Publisher Wiley's Books Pulled from Apple Stores 677
getling writes "Looks like Steve Jobs is almost as unhappy about personal details being publicized as he is with Mac secrets. The book publisher Wiley, who is releasing a new unauthorized biography of Jobs has had its entire line of books banned from Apple stores as a result of their unhappiness with the content of the book. Wiley, publisher of the popular Dummies series of books, as well as the Bible series, is quite surprised, due to the fact that they view the book to show Jobs in a largely positive light ..."
Irony... (Score:5, Interesting)
So isn't Apple/Steve sort of making the 'mercurial' and 'hot-tempered' point for the author? While the Woz has said that Jobs never treated him badly, he admitted that many people said they'd never work for Jobs again because of alleged mistreatment by Jobs (check out the mp3 of the HOPE keynote from 2004, in the Q&A, where an audience member asks about Jobs' behavior).
Re:The private life of public figures. (Score:3, Interesting)
Besides, most people don't go to Apple retail stores to buy books, they go there to buy Macs, so this is really more of a slap on the wrist than anything else.
Re:referrer in amazon link? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Here we go again... (Score:3, Interesting)
He may be an asshole, but his persistence pays off. And while a lot of people complained about working for him (and even demonized him in "Pirates of Silicon Valley), the real engineer's accounts seem to simply say that he didn't suffer fools gladly. The Mac team seemed to genuinely like him.
Re:Repeat after me (Score:3, Interesting)
But when you get to a point where a boycott could do serious damage -- which tends to be the point of a boycott, although this case is more symbolic than anything -- then I'd say there ought to be a really good reason for it.
Re:The private life of public figures. (Score:3, Interesting)
I guess I'm a bit confused by the rest of your post - "Apple has every right to pull those books", but you label them worst than The Most Evil Corporation On The Planet because of it. If they're entitled, let 'em. As I said, actions have consequences, and Apple will have their own consequences from their own actions.
And Apple (last I checked) is not a government - if they want don't want to support X, it's entirely up to them. Also, this is not bullying (which is a first-action thing - ie: the agressor is the instigator), this is retaliation (ie: defence) and I for one have no problem with it.
Simon
Steve Jobs & Apple aren't synonymous (Score:5, Interesting)
So he's nowhere near a "majority" owner, and is only the second largest individual shareholder; at least 10 institutions control a bigger stake [yahoo.com] than Leader, aka Steve Jobs.
Re:The private life of public figures. (Score:1, Interesting)
"As CEO of Apple, he has a fiduciary responsible to Apple's owners (i.e., the shareholders)."
See, that's an interesting point.
It reveals a question of what actually hurts Apple's bottom line. Is the loss of sales of Wiley titles made up by sales resulting from fortifying the Capital-C Cult power of Mac? Bad Boy Steve Jobs earns sales. People like him like liking a rocker who smashes up a few hotel rooms with his guitar.
Re:The private life of public figures. (Score:3, Interesting)
I guess you could say that if Wal*Mart don't withdraw books because of the bottom line, then their sole allegiance is to their bottom line. I guess you could say that Apple have applied a more principled outlook - that they will not support (even at their own expense) vendors hostile to them. Which is best will depend on your worldview.
Of course, like everyone else here I've not read the book, so I don't know what caused such offence - it could have been the decision to "publish and be damned" itself, or some content within the books.
As for over-rated. Have you seen Apples stock prices since he came back ? Under-rated more like!
Simon.
Re:The private life of public figures. (Score:1, Interesting)
Err, if I walked into a store and the books they were selling were calling the CEO a "con" I'd probably walk right out.
Re:Balanced.. (Score:2, Interesting)
The thing about the internet is you have to allow everyone a chance to speak. Sometimes people speak nonsense. It can be hard to sort through the nonsense and find the actual good stuff. That's life.
Re:The private life of public figures. (Score:5, Interesting)
Steve Jobs is Apple. When Apple hired Jobs, they hired his charisma, his contacts, his reputation, his expertise. The CEO of every company is a figurehead, a spokesperson, a representative in every way. If Steve believes that this book casts his leadership in a negative way, then it is very easy to believe that it casts the company in the same negative way.
So you know something about the Apple's Reality Distortion Field. Wait, no, that didn't happen when Jobs wasn't there. Right. It's Jobs' Reality Distortion Field. The man is the company.
Do you believe that Apple / Jobs are bullying Wiley? Do you honestly think that Apple's online store is responsible for a noticable percentage of Wiley's sales? I've seen their books in almost every English book store I've walked into in the past 5 or 10 years. When you go to the Apple store, you buy hardware. You buy books at bn.com, amazon.com or your local bookstore / coffee shop.
Re:referrer in amazon link? (Score:2, Interesting)
What I'm afraid of is that it might lead to barrage of useless links popping up here hoping to lure some of us so that he can get paid, just like spam.
Re:Maybe it's the "iCon" title (Score:3, Interesting)
Still, the iCon title does strike me as odd, and I don't blame Apple for not carrying that particular title. The subtitle, "The Greatest Second Act in the History of Business," sounds quite flattering, and just doesn't fit with "iCon". I suspect the contents of the book fit somewhere in between: not as flattering as the subtitle, but not as inflammatory as the main title. Either way, I doubt the controversy will hurt the authors much.
Re:Ugh (Score:3, Interesting)
Hell, our core operating system, Darwin, has been available for Intel for some years now.
But from two messages up, the "Apple is switching to Intel" stuff is complete bullshit. The performance we're getting out of 2.5 GHz G5s on the shelves today is spectacular. It's still, even a year later, top-shelf performance.
Yes, IBM has had massive problems going to 90 nm fabrication. But so has everybody else. We would have been real happy if IBM could have been at 5 GHz now like they'd projected back in 2002-2003. Going on-stage at WWDC in the summer of '03 and saying "3 GHz in a year!" left us looking really stupid. But shit happens, you know? It's not like IBM is totally dropping the ball on us (yes, I'm talking about you, Motorola).
Re:The private life of public figures. (Score:3, Interesting)
Jobs' kid-gloves attitude towards Microsoft in hopes of getting another handout (did I say handout? I mean "investment," yeah, that's the ticket) limits the market share to people who are either predisposed towards Apple to begin with, or willing to go to the trouble to determine whether the advantages are worth the premium. This reinforces the premium, because if Jobs were to compete agressively, then the increased economies of scale would reduce the premium.
This kind of personal bullshit is bad enough, but the fact that Jobs doesn't put the security risks and security record of Microsoft operating systems and applications into every other Apple ad is just inexcusable. There are plenty of people who could do better, and I hope the Board starts interviewing.
I'm sure Jobs would be happier at Pixar full-time. What is all this crap about suing everyone in sight who doesn't obey every NDA whether or not they ever knew about it let alone signed it? That's find for a movie production studio, but alienating journalists is just plain stupid for manufacturing hardware or software.
Re:Maybe it's the "iCon" title (Score:2, Interesting)
of course, i know absolutely nothing about the book.
Re:Sue, sue and sue (Score:4, Interesting)
the only question would be whether they gained more than they lost by pissing off Apple.
Apple only has about 100 stores, and they don't sell primarily books. As far as retailers of Dummies books go, I'd bet Apple stores are a drop in the bucket. The only reason Apple has the books is to sell more computers. Dummies books being absent from Apple stores will hurt Apple more than it ever would hurt Wiley.
This was modded "Informative"? (Score:2, Interesting)
If that is indeed the case, how come Apple didn't ban all the Apple and Mac related "Dummies" books from their stores before this? The simple fact is that Jobs is an egomaniacal control freak and the biography pissed him off. Your assertion is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Supply some evidence or take off the tinfoil hat. And of course, you were careful enough to inoculate yourself against challenges by stating that people who disagree with you are "Apple zealots". FYI, not all Mac users are enamored of Jobs. I'm a diehard Mac user, and I love Apple's products, but that doesn't mean that I love Apple, or blindly approve of Apple's actions. They are a public corporation after all, not a charitable organization, and they should be subject to the same scrutiny as any other public company. I admire and respect Jobs' vision and leadership, but I wouldn't piss in his mouth if his teeth were on fire. I honestly have never liked the guy.
Maybe not on paper (Score:3, Interesting)
Jobs
Gates
Michael Dell
Jack Welch - when he was there
Page and Brin
These people are the company.
They may not own it on paper, however without these charismatic people there is no company, or rather there is just a shell of a company.
This is part of a new shift in the economy that was primed by computers and automation. Busines is becoming less and less capital intensive so the purpose of the stock market is waning.
From 1840 - 1980's, business was based on capital. You had to have a lot of money to create the production capacity. The capital markets were need ed because it required $50 million to build a factory.
So the old way required floating paper as a means of funding the business.
Now, the stock market is being used as a means of making businesses Rich.
An example is Google.
Google was already profitable before they went public. Google could have easily grown by reinvesting their profits.
That's a slow process that definitely VC firms do not like. So they force companies to go public so the VC firm can recoop their investment.
However, this whole scheme is a house of cards.
Think about it...
What happens when Bill Gates and Balmer decide to retire?
What happens to Apple when Jobs retires?
You heard it here first.
pointless? (Score:3, Interesting)
For instance, I don't do business with Union Carbide or their customers because of how they treated the incident in Bhopal. They may not miss the little bit of money that didn't go their way but, I know that I'm giving them nothing.
I will buy Chinese goods. This is because the Americans being put out of work are the same ones who voted for Bush, and Bush supports big Chinese imports. So, I'm supporting the political position of those factory workers.
There are many people who will not buy fuel from Exon over the oil spill in Alaska. Does Exon miss their money, maybe not. Can those people sleep better at night? Absolutely.
Of course, if you don't give a **** then it doesn't matter. The issue is not about whether you $5 makes a change, its about where *you* chose to put that $5. Its about what you think is important. If you chose not to shop with a jerk, maybe he doesn't care. You'll know that *you* chose to do business with someone else.
Re:pointless? (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually, this makes my point perfectly. If you want to boycott someone, target them specifically. You *can* stop yourself from paying for Exxon directly, but you *can't* stop the green bean manufacturer from using Exxon petrolium in manufacturing of the can.
Trying to randomly stop people from receiving money for services is pointless. Target the chokepoints.