
Jobs had liver transplant 2 months ago; expected to return to work as planned - bsgamble
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124546193182433491.html
======
spoondan
Bury this. Jobs's medical condition, whatever it is or was, is a private
matter about which he has elected to not speak. He's met all reasonable
obligations by announcing when he was going to be out and when he expected to
return. The rest is small-minded gossip.

~~~
gojomo
Jobs is a figure of mythic proportions who is of keen interest to
technologists, entrepreneurs, and the general public. He's been featured in
movies; books have been written about him; he's granted the media many levels
of access, from photos through interviews, to boost his products.

That attention can't be turned off like a spigot. Even if Jobs weren't still
actively involved in Apple, people would be deeply interested (and concerned!)
about his health, making it a legitimate area for reporters (and biographers!)
to report about, as long as the information is obtained in a honest manner.

I believe it's a valid story (for both the WSJ and here) because we care about
Jobs, we care about his creative output (including Apple), and we often best
learn about things in life -- including dealing with health challenges -- by
seeing how they affect prominent people.

~~~
tjogin
True enough, but this particular article is completely unsourced. It is very
little more than gossip at this point.

~~~
gojomo
The WSJ doesn't run "unsourced" news; they had confirmation of the key details
from multiple sources (even if the exact sources aren't named) before running
the story.

~~~
tjogin
I understand if you hold the WSJ in very high regard, as do many people,
myself included. But they have not _published_ in which way they've obtained
the information, not even in vague terms. As far as we know, it is completely
unsourced.

------
mailanay
This sure sounds more serious than those "Hormone Imbalances" that we have
been hearing. My dad suffered a long time because of Liver Cirrhosis before
meeting his end last year. I know first hand how painful liver related
problems can get.

~~~
TrevorJ
I am sorry to hear that. Going through that kind of thing with a family member
is never easy.

------
jsz0
They made the right choice in how they handled this. His personal medical
issues would have completely overshadowed Apple's recent product announcements
and completely derailed the carefully crafted Apple PR train. Instead of
talking about Macbooks & iPhones we'd be talking about the details of liver
transplants. That would not have been good for Apple or its investors -- some
of which will surely be upset over how this was handled but they really need
to consider the alternative before getting too worked up over it

------
markbao
[http://news.google.com/news?pz=1&ned=us&hl=en&q=...](http://news.google.com/news?pz=1&ned=us&hl=en&q=Jobs+Had+Liver+Transplant)

Click first link for full article.

------
sho
_"Apple has previously drawn criticism from some shareholders over what they
have called limited disclosure of Mr. Jobs's health problems"_

 _"once Mr. Jobs resumes work, the company will have to be "very careful"
about what it says"_

This strikes me as almost unbelievably cynical, that Jobs' health could be
factored into the price of Apple shares. I understand why, of course, but
still, I hate it and I wonder how SJ himself feels. "Don't die yet, Steve, I'm
long AAPL!"

I think he should retire soon. He's had a good run. Apple will be fine.

~~~
DavidSJ
How is it cynical to price the health of an organization's key person into its
value?

~~~
sho
Because it's basically placing monetary bets on another human being's health.
Yeah, I know he's the key person, I know why they do it, I just think it's
depressing that our society still hasn't risen above putting a dollar value on
life.

~~~
gizmo
Why should we rise above it? What's wrong with estimating somebody's worth in
dollars?

~~~
jodrellblank
If I have a widget that I'll sell to you for $4 then it's worth $4 to me. If
you'll only pay $2 for it then it's worth $2 to you.

To whom is a human worth money? You can't own people, can't buy or sell them.
Can't recreate them, can't even get an accurate clone.

You can talk about a sportsperson's value to their team in terms of how much
money they bring in in ticket sales, how much sponsorship, how much media
attention, how much another team will pay for them.

But the problem is when lots of money is involved, people care more for the
money than the person. I don't have a problem with people trading on Apple
stock and factoring in SJ's health at some level. I do have a problem when it
pushes further and further towards SJ being treated as just another asset,
some legal and medical details to be pried through, some news announcements to
be analysed, some blood pressure and heart rate figures to be tracking.

Picking apart the Golden Goose to try and find where the Golden Eggs are
hidden? Tearing up the Mona Lisa to find which brushstroke made it worth so
much? Pulling down the Eiffel tower to see if an Operah Tower in the same
place would have as much impact?

If he wasn't already a health fan, would the world be pushing him to alter his
diet? His exercise regime? "In a bowel movement estimated to be worth half a
million dollars this morning, SJ's saturated fat absorption levels were up 13%
on last week (full analysis here), SJ didn't respond to a request for comment.
Unusually, he looked in the mirror for 6% longer than average over the last
three months, experts have raised concerns over his increasing vanity
assessment index especially when taken into account his recent announcement "I
had a great night's sleep last night" to his wife over breakfast, he didn't
respond to 18 phonecalls for comment on that either". Would we be designing
every part of his life and forcing him to live as we think will maximise AAPL
profit, restricting and shaping like a human veal calf?

What's _right_ with estimating somebody's worth in dollars? Why should you be
able to profit from speculating on someone elses work? Why should people who
have no choice where they are born be forced to be judged within the limits of
someone elses monetary system?

~~~
gizmo
It doesn't need to be that complex.

For every million dollars the government puts into hospitals/medicare a bunch
of lives are saved. There are diminishing returns, however, and at some point
you have to say, okay, that's enough, let's put some money into education
instead.

You have to find some kind of balance, and the more you put in education the
fewer lives you can save in hospitals. The only sensible way (I can think of)
to find the right balance is by crunching the numbers. Saving a life for
$1000? That's only 20 text books, definitely a good deal. Saving a life for a
million? That's 20 scholarships. A life isn't worth that much.

Unless you're Steve.

------
mynameishere
Reminds me of the fact fame and fortune aren't worth much compared with
health. I wouldn't trade places with him [...takes another sip of wine.]

~~~
il
Jobs and Apple have changed the world in so many ways. WTF have you done with
your life?

~~~
mynameishere
Quit downmodding this guy. Jesus, I hate the downmod arrow. Here's some
elucidation:

<http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north670.html>

Read it. _Time is the great equalizer. Warren Buffett is worth ten thousand
times more than you are, assuming you are worth $5 million. But he is 78 years
old. Not many people would want to trade places with him, one for one._

Steve Jobs is a better man than I'll ever be, but I'd rather be me than him,
Is that strange? No! Because time treats humans like call options--decay is
priced in, and hits zero at the set date. Steve Jobs is very, very close to
zero, no matter his accomplishments.

~~~
Confusion
_Steve Jobs is a better man than I'll ever be,_

Why? Because he is famous? Because he is rich? Because he, debatably, has
'made the world a better place'? Screw all those default judgements based on
cultural indoctrination. Why is it Good to be famous, rich, innovative, an
effective leader, ...? As far as I'm concerned, Steve Jobs and Warren Buffett
are no better than you or me when I consider what _I_ think is important in
life. Stop pressing culturally correct expectations and judgements on others.
Develop your own code of ethics.

~~~
zimbabwe
I've developed my own code of ethics, which says... that Steve Jobs is a
better man than most of us will ever be. He pursued the things he was curious
in, made sophisticated pieces of technology readily available for consumers,
was enough of an asshole not to have to conform much of his work to standards
he couldn't bear to conform to, developed enough business acumen to deal with
lots of people he probably didn't want to deal with, funded the most brilliant
animator of this generation out of his own pocket, created not one but _two_
companies with a greater reputation for excellence than any company that's
existed before, and he did it all with a flair for the dramatic. In the
meantime he got married and had kids and survived cancer and talked a lot to
kids about loving life and survival.

When I use a computer or listen to an iPod, when I prepare to upload my music
to iTunes practically hassle-free, when I look at the Mac-using companies that
have developed beautiful products, I'm aware that Steve Jobs stands as a
symbol for all of the things I love about this community. A lot of us have
that feeling. It's not celebrity worship like gets slurred around a lot. It's
more that Jobs was the first pro-aesthetic guy in computers, and he's remained
an inspiration and a hero to those of us that like beautiful product, and
revolutionary product, and annual dramatic revelations on-stage.

~~~
thras
That's funny, because I always had the impression that on a personal scale he
was an asshole to his friends and strangers.

But yeah, I like my iPhone.

~~~
zimbabwe
From everything I've heard of him that's right. I don't know, maybe it's just
me, but I rarely judge people on their personality. I know nice guys that are
absolute shits, just as I know one or two nice guys that are incredible
people. Similarly, most assholes are just assholes, but some are very
brilliant people with short fuses. I've found that of the people I associate
with, the least consistent variable is personality, and I find that as I grow
older I lose ties more and more with the people I only liked because of how
they acted. Those cliques dissolve to make way for groups of people united by
interest and motivation, where personality's got less to do with it.

(I also find, incidentally, that the more ambitious your goals the more likely
you are to be an asshole. Jobs is certainly the archetype again. But on the
other hand you've got great people like Jeff Bezos, so I don't agree with the
folk that think assholery leads automatically to greatness.)

~~~
kunqiana
so personality doesn't correlate with competence, but does that mean we should
discount it?

------
satyajit
I am not concerned about AAPL or any cool products it makes. To me, Jobs is a
visionary, and embodies what the company preaches "Think Different"! And agree
with someone said here, his medical condition is his private matter, and we
should respect that.

------
TrevorJ
I find it odd that disclosing a liver transplant and not disclosing the
condition that precipitated it is the way they chose to go here. I would think
that once the transplant cat is out of the bag, you might as well be open
about the condition. After all none of the reasons for needing a new liver are
good and people will probably assume the worst as it is.

~~~
rms
I didn't get the impression that this was an official disclosure.

~~~
Timothee
It wasn't very clear... the fact that they cited an Apple spokeperson made me
think there was some official disclosure, because they usually just not
comment at all on something they haven't released.

Whether or not it was official, I don't think we need to know the exact
condition. What would that change? I can't help him, and the one who can have
probably been working on it for some time now.

------
ComputerGuru
Smart that this comes out today. Yesterday, Apple's stocks jumped up 53% with
the release of the new iPhone and it proved that investor's feel good about
the prospects of an Apple without Jobs at its helm day-in, day-out.

If this article had come out before, I think Apple would've taken a hit.

~~~
jodrellblank
_Yesterday, Apple's stocks jumped up 53% with the release of the new iPhone_

Link? <http://www.google.co.uk/finance?q=aapl> suggests it hasn't broken out
of 130-140 in quite a few days. Particularly not jumping to > 200 yesterday.

~~~
ComputerGuru
Sorry, I must have mis-read it or something.

------
kingkongrevenge
Hopefully he's learned his lesson and started eating lots of meat.

