apple
Report a problem

Steve Wozniak: Steve Jobs sounds "healthy, energetic"

Kevin.   on 31 May 2009 - 20:50 · 25 comments & 4143 views

Advertisement (Why?)
Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak said Steve Jobs sounds "healthy, energetic" a month before he is expected to return to the company, reports The Wall Street Journal.

"Mr. Jobs doesn't sound like he's sick, nor did he seem to be in a health crisis.", he said. Back in January, Steve Jobs admitted poor health. and took a medical leave of absence. He was also too weak to attend a city council meeting.

Steve Jobs health has been the subject of widespread speculation. It's still unknown if he'll attend the 2009 WWDC, and while there are questions on whether Jobs will have all of his previous responsibilities when he returns in June, reports say that he is still involved in key aspects of running the company.

This is good news regarding Steve Jobs health. While we don't know whether he'll make an appearance at the 2009 WWDC or not, we'll be sure to give you an update when we hear more information.

Post a comment · Send to friend Comments · There are 25 additional comments
#1 Tech Star on 01 Jun 2009 - 02:32
Sounds good. Come announce the next iPhone.
(2 replies) #2 excalpius on 01 Jun 2009 - 03:00
"Sounds" good is a clear indicator Steve is anything but. If he was actually doing better, he'd LOOK better.
#2.1 agreenbhm on 01 Jun 2009 - 13:51
excalpius said,
"Sounds" good is a clear indicator Steve is anything but. If he was actually doing better, he'd LOOK better.


Maybe he just spoke to him on the phone?
#2.2 excalpius on 02 Jun 2009 - 20:39
agreenbhm said,
Maybe he just spoke to him on the phone?


Well, of course. But the point is that this is WOZ...he should have access.
#3 Sean2989 on 01 Jun 2009 - 03:21
Damn I was hoping they were going to announce the smaller and lightest CEO in the market
(6 replies) #4 Ez8 on 01 Jun 2009 - 03:28
Maybe if he'd start eating meat his recovery would be immediate.

Most Vegetaries aren't health tbh despite their claims.
#4.1 Joshie on 01 Jun 2009 - 03:41
Hey now, just because it's perfectly natural and scientifically sound to claim that humans are omnivorous and designed to ingest meat doesn't mean nature didn't intend for us to evolve beyond meat to depend entirely on a bean that has to be cooked extensively to the point of a fundamental chemical change in order for its protein to be absorbed by our bodies. Because cooking is totally natural.

/snark
#4.2 Ez8 on 01 Jun 2009 - 03:49
Joshie said,
Hey now, just because it's perfectly natural and scientifically sound to claim that humans are omnivorous and designed to ingest meat doesn't mean nature didn't intend for us to evolve beyond meat to depend entirely on a bean that has to be cooked extensively to the point of a fundamental chemical change in order for its protein to be absorbed by our bodies. Because cooking is totally natural.
While you make a sound statement, there's nothing wrong w/ meat. It's all about intake. I myself enjoy a good salad most of the time rather than eating meat.
/snark

But Steve is Steve he won't change even if it kills him.

#4.3 liamwolf on 01 Jun 2009 - 03:55
Ez8 said,
But Steve is Steve he won't change even if it kills him.


Yes, as we can currently see it doing.
#4.4 Beastage on 01 Jun 2009 - 09:42
Joshie said,
Hey now, just because it's perfectly natural and scientifically sound to claim that humans are omnivorous and designed to ingest meat doesn't mean nature didn't intend for us to evolve beyond meat to depend entirely on a bean that has to be cooked extensively to the point of a fundamental chemical change in order for its protein to be absorbed by our bodies. Because cooking is totally natural.

/snark


That is possible but there were some studies indicated that much depends on your genealogy ... some people have ancestry that was based on mostly vegetarian diet and others have ancestry that was based on mostly carnivore diet, etc.

So there are people that red and white meat is part of their daily diet and they live to 80-90 and some people try to live healthy and avoid meat and end up dead by 50.

Last edited by Beastage on 01 Jun 2009 - 09:48
#4.5 dimithrak on 01 Jun 2009 - 10:16
Ez8 said,
Maybe if he'd start eating meat his recovery would be immediate.

Most Vegetaries aren't health tbh despite their claims.


Pancreatic cancer is something that cannot be stopped whether you be a vegetarian or a meat eater. It is also something that a very few people recover from. Honestly, no one has really recovered from pancreatic cancer. Its very hard as that is the gland in your body that controls most of the levels of your bodies acidity and adrenaline if I my memory serves me right. And thats prity hard to live without, hence Steve Jobs loosing all that weight and maybe some other stuff they don't talk about.

So, yeah he may be alot better with added medications, but until someone really sees him back, you'd never know. I have a feeling he might appear to announce the new iPhone, but at the same time, I also think this could be Steve's last Keynote for apple.
#4.6 C_Guy on 01 Jun 2009 - 14:57
Most Vegetaries aren't health tbh despite their claims.

Neowin has forums for pointless debates started over completely ignorant statements. I don't think Front Page news is it.
(4 replies) #5 VIVIsectVI on 01 Jun 2009 - 03:43
As opposed to him saying what, exactly? "Yeah, Steve looks on the verge of death, and we're placing bets on when he'll kick off, now I'll go watch my stocks plummet...".
#5.1 Sam Symons on 01 Jun 2009 - 03:54
VIVIsectVI said,
As opposed to him saying what, exactly? "Yeah, Steve looks on the verge of death, and we're placing bets on when he'll kick off, now I'll go watch my stocks plummet...".

As opposed to him just saying nothing
#5.2 VIVIsectVI on 01 Jun 2009 - 04:00
Sam Symons said,
As opposed to him just saying nothing


Doesn't mention; did he volunteer the information, or was he asked? Either way, had he said nothing, or spoken of Jobs being ill, there would be a panic in the flock...again.
#5.3 Beastage on 01 Jun 2009 - 09:46
If it is the WSJ I suppose he was asked about Jobs health, no comment would have been just as bad.
#5.4 VIVIsectVI on 01 Jun 2009 - 13:56
Yeah, that's what I'm guessing too. Not saying Jobs is still sick, or that I want to sound all doom-'n-gloom, but I think anything anyone says about his health should be taken with a grain of salt, considering what the ramifications would be.
(1 reply) #6 WhoTheF on 01 Jun 2009 - 03:49
Regardless of the product line announcements, if Jobs shows up on the stage for the WWDC 09, I'd expect stock prices to rise!
#6.1 C_Guy on 01 Jun 2009 - 14:53
Yes it is unfortunate that Apple's "loyal" fans have no faith in the company without Jobs.
#7 Roadrunna on 01 Jun 2009 - 08:29
Just sounds good and healthy huh?

Why do I have a vision of a talking head in a jar? </Futurama_Ref>
#8 Philip Hristov on 01 Jun 2009 - 14:01
Now now, we all know this is not true.
(1 reply) #9 C_Guy on 01 Jun 2009 - 15:00
The saddest part of the whole Jobs health issue, as we can see even in this thread, is people want him to be healthy so he can perform his keynotes or announce shiny new Apple crap or get the stock price up.

Pretty sad how few people want to see a recovery for the sake of him being healthy.
#9.1 excalpius on 02 Jun 2009 - 20:43
He's lived by the sword...
(1 reply) #10 Vakerorokero on 02 Jun 2009 - 01:22
When you have money like he has, almost nothing can kill you, look at all the celebrities and politicians that have some really hard sicknesses, and regular people that die from that same problem.

Money can't buy you health, but it can put an army of doctors to take care of you.
#10.1 excalpius on 02 Jun 2009 - 20:43
True enough. But Death is the ultimate equalizer and no amount of fame or money in the world can buy you a new pancreas.

Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!

Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.

Advertisement (Why?)