/26/2008, -21/+8I know this is a long reply and most of you will not read it, but instead of a short witty reply (which I always enjoy), I want to make an exception and add some substance. Is there a substantial likelihood that a reasonable investor would consider Steve Job's health important? The answer is yes, as evidence by the fact that the mere speculation of his ill heath has a significant negative impact on the price of Apple's stock. If it was confirmed fact, rather than speculation, the value of Apple would probably drop 30-50%. Obviously material. In fact, I would venture to say that it is probably THE most important piece of information I would consider when investing in Apple stock. It is true that it is a private matter, but the law does not balance a person's expectation of privacy with whether there was a material misstatement or omission. So while I fully understand those of you who MORALLY think his health should not be disclosed (and you may be 100% correct about this), LEGALLY it does not matter. Moreover, forget about institutional shareholders, what about all those innocent people (many middle class or lower) who lost a bunch of their retirement money, savings, etc. this past week because they have some of those funds invested in Apple stock? No body feels a moral obligation to give them material information so that they can make an informed decision? Does Steve Jobs private affairs trump millions of shareholders private affairs? I feel bad for Steve Jobs, but I also feel bad for celebrities chased by the paparazzi. While feeling bad for them, I understand that it is just one downside to the many upsides they experience due to their fame and, many times, they have made conscious decisions that have led to those outcomes. Steve Jobs intentionally has made himself synonymous with Apple, and as a result, he has effectively waived a certain expectation of privacy. What is more, Apple should have never said it was a "common bug," because that is worse than "no comment" or "private matter" since it is misleading. If he indeed he does not have a serious illness, the best thing Apple should have done was to come out and say it. Is an insignificant illness really personal enough to be a private matter? If you had a cold, and someone asked you if you had a cold, would you not answer them and tell them it was a private matter?
    • streak, on 07/26/2008, -3/+5You would have a point if Steve's health hadn't been disclosed, but the relevant aspects of his health have been disclosed for years, and so you don't have a point.
      Steve and his doctors proclaimed him cured of the cancer 4 years ago. It was described at that time as having been a fortunate type of cancer to have, if one has to have cancer, in that it could be 100% cured. There has been no change in that.
      Give it a rest.
      • stagmire, on 07/27/2008, -1/+2He said he had a "common bug" and it turns out that was a lie. This is from the same guy who evidently knew about all the backdating operations that were going on for years.

        Investors are bailing AAPL because Steve Jobs doesn't come off as trustworthy. And it doesn't help that they haven't paid a dividend since 1995. The market has spoken, and unlike this discussion thread the market is not composed of apple fanboys who forgive every transgression by Dear Leader.
      • PouyaZ, on 07/27/2008, -0/+1@streak

        I disagree. A 4 year old statement by doctors is insufficient when even "cured" cancer is known to come back and there is new evidence that someone previously with cancer has shown new signs of a peculiar illness. Such new developments are material and new information needs to be disclosed to update investors.
    • username7410, on 07/27/2008, -1/+14Ever heard of a paragraph?
    • stagmire, on 07/27/2008, -0/+3People who are digging you down are proving by their actions that they have never owned shares in a publicly held corporation.
      • haydesigner, on 07/27/2008, -2/+2Wow! You really personally know every one who is digging him down?
      • stagmire, on 07/27/2008, -1/+1"are proving by their actions"
      • GreenAlien, on 07/27/2008, -1/+2Someone in his blog comments said he owns 10's of thousands of Apple stock, and he disagrees with you. So there's one example. Keep your greedy nose out of people's affairs. The company will still be there if anything happens to Jobs. If people like you overreact and the stock price temporarily dips then tough luck. Ride it out.
      • stagmire, on 07/27/2008, -1/+1The guy who said he owns tens of thousands of shares said investors shouldn't be prying into Steve Jobs' health. The poster to whom I responded said "What is more, Apple should have never said it was a "common bug," because that is worse than "no comment" or "private matter" since it is misleading"

        Thus, what the guy who owns all the shares said is irrelevant. AAPL put the statement out that it was a "common bug," so AAPL can't go back now and claim that shareholders have no right to ask a question that it already answered.
      • PouyaZ, on 07/27/2008, -1/+1@ GreenAlien

        Yes the company will still be there, but with a market cap 30-50% less that it currently is.

        Temporary dips? Steve Jobs is Apple's biggest asset and Apple's goodwill relies on him. Without a satisfactory successor, some of that goodwill leaves with him. That asset is embedded in the stock price. Apple trades at a high P/E because of its management (read: Jobs) and growth rate (read: under Job's guidance). Thus, if you delete the asset, then the stock price will also come down to reflect the change in valuation.
  • TheWorm, on 07/26/2008, -13/+3My old favorite Steve Jobs quote was "Dude I invented the friggin iPhone, have you heard of it?" but “This is Steve Jobs, You think I’m an arrogant [expletive] who thinks he’s above the law, and I think you’re a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong” easily tops that.
    • djsim, on 07/27/2008, -2/+20"Dude I invented the friggin iPhone, have you heard of it?"
      That was an FSJ quote.
    • CoreyTamas, on 07/27/2008, -3/+1What did Jobs do which indicated he thinks he's above the law?
      • stagmire, on 07/27/2008, -5/+2He has a duty not to tell bald faced lies to shareholders, and probably also to disclose certain matters like his impending death. If he tells shareholders he has a cold and it turns out he teh cancer and he knew about it --> lawsuit time.
      • CoreyTamas, on 07/27/2008, -2/+1You're talking about something that hasn't happened yet. What has he done up to this point which has flaunted the law?
      • stagmire, on 07/27/2008, -0/+0The accusation is that Steve Jobs did not tell the truth when he told shareholders that he had a "common bug." In other words, that he knowingly mislead shareholders. If that were true, he could theotetically be sued on the basis of his statement. The NY Times writer's was implying that Steve Jobs thought he was "above the law" because he was making assertions that, if true, put Steve Jobs at risk of lawsuit.

        Steve Jobs gets this (hence his statement to the reporter). Why don't you?
      • WiseWeasel, on 07/27/2008, -0/+1I'll guess Nocera's coverage of the options backdating scandal?
  • pyrates, on 07/26/2008, -16/+6The original article that was referrenced already made the front page on digg. Buried for being lame.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/26/business/26nocer ...
  • razorsharpwit, on 07/27/2008, -14/+1Jobz!
  • leontes, on 07/27/2008, -13/+4A careful contextual analysis of the words provides a clearer understanding of Steve Jobs intent and can help us understand the real meaning of what Mr. Jobs was implying with his complex and well thought of moniker.

    Slime- When we think of slime we often think of the discharge of snails and slugs. Or of snot, or some sort of expulsion of organism. But the most compelling understanding of the word may come from the primordial ooze from which all life came from, the mass of molecules a minerals that fused together into some sort of chemical reaction that could reproduce. Slime, the alpha of all creation.

    Bucket- We think of buckets as things that we use to mop, or to catch water in, or to aid in cleaning of some kind, but at its basic level, bucket is a receptacle for water and materials. A bucket is the most simplest and direct way of containing something liquid, something changing, something organic.

    indeed a slime bucket is the closest way to suggest a person is the holder of something new, that is formed from the basic parts of existence. Steve jobs was insulting the gentlemen, sure, but he was complimenting him on his ability to progenate his ideas across the cybersphere, as a good journalist should. Slime bucket? hell, we should all be so lucky to be called such a important thing.
    • clharlem149, on 07/27/2008, -0/+4does the digg community REALLY need the sarcasm tags to recognize it?
  • ThaDRD, on 07/27/2008, -7/+5Slime bucket? Such language!

    /sarcasm
  • PhoneJack, on 07/27/2008, -4/+37Linus Torvalds still wins with his masturbating monkeys comment.
    • Z_Man, on 07/27/2008, -0/+16or the wanking walruses... which I tend to agree with these days.
  • Jovensenforcer, on 07/27/2008, -29/+1obama is the one who is the "Slime Bucket." And his wife is a muslim moments away from commiting jihad. But on a more serious note, the nyt sucks a fat one, and that's not all they do. Gross man, seriously.
  • RedStateRetard, on 07/27/2008, -38/+34Hey Steve! He's not one of your employees, hurling insults at people may be acceptable on the Cupertino campus. But when do it to strangers, you sound like a total douche.

    p.s. I snickered at the "weighed in" part, digg me down...
    • elf25, on 07/27/2008, -2/+3reporters do not count as people, I know, I've seen them without their masks. I work with 50+ of them every day.
    • GreenAlien, on 07/27/2008, -2/+2Well 1) Hardly strangers. They're both old hats at this. 2) Steve personally phoned the guy and said it to his face. 3) He deserved it. 4) He called Jobs an "arrogant *****" first. 5) A "slim bucket" is hardly overally abusive.

      A douche would be someone who plucks crap out of the thin air about people's personal lives and writes about it without a scrap of journalistic integrity.
  • beerock, on 07/27/2008, -8/+9It's incumbent, all journalists are slime buckets. What's the problem?
    • elf25, on 07/27/2008, -0/+1That's not fair to the 12% who ARE good reporters doing good work, getting real news, wasting time by checking facts & sources....
  • npacheco, on 07/27/2008, -10/+4what a badass
  • hiptrigger, on 07/27/2008, -2/+2Where's the problem? Comes with the territory - obviously got his attention and probably made reference to something this dillweed twisted-up in the past. This is a reporter we are talking about here... right in there with lawyers and contractors... Jobsy's abuse is all part of the show. If he were a saint it would be too much.
  • Pake, on 07/27/2008, -7/+24“You think I’m an arrogant [expletive] who thinks he’s above the law, and I think you’re a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong.”
    On the upside, they're both right. One's an arrogant ***** and the other is your average reporter...
  • phocis850, on 07/27/2008, -10/+1Who could ever call a reporter for the NYT a slimebucket? *rolls eyes*
    • appleseed1234, on 07/27/2008, -0/+2Who WOULD ever call a reporter for the NYT a slimebucket?
  • phocis850, on 07/27/2008, -9/+0Who could ever call a reporter for the NYT a slimebucket? *rolls eyes*
  • wTheOnew, on 07/27/2008, -11/+6Takes one to know one.

    /Sarcasm...
  • P1um, on 07/27/2008, -3/+6that's like... 46 slime balls. ouch.
  • filovirus, on 07/27/2008, -9/+3Steve, I hope your health improves and you live a long and fulfilling life.

    Good Luck Bro and Linger Longer
  • 11SPIDER11, on 07/27/2008, -8/+0I see most powerful company in balloon in luxor egypt http://www.sindbadballoons.com it's cool tours over luxor can make i advise any one visit luxor take tour with this cool balloons in the world
  • schneid4323, on 07/27/2008, -9/+5Stocks are such a crook of *****.
    • beerock, on 07/27/2008, -1/+3Yeah and what's with wheels being round, ***** lame, it'd be so cool if they were squared.
      • schneid4323, on 07/27/2008, -1/+1because the square is not as natural. The stock market is 100% artificial.
  • blacklilyninja, on 07/27/2008, -8/+1who cares.... i don't
  • clevercasey, on 07/27/2008, -6/+1So is he finally admitting to being an arrogant [expletive]?
  • timmerk15, on 07/27/2008, -1/+11Apple didn't lie - they said “Steve’s health is a private matter”. They never said he was fine.
    • dn11, on 07/27/2008, -1/+2at one point they said he had "a common bug"... that was a lie. not that it matters.
    • PouyaZ, on 07/27/2008, -1/+2The law does not just look at lies only; it looks at material misstatements OR omissions (e.g., misrepresentation, misleading remarks, etc.). Saying he had a "common bug" is misleading and is grounds for liability. Omitting how the "common bug" caused a more serious illness in him because his body is more sensitive due to prior surgery, an infection, or whatever, is also grounds for liability.
    • Apocalyptic0n3, on 07/27/2008, -3/+1And it is a private matter. Investors should only be told when he has fallen so ill that he can no longer run the company like they did when he had the surgery when he had cancer a few years back. Otherwise I don't think anyone has the right to know unless he wants them to know. Reporters shoving it down our throats that he is dying these past few weeks is really irritating. Digg is starting to feel like a tabloid 8-10 months ago when we found out Jamie Lynn Spears was pregnant. Guess what? I don't care. I don't care who is pregnant and the world, especially younger children like my soon-to-be 12 year old sister (She's had maturity problems due to a traumatizing surgery at birth. Emotionally and mentally she's 9-10), don't need her pregnancy glorified to the point that my sister is telling me that a baby would be a good thing for her.

      This NYT columnist and all the other "reporters" who keep on reporting this story and any other that digs into a person's personal life just because they are a celebrity or similar are slime buckets. Complete slime buckets. You "reporting" is nothing more than tabloid journalism and, to be frank, is repulsive.
  • Mickeh65, on 07/27/2008, -1/+18Diabeetus.
  • nonsequitur668, on 07/27/2008, -13/+2I was so pleased by the response to my last post that I decided to write another one. Don't worry; I have plenty of new stuff to say about Steve Jobs and his fans. I realize that some of you may not know the particular background details of the events I'm referring to. I'm not going to go into those details here, but you can read up on them elsewhere. If I didn't sincerely believe that he is unquestionably failing in his legal and moral responsibility not to precipitate riots, then I wouldn't be writing this letter.

    The whole of Steve's foolish, rambunctious worldview may perhaps be expressed in one simple word. That word is "larrikinism". Let me explain: We must straighten out Steve's thinking. Only then can a society free of his myopic, chthonic circulars blossom forth from the roots of the past. And only then will people come to understand that he would have you believe that my bitterness at him is merely the latent projection of libidinal energy stemming from self-induced anguish. Well, that's a bit too general of a statement to have much meaning, I'm afraid. So let me instead explain my point as follows: If we don't embrace the cause of self-determination and recognize the leading role and clearer understanding of those people for whom the quintessential struggle is an encompassing liberation movement against the totality of Stalinism right now, then Steve's scare tactics will soon start to metastasize until they mold your mind and have you see the world not as it is but as Steve wants you to see it.

    Authority without wisdom is mere noise against the music of eternity. Now that's a strong conclusion to draw just from the evidence I've presented in this letter so let me corroborate it by saying that Steve has a glib proficiency with words and very sensitive nostrils. He can smell money in your pocket from a block away. Once that delicious aroma reaches Steve's nostrils, he'll start talking about the joy of Maoism and how he is a refined gentleman with the soundest education and morals you can imagine. As you listen to Steve's sing-song, chances are you won't even notice his hand as it goes into your pocket. Only later, after you realize you've been robbed, will you truly understand that he may unwittingly instill a subconscious feeling of guilt in those of us who disagree with his theories. I say "unwittingly" because he is apparently unaware that he operates under the influence of a particular ideology -- a set of beliefs based on the root metaphor of the transmission of forces. Until you understand this root metaphor you won't be able to grasp why relative to just a few years ago, haughty nobodies are nearly ten times as likely to believe that Steve's cop-outs are not worth getting outraged about. This is neither a coincidence nor simply a sign of the times. Rather, it reflects a sophisticated, psychological warfare program designed by Steve to feed us ever-larger doses of his lies and crackpot assumptions. But this is something to be filed away for future letters. At present, I wish to focus on only one thing: the fact that all of the bad things that are currently going on are a symptom of his perverted sentiments. They are not a cause; they are an effect.

    The only morally sound solution is to deal with Steve appropriately. Let me try to explain what I mean by that in a single sentence: Steve's occasional demonstrations of benevolence are not genuine. Nor are his promises. In fact, I have always been an independent thinker. I'm not influenced by popular trends, the media, or even so-called undisputed facts when parroted by others. Maybe that streak of independence is what first enabled me to see that we must throw down the gauntlet and challenge Steve's adulators to pursue virtue and knowledge. Our children depend on that.

    Steve says he's going to inculcate the hermeneutics of suspicion in otherwise open-minded people when you least expect it. Is he out of his complacent mind? The answer is fairly obvious when you consider that he exudes the foul odor of alcoholism. And that's why I'm writing this letter; this is my manifesto, if you will, on how to encourage the ethos of exchange value over use value. There's no way I can do that alone, and there's no way I can do it without first stating that I do not propose a supernatural solution to the problems we're having with him. Instead, I propose a practical, realistic, down-to-earth approach that requires only that I stop the Huns at the gate. That's all for this letter. For those that don't like my views, get over it. I aver that I have as much a right to my views, and to express them, as anyone else. So when I say that Steve Jobs's cronies should reevaluate their cherished assumptions about interdenominationalism, you can agree with me or not. That's all there is to it.
    • rickpelletier, on 07/27/2008, -0/+5holy ***** that's a lotta text
    • sharternarter, on 07/27/2008, -0/+4tl;dr
    • ExRe, on 07/27/2008, -0/+10[___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___]
      __][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][_
      ][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___
      ___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][
      _][___][___][___][___][_WALL_OF_TEXT_][___][___][___][_
      [___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___]
      __][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][_
      ][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___
      ___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][___][
  • beerock, on 07/27/2008, -13/+6Jobs was suffering from acute *****-in-mouth disease, a direct result of gouging customers.
    • TEMM, on 07/27/2008, -1/+2Can it really be considered gouging when they are charging a premium for stuff that people DONT NEED? I mean if its say, the power company, then yea overcharging is gouging. Or maybe if you bought some service and it requires another service thats super expensive to work properly then maybe its gouging. But charging apple fanboys and girls through the teeth for stuff they dont need and dont have to buy is smart business sense. You would do it too if you could, dont even lie about that. I know I would. You are just mad because its not you raking in the money from people who cant wait to throw 500 bucks at you for the newest gadget you have to sell them.
  • stagmire, on 07/27/2008, -6/+1Just curious: How many of the people defending Steve Jobs against investors' complaints that he's been deceptive about his health condition are also Ron Paul fanboys who think society should be goverened by the "free market?"
  • mikochu, on 07/27/2008, -7/+6Jobs doesn't have cancer. He sold his soul to the Devil...
    • illwil, on 07/27/2008, -2/+1I'm the Devil and I Lol'd
    • GogglesPaisan, on 07/27/2008, -0/+1Stay tuned for an upcoming episode of 'Reaper'
  • theshague, on 07/27/2008, -3/+18Anybody remember that Markoff was the one that tried to ruin Kevin Mitnick with false reporting and essentially landed Mitnick in solitary for 8 months? I'd say Jobs is right on this one, Markoff is a slime bucket and I'm appalled that the NYT still prints his bull.
    • streak, on 07/27/2008, -0/+1Rather than actually doing any investigative reporting, these guys Markoff Jackoff and Nocera Bonera just wax prophetic about how righteous their opinions are.
  • WishItWerePaul, on 07/27/2008, -1/+3some times (always?) certain type of genius comes in a package like Steve's. can't have it in pieces, its all of it or nothing.
    • Dozernotz, on 07/27/2008, -0/+1Oh for chrissakes. Van Gogh was a complicated genius. Schopenhauer was a complicated genius. Steve Jobs is a power-tripping executive who happened to hire some good industrial designers. The fact that you think his "genius" is sufficient to excuse any assholic behavior just suggests his PR team deserves a raise.
      • WishItWerePaul, on 07/29/2008, -0/+0i actually dont like the type. i do like their product. but if i had to work for someone, i'd pick BG over SJ any day.

        having said that, it _is_ a type of genius and one has to respect that.
      • Dozernotz, on 07/29/2008, -0/+0I think you're applying the word "genius" too broadly. Steve Jobs is probably smart, but what he does every day is not genius.

        Consider that Apple's actual contribution to their products is 99% in marketing and industrial design. iPod chipsets were made by Portalplayer, the HDDs were from Toshiba, the LCDs were from Samsung, the clickwheel was some other off-the-shelf part. All manufacturing is conducted overseas, none of it by actual Apple employees.

        Consider also that Steve Jobs does not even personally do the marketing and industrial design. He has employees for that. His main activities are PR and stockholder relations. Basically he gives good powerpoint. That does not a genius make.
  • voidvector, on 07/27/2008, -3/+3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
  • tzon, on 07/27/2008, -1/+9Hey Steve, tell him how you really feel!
  • NSResponder, on 07/27/2008, -2/+7I will just point out that we only have Nocera's word that this conversation ever took place, let alone what the content of it was.

    The NYT doesn't have a stellar record when it comes to reporters making ***** up.

    -jcr
  • kds405, on 07/27/2008, -1/+19I didn't think he was sick...I just thought it was a new version of Steve Jobs. Steve Jobs Nano.
    • thedragon4453, on 07/27/2008, -0/+2This one fits in that little pocket in the front of jeans.
    • copypastry, on 07/27/2008, -0/+2thin is in
    • kpetree10, on 07/27/2008, -0/+1First, iPod Nano
      Second, MacBook Air
      Third, Steve Jobs Nano

      See a trend?
  • alphaleader, on 07/27/2008, -8/+0I think this should scare people. I say it is time for an anti-apple boycott, where we can watch the omnipotent ass sitting atop his apple shaped throne finally pull the plug on his company. what kind of an arrogant person does he think he is?
    • datek2517, on 07/27/2008, -0/+2The same arrogant person he always was.

      I assume your post was sarcastic?
  • DeFex, on 07/27/2008, -2/+5just a mild case of the smug.
  • h0dg3s, on 07/27/2008, -4/+4I see Digg is still sucking ol' Steven Jobs' *****.
  • FyberOptic, on 07/27/2008, -2/+2Nobody could be worse than Jobs in terms of being a slime bucket. I mean, he didn't care to lie to and steal from his best friend years ago, the guy who eventually made him the rich bastard he is today, so what's a few fibs now that he has thousands of adoring fans?
    • kreatre2007, on 07/27/2008, -1/+1Who did he steal from? If you're referring to Steve Wozniak, Jobs never stole from him. Both Wozniak and Jobs became instant multi-millionaires when Apple went public. Wozniak wasn't very interested in becoming wealthy building computers. It was Jobs who pushed him to start Apple. Wozniak is a very wealthy man today because of what he and Jobs started in 1976.

      If you want to talk about stealing, look at Microsoft.
      • FyberOptic, on 08/02/2008, -1/+1Dude, you need to look into the history of Apple's founders a little bit more. Or you need to hear it come from Steve Wozniak's own mouth, because he's said it multiple times, including in his book.

        One famous example is where Wozniak developed and wrote Breakout for Atari. Jobs handled the business end, and sold it to Atari, telling Woz he got $700 for it, so they split the money. Woz later found out that Jobs got several thousand for it, and screwed him over, having kept the rest.

        But, since Wozniak has ten times more class than Jobs ever will, Woz doesn't hold any grudges or judge Jobs for what he did.
  • judicar, on 07/27/2008, -1/+3I was hoping he had called John Markoff a slimebag because he is, just go back and look up how he demonized Kevin Mitnick back in the 90's.
  • krahzee, on 07/27/2008, -0/+1I find Steve Jobs to be fascinating in that he is in that rare group of people who are the company to a great deal of consumers.

    While we all know that Steve is not the Scientific brains of the company, his taste and marketing ability have made himself and shareholders a ton of money over the year.

    Any illness that would keep him from his daily duties for a long period of time would be sure to scare investors given what happened the last time he didn't run the day to day.

    This article is int resting in that Apple is know for its almost obsessive control of information from within it's own company. now here comes this reporter siting source info claiming Jobs was ill.

    Certainly it's potential to influence his involvement is news worthy given how much money people have invested with Apple, just as leadership changes at any other publicly traded company are.

    If i am an investor looking to go with Apple stock this is info I would want.

    Does everything go into a holding pattern this year since he is not well enough to be hands on all the time?

    If that is the case, how does it effect earnings given that some of tthe product Apple makes like the ipod are nearing market saturation on some levels?
    Will the lack of the next great product hurt the company's growth next year?
    How does all of this tie into Jobsand his illness?

    All of those questions could easily come from concerned share holders.

    While he has a right to privacy, he also must be smart enought to acknowledge that the financial well being of others rests in his hands and they fairly or not have the right to want to know if the CEO is going to be there by year's end or not.
  • tazzydnc, on 07/27/2008, -1/+3As the conversation was off the record I'm not buying the legitimacy of this article
  • DubiSPACEBAR, on 07/27/2008, -2/+6Some reporters are slime bags - Agreed
    Steve Jobs is arrogant and acts like a douche - Agreed

    What's the story here?
  • Hermmunster, on 07/27/2008, -2/+5I've followed apple's history for the past 10-15 years. One thing of note is that Steve Jobs is no better than the slime bucket he claims others to be. His child was virtually abandoned even though DNA proved her to be his daughter. Even after that he gave a minimum of money to support her. He treated his child's mother as if she were garbage and he threw her away.

    I think he needs to review his life some before he does finally die of the disease he's trying to cover up.
  • ibone, on 07/27/2008, -4/+3You got to laugh when one of the biggest known assholes in the corporate world calls someone a "slime bucket".

    Steve Jobs has no business calling anyone names, especially since he has been known as the man without a heart for the past 20 years.
  • dbXXd, on 07/27/2008, -1/+2My dad can beat up your dad... who gives a *****. What a lame story.
  • a007proxy, on 07/27/2008, -0/+1You lint-licker!
  • wkenri, on 07/27/2008, -1/+1The NY Times has become a joke since helping to launch an illegal war through the device of Judith Miller. Paper of record my ass.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 56 of 56 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.