Katie MarsalFollowing the startling news that Apple would no longer show at Macworld Expo after the 2009 event, one report may put to rest fears that the health of Apple co-founder Steve Jobs is the deciding factor behind the move.
"Jobs' decision was more about politics than his pancreas," Goldman says, alluding to Jobs' post-cancer status. "If Jobs for some reason was unable to perform any of his responsibilities as CEO because of health reasons, which would include the Macworld keynote, I should 'rest assured that the board would let me know.'"
Apple has typically followed this practice of disclosure, though only out of necessity: the company remained secretive regarding Jobs' rare form of pancreatic cancer until he chose to undergo surgery in 2004 that temporarily removed him from his duties. In contrast, little has been said this year of Jobs' second, less urgent surgery, which triggered worries and prompted Jobs to call a reporter personally to set the record straight.
The Mac maker's "politics" are more straightforward: the company has gradually withdrawn from many of the shows that once made it famous, whether they have been Macworld Expos in different regions or industry-specific gatherings. Instead, Apple has increasingly chosen to hold its own events, whether they take place at the Town Hall location on its own campus or at special venues like the Yerba Buena Center for the Arts, which has played home to multiple iPod-related events.
To Goldman, what his sources say is simply a matter of logic: even at this year's Consumer Electronics Show, the largest event of its kind on Earth, large firms are pulling out in favor of in-house presentations that let them get full attention. The departure from Macworld is simply seen as another extension of this behavior, even if it threatens to sink an entire industry event in the process.
"Steve Jobs is fine," Goldman writes. "It's Macworld the expo that's on its last legs."
AppleInsider Staff
Chip Loder
Christine McKee
Malcolm Owen
William Gallagher
Andrew Orr
57 Comments
This is pretty obvious. Why would you put something that important in the name and hands of another company? If you're going to do an annual product announcement shindig, you'd want to do it on your own terms. Apple is right on about this. All those moaning about "end of an era" should expect Apple to set soemthing of their own up, from which they can profit. And it'll probably be a lot better. Maybe like the developers conference but for consumers.
Bottom line...MacWorld keynotes by Jobs have become a signature event, that grab alot of press and attention. So then whats to replace it?
Anyway. I just hope Apple has something touchy and netbooky up its sleeve to show off at this Macworld to stimulate some interest in buying more Apple product!
The timing of MacWorld was always pretty bad, too. Since Apple typically announces products only when they are ready, or nearly ready, to ship, that means they are releasing major new products just a few weeks AFTER everyone already made their holiday purchases. Decoupling their product cycle from a rigid annual trade show schedule means they can better time their releases and be more nimble reacting to the market.
Even if Steve Jobs miraculously achieves perfect health, the next Administration will be no friend to Apple's business model.
There is a way that Apple can continue on the path of leading edge innovation and also live in harmony with Socialism.
1.) Add medical diagnostic capabilities to the ipod/iphone line.
2. Give a shitload of freebies to third world countries.
I've been watching Steve's keynotes for 12 years. Part of the excitement of the keynote was the room of 2,000 people cheering, which isn't present in these boring, small, private media events.
Over the past several years, the excitement Apple builds in it's products is dwindling. Watching a MacWorld keynote was like Christmas all over again. Now we get nasty iPod Hi-Fi press events where 4 people clap.
Goodbye exciting Apple. Hello just-like-any-other-boring company.
"Think slightly different"