There's a lot of self-righteous blustering among some analysts and some in the media to the effect that Jobs has been less than completely forthcoming. To their credit, some have mitigated their tone and taken Jobs' statements at face value. It's good to see a little human perspective here - the man is obviously dealing with some critical health issues, and is dealing with them more graciously than many of these analysts would.

We're talking about a man wrestling with his MORTALITY here. OK? Let's cut him at least as much slack as most people expect when they stub their toe or get a splinter.

That said, all this brouhaha (I never pass up a chance to use that word) is based on a false assumption: It assumes that Apple is the same listless, lost company that stabbed-in-the-back Steve returned to a decade ago. It isn't. It is a driven, purposeful, well-run company remade in its founder's image. The hapless Gil Amelios and sallow John Sculleys who once limply guided its fortunes are long gone, the company scrubbed clean of any traces of their DNA.

What the media's assuming is that, with Jobs gone, the company will be nothing more than a Microsoft or a Yahoo - a huge, bloated, purposeless lump of a corporation unable to get out of its own way. It'll be Disney without Disney. (Or at least, DIsney as its was before another Jobs-driven company - Pixar - came on board and reversed their fortunes.)

Let's remember that the press was wrong ten years ago when it told us, over and over and over again, that Apple was dead. They could not have been more wrong, and have learned (and admitted) nothing from that time, they are giddily ready to be wrong again.

Apple will at some point need someone who can guide all the creative types to make the best products possible at any given time, then choose only the best of the possibilities for mass production. If there is no such person within the company, I can think of one person not far removed. Anoint John Lassiter, who chooses only the best and brightest story ideas for production at Pixar (and is now performing similar works for DIsney's theme parks) to take Jobs' place.

Problem solved.

That is, when Jobs finally DOES take his full leave of Apple. Which I hope is not for many years to come.

You people need to watch more TV. Dr. House has explained it all. The patient always lies. Jobs said he was cured of his pancreatic cancer. Clearly he is being treated for metastatic cancer and will be dead within months.

As for the securities laws. No Harm, No Foul.

Mister Snitch, you raise a good and important point about the actual magnitude of Steve Jobs' loss to Apple. Recall that people made similarly dire predictions about whether Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia would survive even for the temporary period that she was in jail. Rumors of that company's demise were greatly exaggerated. What's most important in the end, in my view, is that the corporation's board is considering this issue and planning for it, based on what the directors know about Jobs' importance to the company at this stage.

Fat Man, I really enjoy House, but I admit to being unwilling to assume that everyone who is sick lies to himself or herself and others about his or her condition. On the other hand, I'll acknowledge the validity of your comment insofar as it points out that an executive with cancer is under stress that may affect his or her decision making and bias his or her judgments. No doubt about that. An executive in this condition is ill-equipped, in many respects, to make the difficult, related corporate disclosure decisions. In my view, the board has to make those determinations. But the executive should then lay all the facts at the board's doorstep so that the directors can make a fully informed judgment. Right now, while practical (and maybe fiduciary and moral) principles support a corporate executive's disclosure of private facts to the board, he or she is not required (or even strongly incentivized) to make disclosures of these private facts to the board. That's a legal gap that should be closed, in some way.

Thanks for the thoughts.

Not only has Jobs "been less than completely forthcoming" he made materially false statements, which manipulated the stock price.

That is illegal and Apple will be sued for it and lose.

The thing to keep in mind about Tim Cook is, he's no John Sculley, he's no Michael Spindler, and he's no Gil Amelio. These are good things.

He's focused on the job he has, not hoping to get some kind of political appointment. (Sculley thought Carter would make him treasury secretary.) Tim isn't the kind of wannabe who's going to declare himself "Chief Technical Officer" like Sculley did.

Tim has the job well in hand, and he's not going to buckle under the pressure and have a series of nervous breakdowns like Spindler.

He doesn't see himself as some kind of unfairly unrecognized genius like Amelio does.

Not only has Jobs "been less than completely forthcoming" he made materially false statements, which manipulated the stock price.

You have no reason to believe anything of the kind. He said what he believed to be the case before MacWorld, and advised his employees and the rest of us when he got new information.

Joan: You are a law prof, what do you know of life? I am an old fat man, and I have seen a lot of ugly $#;+ come down.

Everybody lies, to everyone, especially themselves, all the time. The more threatening a situation is to a man's existence, the more likely he is to lie about it. There are very few men who would say: "I have pancreatic cancer and I will die shortly."

Jobs not only lied to the public, but he undoubtedly lied to the board, who therefor had no basis on which to make any decision other than the one they made.

Further, I would guess that under HIPAA, Jobs can prevent the board from talking to his doctors and seeing his charts. I wonder if HIPAA is a defense against Securities laws claims?

Fedgovernor: It may be illegal to lie, but it is stupid to believe anything anyone says about their health. Like I said watch "House", read what i said above.

Some Guy: Just understand that people lie. A presumption of good faith is willful ignorance of the human condition.

"You have no reason to believe anything of the kind."

I have many reasons to believe it. He stood before investors and claimed he only suffered from an imbalance of hormones when in fact, he had previously been informed by his doctors that he had terminal pancreatic cancer.

That's materially false and misleading. Apple will be sued for it, and should be, since much of the company's worth is perceived by investors to be because of Jobs' influence.

You can't defraud investors by misleading them about the health of key executives.

It's illegal.