Apple's Jobs a hypnotizer? More like a hypocrite.

Apple's Jobs a hypnotizer? More like a hypocrite.

Summary: So, the ink is long dry and the newspaper holding the headline that Cisco and Apple found some common ground over the iPhone trademark is already in the recycling bin. Today however, ComputerWorld has an analysis saying that Cisco got the short end of the stick.


So, the ink is long dry and the newspaper holding the headline that Cisco and Apple found some common ground over the iPhone trademark is already in the recycling bin. Today however, ComputerWorld has an analysis saying that Cisco got the short end of the stick.

...the arrangement's details remain confidential....

..."The rule in Silicon Valley is that if Apple leaves the table smiling, the other guy got screwed," said Rob Enderle, an independent analyst and principal of the Enderle Group. "And Apple left the table smiling on this one."

Roger Kay, of Endpoint Technologies Associates, agreed. "It certainly looks like Cisco gave away the store."...

..."Apple clearly got the better deal," Kay said. "Steve's [Jobs] ability to hypnotize people is legendary. He's like the Rasputin of the computer industry."

Jobs a hypnotizer? I wouldn't be so sure about Cisco getting the short end of the stick. Cisco didn't get to be the titan that it is without playing some shrewd hardball itself. Also, I'm a believer in hypnotism. Just not by Steve Jobs. Let's not forget the small bit of hypocrisy exhibited by our modern day Mr. Rasputin. On the one hand, his company will stop at nothing to protect it's own trademarks by threatening small mom and pop businesses for their unrelated usage of the term "pod" which isn't even an Apple trademark. On the other, when it's convenient to do so (despite the owners' wishes), the company has no compuction about trampling the trademark rights of others. Cisco is one case in point (now settled). Apple Corps. Ltd. the other. Jobs is doing wonders for Apple's shareholders. But is it any way to do business?

Topic: Cisco

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.


Log in or register to join the discussion
  • What's the deal?

    I've often wondered what this fascination is with Apple.

    As far as platforms go it is the most closed. Jobs & co. control the hardware and the software. At least Windows users can build and customize the hardware they use.

    Of course those of us in the FOSS world can build and customize our hardware AND our software.

    Apple == closed
    Tim Patterson
    • Unrelated

      In other news HP seems pleasantly surprised to realize $25 million in sales directly related to their Debian GNU/Linux support.

      <a href="">HP & Debian</a>
      Tim Patterson
    • The deal is,

      Apple is not Microsoft. Apple makes the most closed system of all, but as long as it isn't Microsoft, it's accepted.

      Just imagine how much protest there'd be if Microsoft decided to start making hardware as well as software.

      Carl Rapson
      • Rational?

        So being that Apple is the most closed (anti-freedom) consumer system, why are they treated like neatest thing since sliced bread? Is all of this based on merit or is it a result of perpetual "buzz"?

        It's not just their boxes. It's iTunes as well. People buy songs from iTunes service and pay nearly CD price for the individual songs which are DRM'd with fairplay locking into an iTunes client on their boxes. This seems insane to me. Proof that often times what is perceived as "cool" can also be sheer stupidity.
        Tim Patterson
        • Tell the RIAA

          To Stuff it then.

          In case you're wondering, why the RIAA, I'm willing to spell it out for you.

          1) Apple Removes FairPlay, hell they even offer a free Utility online to get rid of it.

          2) The RIAA pulls all of their Content.

          3) RIP iTunes Store.

    • The Real Deal is

      Apple tried to copy Microsoft once, it didn't turn out well due to Microsoft screwing over OEMs that didn't use their OS exclusively (they would end up paying for MS-DOS/Windows even if they shipped a different OS) so that didn't turn out well.

      Next when Apple aquired NeXTstep, they tried to out Java Java with Yellow Box, it didn't turn out well so they renamed it Cocoa and rebuilt OpenStep to be Mac OS X.

      Apple is now a hardware company, they don't care about Software so much, Mac OS X is really just there to sweeten the deal, and because pretty much everyone there hates Windows. Seeing as how Linux just rips off other Operating Systems and has a very inconsistent Ecosystem, that's not a very good option either.

      Quit griping about Apple not trying to Out Microsoft Microsoft. They were never a software company and they make all of their money on Hardware.

    • History lesson

      This attention on Apple is actually fairly recent. For many years, Apple was
      ignored by the press, except for the occasional "Apple is doomed" story.

      It's pretty much been since the iMac came out that Apple has been getting more
      press attention, and it's because Apple makes cool stuff. OS X is cool. Apple
      hardware is cool. The iPod is cool. The iPhone looks like it will be cool.

      Compared to that is the PC industry where the most exciting thing that happens is
      a new beige box from Dell with a faster CPU, and a new operating system 5 years
      late from Microsoft that looks like a warmed over OS X.
  • You're making an assumption

    You're assuming that Apple was trampling a trademark solely owned by Cisco.
    Wasn't that the point - that Cisco maybe didn't solely own it? Also you don't
    think that Apple's previous use of "iAPPLEPRODUCT" means anything. The whole
    Cisco use of "iPhone", I think was questionable.
    Prime Detailer
    • Questionable?

      Wether you think it's questionable or not is irrelevant.

      Does/did Cisco own the "iPhone" trademark or not? That's all that really matters.
      Tim Patterson
      • That is the question

        And if you look at the actual history of the name in Cisco, complete with the
        renaming of a product it brought out a year earlier as "iPhone," with a picture sent to
        the trademark people with a pasted-on label, it's not all as clear as that.

        The other question is, who wanted the name more?

        Cisco is huge, true, but it's not really a consumer brand. It's a business brand. How
        many homes have Cisco in them?
        • Don't forget

          /Cisco is huge, true, but it's not really a consumer brand. It's a business brand. How many homes have Cisco in them?/

          Any home with Linksys products.
    • No that's not it

      Apple had the Trademark outside of the states. Cisco had it in the states. And just like how 2+2=4, Apple used that to bargain with Cisco and now both can use it anywhere (except Canada, I heard Apple is facing another iPhone trademark battle there, but I've been ignoring these trademark battles for the most part knowing full well that Apple would end up using it in the end no matter what) so that's that.

  • Use it or loose it

    Cisco, do you have a product? NO
    Cisco, are you planning a product, NO.
    Sorry Cisco you can not hold a trademark hostage.
    • Corrected Version!

      Cisco, do you have a product? YES
      Cisco, are you planning a product, NO I already have one.
      Sorry Apple you have to come to terms with Cisco or give up the name!

      Schools out!
      • Thats not the case here Shady .

        If anything doing this , letting Apple use the iPhone name will do Cisco good in the long run . Hey I never knew Cisco had an iPhone already , were it not for all this BUZZ . Now everyone knows about Cisco's iPhone , and more will find out about it in the near future . It's good for both companies .
      • Schools Out

        And they have come to an agreement.

  • Why not both?

    It's possible to be both hypnotic and a hypocrite.
    tic swayback
  • Not only a hypocrit

    Jobs is pure evil, as is anyone who supports his monopolistic empire.
    • I'm sure you mean Gates

      At any rate, I kind of wish I looked around before signing up. I just realized how much this site favors Microsoft.

    • LOL...!!!!

      Pleeeeaaaassssseeee..... That's the funniest damn thing I've read yet Non-Zealot!
      You do make people laugh, take comfort in that, at least.