Headline Feeds
In an open letter to employees, Apple (Nasdaq: AAPL) CEO Steve Jobs revealed that his health concerns now warrant a medical leave of absence, and the world reacted in a big way. The news that his health issues are more complex than originally thought has dominated the financial news world as well as national media and, naturally, the Apple-focused blogosphere.
"In order to take myself out of the limelight and focus on my health, and to allow everyone at Apple to focus on delivering extraordinary products, I have decided to take a medical leave of absence until the end of June," Jobs wrote.
Speculation Aplenty
The news is everywhere, and so much of it degrades from hard news to supposition that something fishy is going on (have Apple and Steve Jobs have been deliberating deceiving shareholders?) -- and that there's lawsuits in the works (which may or may not have a leg to stand on).
At least New York Times Executive Suite blogger Joe Nocera -- who received an infamous phone call from Jobs himself last summer -- leads with some possible non-nefarious explanations for the situation before getting into the accusations.
"It is certainly possible that he had the condition he described to me last summer. It is also possible that he did, in fact, have 'a hormone imbalance,' as he announced last week, as rumors swirled again about his health. And it is even possible that a few days later he discovered that his problems were 'more complex' -- whatever that means -- and that he only just realized that he needs to take a medical leave. It is possible, in other words, that he and Apple are telling the truth," Nocera wrote.
"Possible -- but unlikely," he added.
So many other pundits seem ready to say Jobs is lying -- even to himself.
"Why hasn't it occurred to anyone that Steve Jobs is lying to himself about his health and ergo to the rest of the world. I believe it's called denial," commented Marcia on Nocera's post.
Still, one apparent doctor chimed in: "Apple's explanations don't make sense. We don't know the original diagnosis, surgery, or the prognosis. There are different types of pancreatic cancer. Some have a better prognosis than others. The failure to disclose the real picture only makes me think that the prognosis is bleak. If all Mr. Jobs needs is pancreatic enzyme replacement, that is not a major problem. If it is more complex, Apple should be making plans for a future without him. This is only my opinion based on 38 years of practicing medicine," commented Jared Frazin.
Then Couch Pundit added, "People who have had the Whipple procedure typically have weight-loss problems. Steve's being a vegan probably complicates his already precarious nutrition situation."
Mark Adams, however, represents readers who seem to have had enough of the Jobs health rumormongering and subsequent backlash: "Apple is innovating, continuing to lead, and you're worried about the health of the person at the top? How about if you were focused on healthy execs who can't get the job done? Isn't that more of a problem? Apple doesn't need a bailout, and it continues to innovate and move forward. Who cares if he's telling the truth about his personal health. How about focusing on execs who won't talk about the real health and future of their companies? It's pathetic when journalists decide to throw blood in the water just to see what happens," Adams noted.
But What If He's Gone and Never Comes Back?
Of course, there are some obvious questions and concerns that look beyond the current state of Jobs' health. How will Apple run without him for six months? Who is this Tim Cook guy, anyway? And what if he never fully returns to the helm?
"Jobs is obviously a very charismatic figurehead, and when an organization has a charismatic leader, it's a fair question to ask how much of the 'sizzle' can be translated to the organization at large," Charles King, principal analyst for Pund-IT, told MacNewsWorld.
"Jobs is known as a hands-on guy, and he watches over the product development cycle much more than any other hardware CEO that I can think of. But putting together a terrific product like the iPod or iPhone cannot be done by a one-man band. You must have great help to cultivate that kind of success time after time," King explained.
"My sense is that the company will be in better shape than some of the schizophrenic market watchers might assume," he added.
Tim Cook Already Has the Reins
"Tim Cook really *does* kind of run the company right now and has for a while. Snappy product announcements are not his forte, and nor are they really the purview of the CEO. Tim doesn't need to dazzle or have any pizzaz announcing products and can be a fantastic CEO without that," commented Gazoobee on TheAppleBlog post on the subject. "Similarly, the design of the products was never really up to Jobs. It's not like he sat in the lab pulling long hours designing stuff."
Indeed, by Thursday afternoon, the tide of blog traffic and media attention finally seemed to be turning to Cook and Apple's ability to keep running strong. AppleInsider posted a roundup of comments from industry watchers who believe that Cook is incredibly capable of running Apple.
"With all the craziness swirling around Wall Street, Steve's health, and the world economy, can anyone think of a better guy to have in charge than someone with the attributes of Mr. Cook? One of the many things that Steve has been brilliant about is building an executive team. It's difficult to point to any weak links in the Apple hierarchy. Now look at the companies they compete with. HP (NYSE: HPQ), Dell (Nasdaq: DELL), Sony (NYSE: SNE), Nokia (NYSE: NOK), Motorola (NYSE: MMI) and Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT) among others. The talking heads are worried about 'the vision thing' at Apple? Puhleeeeeeeze!" commented BillH on the AppleInsider.com thread.
"As an investor I'd be more concerned if Jonathan Ive left. He's got rare talent that you cannot replace," noted msb0014.
There's Definitely More to Apple Than Steve Jobs
"There's a lot of questions around the short term and what that means from a product standpoint, but we've got history, that when he left Apple for cancer treatment, Apple didn't skip a beat while he was gone. I believe Apple has a strong top-down product plan that heads well into the future," Ben Bajarin, director of consumer technology practice for Creative Strategies, told MacNewsWorld.
"The press, the media, the financial guys take a lot of stake in what Steve Jobs does -- they've noticed what he's accomplished since he came back, so there's a link that says, 'Maybe this guy is responsible solely for where the company goes.' But if history shows us they are still going to execute and put innovative products into the market, I think that's what matters. Consumers aren't sitting there thinking, 'I'm buying this computer because Steve Jobs is CEO.' They're buying a Mac, iPods or iPhones because they are truly innovative, meet their needs, and Apple is making products that people want," Bajarin explained.
"Again, I just don't think that Apple is making products people want solely because of Steve. I think there's an infrastructure, a philosophy about technology that I just don't see in other technology companies, and I don't think that's going to go away just because Steve is not there," he added.
Other Stuff Happened This Week, Too
Meanwhile, there was other news on the Apple front this week, but it's just too hard to remember. Oh, right ... how about those "iPhone nano" rumors?
MacRumors.com made a post on Tuesday that indicates that a new "iPhone nano" may hit in the June time frame, and that it might not be available in the U.S. -- rather, it'd be available in China first.
While the Chinese market is indeed huge, it's hard to imagine Apple releasing a new product in Asia first.
"I'm sorry, but that would be stupid. Not going to happen," maxp1 commented on the MacRumors.com post.
"Apple would not release a new product only overseas. This is Apple people. Cupertino, California. Enough said," added dwardin9.
Still, the whole iPhone nano idea brings up the issue of the cell phone market as a whole -- can Apple continue to enjoy massive success with a single basic product? Does Apple need to branch out with smaller form factors? Cheaper prices? Bigger screens? Didn't Palm just announce a new Pre touchscreen phone and a new webOS operating system to wide acclaim? How many Android-based phones will hit the States in 2009?
"Competition is changing the market. Yesterday customers bought phones and iPods separately. Many still do. But others buy multimedia smartphones -- this is a market where you have to play all the angles because customers want different things," Jeff Kagan, a wireless and telecom industry analyst, told MacNewsWorld.
Of course, the shape and size of any nano phone -- which may or may not capture the hearts of new consumers -- remains to be seen.
