Comments on: How long before Jobs is Disney's new boss?

CNET News.com's Charles Cooper says the final script may look a lot different than the lovefest on display after the Pixar announcement.

[casper2004]

What's it going to turn into? A corporate takeover? That should be illegal

Didn't Steve Jobs try to take all the credit for the Windows that Bill Gates invented?

Considering

Bill Gates didn't create anything, and instead STOLE all of his technology and tricked others into selling their code, no. Bill Gates should be imprisoned.

[Edited by: admin on Jan 25, 2006 11:24 AM]

[atomicjo]

Apple is making a comeback!

Steve jobs is a genius and Bill Gates had to work for him long
enough to figure out how to make windows "user friendly". Apple
has always produced the superior computer and the general public,
in their computer infancy, is starting to realize it. Look at Apples'
market recent share.

No...

It was the other way around... Mac came out with a GUI way before Windows did.

[corelogik]

If this isn't a joke,...

I think I will be seriously sick.

As for the rest, Steve is Pixar's biggest shareholder, when Disney
trades stock to buy out Pixar, Steve will get the majority of the
stock. That makes Steve the single biggest shareholer of Disney
stock. That hardly qualifies as a corporate take over...

Besides whether you like Apple or not they seem to be doing just
fine for a "crappy company that makes nothing but junk,..".
Maybe this is a good thing and Disney can learn something from
Steve.

Steve may not always be right, but Apple is in the best shape of
it's life so he must not be all that wrong either...

[James P. Larsen]

Gates didn't 'invent' Windows

Ito R writes:
> Didn't Steve Jobs try to take all the credit
> for the Windows that Bill Gates invented?

LOL! In fact, probably the most valuable document
MS owns is a piece of paper signed by ex-Apple
President John Scully giving MS permission to make
an OS that resembles Mac OS.

Go to http://www.dcs.napier.ac.uk/~bill/rambling15.html and
read the purple sidebar for the story on how it
came about.

To read about the lawsuit that resulted from this
deal, go here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Computer%
2C_Inc._v._Microsoft_Corp.

[lucien64]

You're wrong my son!

Bill Gates didn't even invent DOS and he didn't invent the Windowing Concept of a computer interface. Neither did Jobs... The idea surfaced somewhere at Xerox.

[FisherKingKQJ]

Xerox

Xerox did the first mouse, GUI and Benjamin Franklin. :) :) :)

[just_some_guy]

Just give me The Incredibles 2!

I don't care who is in charge, just make sure the sequel is as good as the first movie.

Oh - and I prefer watching it on a screen larger than my iPod. Thanks.

[smilepak]

The new ESINER!

In my opinion, Steve Job will become another EISNER. With this buyout, that will potentially give him the largest shareholding rights on the board.

If Igar fail to deliver, out he goes and Steve will step in. Keep in mind that the Chair seat is currently "TEMPORARLY" being held by Mitchell.

I foresee that Steve Job will eventually step in as CEO of the Company.

We shall see a whole new Disney very soon.

[Earl Benser]

We need awhole new Disney....

Eisner and rust ruined the old one.

[TV James]

I don't buy it.

You can make your prediction for it, I'll make my prediction against it. I don't think Steve Jobs will want the top job at Disney.

First, Bob Iger's already proving himself by stepping up. In recent history, first with ABC and now all of Disney. He was hand-picked by Michael Eisner and the board is all people who looove Eisner. So, they will support him. Plus, he's already making great strides to improve Disney, so they will give him time to continue to prove himself. Look how long Eisner lasted. This is a board not given to quick action.

Secondly, Apple is still nimble. Pixar is incredibly nimble. Disney aint nimble. From cruise ships to theme parks to cable tv networks to licensed and O&O mall stores to ESPN to ABC, this is one large company with many, many levels of bureaucracy and its hand in many, many things.

Steve Jobs would be lost in the CEO position. Not because of a lack of talent or an inability to see the larger picture, but because of just how much crudwork is involved in keeping the amorphous blob on track. He would feel confined, trapped, unable to innovate. His mind zip-zaps around way too quickly to be mired in the mundane required to steer a ship of this size.

Plus, his passion for his pet projects, be they NeXT, Pixar or Apple. Who's to say how much passion he has for Disney? He has no hand in what Disney is today. To be sure, he will have a strong hand in what Disney going forward, but I think he'll stick to a role that allows him to innovate, be creative, bring together departments in new ways and so forth.

The only way he rises to the top of Disney is if they revive the shared structure that Eisner and Frank Miller(?) enjoyed where they played off each other, one focused on the money, the other on the creativity.

[S R]

So, what's wrong?

"In December 1996, Apple Computer bought Next Computer, a
foundering company that Jobs formed after leaving Apple in
1988. The deal was the crowning career mistake of Gil Amelio,
Apple's chief executive at the time, who was desperate to
reverse a famously feckless tenure."

This might have been a mistake for Gil Amelio, but it was the
best thing that could have happened to Apple. Imagine the
Apple with Gil today? Where would they have been? Michael
Dell's words would have come true.

"But pardon my sarong if I don't believe everything Jobs says. He
is an executive of rare accomplishment. He also is a practiced
corporate finagler with large ambitions."

Which corporate magnet is not a "finagler"? Every corporate
magnet is. The only exception for Jobs (and a very few others) is
that he has "large ambitions."

So, let me understand the point here. Disney buys Pixar. Pixar
is a runaway success company. Disney is expected to "perform"
with this buy. But, if that doesn't happen, then someone has to
step up to the plate and get the company back on track. So, if
Iger "fails" to deliver, then why not have someone visionary step
up? What is wrong to replace a "failed" head? Looks like
mediocre living has become the norm of life these days!

[BobBobBobBobBobBobBob]

whats wrong is a C|Net writer...

Nothing new for a C|Net writer to do but turn a good thing (for
Disney) into something bad... anything to generate hits.

[kxmmxk]

Mountain - Molehill

The two situations are so completely different.

Jobs taking over Apple again was a natural. It was his baby, his first company, one he was unceremoniously kicked out of. It was a natural for him to take it over again, and it's a real good thing he did. And it's clear that what he wants most is for Apple to succeed and not just as a career move.

Disney is something else. I have no doubt he will end up having significant input as Disney was well aware when the deal was formed. But Disney isn't his baby in any way. And I sincerely doubt he'll give up running Apple to run Disney. And I don't think he can run both. Running Disney would be much more effort than running Pixar was.

It's more likely that he will exert influence to protect the Pixar group and what they put out and also use that influence for more deals with Apple.

That is what people should be talking about, what does the new 'sisterhood' of Apple and Disney mean for everyone else.

[Joe Blow]

I'll Bet Steve is Rubbing His Hands Together ...

just pleased as punch with this development. He just slashed his cost of distribution to zero, which relieves Pixar of having to go and cut another distribution deal with Disney or somewhere else. He converted his Pixar stock into Disney stock while the former was at a high, and the latter is near a low, and if the Pixar division keeps pumping out another few billion dollars in winners, Disney's stock price can only go up. That assumes the price doesn't get dragged down too heavily by poor performance in one or more other divisions, though. Can you spell an Al Qaeda attack on a Disney theme park or cruise liner? Talk about a big, fat, weak, juicy target symbolic of U.S. corporate economic power _and_ cultural identity (yeah, I know, using "cultural" and "Disney" together is more than a stretch, but we are talking about the perceptions of fanatical nut jobs living in caves! :)

Jobs will most likely bide his time, and play the good corporate executive role as long as things are going well. He will be plenty busy protecting and promoting his Pixar folks throughout Disney over the next few years, which includes the theme parks and other divisions, as was explicitly stated in the press release. You can bet your sweet bippy that the video iPod/ABC/ESPN/etc. connection will expand to every show that people would be willing to pay for, and I'm amazed that over three million TV show files have been downloaded (and, more importantly, paid for) already.

Steve may not be interested in running all of Disney this week, but I can't believe that he isn't already instructing his Pixar point-men/women, who will be spreading out through the rest of the company's management and technical strata, to report back directly to him their observations and recommendations. I do know I wouldn't want to be a long-time Eisner supporter who has stood in the way of Steve getting something done, whether it was Pixar film distribution, video iPod distribution, an animation project that competed with Pixar's, etc. Those guys/gals are probably already toast, if not outright plasma, at this point.

If/when the time is right, after Steve has had a chance to see who "gets it" and who doesn't, and if Iger and significant portions of the rest of Disney stumble (and the Pixar part doesn't, which is a possibility, although one of lower probability), then you can start your stopwatch on the Steve-as-Disney-CEO countdown. That's years away, though, at a bare minimum. And as someone pointed out, other than to satisfy even the yawning chasm that is his ego, why would Steve even want to risk being responsible for a bunch of boring legacy businesses he had no hand in building, when he can be plenty busy (and productive) for years pushing his/Pixar's (and, most assuredly, Apple's) agenda through the arteries of the Disney circulatory system, preparing for a takeover from the inside-out?

Oh, and BTW, it's corporate "magnate", not "magnet", although Steve's Reality Distortion Field may depend on magnetic force, courtesy of his personality or The Dark Side (which could be one and the same, but then, how could Bill Gates be the Emporer? :)

All the Best,
Joe Blow

Gates

That would be "emperor", Joe, not "emporer". Good catch on
"magnet", but I guess you turned off the spell checker after that,
huh?

[R. U. Sirius]

Much ado about nothing

Apple is Job's original vision, and no one can argue that he has reignited that company.

I doubt he would ever give up the top post at Apple voluntarily, and why would he? If the market cap of Apple keeps moving skyward, at some point it can buy Disney in much the same way that Sony bought Universal.

I'm not dismissing what you're saying Coop, because anything is possible. But it seems to me that Apple is the one of the few shining stars in tech these days, and a lions share of that success is due to Steve Jobs. My bet is he wants bigger things for his company, not Walt's.