If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Beatweek Magazine)   Should Mark Zuckerberg resign from Facebook over stock price? Yeah, right after Steve Jobs   (beatweek.com) divider line 48
    More: Stupid, Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook  
•       •       •

1844 clicks; posted to Geek » on 20 Aug 2012 at 8:37 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



48 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-08-20 08:38:51 PM
No.
 
2012-08-20 08:45:04 PM
By comparison, the public stock market makes social media look stable.
 
2012-08-20 08:47:21 PM
Steve Jobs is dead.
 
2012-08-20 08:49:54 PM
I don't know why he went public in the first place. I mean, I know WHY he went public (to make ass tons of money). But had to have Ben making a decent bundle for himself and small circle of investors via ad revenue and game partnerships with the likes of Zynga and their ilk.

Did he just want THAT much more? I'll admit, I'm pretty ignorant in the ways of business. Like, completely. But I know if I was making as much money as he was, I'd be fairly loath to turn my baby over to a bunch of people that would just as soon sell it off for parts and leave me for dead to make a quarterly profit.
 
2012-08-20 08:51:13 PM

Shadowknight: I don't know why he went public in the first place. I mean, I know WHY he went public (to make ass tons of money). But had to have Ben making a decent bundle for himself and small circle of investors via ad revenue and game partnerships with the likes of Zynga and their ilk.

Did he just want THAT much more? I'll admit, I'm pretty ignorant in the ways of business. Like, completely. But I know if I was making as much money as he was, I'd be fairly loath to turn my baby over to a bunch of people that would just as soon sell it off for parts and leave me for dead to make a quarterly profit.


Wow, I spilled auto correct all over my post. Sorry about the nonsense.
 
2012-08-20 08:56:17 PM

Shadowknight: I don't know why he went public in the first place. I mean, I know WHY he went public (to make ass tons of money). But had to have Ben making a decent bundle for himself and small circle of investors via ad revenue and game partnerships with the likes of Zynga and their ilk.

Did he just want THAT much more? I'll admit, I'm pretty ignorant in the ways of business. Like, completely. But I know if I was making as much money as he was, I'd be fairly loath to turn my baby over to a bunch of people that would just as soon sell it off for parts and leave me for dead to make a quarterly profit.


Greed? Maybe he knows that Facebook is a fad like any other social media site and made sure he got his?
 
2012-08-20 08:57:56 PM

OddLlama: Shadowknight: I don't know why he went public in the first place. I mean, I know WHY he went public (to make ass tons of money). But had to have Ben making a decent bundle for himself and small circle of investors via ad revenue and game partnerships with the likes of Zynga and their ilk.

Did he just want THAT much more? I'll admit, I'm pretty ignorant in the ways of business. Like, completely. But I know if I was making as much money as he was, I'd be fairly loath to turn my baby over to a bunch of people that would just as soon sell it off for parts and leave me for dead to make a quarterly profit.

Greed? Maybe he knows that Facebook is a fad like any other social media site and made sure he got his?


Only if he sold his shares before the collapse, I'd think. If this is the case, he flew a bit close to the sun on that one.
 
2012-08-20 08:58:19 PM

Shadowknight: Did he just want THAT much more? I'll admit, I'm pretty ignorant in the ways of business. Like, completely. But I know if I was making as much money as he was, I'd be fairly loath to turn my baby over to a bunch of people that would just as soon sell it off for parts and leave me for dead to make a quarterly profit.


IIRC, Facebook had accumulated enough private investors that they would have had to start making major disclosures to the SEC. They figured that if they were going to do the paperwork anyway, they may as well make the money from going public.
 
2012-08-20 08:58:32 PM
He should resign from Facebook, sell most of his stock in the company, and spend the rest of his life hanging out and banging hot chicks. I can't imagine why he would do anything else, except maybe become the goddamn Batman. It's not like Facebook is looking for a cure for cancer or something; its sole purpose is to make money for Mark Zuckerberg, and it has in all likelihood done about as much of that as it was ever destined to do.
 
2012-08-20 08:58:54 PM
Mark Zuckerberg is no Steve Jobs.

The fact he hasn't lost a huge portion of his customer base to another social networking site does not mean it won't happen. I don't think he should resign though because whoever takes over will almost inevitably make changes that will fark over the site more.
 
2012-08-20 09:06:12 PM
Is John Sculley available to give The Zuck a hand?
 
2012-08-20 09:07:23 PM
What kind of future does Facebook have?
 
2012-08-20 09:10:51 PM
I lost it all on Friendster and Neopet.
 
- I miss you Taffy the Guppypup
 
2012-08-20 09:17:26 PM
Sir, the emperor hath no clothes!
 
2012-08-20 09:20:40 PM
Doesn't he own over 50% of the voting stock in FB?

Although he could...

1. Resign
2. Sell his stake
3. Price collapse of FB stock
4. Buy back for pennies on the dollar
5. Profit.
 
2012-08-20 09:25:57 PM

Harry_Seldon: 1. Resign
2. Sell his stake
3. Price collapse of FB stock
4. Buy back for pennies on the dollar
5. Profit.


Am I the only one who thinks that kind of market manipulation should be illegal?
 
2012-08-20 09:28:09 PM

Sergeant Grumbles: Harry_Seldon: 1. Resign
2. Sell his stake
3. Price collapse of FB stock
4. Buy back for pennies on the dollar
5. Profit.

Am I the only one who thinks that kind of market manipulation should be illegal?


I'm reasonably certain that it is.
 
2012-08-20 09:29:44 PM

Shadowknight: I don't know why he went public in the first place. I mean, I know WHY he went public (to make ass tons of money). But had to have Ben making a decent bundle for himself and small circle of investors via ad revenue and game partnerships with the likes of Zynga and their ilk.

Did he just want THAT much more? I'll admit, I'm pretty ignorant in the ways of business. Like, completely. But I know if I was making as much money as he was, I'd be fairly loath to turn my baby over to a bunch of people that would just as soon sell it off for parts and leave me for dead to make a quarterly profit.


Actually you're wrong. He didn't want to go public. He had to. After a certain amount of private investors, you have to go public and report to the SEC. He should have reached that a long time ago, but he gamed the system and prevented going public by over a year. This is why he didn't want to go public, because he didn't want the pressure to make money.
 
2012-08-20 09:42:14 PM
he and that whole fukin company should be in jail

i.ytimg.com
 
2012-08-20 09:47:27 PM
Shadowknight: I don't know why he went public in the first place. I mean, I know WHY he went public (to make ass tons of money). But had to have Ben making a decent bundle for himself and small circle of investors via ad revenue and game partnerships with the likes of Zynga and their ilk.

Did he just want THAT much more? I'll admit, I'm pretty ignorant in the ways of business. Like, completely. But I know if I was making as much money as he was, I'd be fairly loath to turn my baby over to a bunch of people that would just as soon sell it off for parts and leave me for dead to make a quarterly profit.


The reason for stories like this is that he set everything up to retain control over the company even if investors revolt. He made a killing at the same time protecting his company, and Wallstreet is NOT happy about that because he's maintaining control vs doing things to bring in the most profit right now dammnit!

Basically, Wallstreet is pissed.
 
2012-08-20 09:51:24 PM

moralpanic: Shadowknight: I don't know why he went public in the first place. I mean, I know WHY he went public (to make ass tons of money). But had to have Ben making a decent bundle for himself and small circle of investors via ad revenue and game partnerships with the likes of Zynga and their ilk.

Did he just want THAT much more? I'll admit, I'm pretty ignorant in the ways of business. Like, completely. But I know if I was making as much money as he was, I'd be fairly loath to turn my baby over to a bunch of people that would just as soon sell it off for parts and leave me for dead to make a quarterly profit.

Actually you're wrong. He didn't want to go public. He had to. After a certain amount of private investors, you have to go public and report to the SEC. He should have reached that a long time ago, but he gamed the system and prevented going public by over a year. This is why he didn't want to go public, because he didn't want the pressure to make money.


Thanks. Like I said, completely ignorant in business, so this is actually fairly informative.

Same goes for the rest of you who answered too.
 
2012-08-20 09:52:25 PM
Steve Jobs was forced out and "Apple quickly went into the crapper for a decade", says TFA.

That's a bit revisionist. Jobs left in 1985 but Apple put out very strong products (Mac SE series, Mac II series, PowerBook 100 series) for the rest of the 80s and early 90s. If you have to pick a year when things started to go off the rails it would be 1993. You can see it in the list of new products each year.

1991
Macintosh Classic II
Macintosh Quadra 700
Macintosh Quadra 900
Performa 200
PowerBook 100
PowerBook 140
PowerBook 170
/great

1992
Macintosh LC II
Macintosh Quadra 950
PowerBook 145
Performa 600/600CD
Macintosh IIvi
Macintosh IIvx
PowerBook 160
PowerBook 180
PowerBook Duo 210
PowerBook Duo 230
PowerBook Duo 270c
PowerBook DuoDock
/okay, not sure about some of those

1993
Macintosh Centris 610
Macintosh Centris 650
Macintosh Color Classic
Macintosh LC III
Macintosh Quadra 800
Performa 250
PowerBook 165c
Workgroup Server 80
Workgroup Server 95
Performa 450
Macintosh LC 520
PowerBook 180c
Macintosh Quadra 660av
Macintosh Quadra 840av
PowerBook 145B
Workgroup Server 60
Newton Message Pad (OMP)
PowerBook 165
Performa 400
Performa 405
Performa 410
Performa 430
Macintosh Centris 660av
Macintosh Color Classic II
Macintosh LC 475
Macintosh LC III+
Macintosh Quadra 605
Macintosh Quadra 610
Macintosh Quadra 650
Macintosh TV
Performa 275
Performa 460
Performa 466
Performa 467
Performa 475
Performa 476
PowerBook Duo 250
/dafuq?!
 
2012-08-20 09:56:57 PM

Shadowknight: I don't know why he went public in the first place. I mean, I know WHY he went public (to make ass tons of money). But had to have Ben making a decent bundle for himself and small circle of investors via ad revenue and game partnerships with the likes of Zynga and their ilk.


Has Zuckerburg been pulling all the strings? Serious question... I wasn't sure if had a majority share or not or how much real control he's had lately.

Also, I don't think he had a lot of liquid assets. All his "money" was theoretical money on paper, and even now most of his money is in stock but easier to turn to cash quickly. I also heard the story about how he has this huge house, but took out a huge mortgage instead of buying it outright... presumably because the mortgage has lower interest than his investments. My point is that I don't think he's doing things to "make ass tons of money" so much as he's trying to actually turn his existing assets into real cash.
 
2012-08-20 09:58:11 PM
Isn't the stock price just going to the "right" level? The bank did a damned good job of accurately estimating the hype and setting the price at a level that would sell out the IPO, which is their goal; not to set a price that reflects the actual value of the company.
 
2012-08-20 10:05:00 PM

jonny_q: Has Zuckerburg been pulling all the strings? Serious question... I wasn't sure if had a majority share or not or how much real control he's had lately.

Also, I don't think he had a lot of liquid assets


Zuckerberg has majority voting power. He is in absolute control of FB. Basically, butt hurt investors can pound sand right now.

He sold $1 billion in stock to diversify portfolio. He is loaded with cash. Regardless of FB holdings, he is a billionaire.
 
2012-08-20 10:11:20 PM

Nem Wan: You can see it in the list of new products each year.


Maybe you can. I never heard of any of those products, fanboy. For all I know, the 1993 product like was the best fiscal year ever in the history of anything. But that's irrelevant.


The moral of the story is that Apple isn't a technology company, they're a fashion brand that makes computers. Without Jimmy Chu, you're left with Ugly Shoe. Without Steve Jobs, Apple was just A Core.

You need the visionary to start the fire. You need disciples to keep it going. Facebook was one man's good idea. Zuck stole that idea and made it a successful company. If he leaves, it depends on what kind of people he's trained up on how it performs from here on out.
 
2012-08-20 10:18:19 PM

Brick-House: he and that whole fukin company should be in jail

[i.ytimg.com image 480x360]


I'm sorry, did I miss the part where you were forcibly legitimately raped by facebook without engaging your anti-rape uterus chaff?

Because no one forces you to use a shiatty social media site. You are more than welcome to use any of the dozen pretenders of various flavors, or just contact your friends the old fashioned way. In person.
 
2012-08-20 10:23:12 PM

malaktaus: He should resign from Facebook, sell most of his stock in the company, and spend the rest of his life hanging out and banging hot chicks. I can't imagine why he would do anything else, except maybe become the goddamn Batman. It's not like Facebook is looking for a cure for cancer or something; its sole purpose is to make money for Mark Zuckerberg, and it has in all likelihood done about as much of that as it was ever destined to do.


Zuckerberg isn't in the data mining business or the money making business, he is in the empire business.
 
2012-08-20 10:30:14 PM

Nem Wan: Newton Message Pad (OMP)


www.damaschke.de
 
2012-08-20 10:37:49 PM

doglover: Nem Wan: You can see it in the list of new products each year.

Maybe you can. I never heard of any of those products, fanboy. For all I know, the 1993 product like was the best fiscal year ever in the history of anything. But that's irrelevant.


The moral of the story is that Apple isn't a technology company, they're a fashion brand that makes computers. Without Jimmy Chu, you're left with Ugly Shoe. Without Steve Jobs, Apple was just A Core.

You need the visionary to start the fire. You need disciples to keep it going. Facebook was one man's good idea. Zuck stole that idea and made it a successful company. If he leaves, it depends on what kind of people he's trained up on how it performs from here on out.


You have no idea what you're talking about. Apple's history is written in its product line and 1993 was a mess.

Color performa lol
Quadra 840av was a beast though
 
2012-08-20 11:03:50 PM
Harry_Seldon: jonny_q: Has Zuckerburg been pulling all the strings? Serious question... I wasn't sure if had a majority share or not or how much real control he's had lately.

Also, I don't think he had a lot of liquid assets

Zuckerberg has majority voting power. He is in absolute control of FB. Basically, butt hurt investors can pound sand right now.

He sold $1 billion in stock to diversify portfolio. He is loaded with cash. Regardless of FB holdings, he is a billionaire.


Wallstreet doesn't much like public companies that are pretty much still private. Very few public companies are majority owned, and thus insulated from investors, by their creators. As said, Wallstreet and some major institutional investors that know they're leaving money on the table because Mark will do what Mark wants, are pissed. And there's nothing they can do about it but throw out FUBAR into the media to "punish him". '

Zuckerberg committed cardinal sin #1 on Wallstreet. He didn't rape his company for maximum profit in minimum time.
 
2012-08-20 11:12:28 PM

mccallcl: You have no idea what you're talking about.


No, I have no idea what YOU'RE talking about because I don't care about Apple's 1993 product line.

I was way more interested in the shiat under my fingernails than in googling any of those products. I don't doubt they weren't good, but just listing a bunch of products from nearly 20 years ago doesn't mean anything to most sane people.
 
2012-08-20 11:20:38 PM

SacriliciousBeerSwiller: Steve Jobs is dead.


I guess that's why he didn't move around too much.
 
2012-08-20 11:37:07 PM

Shadowknight: I don't know why he went public in the first place. I mean, I know WHY he went public (to make ass tons of money). But had to have Ben making a decent bundle for himself and small circle of investors via ad revenue and game partnerships with the likes of Zynga and their ilk.

Did he just want THAT much more? I'll admit, I'm pretty ignorant in the ways of business. Like, completely. But I know if I was making as much money as he was, I'd be fairly loath to turn my baby over to a bunch of people that would just as soon sell it off for parts and leave me for dead to make a quarterly profit.


He didn't turn it over to anyone. FB control is set up so that Zuckerberg could launch it into the sun and the other shareholders would be powerless to stop him. They can call for his ouster or stepping aside all they want but if Zuckerberg wants to stay, he stays. People were insane to buy the stock under those conditions.
 
2012-08-21 12:01:53 AM
I understand people are upset about the stock price, but it was WAY overvalued to begin with...and there were too many questions on how Facebook would make money off of their huge user base. It will take time to sort this out.

The kid has done pretty well not really caring about money (despite the fact he's a billionaire, he really doesn't live like it...he's still a geek), let him run it. At this point I don't think it will turn into Friendster or MySpace.

I'm sure some of the original angel investors will pipe in with advice. Let the board do their job, let Zuck do his job, and let Facebook figure out how to make money.

/didn't purchase any stock
//would have shorted it...tech stocks tend to be way overvalued.
///will probably rebound in a year or two
 
2012-08-21 12:34:42 AM

Nem Wan: Newton Message Pad (OMP)


Nem Wan: Macintosh TV


These eventually came back, but, you know, in a realistic fashion.

And I'm not an Apple apologist - 1993 was agreeably the worst farking year for the company. They put out a great deal of shiat trying to compete with Windows for Workgroups without actually making a product that could compete,

I'm just going to forget the whole "clone" years which Apple approved before Jobs came back. But that was after 1993. When Jobs came back in 1997, that's when things turned around.

Job's biggest contribution, although the entertainment and the techies don't want to admit it, was building a store around the digital distribution of music and managing the DRM so it was unobtrusive at the time. He coupled that with a great design for a portable music player.

Apple is going to try it again with video, but the competition is more fierce (people have TV, cable, FIOS, Satellite, NetFlix) and the market isn't as panicked as it was when the iPod hit. The big thing that made iTunes a success was that it was convenient for people licensing music AND that it was convenient for people consuming it. The music industry needed a lifeline, and they threw it to Apple. Apple can make a great video delivery device with Apple TV, but the back end convenience for people selling TV isn't there yet. It may never be. Hulu has dropped shows, Netflix is getting boxed out, and every "box" station in America is delivering on-demand. Apple is now competing against that.

They may still come up with some magic formula, but it's not going to be nearly as easy as breaking into the music marketplace.
 
2012-08-21 01:31:28 AM

doglover: mccallcl: You have no idea what you're talking about.

No, I have no idea what YOU'RE talking about because I don't care about Apple's 1993 product line.

I was way more interested in the shiat under my fingernails than in googling any of those products. I don't doubt they weren't good, but just listing a bunch of products from nearly 20 years ago doesn't mean anything to most sane people.


You're sensing part of the point I intended, which was that Apple started putting out just too many products. You don't want to look those up. Neither did customers (and they didn't have Google).
 
2012-08-21 02:46:30 AM

Shadowknight: I don't know why he went public in the first place. I mean, I know WHY he went public (to make ass tons of money). But had to have Ben making a decent bundle for himself and small circle of investors via ad revenue and game partnerships with the likes of Zynga and their ilk.

Did he just want THAT much more? I'll admit, I'm pretty ignorant in the ways of business. Like, completely. But I know if I was making as much money as he was, I'd be fairly loath to turn my baby over to a bunch of people that would just as soon sell it off for parts and leave me for dead to make a quarterly profit.


He went public because the company was overvalued and it was time to launch it at a silly high price to find the morons willing to pay that price.

The dropping stock price is not a MISTAKE, im pretty sure it was planned. (it was never WORTH that much money)
 
2012-08-21 04:15:14 AM

I sound fat: Shadowknight: I don't know why he went public in the first place. I mean, I know WHY he went public (to make ass tons of money). But had to have Ben making a decent bundle for himself and small circle of investors via ad revenue and game partnerships with the likes of Zynga and their ilk.

Did he just want THAT much more? I'll admit, I'm pretty ignorant in the ways of business. Like, completely. But I know if I was making as much money as he was, I'd be fairly loath to turn my baby over to a bunch of people that would just as soon sell it off for parts and leave me for dead to make a quarterly profit.

He went public because the company was overvalued and it was time to launch it at a silly high price to find the morons willing to pay that price.

The dropping stock price is not a MISTAKE, im pretty sure it was planned. (it was never WORTH that much money)


Facebook was forced into going public. I believe the SEC limits the number of private shareholders to 500. Once that number is exceeded, the SEC requires a company to go public. FB share were being traded at a high value on the privately. The IPO was priced to maximize the amount of capital raised returning to FB coffers, not to provide a quick turnaround for IPO purchasers. I think it was fairly clear that FB was being offered at the very high end of it's value, and would not provide the typical IPO pop. This pissed off initial investors who expected a quick buck, and not have to hold the company long to see a return on investment.

It is not like the IPO money disappeared. FB is now well capitalized, and the value of that investment will be determined by their business plan. The company is not burning money, and it is profitable, although it is trading at an extremely high P/E even at the current price (69)
 
2012-08-21 07:56:36 AM

Nem Wan: Steve Jobs was forced out and "Apple quickly went into the crapper for a decade", says TFA.

That's a bit revisionist. Jobs left in 1985 but Apple put out very strong products (Mac SE series, Mac II series, PowerBook 100 series) for the rest of the 80s and early 90s. If you have to pick a year when things started to go off the rails it would be 1993. You can see it in the list of new products each year.

1991
Macintosh Classic II
Macintosh Quadra 700
Macintosh Quadra 900
Performa 200
PowerBook 100
PowerBook 140
PowerBook 170
/great

1992
Macintosh LC II
Macintosh Quadra 950
PowerBook 145
Performa 600/600CD
Macintosh IIvi
Macintosh IIvx
PowerBook 160
PowerBook 180
PowerBook Duo 210
PowerBook Duo 230
PowerBook Duo 270c
PowerBook DuoDock
/okay, not sure about some of those

1993
Macintosh Centris 610
Macintosh Centris 650
Macintosh Color Classic
Macintosh LC III
Macintosh Quadra 800
Performa 250
PowerBook 165c
Workgroup Server 80
Workgroup Server 95
Performa 450
Macintosh LC 520
PowerBook 180c
Macintosh Quadra 660av
Macintosh Quadra 840av
PowerBook 145B
Workgroup Server 60
Newton Message Pad (OMP)
PowerBook 165
Performa 400
Performa 405
Performa 410
Performa 430
Macintosh Centris 660av
Macintosh Color Classic II
Macintosh LC 475
Macintosh LC III+
Macintosh Quadra 605
Macintosh Quadra 610
Macintosh Quadra 650
Macintosh TV
Performa 275
Performa 460
Performa 466
Performa 467
Performa 475
Performa 476
PowerBook Duo 250
/dafuq?!


And who was buying all these 'great' machines? NOBODY

/Steve Jobs was forced out and Apple quickly went into the crapper for a decade +
 
2012-08-21 08:40:31 AM

doglover: No, I have no idea what YOU'RE talking about because I don't care about Apple's 1993 product line.


That's why when you say things like "The moral of the story is that Apple isn't a technology company, they're a fashion brand that makes computers. ", you don't know what you're talking about and should be ignored.
 
2012-08-21 08:52:33 AM
Why does anyone care about facebooks stock price? any real investors avoided that mess and people that jumped in and got raped deserve it for not using common sense...
 
2012-08-21 10:26:31 AM

Icetech3: Why does anyone care about facebooks stock price? any real investors avoided that mess and people that jumped in and got raped deserve it for not using common sense...


Yes, everyone should just acknowledge that Wall Street is corrupt as hell and not worry about it.

/yes, most anyone who's been around the block once or twice stayed the hell away
//no, it doesn't make it ok
 
2012-08-21 11:15:18 AM
How do you quantify people jerking off on the internet?
 
2012-08-21 11:58:49 AM
SacriliciousBeerSwiller: Icetech3: Why does anyone care about facebooks stock price? any real investors avoided that mess and people that jumped in and got raped deserve it for not using common sense...

Yes, everyone should just acknowledge that Wall Street is corrupt as hell and not worry about it.

/yes, most anyone who's been around the block once or twice stayed the hell away
//no, it doesn't make it ok


Actually, I'm not understanding what wasn't ok? A lot of small time idiots ate up the CNBC 24/7 infomercials and threw gambling money into the circle, and promptly lost it. Even with loud voices out there practically screaming to not believe the hype, and to look at the fundamentals.

If you're stupid enough to be playing with non-excess money in the market on a individual level, you deserve to get burned. 70% of trading is done by automation. Most of the rest is done by large corporate institutional investors. Everyone else is just a smuck seeing how long they can hold onto their money.

There's a reason ETrade and the like is called "dumb money" in the industry. Every idiot with a iPad thinks he's a quantitative analyst with a doctorate degree in mathematics and algorithms. A fool and his money after all...
 
2012-08-21 03:46:27 PM

urban.derelict: Nem Wan: Steve Jobs was forced out and "Apple quickly went into the crapper for a decade", says TFA.

That's a bit revisionist. Jobs left in 1985 but Apple put out very strong products (Mac SE series, Mac II series, PowerBook 100 series) for the rest of the 80s and early 90s. If you have to pick a year when things started to go off the rails it would be 1993. You can see it in the list of new products each year.

1991
Macintosh Classic II
Macintosh Quadra 700
Macintosh Quadra 900
Performa 200
PowerBook 100
PowerBook 140
PowerBook 170
/great

1992
Macintosh LC II
Macintosh Quadra 950
PowerBook 145
Performa 600/600CD
Macintosh IIvi
Macintosh IIvx
PowerBook 160
PowerBook 180
PowerBook Duo 210
PowerBook Duo 230
PowerBook Duo 270c
PowerBook DuoDock
/okay, not sure about some of those

1993
Macintosh Centris 610
Macintosh Centris 650
Macintosh Color Classic
Macintosh LC III
Macintosh Quadra 800
Performa 250
PowerBook 165c
Workgroup Server 80
Workgroup Server 95
Performa 450
Macintosh LC 520
PowerBook 180c
Macintosh Quadra 660av
Macintosh Quadra 840av
PowerBook 145B
Workgroup Server 60
Newton Message Pad (OMP)
PowerBook 165
Performa 400
Performa 405
Performa 410
Performa 430
Macintosh Centris 660av
Macintosh Color Classic II
Macintosh LC 475
Macintosh LC III+
Macintosh Quadra 605
Macintosh Quadra 610
Macintosh Quadra 650
Macintosh TV
Performa 275
Performa 460
Performa 466
Performa 467
Performa 475
Performa 476
PowerBook Duo 250
/dafuq?!

And who was buying all these 'great' machines? NOBODY

/Steve Jobs was forced out and Apple quickly went into the crapper for a decade +


Don't really have a dog in this fight (no opinion) but a quick google search gives a pretty good detail for both sides of the argument to use.

Link
 
2012-08-21 08:14:50 PM

doglover: mccallcl: You have no idea what you're talking about.

No, I have no idea what YOU'RE talking about because I don't care about Apple's 1993 product line.

I was way more interested in the shiat under my fingernails than in googling any of those products. I don't doubt they weren't good, but just listing a bunch of products from nearly 20 years ago doesn't mean anything to most sane people.


Right but what does it mean to you?
 
2012-08-21 11:15:48 PM
Nem Wan: You need to check the SPECS for those machines. Apple was putting out machines that were the same machine except had, say, 2MB RAM, 2.5MB RAM and 4MB RAM. 3 different SKUs to support? And they did this up and down the line. They had 100 different products, 10% difference between the lot of them.

Jobs came in and slashed them down to the base models and turned the place around.

Tony
 
Displayed 48 of 48 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report