Steve Jobs -- One Last Thing (Nov. 2 on PBS)

[Ed H.]

"Few men have changed our everyday world of work, leisure and human
communication in the way that Steve Jobs, Apple's former CEO, has done.
The scope of his impact was evident in the outpouring of tributes from
around the world Ñ voiced on Twitter as well as through makeshift
memorials in front of Apple stores Ñ following his death, from
complications of pancreatic cancer, on October 5, 2011. Steve Jobs Ð
One Last Thing not only examines how his talent, style and imagination
have shaped all of our lives, but the influences that shaped and molded
the man himself. The documentary takes an unflinching look at Jobs'
difficult, controlling reputation and through interviews with the
people who worked closely with him or chronicled his life, provides
unique insight into what made him tick. Among those interviewed for the
film are Ronald Wayne, co-founder of Apple Computer, Co. with Jobs and
Steve Wozniak; Bill Fernandez, who is credited with introducing Jobs to
Wozniak and was also Apple Computer's first employee; Robert Palladino,
calligraphy professor at Reed College whose classes Jobs acknowledged
with inspiring his typography design for the Apple Mac; Walt Mossberg,
who covered Jobs as the principal technical journalist for The Wall
Street Journal; Dean Hovey, who designed the mouse for Apple; Robert
Cringley, who interviewed Jobs for his documentary Triumph of the
Nerds; and Dr. Alvy Smith, co-founder of Pixar Animation Studios, which
Jobs acquired in 1986.

In addition to those who knew and worked with him, Steve Jobs Ð One
Last Thing features a never before broadcast, exclusive interview with
Jobs. Speaking a year after he was first diagnosed with cancer, Jobs
expounds on his philosophy of life and offers advice on changing our
own life to achieve our ambitions, desires and dreams: "Life can be
much broader once you discover one simple fact, and that is, everything
around you that you call life was made up by people that were no
smarter than you ... the minute that you understand that you can poke
life ... that you can change it, you can mould it ... that's maybe the
most important thing."

Steve Jobs Ð One Last Thing takes its name from a catchphrase Jobs used
to tease and titillate audiences at the many successful publicity
launches he helmed for the ever evolving Apple product line. Appearing
to reach the end of a presentation, he would then announce to the
expectant crowd: "Oh É one last thing,Ó before unveiling the company's
latest design achievement."

Check your local listings.

<http://www.pbs.org/programs/steve-jobs-one-last-thing/>

--
Ed H.

[Fred Moore]

In article <011120112352418125%fa...@notreal.net>,

Thanks for the heads up, Ed. My PBS station is broadcasting it at 10p
EDT.

[Alan Browne]

On 2011-11-02 00:52 , Ed H. wrote:

> Check your local listings.
>
> <http://www.pbs.org/programs/steve-jobs-one-last-thing/>

Sounds like a good follow on to "The Fabric of the Cosmos." (NOVA) on at
21:00 (EDT). 1LT will be at 22:00 EDT here.



--
gmail originated posts filtered due to spam.

[Alan Browne]

On 2011-11-02 00:52 , Ed H. wrote:

>

> <http://www.pbs.org/programs/steve-jobs-one-last-thing/>

Watched it. Wasn't that great, would need a more in-depth treatment, I
think.

[Tim McNamara]

In article <LqCdnUrTUIEbLy_T...@giganews.com>,

Alan Browne <alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> On 2011-11-02 00:52 , Ed H. wrote:
>
> >
> > <http://www.pbs.org/programs/steve-jobs-one-last-thing/>
>
> Watched it. Wasn't that great, would need a more in-depth treatment,
> I think.

I found it to be fairly superficial although somewhat moving at times.
It felt kind of rushed. But OTOH it did show something of the breadth
of different fields with lots of Jobs's fingerprints on them- computers,
the music recording industry, the music distribution industry, the movie
industry, visual arts, etc.

The thing I did not know about (and which therefore surprised me) was
Ross Perot's $20 million investment in NeXT. I'm not sure how had I
missed that tidbit of information.

It was also interesting that Jobs was essentially describing the iPad to
people 30 years ago. You think about something that long, you
eventually work out the ideas to a pretty high level.

--
Your time is limited. Don't waste it living someone else's life.

Steve Jobs 1955-2011

[Alan Browne]

On 2011-11-03 14:05 , Tim McNamara wrote:
> In article<LqCdnUrTUIEbLy_T...@giganews.com>,
> Alan Browne<alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>> On 2011-11-02 00:52 , Ed H. wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> <http://www.pbs.org/programs/steve-jobs-one-last-thing/>
>>
>> Watched it. Wasn't that great, would need a more in-depth treatment,
>> I think.
>
> I found it to be fairly superficial although somewhat moving at times.
> It felt kind of rushed. But OTOH it did show something of the breadth
> of different fields with lots of Jobs's fingerprints on them- computers,
> the music recording industry, the music distribution industry, the movie
> industry, visual arts, etc.

I think the real impact is on attention to design esthetic and marketing.

> The thing I did not know about (and which therefore surprised me) was
> Ross Perot's $20 million investment in NeXT. I'm not sure how had I
> missed that tidbit of information.

I knew about that - I was just surprised at the air time Perot got in
the show last night.

The $150M investment by MS into Apple was exaggerated in importance -
Apple had $1B in the bank at the time. What helped Apple was the
commitment to provide MS Office for the Mac for at least 5 years.

Also showed the Apple fandom reaction and Steve Jobs' dismay at their
reaction. Kind of shows the insane weirdness of Apple fanboi/gurl
ridiculousness in the face of MS. As Jobs said, Apple's success did not
depend on MS' demise.

> It was also interesting that Jobs was essentially describing the iPad to
> people 30 years ago. You think about something that long, you
> eventually work out the ideas to a pretty high level.

He certainly wasn't alone and likely not first to envision the
possibilities for an iPad like device. A little revisionist geniusism
there, I think.

[JF Mezei]

Alan Browne wrote:
> On 2011-11-02 00:52 , Ed H. wrote:
>
>>
>> <http://www.pbs.org/programs/steve-jobs-one-last-thing/>
>
> Watched it. Wasn't that great, would need a more in-depth treatment, I
> think.

I am in the process of reading the Apple bible (The book of Jobs). I
had already seen the big interview between Gates and Jobs (I had posted
the linke in this newsgroup some time ago).

Seeing Woz say things on TV brings added dimension compared to just
reading text on an iphone.

One thing that surprised me was seing a fat steve jobs. I guess that may
have been during late 1980s when he was at Next.

[Alan Browne]

I noticed that too - oddly shown toward the end of the program. Not fat
- just 'full bodied'.

[Tim McNamara]

In article <6MOdnbWTU9PEnS7T...@giganews.com>,

I didn't say he was. At the very least, Gene Roddenberry beat him to
it. ;-)

[Fred Moore]

In article <6MOdnbWTU9PEnS7T...@giganews.com>,

Alan Browne <alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> On 2011-11-03 14:05 , Tim McNamara wrote:
> > In article<LqCdnUrTUIEbLy_T...@giganews.com>,
> > Alan Browne<alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
> >
> >> On 2011-11-02 00:52 , Ed H. wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> <http://www.pbs.org/programs/steve-jobs-one-last-thing/>
> >>
> >> Watched it. Wasn't that great, would need a more in-depth treatment,
> >> I think.
> >
> > I found it to be fairly superficial although somewhat moving at times.
> > It felt kind of rushed. But OTOH it did show something of the breadth
> > of different fields with lots of Jobs's fingerprints on them- computers,
> > the music recording industry, the music distribution industry, the movie
> > industry, visual arts, etc.
>
> I think the real impact is on attention to design esthetic and marketing.

One thing I found particularly interesting was the Zen master's comment
on how the Zen philosophy of the integration and coherence of the whole
of life (my poor paraphrase of what he actually said) contributed to
Steve's product and design choices. My knowledge of Zen buddhism is
entirely superficial, so I wish I knew more to _understand_ the
specifics of how one gets from the inspiration to the product.

Enlightenment solicited.

[Alan Browne]

There are branches of Buddhism. My SO practices one that is more
spiritual and internal. Zen Buddhism is another beast.

That's a long way of saying:
"Google &| Wikipedia is/are your friend(s)."

[Tim McNamara]

In article <fmoore-DC10F0....@news.eternal-september.org>,

Bearing in mind that I am a really lousy Buddhist, if indeed I could
even be remotely called a Buddhist, I've been reading a lot of books on
Buddhism for 35 years now.

There is a great book by Thich Nhat Hanh titled _The Teachings of the
Buddha_ or something like that. It's written as an introduction to
Buddhist thought and is very pithy and direct to the point. It provides
a good platform for understanding the fundamentals, one of the best
books on Buddhism I have found.

There is also a more advanced book by Thich Nhat Hanh called _Zen Keys_,
even though he is Viet Namese rather than Japanese and Zen comes from
Japan. While not a "Zen Buddhist" himself, his training in Viet Nam
covered much the same ground; and he notes that he considers Zen the
most direct way into the heart of the Buddha's teaching. I found this
to be an excellent book.

I would also recommend Robert Aitken's books; Aitken was a Zen teacher
in Hawaii who discovered Zen while in a Japanese POW camp during WW II.
He is one of the best of the Western authors on Zen, avoiding the
excessive wordiness that Westerner authors on Zen tend to fall into.

And finally I would recommend reading Gary Snyder's poetry especially
_Mountains and Rivers Without End_ and _No Nature_.

Here's one discussion of aesthetic principles in Zen. I think the one
that describes Jobs's design sense is "shibui":

<http://www.presentationzen.com/presentationzen/2009/09/exposing-ourselve
s-to-traditional-japanese-aesthetic-ideas-notions-that-may-seem-quite-for
eign-to-most-of-us-is-a-goo.html>

"Beautiful by being understated, or by being precisely what it was
meant to be and not elaborated upon. Direct and simple way, without
being flashy. Elegant simplicity, articulate brevity. The term is
sometimes used today to describe something cool but beautifully
minimalist, including technology and some consumer products. (Shibui
literally means bitter tasting)."

According to Michener: "The Japanese have a word which summarizes all
the best in Japanese life, yet it has no explanation and cannot be
translated. It is the word shibui, and the best approximation to its
meaning is 'acerbic good taste.'"

"Acerbic good taste" somehow seems to apply to Jobs in his design sense.

[Johnny Bravo]

"Alan Browne" wrote in message
news:LqCdnUrTUIEbLy_T...@giganews.com...

On 2011-11-02 00:52 , Ed H. wrote:

>
> <http://www.pbs.org/programs/steve-jobs-one-last-thing/>

>Watched it. Wasn't that great, would need a more in-depth treatment,
>I think.

I didn't watch it. I didn't want to watch it. He's dead and gone -
and I don't care - not one whit.

If he had never lived - it wouldn't have made a difference.

[Richard Maine]

Johnny Bravo <j...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I didn't watch it. I didn't want to watch it. He's dead and gone -
> and I don't care - not one whit.
>
> If he had never lived - it wouldn't have made a difference.

Me thinks thou dost protest too much, Priam.

You evidently care enough to post about it. In fact, it seems like you
care quite a lot, to the point of obsession. What your cares are is
harder to tell, but someone who didn't care a whit probably would not be
reading this newsgroup at all and certainly wouldn't be posting to
explain how he didn't care.

--
Richard Maine | Good judgment comes from experience;
email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgment.
domain: summertriangle | -- Mark Twain

[BreadW...@fractious.net]

nos...@see.signature (Richard Maine) writes:

> Johnny Bravo <j...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>> and I don't care - not one whit.

> Me thinks thou dost protest too much, Priam.

That one doesn't look like Priam. Looks like a bit of an ass, but
Priam's not the only one out there.



--
Plain Bread alone for e-mail, thanks. The rest gets trashed.

[Jolly Roger]

In article <timmcn-4C742A....@news.iphouse.com>,

Tim McNamara <tim...@bitstream.net> wrote:

> There is a great book by Thich Nhat Hanh titled _The Teachings of the
> Buddha_ or something like that. It's written as an introduction to
> Buddhist thought and is very pithy and direct to the point. It provides
> a good platform for understanding the fundamentals, one of the best
> books on Buddhism I have found.

This one?:

<http://www.amazon.com/Heart-Buddhas-Teaching-Thich-Nhat/dp/0767903692>

--
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR

[Davoud]

Fred Moore:

> One thing I found particularly interesting was the Zen master's comment
> on how the Zen philosophy of the integration and coherence of the whole
> of life (my poor paraphrase of what he actually said) contributed to
> Steve's product and design choices. My knowledge of Zen buddhism is
> entirely superficial, so I wish I knew more to _understand_ the
> specifics of how one gets from the inspiration to the product.
>
> Enlightenment solicited.

There is no enlightenment. Superstition, mysticism, and other
hocus-pocus, whether Anabaptist or Zen, have nothing to do do with
product design. A particular bit of inspiration--another word for
"bright idea"--may arise from unknown sources as science continues to
unravel the extremely complex electro-chemical processes that power the
human brain, but magic is not one of them.

If I'm not mistaken, Steve Jobs said where he got the inspiration for
certain product designs. An interested person (that leaves me out)
could read the current biography and various collected quotes, and
probably learn much.

Davoud

--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm

[JF Mezei]

Am currently reading the Apple bible. Am up to the launch of the
Macintosh. A few interesting tidbits I didn't know about the project.


Hindsight is very interesting.

You know how, in some scary movies, you try to tell one of the
characters "don't go there, you'll get killed ?" (But they still go
there and still get killed !)

That is how I felt when I was reading about Jobs liking Sculley and
spending so much time to convince him to join Apple. (have just gotten
to the stage where there a hint that the love affair is about to end).

I was surprised BTW that the Apple board decided to pull the "1984" ad
and that it was the advertisers and Jobs who arranged for the 30 second
spot to be dropped, but said it was too late to drop the 60 second one
so it got aired anyways.


In the early days of Apple, Job's temper tantrums and lack of hygiene
made it clear how it would be easy for Sculley to fire Jobs. But during
the last portion of the Mac project, it appeared that people had learned
to work with Jobs and push him back when necessary and that Jobs had
learned to bathe and put on shoes. So it would seem that Sculley would
have less of a reason to fire Jobs.

Am looking forwards to reading more of this as I suspect I will read
about what happened to cause Sculley to fire Jobs. I was also susprised
to see him get on board in 1983. I had thought he had arrived after the
launc of the Mac.


I have read books about Gerstner trying to rebuild IBM. I've read books
about the death of Digital Equipment Corp. I didn't fully read "The Soul
of a Machine" (about Data General).

While the Book of Jobs is pitched as a biography, I now see it more as a
historical record of the heydays of personal computing. I could see
this book as becoming part of a computer science curriculum to learn
about the history of how things got done in the early days of personal
computing.

[Tim McNamara]

In article <UpYsq.9243$am1....@newsfe05.iad>,

Dude, really. If you're going to troll at least develop some skills at
it. This was lame.

[Tim McNamara]

In article <jollyroger-C72F8...@news.individual.net>,

Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:

> In article <timmcn-4C742A....@news.iphouse.com>,
> Tim McNamara <tim...@bitstream.net> wrote:
>
> > There is a great book by Thich Nhat Hanh titled _The Teachings of the
> > Buddha_ or something like that. It's written as an introduction to
> > Buddhist thought and is very pithy and direct to the point. It provides
> > a good platform for understanding the fundamentals, one of the best
> > books on Buddhism I have found.
>
> This one?:
>
> <http://www.amazon.com/Heart-Buddhas-Teaching-Thich-Nhat/dp/0767903692>

That's the one. Excellent book.

[Jolly Roger]

In article <timmcn-B6805D....@news.iphouse.com>,

Tim McNamara <tim...@bitstream.net> wrote:

> In article <jollyroger-C72F8...@news.individual.net>,
> Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <timmcn-4C742A....@news.iphouse.com>,
> > Tim McNamara <tim...@bitstream.net> wrote:
> >
> > > There is a great book by Thich Nhat Hanh titled _The Teachings of the
> > > Buddha_ or something like that. It's written as an introduction to
> > > Buddhist thought and is very pithy and direct to the point. It provides
> > > a good platform for understanding the fundamentals, one of the best
> > > books on Buddhism I have found.
> >
> > This one?:
> >
> > <http://www.amazon.com/Heart-Buddhas-Teaching-Thich-Nhat/dp/0767903692>
>
> That's the one. Excellent book.

Thanks. I'll check it out.

[Alan Browne]

On 2011-11-04 17:57 , Richard Maine wrote:

> Me thinks thou dost protest too much

Why reply to it?

[Fred Moore]

In article <VrSdnfybg5JplCnT...@giganews.com>,

Alan Browne <alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> There are branches of Buddhism. My SO practices one that is more
> spiritual and internal. Zen Buddhism is another beast.

Certainly there are innumerable variants of Buddhism as there are of,
say, Christianity. Zen's 'experiential' approach, however, sets it far
apart from the conventional Buddhist approach of rote prayer and ritual,
similar to orthodox Christianity/Judaism (no offense meant to anyone's
beliefs).

> That's a long way of saying:
> "Google &| Wikipedia is/are your friend(s)."

Thank you, Alan. My knowledge is up to the basics of the Wikipedia
article. However, an introduction to the complex details which cut to
the design approach was what I was looking for. Tim's mention of shibui
stirred a long lost recognition of that word from a college
architectural history class.

[Fred Moore]

I wrote:

> > One thing I found particularly interesting was the Zen master's
> > comment on how the Zen philosophy of the integration and coherence of
> > the whole of life (my poor paraphrase of what he actually said)
> > contributed to Steve's product and design choices. My knowledge of
> > Zen buddhism is entirely superficial, so I wish I knew more to
> > _understand_ the specifics of how one gets from the inspiration to
> > the product.
> >
> > Enlightenment solicited.

To which Tim McNamara kindly responded:

Thanks for the information, Tim! Conceptually this was what I was
looking for. I had forgotten about shibui. I did know the word once upon
a time. I'll check out the references.

[Fred Moore]

In article <041120111949257194%st...@sky.net>, Davoud <st...@sky.net>
wrote:

> Fred Moore:
> > One thing I found particularly interesting was the Zen master's comment
> > on how the Zen philosophy of the integration and coherence of the whole
> > of life (my poor paraphrase of what he actually said) contributed to
> > Steve's product and design choices. My knowledge of Zen buddhism is
> > entirely superficial, so I wish I knew more to _understand_ the
> > specifics of how one gets from the inspiration to the product.
> >
> > Enlightenment solicited.
>
> There is no enlightenment.

Really? So <fill in your favorite Good Guy> and <fill in your favorite
Bad Guy> are equally wise, aware, advanced?

> Superstition, mysticism, and other
> hocus-pocus, whether Anabaptist or Zen, have nothing to do do with
> product design. A particular bit of inspiration--another word for
> "bright idea"--may arise from unknown sources as science continues to
> unravel the extremely complex electro-chemical processes that power the
> human brain, but magic is not one of them.

As an atheist and a technologist, I'm certainly not into 'superstition,
mysticism, and other hocus-pocus'. However, interesting, useful ideas
can come form many disparate sources. Of course, they need to be
examined, tested, and verified before incorporating them in one's life;
but none of us is the font of all wisdom. I'll take suggestions from
many thoughtful sources.

> If I'm not mistaken, Steve Jobs said where he got the inspiration for
> certain product designs. An interested person (that leaves me out)
> could read the current biography and various collected quotes, and
> probably learn much.

The book is on my library reserve list. I started out as number 397; now
I'm number 41. They must have ordered more copies. A bit of a wait
doesn't bother me. It might aid dispassionate reflection.

[Fred Moore]

In article <4eb4bb8b$0$31219$c3e8da3$b280...@news.astraweb.com>,

Thanks for posting your thoughts on what you've read so far. Please keep
us posted as you progress. I'm on the reserve list at my library for the
book. The details will, indeed, be interesting.

I agree with earlier comments that the PBS program was a bit
superficial, but there's so much to cover! Not just Steve jobs, but the
history of the personal computer as you mention. I don't know how they
could have done it differently and still fit it all into an hour.

[Tim McNamara]

In article <fmoore-CB60AA....@news.eternal-september.org>,

You're welcome!

[Tim McNamara]

In article <fmoore-F9195B....@news.eternal-september.org>,

Fred Moore <fmo...@gcfn.org> wrote:

> I agree with earlier comments that the PBS program was a bit
> superficial, but there's so much to cover! Not just Steve jobs, but
> the history of the personal computer as you mention. I don't know how
> they could have done it differently and still fit it all into an
> hour.

The history of personal computer and of just the roles of Apple and
Microsoft in it would be fit for a 10 part documentary by Ken Burns,
with one episode at least being dedicated to GNU, Linus Torvalds and the
FOSS movement.

[Alan Browne]

On 2011-11-05 11:59 , Fred Moore wrote:
> In article<VrSdnfybg5JplCnT...@giganews.com>,
> Alan Browne<alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>> There are branches of Buddhism. My SO practices one that is more
>> spiritual and internal. Zen Buddhism is another beast.
>
> Certainly there are innumerable variants of Buddhism as there are of,
> say, Christianity. Zen's 'experiential' approach, however, sets it far
> apart from the conventional Buddhist approach of rote prayer and ritual,

That's an over simplification of "conventional Buddhism" (since there is
no such thing as a convention for Buddhism).

Her approach has those elements as well as a lot of study about her own
"world" of issues, how they connect, what to discard, what to adopt,
self-improvement (as a person, not taking a cooking class...), and so
on. All of this is driven by the self-awareness and change aspect of
Buddhism - the part that drives the Catholics and Holy-rollers nuts.

> similar to orthodox Christianity/Judaism (no offense meant to anyone's
> beliefs).
>
>> That's a long way of saying:

>> "Google&| Wikipedia is/are your friend(s)."

>
> Thank you, Alan. My knowledge is up to the basics of the Wikipedia
> article.

Since you stated an initial query of ignorance, those are adequate
starter resources and certainly not the end all. And more on-topic than
discussing it here.

[Tim McNamara]

In article <041120111949257194%st...@sky.net>, Davoud <st...@sky.net>
wrote:

> Fred Moore:
> > One thing I found particularly interesting was the Zen master's
> > comment on how the Zen philosophy of the integration and coherence
> > of the whole of life (my poor paraphrase of what he actually said)
> > contributed to Steve's product and design choices. My knowledge of
> > Zen buddhism is entirely superficial, so I wish I knew more to
> > _understand_ the specifics of how one gets from the inspiration to
> > the product.
> >
> > Enlightenment solicited.
>
> There is no enlightenment. Superstition, mysticism, and other
> hocus-pocus, whether Anabaptist or Zen, have nothing to do do with
> product design.

I know nothing about Anabaptists and it is evident that you know nothing
about Zen nor "enlightenment." FWIW Zen is closer in its outlook to
science than to what is normally thought of as religion.

[Alan Browne]

On 2011-11-05 12:42 , Fred Moore wrote:

> I agree with earlier comments that the PBS program was a bit
> superficial, but there's so much to cover! Not just Steve jobs, but the
> history of the personal computer as you mention. I don't know how they
> could have done it differently and still fit it all into an hour.

They shouldn't have tried! It deserved a multi part look covering other
aspects and entrants of the personal computer industry. Microsoft's
story should have been elaborated, esp. in regard to how the two
companies complemented as well as competed, albeit in an asymmetrical
fashion.

Then again this is interesting to us - but for a broader audience the
PBS doc. was probably good enough. Well, maybe 2 hours would have been
better.

[Tim McNamara]

In article <0ImdndEACfNu9yjT...@giganews.com>,

Alan Browne <alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> On 2011-11-05 11:59 , Fred Moore wrote:
> > In article<VrSdnfybg5JplCnT...@giganews.com>,
> > Alan Browne<alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
> >
> >> There are branches of Buddhism. My SO practices one that is more
> >> spiritual and internal. Zen Buddhism is another beast.
> >
> > Certainly there are innumerable variants of Buddhism as there are
> > of, say, Christianity. Zen's 'experiential' approach, however, sets
> > it far apart from the conventional Buddhist approach of rote prayer
> > and ritual,
>
> That's an over simplification of "conventional Buddhism" (since there
> is no such thing as a convention for Buddhism).

Just to expand, arguably in Buddhism as well as in Christianity, Islam,
Judaism and probably every other "ism," we all tend to think that what
we believe is the norm and that everyone who believes otherwise is a
little off. That seems to be part of human nature. After all, if we
thought someone else's beliefs were more accurate than our own, we'd
change what we believe.

As with other "isms," Buddhism has a widely varying set of beliefs and
practices. There is a fundamental divide between the Therevada and
Mahayana traditions within Buddhism and wide differences between
different schools. There are also fundamental similarities, of course-
especially that of personal transformation through mindfulness.

> Her approach has those elements as well as a lot of study about her
> own "world" of issues, how they connect, what to discard, what to
> adopt, self-improvement (as a person, not taking a cooking class...),
> and so on. All of this is driven by the self-awareness and change
> aspect of Buddhism - the part that drives the Catholics and
> Holy-rollers nuts.

The fundamental cosmological assumption of the Abrahamic religions is
that there is an ultimate, perfect, unchanging, eternal reality. That's
true of other religions as well, of course, but the Abrahamic religions
re very explicit about this. In the case of Christianity and Islam,
there is also the belief that they have the right and the obligation to
convert others- by force if necessary- to their world view. Any other
viewpoints are a threat to their "truth" (which is strange thinking, if
you reflect for a moment. The truth- pi, for example- cannot be
threatened; it simply is and nothing can undo it. Militant religionists
of any faith merely reveal the falsity of their religion by their
insistence on its truthiness. This sort of foolishness has
unfortunately bled over into right wing politics in particular and has
moved from the idiot fringe to front and center of the Republican Party
in the past decade).

The fundamental underlying observation of Buddhism is that everything
changes all the time. Without this, life would be impossible. Growth
would be impossible. Change would be impossible. Learning would be
impossible. The root cause of suffering is ignorance of this.

[Alan Browne]

On 2011-11-05 14:16 , Tim McNamara wrote:
> In article<0ImdndEACfNu9yjT...@giganews.com>,
> Alan Browne<alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>> On 2011-11-05 11:59 , Fred Moore wrote:
>>> In article<VrSdnfybg5JplCnT...@giganews.com>,
>>> Alan Browne<alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>>> There are branches of Buddhism. My SO practices one that is more
>>>> spiritual and internal. Zen Buddhism is another beast.
>>>
>>> Certainly there are innumerable variants of Buddhism as there are
>>> of, say, Christianity. Zen's 'experiential' approach, however, sets
>>> it far apart from the conventional Buddhist approach of rote prayer
>>> and ritual,
>>
>> That's an over simplification of "conventional Buddhism" (since there
>> is no such thing as a convention for Buddhism).
>
> Just to expand, arguably in Buddhism as well as in Christianity, Islam,

I personally don't care about any of them and this is not the place to
discuss this as I perhaps hinted in the prior post.

[Davoud]

Tim McNamara:

> I know nothing about Anabaptists and it is evident that you know nothing
> about Zen nor "enlightenment." FWIW Zen is closer in its outlook to
> science than to what is normally thought of as religion.

In the 10 years in which I lived in Buddhist Southeast Thailand (where
I am able to speak, read, and write with ample fluency) I learned a bit
about Buddhism and its concepts of rebirth and enlightenment.
Hocus-pocus.

Zen is a mystical religion and not a science, first promulgated, so the
story goes, when Buddha silently twirled a flower as his eyes sparkled
(Thai scholars' interpretation). All of the assembled disciples but one
missed the "message." One disciple got it (by magic conveyance from the
Buddha's mind to the disciple's mind), and Zen was born. That's
hocus-pocus.

Some think that Zen is like a science because it is said to emphasize
experience over theory. The "experience" is that gained in meditation,
which, historically, was frequently aided by opiates or psychoactive
drugs. Use of cannabis is widespread in the monkhood. In Thailand 1 in
10 monks is addicted to methamphetamines. Zen is not a science. It's
just one of myriad forms of religious hocus-pocus.

[JF Mezei]

Davoud wrote:

> Zen is a mystical religion and not a science,

Is Zen a religion (belief in some god who created the universe type) or
just a lifestyle ?

[Davoud]

Davoud:

> > Zen is a mystical religion and not a science,

JF Mezel:

> Is Zen a religion (belief in some god who created the universe type) or
> just a lifestyle ?

Where are you? California, where the name itself attracts people due to
a cool and mystical sound? (Cue mystical gongs here.) For many there
it's a short-lived, nonsensical fad.

Asia? Zen a branch of the Buddhist religion. A belief system doesn't
require a god who created the Universe to be a religion. There are lots
of borderline belief (and non-belief) systems whose status as religion
or not religion may be debated (atheism and humanism, e.g.), but Zen
Buddhism isn't one of them. It's a religion. As such, it's comparable
to the emperor's new suit.

[Doug Anderson]

Or perhaps "religion" has a broader meaning than you think it does,
and Zen is a religion that doesnt' necessarily include a belief in
some god who created the universe.

[Tim McNamara]

In article <4eb60cfe$0$1658$c3e8da3$66d3...@news.astraweb.com>,

Neither, nor is is a mystical religion. Zen is simply a method for
disciplining the mind and clearing out misconceptions and misleading
beliefs with the ultimate goal of seeing into the true nature of oneself
and everything else. There's nothing mystical about it.

Indeed, Buddhism is somewhat unique among religions in that it denies
the existence and the necessity of an eternal creator-god. The
"mystery" of Buddhism is that there is really no mystery.

[Jolly Roger]

In article <slrnjbce4d....@krismbp.local>,
Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> In message <timmcn-10E837....@news.iphouse.com>

> Tim McNamara <tim...@bitstream.net> wrote:
> > In article <0ImdndEACfNu9yjT...@giganews.com>,
> > Alan Browne <alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
> >> On 2011-11-05 11:59 , Fred Moore wrote:
> >> > In article<VrSdnfybg5JplCnT...@giganews.com>,
> >> > Alan Browne<alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> There are branches of Buddhism. My SO practices one that is more
> >> >> spiritual and internal. Zen Buddhism is another beast.
> >> >
> >> > Certainly there are innumerable variants of Buddhism as there are
> >> > of, say, Christianity. Zen's 'experiential' approach, however, sets
> >> > it far apart from the conventional Buddhist approach of rote prayer
> >> > and ritual,
> >>
> >> That's an over simplification of "conventional Buddhism" (since there
> >> is no such thing as a convention for Buddhism).
>
> > Just to expand, arguably in Buddhism as well as in Christianity, Islam,
> > Judaism and probably every other "ism," we all tend to think that what
> > we believe is the norm and that everyone who believes otherwise is a
> > little off. That seems to be part of human nature. After all, if we
> > thought someone else's beliefs were more accurate than our own, we'd
> > change what we believe.
>

> I don't think that's true. Most people I know, for example, could easily
> agree on a few things that are the norm for Christians.

the norm for Christians:

<http://jollyroger.kicks-ass.org/christian_wars.jpg>

[Jolly Roger]

In article <timmcn-67D1E6....@news.iphouse.com>,

Tim McNamara <tim...@bitstream.net> wrote:

> In article <4eb60cfe$0$1658$c3e8da3$66d3...@news.astraweb.com>,
> JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:
>
> > Davoud wrote:
> >
> > > Zen is a mystical religion and not a science,
> >
> >
> > Is Zen a religion (belief in some god who created the universe type)
> > or just a lifestyle ?
>
> Neither, nor is is a mystical religion. Zen is simply a method for
> disciplining the mind and clearing out misconceptions and misleading
> beliefs with the ultimate goal of seeing into the true nature of oneself
> and everything else. There's nothing mystical about it.
>
> Indeed, Buddhism is somewhat unique among religions in that it denies
> the existence and the necessity of an eternal creator-god. The
> "mystery" of Buddhism is that there is really no mystery.

Well put. : )

[Jolly Roger]

In article <061120110116049564%st...@sky.net>, Davoud <st...@sky.net>
wrote:

> Davoud:
> > > Zen is a mystical religion and not a science,
>
> JF Mezel:
> > Is Zen a religion (belief in some god who created the universe type) or
> > just a lifestyle ?
>
> Where are you? California, where the name itself attracts people due to
> a cool and mystical sound? (Cue mystical gongs here.) For many there
> it's a short-lived, nonsensical fad.
>
> Asia? Zen a branch of the Buddhist religion. A belief system doesn't
> require a god who created the Universe to be a religion. There are lots
> of borderline belief (and non-belief) systems whose status as religion
> or not religion may be debated (atheism and humanism, e.g.), but Zen
> Buddhism isn't one of them. It's a religion. As such, it's comparable
> to the emperor's new suit.
>
> Davoud

So you're an "all or nothing" sorta guy then?

[Tim McNamara]

In article <jollyroger-20D63...@news.individual.net>,

About right for the high-profile Christian "leaders" these days, even if
most Christians are quite a bit more moderate.

[Tim McNamara]

http://wpcomics.washingtonpost.com/client/wpc/gz/2011/11/05/

[Wes Groleau]

On 11-06-2011 08:48, Jolly Roger wrote:
> the norm for Christians:
> <http://jollyroger.kicks-ass.org/christian_wars.jpg>

Christians are irrational and everyone else is rational?

A more accurate cartoon would put both of your people in this boat:
http://Ideas.Lang-Learn.us/WWW?itemid=99

--
Wes Groleau

First Language Acquisition observed up—close & personal
http://Ideas.Lang-Learn.us/barrett?itemid=1349

[JF Mezei]

Lewis wrote:

> Anyone care ti imagine what Nixon or Eisenhower would have to say about
> the current state of the Republican Party?

Every political party can have a platform which represents the will of
its constituents. If the republican party chooses a Sarah Palin like
policy platform and gets elected, then this will reflect the will of the
american public.

If you are not happy about it, then you need to look at why the american
public would vote that way and what tactics the republicans are using to
win.

When you consider that a war criminal who killed more americans than Bin
Ladin did got RE_ELECTED, you should not underestimate the Republican
party's strategic capabilities.


They have managed to disarm Sarah Palin who announced she is not
running, so they aren't that stupid after all. Don't under
estimate them.

[JF Mezei]

Lewis wrote:

> Maybe, but it is one person's telling of the story. The situation with
> Sculley is a perfect example. Jobs doesn't know why Sculley forced him
> out.


I haven't gotten to that part yet. (but I think i am getting there
soon). But based on what I have read so far about Jobs, I can see how
Scullie and the board would see Jobs as a problem maker that should be
eliminated.

Note that the Book of Jobs was not witten by Jobs but by an experienced
biographer who did interview lots of different people. So we're not just
getting one side of the story.

[Davoud]

Tim McNamara:

> Neither, nor is is a mystical religion. Zen is simply a method for
> disciplining the mind and clearing out misconceptions and misleading
> beliefs with the ultimate goal of seeing into the true nature of oneself
> and everything else. There's nothing mystical about it.

> Indeed, Buddhism is somewhat unique among religions in that it denies
> the existence and the necessity of an eternal creator-god. The
> "mystery" of Buddhism is that there is really no mystery.

Spend a few years living in SE Asia and then report. Buddhism has no
rigid canon in the sense that a structured religion such as Catholicism
has, and Buddhists worship myriad gods and spirits which inhabit
animate and inanimate objects. They avail themselves of the vast Hindu
pantheon as well, with Brahma, Ganesha and Hanuman among the favorites
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erawan_Shrine>. Representations are
everywhere and in every medium--castings, carvings, drawings....

Lingam and yoni, sticks and stones, flowers, trees, tigers, elephants,
monkeys, human beings, all may possess magic and be worshiped in the
practice of Buddhism.

If that's not enough to illustrate that Buddhism is as irrational as
any other religion (though not more so, I would argue), consider that
prayer, one of religion's nuttier manifestations, is also widespread.
The worship of the items that I mentioned involves making offerings,
symbolic or otherwise, and offering prayers of supplication to the
spirits that inhabit the objects (above link again).

This worship takes place everywhere--in the temples (where mysticism is
practiced and taught and all manner of objects are worshiped in
addition to the Buddhas), in the streets (above link again), in homes,
workplaces, schools, government offices, you-name-it.

[JF Mezei]

Michelle Steiner wrote:

> BTW, thanks for pointing out that Apple is not a religion.
>

Now, that is total blasphemy !

Michelle,

Saying such a thing makes you an Apple troll in the same class as Priam :-)

You're an Apple killer, you should be arrested.

Linux and Widnows and unnatural abominations. Stop them from
interconnecting.

Those who do not believe in Apple are atheists and are amoral agents of
SATAN. Put Apple in the schools and courts. Show them we're an Apple
nation !

Somebody ban this obscene Windows exhibit !


Stop persecuting members of the Church of the Apple, stop disrespecting
my beliefs that Apple products are perfect. Why are you waging a *war*
against the Church of Apple ?


:-) :-) :-)

[Wes Groleau]

On 11-06-2011 15:50, JF Mezei wrote:
> Every political party can have a platform which represents the will of
> its constituents. If the republican party chooses a Sarah Palin like
> policy platform and gets elected, then this will reflect the will of the
> american public.

Or rather, it reflects the will of the 45-50% who actually bother
to vote. With the level of polarization now, though, we might
actually get a sixty percent turnout.

Polls say 53% oppose OWS, 47% support. Or was it the other way?

Anyway, of both of those groups, at least half and probably 80%
don't really care. So, on one side, you have maybe ten percent
of us wanting to "Occupy Wall Street" (and claiming to be the 99%)
and on the other side, ten percent that want to counter them and
can't figure out how to do it (though one strategy is to say
"I am the 53%")

This twenty percent is like the two people in Bill Mauldin's boat
in <http://Ideas.Lang-Learn.us/WWW?itemid=99>

The rest of us are the boat.

The one percent is the water. Or maybe the greedy sharks under it.

[Davoud]

Tim McNamara:
> Bearing in mind that I am a really lousy Buddhist, if indeed I could
> even be remotely called a Buddhist, I've been reading a lot of books on
> Buddhism for 35 years now.

> ....

> There is also a more advanced book by Thich Nhat Hanh called _Zen Keys_,
> even though he is Viet Namese rather than Japanese and Zen comes from
> Japan.

I get your point about being a lousy Buddhist. In 35 years of studying
it you failed to discover that Zen originated in south India and
emerged in China sometime during the first millennium, CE. Its name is
the Japanese version of the Chinese word chan, which in turn comes from
a Sanskrit word which I think is thayana or dhayana or similar.

I'm sorry that I'm not authoritative on these words because I don't
know the languages; I get them from my knowledge of Thai, where they
are not necessarily very close to the Sanskrit originals. I know that
in both Sanskrit and Thai the stem "yan" means "vehicle." Mahayan,
"great vehicle," Chakrayan, modern Thai for "bicycle."

> According to Michener: "The Japanese have a word which summarizes all
> the best in Japanese life, yet it has no explanation and cannot be
> translated. It is the word shibui, and the best approximation to its
> meaning is 'acerbic good taste.'"

Michener? The fiction writer? Sheesh! Michener wrote those words in a
freakin' work of fiction! Anyone who thinks that there are words that
defy translation and explanation has swallowed the Kool Aid of mystical
bull-crap. Try "minimalist," "what is necessary and no more," "keep it
simple, stupid," "don't over-do it," ideas like that, and you are close
enough to "shibui" as makes no difference. Anyone who tries to tell you
differently is trying to get you to drink the mystical Kool-Aid.

I just looked up the word in Wikipedia and found "The seven elements of
shibusa are simplicity, implicity, modesty, silence, naturalness,
everydayness, and imperfection."

Dearly beloved, if the concept comprises seven elements then it fails
the self-consistency test by not being simple! Seems like the Japanese
themselves might be pulling our legs on this one. In each instance in
which I've seen the word shibui (or shibusa) used in English, there has
been a perfectly satisfactory English word that would have served the
same purpose without the pompous mysticism.

[Matthew Russotto]

In article <slrnjbceh2....@krismbp.local>,

Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

>Maybe, but it is one person's telling of the story. The situation with
>Sculley is a perfect example. Jobs doesn't know why Sculley forced him

>out. I'm pretty sure that after Jobs left Apple he never spoke to
>Sculley again, feeling that he'd been betrayed and stabbed in the back.
>Perhaps Jobs is right (I think he mostly is), but there are other sides
>to the story, includes John's and the sides of the other members of the
>board of directors at the time.

Sculley had his book already.
--
The problem with socialism is there's always
someone with less ability and more need.

[Matthew Russotto]

In article <j96spe$jl1$1...@dont-email.me>,

Wes Groleau <Grolea...@FreeShell.org> wrote:
>
>Polls say 53% oppose OWS, 47% support. Or was it the other way?

Same 53% who pay income tax?

[Tim McNamara]

In article <j97n2q$66h$1...@dont-email.me>,

russ...@grace.speakeasy.net (Matthew Russotto) wrote:

> In article <j96spe$jl1$1...@dont-email.me>,
> Wes Groleau <Grolea...@FreeShell.org> wrote:
> >
> >Polls say 53% oppose OWS, 47% support. Or was it the other way?
>
> Same 53% who pay income tax?

Facile and predictable, Matthew. Pull the other one, it's got bells on
it.

[JF Mezei]

I have now reached the point in the Book of Jobs where Steve has left
Apple and is starting Next.


Back in the 1980s, the Digital Equipment Corporation User Group (DECUS)
would hold annual symposiums. One of the sessions that was almost
always present was titled "Care and feeding of techies" which was aimed
at techies who were promoted to management, as well as new management
who inherited responsibilities of managing techies.

It seems to me that Apple would have greatly benefitted from this.

Jobs was a very valuable but difficult to manage asset. Sculley and the
others did not learn the proper way to nurture Steve Jobs.

The fact that Apple sued Jobs for stealing onlt 5 employees (Apple about
4300 by then) shows how spitefull Apple had become. They waned him out,
he left.

Note that such childish behaviour happened at HP as well. They fired
Mark Hurd, and when Oracle snapped him up right away, HP sued Oracle.

It is a bit ironic that Sculley complained about sales of Macintosh not
going well, yet Sculley refused to lower the price to spurr demand and
then Jobs was blamed for the lack of continuing success.

Jobs was certaintly a character. I suspect that if they had hired
another CEO than Sculley, something similar may have happened, unles
sthey had hired someone who could have found a way to keep Jobs happy
and occupied.

Once the Macintosh (a skunkwork project started away from Apple
headqurters) was done, Apple should have moved Jobs right away to
"AppleLabs" to develop the next product, and then move the Macintosh
into "production mode".





I am saddened however to read the timing of this. I bought my Mac+ in
late summer 1986. While the original gang's signatures are still
imprinted insude the case (including Steve Job's signature), this
product w was not a "Steve Jobs" product since he left in 1985.


I was surprised to learn the "Reality Distortion Field" is not an
expression concucted by trolls like Priam but was actually used within
Apple when refering to Steve Jobs.


I have to say that the Book of Jobs is far better than I had expected. I
am looking forwrd to reading the "NeXT" era and then his return to Apple.


And it explains why Bob Dylan was shown in that "Think different"
commercial that was originally nararate by Jobs but when aired, narrated
by R Dreyfuss. (Jos love Bob Dylan's music).

[JF Mezei]

For those in Canada...

Steve Jobs: One Last Thing

Sunday, November 27, 2011 10:00 PM ET/PT on CBC News Network
Saturday December 3 at 10 pm ET/PT on CBC News Network
Sunday December 4 at 8 pm ET on CBC News Network



BTW, i had finished reading the Book of Jobs...


Very well written book. Generally speaking, Steve Jobs was more "Jobs"
than I had thought.

First cancer detected in 2003, he refused treatments thinking is
all-fruit diet would cure it. First treatments 9 months later.


When he asked for leave in January 2011, Jobs had been told that his
cancer had spread, and he was hoping fancy chemotherapy would solve it.
They did the DNA sequence on his cancer samples and then would choose
chemo drugs that would work best on them. (as opposed to generic drugs
that kill off all cells). Not quite the holy grail where they
manufacture drugs specific to your DNA, but getting there. Interesting
contrast in high tech medecine versus his "all fruit diet" of 2003/2004.

It is not clear in the book when Jobs accepted that death was
inevitable. The writer stops at about the time Jobs resigned from Apple.
But the book hints that Jobs privately knew he wouldn't last long by
August. The fact that he tried treatments early in 2011 indicates he
still had hopes back then.


Of course, what the book writes and what Jobs really thought inside of
himself could be 2 different things.



Considering that he was going through cancer treatments, it is pretty
amazing that Jobs did the "Back to Mac" announcement in June 2011 and
the next day did his pitch for the flying saucer HQ at the Cuppertino
city council (which I believe would be his last formal public appearance)


And cosnidering he had gone through (or still going through) chemo, his
gaunt appearance was normal. (but since we didn't know that, we only saw
the difference between public appearances and saw major degradation).

[JF Mezei]

OK...


Now that I have read the book, I am not so sure about Apple's future. (I
say this in a neutral tone).

Jobs played a crucial leadership role and his difficult personality and
very high standards pushed employees to realy push the limits.

My impression of Tim Cook is that he is more of the efficient
administrator rather than a leader who brings all depeartments together
to implement his vision.

So now, innovation would come from the grunts at lower levels and filter
up, instead of coming from the very top.


Jobs gave himself the power to force redesigns, even if at last minute.
The rounded edge of the iPad is one such example with Jobs realising the
original design would make the unit hard to grab from a table surface.

There will be nobody to do this time of last minuet refinement anymore.

Johny Ives will continue to come out with amazing product designs but
they may not be as great as before without Jobs pushing him to make
improvements.

It is a given that Apple's next big thing will be the TV. ipod touch or
ipad as the remote which will control everything. Jobs speaks of this in
the bible so that would be a product that is being worked on.

Cook will have to review the decision of whether to allow itunes to sell
music to android phones or linux computers. (Jobs had originally refused
to allow iTunes on Windows but so many people tried to convince him of
the potential that he relented).

There was a growing conflict between Jobs and Google. But Cook seems to
be more pragmatic one and perhap they will see the money potential in
selling to other phone platforms.

Microsoft/Nokia might be more desperate to join forces with Apple and
rely on Itunes for music/videos.




On the plus side, we won't have to suffer through JobS, tantrums such as
ordering the iphone screws be changed to prevent us from opening our
units and hopefully the Apple products will become a bit more open
without artificial restrictions.


I guess the iphone5 next year will be the first big test of whether
there are subtle changes at Apple.

But I think we are deluding ourselves if we think that Apple will
continue unchanged.

My fear is that without someone like Jobs at the helm to drive
everything, Apple may have a harder time innovating.

Its structure is still superior to that of companies such as HP, so they
would still be better at innovation. But not sure if they will be able
to revolutionise beyond the plans such as TV that Jobs put in motion.

and BTW, Jobs, which early in the book had such high praised for Hewlett
Packard and how the founders had managed to infuse their DNA into the
company so it would continue long after they left and used them as a
role model, did admit at the very end that he was saddened to see HP
self destruct, having failed to continue in the path set by the 2 founders.

[Jolly Roger]

In article <4ed14b5f$0$15505$c3e8da3$f017...@news.astraweb.com>,

JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> Now that I have read the book, I am not so sure about Apple's future.

Don't pretend that you have ever been sure of it. Nothing has changed.
You're still blowing the same stale hot air you've been spouting for the
past year or so.

[dorayme]

In article
<4ed146bf$0$20221$c3e8da3$9dec...@news.astraweb.com>,
JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

...

> First cancer detected in 2003, he refused treatments thinking is
> all-fruit diet would cure it. First treatments 9 months later.
>

Why don't you stop all your silly prattling? Too many of us and
close family members have cancer and all your idiotic talk about
some one guy who none of the people here have any relationship
with including your babbling self has no meaning or use. Shut up,
stop being a superficial gossiping idiot.

--
dorayme

[Jolly Roger]

In article <dorayme-042D49...@aioe.org>,

Well put. The guy is obviously extremely obsessed with Steve Jobs and
Apple, to the point of repeating the same blow-hard hot air over and
over again. Personally, I'm almost convinced he's purposefully trolling,
and I'm about ready to send his useless posts to the kill box to live
with posts from the other regular trolls here.

[JF Mezei]

Jolly Roger wrote:
> In article <4ed14b5f$0$15505$c3e8da3$f017...@news.astraweb.com>,
> JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:
>
>> Now that I have read the book, I am not so sure about Apple's future.
>
> Don't pretend that you have ever been sure of it. Nothing has changed.
> You're still blowing the same stale hot air you've been spouting for the
> past year or so.

Not quite. There was a point earlier this year where I changed my mind
and became confident that Apple would continue normally.

Now, I am not so sure anymore, after having read how Jobs operated the
company.

I have seen how leadership issues at 2 different levels caused Digital
to fail. (firstly because the founder failed to adapt to the newer
markets and new competition and how his successor was incumpetent and
without vision and just accelerated the demise of Digital.


I have seen (and Jobs also noted at the end of the book) how HP ceased
to be the company built by Mr Hewlett and Packard due to bad leadership
and was floundering. (Whitman seems to be taking charge so perhaps there
is some hope for HP)

Apple is now at a stage where they have almost completed the creation of
an integrated market that spans hardware to entertainment content. The
path to completion of this is fairly clear (TV hardware/software and
access to TV and movie programming at affordable price) and Jobs will
likely have given Apple enough guidance to complete Apple's products and
services in entertainment.

But as with every innovator, competitors eventually do arrive (aka:
android) and will try hard to steal the market from Apple especially
since it is a profitable market.

Apple may choose to agressively protect its share of the market, or it
may choose to accept lower market share but higher profitabiity, hoping
that by the time that share of the pie has srunk too much, Apple will
have re-invented the market with something totally new (such as the
iHollowdeck) which will render moot the competitor's products and give
Apple back a dominant share of the market.


And this is where I have questions because I don't see Tim Cook as
having the vision to decide to develop a revolution such as the
iHolowdeck (or whatever form of entertainment will replace existing
music/movie/TV).

Consider Microsoft. Gates had plenty of great visionary ideas, but
couldn't execute for a variety of reasons (one big one was a policy of
upwards compatible changes forcing Microsoft to continue to be hindered
by old buggy software). With Jobs gone, and Balmer at the helm, does
Microsoft even have new ideas ?








Lets not kid outselves, Cook ran the company while Jobs had fun with
designing products and implementing a vision. or to put it differently:
Jobs delegated the boring administrative stuff to Cook so he could focus
on helping create the best products on the market.

Cook continues to run the company, but who will be creating the new
ideas and convincing all parts of Apple to adopt that vision ?


Perhaps I don't know Cook enough to pass judgement. But reading the
book of Jobs showed me that Steve had far more impact on the success of
Apple than I had thought.


Or perhaps the book of jobs was highly skewed by Jobs's reality
distortion field and in reality, Job's impact was much smaller than the
book say he had.

But if we are to believe the book, Jobs had a huge impact.


And in case you haven't read the book, the expression "reality
distortion field" was not invented by Priam, but it was in use at Apple
during the Mac development years.

[Jolly Roger]

In article <4ed17285$0$8507$c3e8da3$cc4f...@news.astraweb.com>,

JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> Jolly Roger wrote:
> > In article <4ed14b5f$0$15505$c3e8da3$f017...@news.astraweb.com>,
> > JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> >
> >> Now that I have read the book, I am not so sure about Apple's future.
> >
> > Don't pretend that you have ever been sure of it. Nothing has changed.
> > You're still blowing the same stale hot air you've been spouting for the
> > past year or so.
>
> Not quite. There was a point earlier this year where I changed my mind
> and became confident that Apple would continue normally.

Whatever.

[snipped more of the same mindless drivel]

I honestly could not care less what your thoughts are regarding Apple's
future. Your thoughts and opinions about Apple will have zero impact on
my monetary investment in the company, and zero impact on my future
purchases of Apple products. And I suspect this holds true for the rest
of Apple's millions of customers and investors. Your opinions don't
matter one single iota.

[JF Mezei]

dorayme wrote:

> Why don't you stop all your silly prattling? Too many of us and
> close family members have cancer and all your idiotic talk about
> some one guy who none of the people here have any relationship
> with

In case you had not heard, Steve Jobs was a very important person in the
IT industry and is the sole reason that this newsgroup exists. he was a
very public person with excellent presentation skills and the fact that
he continued to work and generate new idea for Apple during his many
years with cancer is a testament to his love/devotion to his company.
(and I have a lot of respect for his wife who supported him throughout
this).


There was very little information that came out while he was alive, and
now that the book is out, much of the speculation can be laid to rest.

You may not care about the future of AAPL shares, but I do. You may not
care aboutthe future of apple products, but I do (having been burned by
Apple widthdrawing from business servers, I am now curious about rumours
of changes for desktops).

Let me ask you this have you written similar criticism to all the news
mdia and TV networks who have written documentaries about Steve Jobs ?

Have you complained to the author of Steve Jobs' biography ?

Do you realise that one reason Steve Jobs authorized this biography is
that he wanted people to read it and better understand what Steve Jobs
was all about ?

Are you saying we can't discuss this ?

[Alan Browne]

On 2011-11-26 15:06 , JF Mezei wrote:
> For those in Canada...
>
> Steve Jobs: One Last Thing
>
> Sunday, November 27, 2011 10:00 PM ET/PT on CBC News Network
> Saturday December 3 at 10 pm ET/PT on CBC News Network
> Sunday December 4 at 8 pm ET on CBC News Network

In Canada we get PBS. Saw it then.


--
"I see!" said the blind man as he picked up his hammer and saw.

[dorayme]

In article
<4ed1745d$0$31143$c3e8da3$b280...@news.astraweb.com>,

JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> dorayme wrote:
>
> > Why don't you stop all your silly prattling? Too many of us and
> > close family members have cancer and all your idiotic talk about
> > some one guy who none of the people here have any relationship
> > with
>
>
> In case you had not heard, Steve Jobs was a very important person

That does not mean you have to prattle on about his illness.

>
> There was very little information that came out while he was alive

So what, why should such things not be pretty private. I am sure
a prattling gossip like you will think of reasons.

> You may not care about the future of AAPL shares, but I do. You may not
> care aboutthe future of apple products, but I do (having been burned by
> Apple widthdrawing from business servers, I am now curious about rumours
> of changes for desktops).
>

As if this has anything much to do with the cancer that he *had*
when he *was* alive. You seem to have a problem with relevance
and reasoning. If you prattle unreasonably and especially if a
superficial bullshit artist like you starts to touch on a sad
disease like cancer and the terrible treatments of it, do pardon
me for being irritated. It irritates me that fellow Mac users can
be such prattling idiots. When I become ruler of the world, guys
like you will be *forced* to use Win PCs only.

> Let me ask you this have you written similar criticism to all the news
> mdia and TV networks who have written documentaries about Steve Jobs ?
>

Why ask me this? I don't have aready at hand pipeline to these
idiots, I do to you.

> Have you complained to the author of Steve Jobs' biography ?
>

This is a technical usenet group, stick to technical Mac system
topics.

> Do you realise that one reason Steve Jobs authorized this biography is
> that he wanted people to read it and better understand what Steve Jobs
> was all about ?
>

You are making me really sick.

> Are you saying we can't discuss this ?

Yes, I am and I now order you to stop.

--
dorayme

[George Kerby]

On 11/26/11 5:13 PM, in article
4ed17285$0$8507$c3e8da3$cc4f...@news.astraweb.com, "JF Mezei"

<jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> Jolly Roger wrote:
>> In article <4ed14b5f$0$15505$c3e8da3$f017...@news.astraweb.com>,
>> JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> Now that I have read the book, I am not so sure about Apple's future.
>>
>> Don't pretend that you have ever been sure of it. Nothing has changed.
>> You're still blowing the same stale hot air you've been spouting for the
>> past year or so.
>
>
> Not quite. There was a point earlier this year where I changed my mind
> and became confident that Apple would continue normally.
>
> Now, I am not so sure anymore, after having read how Jobs operated the
> company.
>

But - the real question is: Did you sell any AAPL stock that you may have?

[Tim McNamara]

In article <4ed1745d$0$31143$c3e8da3$b280...@news.astraweb.com>,

Clearly you should (a) get a life and (b) use something other than Macs
for your computing needs. Navel gazing is one thing but you seem to be
staring at Jobs's navel. Very weird.

[JF Mezei]

dorayme wrote:

> So what, why should such things not be pretty private. I am sure
> a prattling gossip like you will think of reasons.

In case you had not heard:

a PUBLIC BOOK WAS WRITTEN ABOUT IT WITH JOBS' PERMISSION.

If you do not wish to discuss this fine. But don't prevent others who do
wish to discuss is. I initially posted some comments as I was reading
the book and some people wroite that they appreciated hearing about what
was in the book. I had no idea that you would revolt so bitterly now
when you had not done so earlier.

> As if this has anything much to do with the cancer that he *had*
> when he *was* alive. You seem to have a problem with relevance
> and reasoning.

Excuse me ? Steve Jobs died. A book was written and it includes
details about his cancers. It is relevant because it puts Jobs'
achievements since 2003 in perspective. He may not have wanted to
discuss them when he was alive, but authorized the publication of this book.

> This is a technical usenet group, stick to technical Mac system
> topics.

I merely continued an existing topic. I did not start a new one. If you
are not interested in it, mark as as "ignore".

>> Are you saying we can't discuss this ?
>
> Yes, I am and I now order you to stop.

I shall remember your attitude. You insulted me once when I tried to
help on a technical matter and now this.

[JF Mezei]

George Kerby wrote:

> But - the real question is: Did you sell any AAPL stock that you may have?
>

No, I have not sold AAPL. In fact I may buy more. Which is why I am
looking into this issue. The departure of Jobs won't have short or even
medium term impact on Apple. I am wondering about long term and as I
stated, I really do not know what the impact of Jobs, departure will have.

[JF Mezei]

Tim McNamara wrote:

> Clearly you should (a) get a life and (b) use something other than Macs
> for your computing needs. Navel gazing is one thing but you seem to be
> staring at Jobs's navel. Very weird.

Are you aware that I am not the only one to have read the book ? It is a
best seller and sold 379,000 copies in its first week of publication.

[dorayme]

In article
<4ed18b80$0$32204$c3e8da3$670b...@news.astraweb.com>,

JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> dorayme wrote:
>
> > So what, why should such things not be pretty private. I am sure
> > a prattling gossip like you will think of reasons.
>
> In case you had not heard:
>
> a PUBLIC BOOK WAS WRITTEN ABOUT IT WITH JOBS' PERMISSION.
>

That is not any sort of reason to take up all this stuff and
especially not to do so here.

> > This is a technical usenet group, stick to technical Mac system
> > topics.
>
> I merely continued an existing topic.

That is not a good reason. "I was merely x" is not a valid excuse
form.

>
> >> Are you saying we can't discuss this ?
> >
> > Yes, I am and I now order you to stop.
>
> I shall remember your attitude.

To remember x, you need to understand x. I doubt if you can see
how awful all this gossipy stuff about someone's stress and grief
and health is.

> You insulted me once when I tried to
> help on a technical matter and now this.

You contradicted yourself pretty blatantly in your last post on
creating hard links and have you a single clue why I mentioned it
- that was the insult eh? The real reason was my frustration at
your inexcusable misunderstanding of the question in the post to
which you were replying. It might seem unreasonable to you that I
pay no money for answers so I should not expect to get top
quality. But that is just a silly non-dorayme point of view.

I asked a unified question. It had details in it. You thought to
ramble on about various details leaving me completely in the dark
as to whether your ramblings added up to a yes or a no to the
fundamental question.

Do you really suppose I am not aware you are probably a nice guy
trying your best and that you even know all sorts of things that
are impressive in themselves? But what is the point of walking
the earth full of facts and bits and pieces of knowledge if you
are not crucially interested in the relevant questions?

--
dorayme

[JF Mezei]

Michelle Steiner wrote:

>> I am now curious about rumours of changes for desktops).
>

> Steve's biography is going to tell you that?
>

In the Apple's organisation, there is Forstall for IOS and Mansfield for
Mac hardware, but OS-X not mentioned. So who is responsible for OS-X
development ?

http://investor.apple.com/faq.cfm?FaqSetID=6

Is OS-X part of Forstall's iOS software division ? Or part of
Mansfield's Mac hardware ? Asking questions about future of desktops
and OS-X is perfectly valid.




What the biography says is that Jobs had a far greater hand in every
product decision than I had thought. Therefore, his departure has
greater impact at Apple for the future than I had thought.


Yes, Jony Ives' group will design a great next iPhone, next iMac, next
MacBookAir, next ipod lineup. There are all existing products that can
be refined. And Forstall will continue to improve IOS.


But who will decide what market Apple should next attack ? Whose vision
will drive Apple's next forays ?

Jobs didn't need to teach Cook how to run the company because Cook was
very good at it thus a natural shoe in for the job of CEO. Remember
that Jobs focused more on product decisions as well as some negotiations
with outside parties, leaving Cook to run the company efficiently.



However, you can't teach instinct, vision and imagination and those are
the values which Jobs brought to Apple. And Jobs couldn't have given
those to Cook.


Another apsect. Jobs surrounded himself with great/competent people. But
another requirement was that those people be able to work under Jobs as
Jobs was not an easy person to work for. And in the case of Board and
Cook, Jobs also ensured that they were loyal to him to prevent them from
turning against him and doing another "Sculley".

Compatibility with Jobs did not mean you thought like him. It meant you
accepted to do as told, and sometimes found out how to convince him of
certain things.


Jobs was the glue that brought all the departments together and infused
a single vision. A true leader. There were many "tantrum" decisions by
Jobs which SVPs learned to accept.


For instance, they wanted itunes on Windows, Jobs blocked it. Eventually
they found a way to convince him to allow itunes on Windows. They
suggested itunes on Android. He blocked it. He is no longer there. Will
itunes on android become reality ?

It would make strategic sense because if Apple can assert its presence
in the android music market before Google, then Google has less chance
of growing its music market and making Apple irrelevant.



So I am really not convinced that it is business as usual at Apple. And
I really do not know who will drive innovation, imagination and vision
at Apple. Right now, they are still implenenting business plans set
while Jobs was still alive. But they are already starting to look into
the futur to plan the next best thing since sliced bread, and that is
being done without Jobs.

It may take a few years before we see real signs of change. But I am
convinced Apple will be different in a few years. Doesn't mean worse or
better. Just different. Nobody can preduct.

Jobs was unique. He is one of the few who are not replacable.

[George Kerby]

On 11/26/11 7:01 PM, in article
4ed18be8$0$32204$c3e8da3$670b...@news.astraweb.com, "JF Mezei"

I am holding - despite the Obama economy and world credit problems. The
figures on sales are up and Black Friday is positive.

I cannot afford to overload my portfolio anymore than I have, but am writing
long-term calls (Jan2013 - $500) on my holdings when the market improves. I
covered some that I wrote a year ago @ 01/12/$400, but expect to get those
back within a few weeks.

Don't really know why so many in here are so weirded out by your
observations, other than the Big C thing. Currently, yes, I am bothered
about it since our precious kitty is going through the last stages of a
ravagenous basal cell carcinoma of her mandible and she is basically at the
point where we are going to take her out of her pain. Maybe you touched some
folks wrongly, I don't know.

[Tim McNamara]

In article <4ed1a9f5$0$2337$c3e8da3$76a7...@news.astraweb.com>,

JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> Michelle Steiner wrote:
>
> >> I am now curious about rumours of changes for desktops).
> >
> > Steve's biography is going to tell you that?
> >
>
> In the Apple's organisation, there is Forstall for IOS and Mansfield
> for Mac hardware, but OS-X not mentioned. So who is responsible for
> OS-X development ?
>
> http://investor.apple.com/faq.cfm?FaqSetID=6
>
> Is OS-X part of Forstall's iOS software division ? Or part of
> Mansfield's Mac hardware ? Asking questions about future of desktops
> and OS-X is perfectly valid.

Where ya been? The future of Macs is iOS and the MacBook Air, the iMac,
the Mini. Servers are gone, "desktops" will either go away or be
reduced to one model. This year's laptops are 5 times as powerful as
the biggest, fastest desktops of a decade ago. The desktop form factor
itself is coming to the end of its utility. Another 5 years and it'll
be gone.

[Tim McNamara]

In article <4ed19769$0$4781$c3e8da3$1069...@news.astraweb.com>,

Yep. And here you are obsessing about "what it means" like it's the
damned Oracle at Delphi. Burn some incense, chew some bay leaves and
getcher freak on- that will give you as much guidance about the future
of Apple as will the biography of Jobs.

As has been pointed out to you time and again over the past 18 months:
anyone outside the top management group at Apple just doesn't know WTF
they are talking about regarding the future of the business and its
product lines.

[Patty Winter]

In article <CAF71D79.7C204%ghost_...@hotmail.com>,

George Kerby <ghost_...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>Don't really know why so many in here are so weirded out by your
>observations, other than the Big C thing. Currently, yes, I am bothered
>about it since our precious kitty is going through the last stages of a
>ravagenous basal cell carcinoma of her mandible and she is basically at the
>point where we are going to take her out of her pain.

George, I'm very sorry to hear about your kitty. Mine had part of
her mandible removed earlier this year. That was all that was needed
only because the growth she had there was benign, which I'm told is
very rare. My thoughts to your family at this tough time for you.


Patty

[JF Mezei]

Tim McNamara wrote:

> anyone outside the top management group at Apple just doesn't know WTF
> they are talking about regarding the future of the business and its
> product lines.
>

This isn't about product lines. This is about corporate management and
leadership. I suggest you read the book before flaming me.

The book changed my interpretation of Jobs and Apple sufficently for me
to wonder what changes will happen at Apple due to his departure.

[Jolly Roger]

You have wondered publicly about what changes will happen since before he
died. You aren't fooling anyone, troll.

--
Posted from my iPhone.

[Tom Stiller]

In article <4ed1d0bf$0$20311$c3e8da3$9dec...@news.astraweb.com>,

In all of this I have heard o mention of Apple University:

<http://articles.latimes.com/2011/oct/06/business/la-fi-apple-university-
20111006>

"To survive its late founder, Apple and Steve Jobs planned a training
program in which company executives will be taught to think like him, in
'a forum to impart that DNA to future generations.' Key to this effort
is Joel Podolny, former Yale Business School dean."

--
PRAY, v. To ask that the laws of the universe be annulled in behalf
of a single petitioner confessedly unworthy. -- Ambrose Bierce

[Alan Browne]

Are you aware that everyone can read it without suffering your
"interpretation"?

[Jolly Roger]

Alan Browne <alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
> On 2011-11-26 20:50 , JF Mezei wrote:
>> Tim McNamara wrote:
>>
>>> Clearly you should (a) get a life and (b) use something other than Macs
>>> for your computing needs. Navel gazing is one thing but you seem to be
>>> staring at Jobs's navel. Very weird.
>>
>>
>> Are you aware that I am not the only one to have read the book ? It is a
>> best seller and sold 379,000 copies in its first week of publication.
>
> Are you aware that everyone can read it without suffering your "interpretation"?

He is aware, but doesn't care. He is trolling.

[George Kerby]

On 11/26/11 11:42 PM, in article 4ed1cddd$0$1689$742e...@news.sonic.net,

Thanks Patty. Appreciate your good thoughts...

[Davoud]

George Kerby:

> >Don't really know why so many in here are so weirded out by your
> >observations, other than the Big C thing. Currently, yes, I am bothered
> >about it since our precious kitty is going through the last stages of a
> >ravagenous basal cell carcinoma of her mandible and she is basically at the
> >point where we are going to take her out of her pain.

Patty Winter:

> George, I'm very sorry to hear about your kitty. Mine had part of
> her mandible removed earlier this year. That was all that was needed
> only because the growth she had there was benign, which I'm told is
> very rare. My thoughts to your family at this tough time for you.

The sympathy of ever pet lover is with Mr. Kerby, whether he knows it
or not. My wife and I lost two rescued greyhounds to cancer, each at
age 11-12. But they were large dogs, and, in our experience, not likely
to be long lived like some smaller breeds.

The loss of a pet in this way can't be compared to losing an only child
because pets are too easily replaceable. Still, we have no children, so
our dog, whoever it is, is our surrogate only child. Since we are true
dog lovers and we get only rescued animals we don't spend time feeling
sorry for ourselves when our dog dies; we scour the shelters and the
rescue organizations for a new dog. Now it's Thumper, a rescued
Labrador and golden retriever and who-knows-what mix and he is a
wonderful boy.

Three years ago we lost my wife's "baby" sister to cancer. In her home
left behind her husband, a four-year-old son, and a 14-year-old
daughter. Then there was my wife and her 82-year-old mom.

With deepest sympathy and respect for the 3,000 victims of the 9/11
attacks, six *million* people died of cancer worldwide in 2001 (that's
17,000 per day). Every year > 500,000 Americans die of cancer. Where
are the $ trillions for *that* war?

--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm

[Tim McNamara]

In article <4ed1d0bf$0$20311$c3e8da3$9dec...@news.astraweb.com>,

JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> Tim McNamara wrote:
>
> > anyone outside the top management group at Apple just doesn't know
> > WTF they are talking about regarding the future of the business and
> > its product lines.
>
> This isn't about product lines. This is about corporate management
> and leadership. I suggest you read the book before flaming me.

Get over yourself. That "flame" was a comment about the industry of
Apple pundits who do little but puke bullshit out every day all day long
and try to get paid for it. Apple's ring of privacy and secrecy was the
best in the IT sector and the pundits rarely if ever knew anything real
(and if they did they probably didn't dare to actually print most of it).

Most of the rest of us in this newsgroup (and the media in general and
Wall Street, for that matter) don't need to read the book to find out
about Apple's corporate management and leadership style because this has
been very public and well known for years. I bought my first Mac in
1986 and a bunch of other folks here bought their first Macs before me.
Apple's management style was described in the media of that time and it
didn't really change that much except during the period of Jobs's
ouster; after his return his management style intensified but wasn't
really different. Apple and its employees existed to actualize Jobs's
vision of his products.

You're apparently late to the party finding this stuff out and now
you're amazed by what is pretty much old hat for everyone else. You'll
have to pardon the rest of us for yawning while you catch up.

The interesting thing to me about the book is a deeper look into Jobs's
psychology: his motivations, values, beliefs, expectations for the
future, relationships, etc. Trying to use the book as a cup of tea
leaves to predict the future of Apple without Jobs is silly. The future
of Apple will be determined by the people who are there, not someone who
is no longer there.

> The book changed my interpretation of Jobs and Apple sufficently for
> me to wonder what changes will happen at Apple due to his departure.

Jobs ran Apple. From the day he became the iCEO until his retirement
briefly before his death, Jobs made every decision from what toilet
paper was in the johns to the end-user design decisions for every single
product Apple ever released in that time frame. This ain't news.
Neither is it news that he was obsessive, ruthless, intimidating,
manipulative (for all of which he was quite infamous) and he could be
extremely rewarding of talent and hard work as well. But Apple was
never really a happy place to work under Jobs, by all accounts.

As a business Apple is a reflection of Jobs's personality. That will
remain for a while and it will change over the long run. The company
will gradually lose Jobs's singular vision; if they are lucky they will
find someone else who is a laser-focused brilliant visionary to oversee
the design of their products. BTW, Tim Cook is not and never will be
that guy. One change that will happen at Apple is that it will no
longer be the CEO driving that vision. It will be someone else in the
system. The Apple of 2012 is not going to look very different- but the
Apple of 2015 will.

And that's to the good IMHO, otherwise Apple will end up stuck in the
past and fossilized. Jobs's departure and death will end up turning
some parts of Apple upside down, letting in air and light. They'll
stumble and bumble some, lose their way temporarily, etc., but then so
did Jobs over the years When you swing for the fence every time you're
at bat, you strike out sometimes. As long as they avoid the
Scully-Amelio type fuckups they should be OK.

And why are we still talking about this? It will be what it will be and
neither you or I have any input into it. All the newsgroup flatus in
the world won't make a difference. If you don't like the trend over the
next five years, sell your stock before you lose too much money. Simple.

[Jolly Roger]

In article <timmcn-BB5803....@news.iphouse.com>,

Tim McNamara <tim...@bitstream.net> wrote:

> The interesting thing to me about the book is a deeper look into Jobs's
> psychology: his motivations, values, beliefs, expectations for the
> future, relationships, etc.

Indeed. I very much appreciate that the book allows me to glean just a
little more of a glimpse into the mind of Jobs. I find him a truly
fascinating person in so many ways! And I miss him dearly, even though
we never met.

--
Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me.
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM
filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting
messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google
Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts.

JR

[Tim McNamara]

In article <4ed1cddd$0$1689$742e...@news.sonic.net>,

Ditto. Just over a year ago we lost our good buddy Fionn after he
suffered multiple bladder obstructions within a week due to struvite
crystals. That was a very sad day following a very difficult week.
Everyone who has pets eventually experiences tragedy, and yet they
enrich our lives so much.

Peace and sympathy to George, his family and his kitty.

[JF Mezei]

Tom Stiller wrote:

> "To survive its late founder, Apple and Steve Jobs planned a training
> program in which company executives will be taught to think like him, in
> 'a forum to impart that DNA to future generations.' Key to this effort
> is Joel Podolny, former Yale Business School dean."

This is mentioned in passing in the book. But you still can't teach
instinct, imagination and vision.

[JF Mezei]

Jolly Roger wrote:

> Indeed. I very much appreciate that the book allows me to glean just a
> little more of a glimpse into the mind of Jobs. I find him a truly
> fascinating person in so many ways! And I miss him dearly, even though
> we never met.

So, you're allowed to discuss what you got out of reading the book, but
I am not ?

[Alan Browne]

You're being a bit thick. JR is mentioning the effect of the book on
him, not reading its entrails to predict the future of Apple.

[Doug Anderson]

Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> writes:

> In article <4ed14b5f$0$15505$c3e8da3$f017...@news.astraweb.com>,
> JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:
>
> > Now that I have read the book, I am not so sure about Apple's future.
>
> Don't pretend that you have ever been sure of it. Nothing has changed.
> You're still blowing the same stale hot air you've been spouting for the
> past year or so.

Yes, really.

Isn't this the same JF Mezei who believed that as an Apple stockholder
he was entitled to view Jobs's medical records?