Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Apple Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: HerbVic who wrote (29208)	10/8/2000 10:18:38 PM
From: Softechie	Respond to of 213176

This is the case of calling IBM dead in the 80's. I wish I had bought IBM when it was so called "dead" then. They said PC's will kill IBM but no IBM has turned around and taken a chunk of PC's market share and improved bottom line. I don't see a company like Apple dropping dead in 1 day. Damn ridiculous.

To: HerbVic who wrote (29208)	10/9/2000 1:19:27 AM
From: J R KARY	Respond to of 213176

Mike Malone interviewed SUNW's CEO Scott McNealy last week Malone's article on AAPL and Jobs could be semi-professional pay-back if the news worthy Jobs rebuffed a interview on Malone's "CEO" show. Otherwise it seems out of place , along with the dearth of AAPL news. Malone had a great chat with McNealy (on PBS) and I'm sure he would like one with Jobs. Don't understand the silence from AAPL on this week's coming events nor the newsworthiness of Barron's and Malone's articles. Kind of reminds me of the period just before Power Computing was made a stock offer. Ya never know but covering employee/officer options with a buy-back at this level is very prudent. Of course if that is what AAPL is doing ;>) Jim K.

To: HerbVic who wrote (29208)	10/9/2000 1:57:04 PM
From: Alomex	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 213176

Here's a rather sad commentary on Apple, written since the pre earnings warning. I disagree. The article makes at least one interesting point: A temporary setback? Don't be too sure. Unlike, say, Hewlett-Packard, Apple has always been a company that deals poorly with failure. When things go bad at Apple, they go very bad. On Jobs: Why is he a poor CEO? Because he's mercurial, insufficiently engaged by the more boring (but crucial) operations like distribution, and ultimately, because he's a pretty nasty piece of work. I don't know if this is still the case. However relaunching the NeXT as the new Mac cube shows that there is still a bit of the old stubborn I'm-right-the-customer-is-wrong Jobs in there. Even after all the successes of the last two years, Apple is still where it was during the Spindler era. It is a niche player, with an anomalous operating system, trying to survive in a market dominated by giant corporations like Compaq, Dell and IBM. Sure, but now the company has growing revenues and a beta version of what at long last looks like a decent OS (this is like eleven or twelve years after the new and improved MacOS was first announced).