The end of the Silicon Valley celebrity CEO?

http://bigtech.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2008/12/18/why-apples-macworld-exit-matters/


It’s tempting to say it’s no big deal that Apple is ditching the Macworld Expo. Yes, Steve Jobs has used Macworld stages to introduce the iPhone, the Macbook Air, the iBook and a slew of other objects of techno-lust. But Jobs doesn’t need Macworld to get attention. Mr. Innovation could have invited the press to a bowling alley in Fresno to unveil new technology, and a crowd would still show up.

But this actually is a big deal. Fueled by Apple’s (AAPL) recent success, Jobs’s San Francisco Macworld keynote had become the industry’s most remarkable marketing event. Journalists from around the world, drawn by star power and the force of tradition, gathered annually to hear Jobs set the agenda for consumer technology.

It’s true that over the years Apple has developed alternate venues to get its message out; there’s the Worldwide Developer Conference before the back-to-school season, an iPhone event in the spring or summer, an iPod event in September, and one or two more. But Macworld was the big splash — the one time when press and analysts gathered at Apple’s doorstep without having to be invited.

Are things different without a Jobs keynote at Macworld? In the short term, barely. There just aren’t many superstars left running companies these days, now that folks like Microsoft founder (MSFT) Bill Gates and former Intel CEO (INTC) Craig Barrett have stepped back from operational roles. There are folks like Mark Hurd of Hewlett-Packard (HPQ) and Sam Palmisano of IBM (IBM), but they’re known more as uber managers than as tech geniuses.

There’s Oracle founder Larry Ellison, but Joe Sixpack has no idea what Oracle (ORCL) does. Then there are the Web 2.0 celebrities – Eric Schmidt, Sergey Brin, and Larry Page at Google (GOOG), and Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg – but none of them could be mistaken for inspirational speakers. So as long as Steve Jobs is still at the helm of Apple, and as long as Apple’s products remain popular, the tech community will gather when he’s got something to say.

The question is what happens when His Steveness steps away from the company, or when Apple’s products are no longer the toast of the town. When that happens – and it’s a matter of when, not if — Apple executives may long for the bygone days of the Macworld keynote, when the techies of the world huddled like kids on Christmas, and expected to be blown away.

Not that I dont love Steve Jobs, but he's a lot of why Apple isn't larger than they are. Honestly, If Steve would get down off of his "High horse", let go off the past and co-operate with the consumers, we'd be in school for Apple's OS right now and not Microsoft's. The fact that he's unwilling to cater to the gaming crowd, business crowd and "home builder" crowd, I can almost guarantee that Apple would have had a huge market penetration. OS X is by far one of the most stable OSes out there, Theres no need to defrag, no need to worry about Viruses, The installation of a product is very simple, but the fact that Apple refuses to let anyone install OS X on a non-proprietary system is what holds them down. Steve Jobs is very "stuck up" so to speak in regards to the consumer and perhaps we might see a turning of the tides when he's gone, but until then they'll always be "second best" because they don't know how to play well with others.

I agree with your comment except for one aspect. Mac OS X viruses. Please do not use this argument as to why the mac OS is better than Windows. You know there is only one reason why there are so few(yes, there are some) viruses for the mac. And that's pure numbers. There is a huge difference between the number of mac computers and windows computers. Lets take a different look at this. A business look.

You are writing a book about how to be a Rodeo Clown. Well 90% of the Rodeo Clown wannabees speak French only. And 10% of them speak German. Now translating the book from French to German is very time consuming and by the time you get it translated there will already be another book that does the same thing(hence no longer needing your book) or the profession will no longer exist.

Its the same with Viruses. Why spend the extra manpower for 10% of the market when you can focus on 90%? Honestly, by the time you get the second OS virus coded, there is probably a fix hence destroying your workaround of whatever it is you are engineering. So why not just enjoy the max amount of time you can with 90% of the market on the first shot?

No viruses for Mac? They don't exist? Really? What are these then? Virus Profile: OSX/Inqtana.a Or this one? OSX/Puper

I'm not adamant about a lot of things but this is one of them. Please do not use the "But macs don't have viruses" line unless you can give a specific reason in the code of the MAC OS down to the code itself number by number and word by word that specifically proves that no virus can be written for it(which is impossible as I just showed you two existing viruses).

On a personal note, what the F is wrong with windows? I love it. When there is an error I can get it fixed. Why do I need a no thought OS like OS X when I can make my OS do exactly what I want it to do while still working with over 95% of components and software ever written, unlike a mac?

Now good day Sir.

I SAID GOOD DAY!

Calm down there haus, I never said there weren't any viruses, I said there wasn't a need to worry about them because there are very few of them.
I know there are a few out there and yes its mainly because of the market, but it's also got to do with a few other things, such as the programming language as well as the architecture, it's not soley dependant on the market share, however, you could also argue that people aren't hard pressed to learn how to program for OS X because of the market share.
But also in that respect, when you look at Linux or any other *Nix based flavors and how many companies actually use them for their servers, Im surprised that there aren't more viruses for them because as a "cracker" (non-racial), I would want to target a corporation as opposed to a "house hold user" and when you think about it, the vast majority of actual "hackers" and "crackers" (not to be confused with "script kiddiez") actually use and prefer *Nix based OSes over windows... that in itself should open up doors to more and more viruses and things of that nature on *Nix based systems in comparison to the types of users that operate on Windows.


P.F.S. As far as Mac being incompatible with programs and what not, it sounds like youre still stuck in the early 2000's era where there where problems. As Mac leans towards the Intel Architecture, Its becoming a lot less of a problem (aside from games of course). Now days, it seems like the programs that I use to use on Mac can't be found on windows, but the Windows programs I use can be downloaded for both Mac and Windows. Unfortunantly, with the X86 Architecture in tact, that also leads to more viruses for Mac as well where as the PowerPC architecture was more difficult and thus less malware was programmed for it. If you think about it, "Hackintosh" wasn't a reality until they introduced the x86 OS X.