Oskar's Weblog

共花了不到七千日元．．．

早在小學時習慣了每天都閱讀報章，不是娛樂，體育，而是頭版。看到太多時事的新聞，不想寫還要寫，寫了令自己的心理平衡一下吧。

一段影片，一位小孩和十九名路人，那活生生上演了現實的中國，這事沒有單一的主角，那正是今天中國社會的寫照。有社論寫到 ：

一個兩歲的女孩路上被車撞倒，假如有一個人從她身邊路過不管不問，可以有很多解釋。那個人或許是沒看見，那個人或許是特別膽小，那個人或許是個壞人，那個人或許是個精神病，等等等等。假如有兩個人從她身邊走過不管不問，可能的合理解釋就會大幅度減少。假如三個人從這樣可憐的女孩身邊走過不管不問，除了用“極端不幸運”之外，已經難以找到別的解釋。

然而，那是十八個路人經過，最後第一個上前關心的，居然是中國社會上最不起眼的撿破爛的女子，中國人今天的富有只是在表面，可悲的內裏比改革開放前更加貧窮。今天午飯，我跟別人和老爸討論那些問題，到底中國出了什麼毛病？為何中國的今天是那樣的？更加的香港不能獨善其身，若中國內地不去改變，那香港早晚也會這樣吧。跟別人討論後得出一些觀點，那些觀點不謀而合地問題只出在一個出發點，中國的共產黨。還記得在中學英文堂時讀的動物農莊的一書，書中用一個農莊的豬隱喻講述馬克思主義，蘇聯的斯大林和烏托邦主義等等。烏托邦主義是過分的理想化主義，在人性的弱點下跟本行不了，然而馬克思主義就有著烏托邦的那元素，所以理論是好，但長遠是行不了，而馬克思的主義就做就了前蘇聯的列寧，斯大林和各地的共產黨。在中國的近代史中，國民黨敗走台灣，共產黨得中華等，做就了今天中國國內的人性崩潰，唯物主義的局面。可能那就是前中共元老所說的“富有中國特色的社會主義”。

可能很多人不知道，中國的掌權者一向奉行無神論，無宗教的社會，一本的毛語錄就可以連中國的儒家思想，長久的倫理學都拋諸腦後；一句不管黑貓白貓，捉到老鼠就是好貓，就做就了今天的中國人不管對與錯，能找到金錢就是對的法則。有人會問為何說中國無宗教社會？誰說中國不可以信教？那我會反問有沒有人可以指出中國國教是那一門？就連早年跟隨孔子學說的也會被批鬥，王明道的勞改，對藏傳佛教的干擾等等都說明中國社會一件事，人民可以信，，不過要分層次，不可太過投入，而我聽過早年讀聖經前要讀毛語錄，現在就不得而知，只知道外國傳道人在中國傳教常受到監控。那跟今天的人性崩潰有什麼關聯？

想大家一定看過北美五六十年代，和香港六七十年代做主題的電影或電視劇，那年代都是混亂的，貪婪的，但他們和香港怎樣改變過來？以香港為例，當時是被英國管治，而反貪的風氣改變是有一個能強政厲治的姬達爵士去執行，而他因為自幼就受英式教育也明白何為對與不對，深入點說當時的英式教育也會將宗教上的倫理道德觀放入教材，不要看小它的作用，如果把正確倫理道德觀放入小孩的觀念上，那就是明日他成人結果的種子，減少了小孩變成人性崩潰的局面。因為有那些元素，當年香港反貪污的工作可以成功，此外歐美社會的以教立國，也令它們在六七十年代的混亂，貪婪改正過來，因為拿起一本聖經就分出那是對那是錯；所以有宗教的社會是有幫助；若真的沒有宗教的話，有代表性的人物也很重要，就美國為例，除了宗教令震盪人心的人物也很重要，從林肯到馬丁路德金，由思想家到執行者，做就了今天的美國。可能有人說他們都是那麼的冷血，如路易斯安那在風暴後商家發災難財等，但別忘記有人發災難財，有更加多的人在守望相助。

所以外在的富有不是長久，然而內在的富有才是永恆。我常跟別人說金錢買到很多東西，但人的腦袋，創意，和道德觀是買不到的，而那是人最貴重的財產吧。

It was in my reading folder long long time ago, this article is from Charles Arthur a technology editor of the Guardian in Britain. This article is describe about some detail of how Steve Jobs had be thinking, and work.

He’s chief executive of two of the most powerful technology brands in the world: Apple and Pixar. But what motivates Steve Jobs? And how does he choose a new washing machine? Charles Arthur investigates

Published: 29 October 2005

Imagine the scenario: a billionaire walks into a mobile phone shop. The sales assistant says, “Can I help you?” but gets the reply “Just looking, thank you.” The man tries a few phones, lifting his glasses to look at the detail of the display. He presses a couple of buttons. He shakes his head. He could buy any phone in the shop; in fact he could buy the shop, or even buy the chain. But he doesn’t. He walks out, empty-handed.

It sounds like an urban myth but it could be a day in the life of Steve Jobs, who is chief executive of two technology companies that are admired both inside and outside their respective industries: Apple (which makes the iPod and a range of computers) and Pixar (which made the films Toy Story and The Incredibles). Apple made him a multi-millionaire, Pixar made him a billionaire, and the two mean that at the age of 50 he has cemented a unique position as a force in computing, consumer electronics (through the iPod), the music business (the iPod again) and Hollywood.

And despite all that, he still can’t choose a mobile phone. (How nice to find you have something in common with such people.) His problem, he says, is that he can’t find things that satisfy him. “I end up not buying a lot of things,” he says, carefully, when I ask how he chooses what to buy from the myriad of gadgets and technologies in the shops. “Because I find them ridiculous.”

I’m in an anonymous underground room in Paris with Jobs and a large group of journalists, in a floor below a conference centre where people are flocking to a showcase of Apple products and services, a cacophony of promotional videos and software demonstrations with amplified voice accompaniment by eager geeks. But here, it’s quiet. Jobs is dressed in his trademark black turtleneck sweater and blue jeans, and trainers. The only gadgetry here is an iPod nano, the credit card-sized player he has just launched.

Despite his rock-star approach to unveiling new gizmos, Jobs has no great love of the media, which has from time to time exposed details about his private life that he would rather keep to himself. Thus he is a prickly interviewee, disliking personal questions, always aiming to turn the conversation back to his companies and their output. Though outwardly friendly, with an easy smile, in time he betrays his impatience through his hands and shoulders.

Suggest something he disagrees with – such as that there might be demand for an FM tuner in the iPod – and he’ll respond with the unprovable “People don’t want that.” Questions he deems foolish are themselves rebuffed with a brusque question, such as “Oh yeah? Who?”

A friend who once worked at Apple suggested to me that “Steve basically thinks of the press as insects.” Certainly, he is hard to engage at a personal level. And journalists are always at a disadvantage to Jobs, which may be just how he likes it. He has the insider knowledge of which way the technological river is flowing. When I questioned him, Apple had not launched its video-enabled iPod, nor begun selling videos from its online music store. But to me it seemed obvious that would happen, and soon. Isn’t it a logical next step, I asked?

“Whether people will buy a device just to watch video – it’s not clear,” Jobs replied easily. “So far the answer’s been no, because there are several devices out which play video and none of them has been successful yet. So, um – so far, nobody’s figured out the right formula.”

What’s missing from the other devices already on sale, then?

“Well, uh, if we knew then I probably shouldn’t talk about it,” Jobs beamed. Three weeks later, he did talk about it, holding aloft the video iPod he had known then was ready: “Never before has it been done where you can buy hit, network, prime-time shows online the day after they air on TV and watch them on your computer and iPod.” Whether it’s the right formula remains to be seen, of course.

So, looking forward, what does he see? For example, will TVs and computers merge? “Our personal belief is that while there’s an opportunity to apply software to the living room, the merging of the computer and the TV isn’t going to happen. They’re really different things. So yes, you want to share some information [between the two], but people who are planning to put computers into the living room, like they are today, I’m not sure they’re going to have a big success.” That’s a no, then.

He is disparaging about approaching development backwards. Home networking wirelessly whizzing music and video around the house? “I think in the future you’ll see some of that, but you’ve got to be sure it’s not a technology in search of a problem.” Wireless headphones for your iPod? “It means you not only have to recharge the iPod, you have to recharge the headphones, and people don’t want to do that – so again, I think it’s like so much f you see: a technology in search of a problem.”

But when he’s got a problem that needs some technology to solve it, he can be as painstaking as he is about his computer company’s output. He once described how he and his family chose a new washing machine. Not for them a cursory study of the spin speed and price tag; instead they discussed European versus American design, relative water use, detergent demands, everything. When I remind him of this, he smiles slowly, and says, “Yeah, but you have to have a washing machine, right?” It’s all the other things that frustrate him. So how does he choose things? “Same as you,” he says slowly. “We’re both busy and we both don’t have a lot of time to learn how to use a washing machine or to use a phone – you get one of the phones now and you’re never going to learn more than 5 per cent of the features.” He’s talking much faster now, accelerating in frustration. “You’re never going to use more than 5 per cent, and, uh, it’s very complicated. So you end up using just 5 per cent. It’s insane: we all have busy lives, we have jobs and we have interests and some of us have children, everyone’s lives are just getting busier, not less busy, in this busy society. You just don’t have time to learn this stuff, and everything’s getting more complicated.”

That frustration is characteristic of the man. Jobs, 50 last February, is notoriously finicky about the tiniest details of the products that Apple produces. (He gets less involved in Pixar’s output.) The iPod’s success largely derives from its ease of use, which derives from his insistence, when shown prototypes, that one should be able to pick any piece of music within three button presses from turning it on.

It’s remarkable that Jobs is still about. By rights, he should have disappeared decades ago, after being kicked out of Apple in 1985 and starting up another computer company that couldn’t make a profit, and buying an animation company that almost bled him dry (and which he tried to sell several times).

Yet NeXT Computer was bought by Apple, throwing him a lifeline which let him take charge again of his creation. And Pixar Animation, which Jobs co-founded in 1986, came up trumps with the first totally computer-generated feature film, Toy Story, giving him leverage over the all-powerful Disney and making him a billionaire in its stock-market floatation.

Still, Apple was just chugging along before the iPod relaunched it in October 2001. The ubiquitous small white machines now generate just under half of its $14bn revenues, and are still growing.

It sounds easy enough. But Jobs has rarely been offered, and rarely taken, the simple path. The son of a college student and a political science professor, he was adopted by a family led by a machinist at a laser manufacturer. Although his birth mother had made it a condition of his adoption that his new parents get him to attend university, he dropped out of Reed College in Portland, Oregon, after just six months. But then he became a “drop-in” back at Reed, attending only the courses, such as calligraphy, that interested him, while scratching an existence earning a few cents recycling cans and eating for free each week at the local Hare Krishna temple.

He got a job with the games company Atari, then left to travel in India. On his return, he worked for Hewlett-Packard before setting up Apple Computer in 1976 in the Jobs family garage with former school friend and computer hacker Steve Wozniak.

Apple grew and prospered, and so did Jobs; the Macintosh introduced the idea of “windows” and “mice” to the wider world. Microsoft adopted the idea and made it famous, continuing a long rivalry between Jobs and Bill Gates that stretches forwards and back in computing history. While Jobs obsessed over details, Microsoft steamrollered its way into companies and took over the world.

What’s peculiar is that Gates has frequently been wrong about the overall direction of technology. His 1995 book The Road Ahead is full of clunkers about how life would develop; Microsoft barely realised that the internet was coming along.

By contrast, you’d be unwise to bet against Jobs. In 1996, when NeXT Computer had already failed in its attempts to sell hardware (and so was having to concentrate on software), he gave a long interview to Wired magazine. In it he forecast that Microsoft wouldn’t find out a way to own the Web, that nobody would make money from web browsers, that the Web would be a huge hit for commerce (at a time when Amazon was barely six months old), and that the internet would revolutionise the supply of manufactured goods, by letting consumers specify fine detail of their desired product which could be relayed back to factories. Dell Computer, for example, works on precisely that basis. And Dell is by far the most profitable of the computer manufacturers. Jobs tends to be right about the direction of technology.

He has been wrong a few times, though. At NeXT, he thought people would pay a huge premium for an overdesigned cube-shaped computer (it had a laser-cut magnesium case; most manufacturers just used injection-moulded plastic). Only 50,000 were sold over eight years. At Apple, he thought people would pay a premium for a cube-shaped computer, the Cube; they didn’t. In the same year, 2000, he thought people would prefer to watch DVDs on their computers, rather than making their own music compilations by “burning” CDs. They didn’t. But he learnt from the latter mistake: Apple immediately bought in a music-playing program called SoundJam and its developer, Jeff Robbin. SoundJam became iTunes, the program that feeds the iPod, and Robbin leads its software side.

What has helped Jobs back from his errors is his ability with people. From a point of minimal leverage he has bettered both the Disney corporation and the record labels, two of the toughest (legal) negotiators on earth. Disney gave Pixar a favourable deal; the record companies licensed the iTunes Music Store, which has more than 75 per cent of the entire legal music download market.

Alan Deutschmann, a journalist who researched Jobs’s middle years for a biography called The Second Coming of Steve Jobs, believes he displays two personalities in his dealings with people: Good Steve and Bad Steve. The Good side is charming, and can make people believe almost anything; that’s the side on public view at the rock-star product launches. He’s been said to have a “reality distortion field” – by a mixture of charm and exaggeration, he can make you believe pretty much anything. But once he’s walked away, you’re sometimes left thinking “Huh?” Or as Bud Tribble, another of the early Macintosh employees, described it: “In his presence, reality is malleable. He can convince anyone of practically anything.” But, he added, “It wears off when he’s not around.” (Tribble, too, still works at Apple.)

When the Good Steve system hasn’t worked, or isn’t needed, there’s Bad Steve. He can get furiously angry, an emotion reserved for private moments with staff or those he thinks have been disloyal or useless. And his relationship with the media has its ups and downs, too. While he loves hobnobbing with celebrities, he hates being treated like one, and Apple’s relationship with the press reflects that.

“Apple manipulates several narratives to continue to make its products interesting fodder for journalists,” comments Jack Shafer, editor-at-large of the webzine Slate. “One is the never-ending story of mad genius Steve Jobs, who would be great copy even if he were only the night manager of a Domino’s pizza joint.”

He probably wouldn’t stay night manager for long, if he were. Jobs is a fiendishly good negotiator, a skill honed in the 1970s, when he charmed every supplier in Silicon Valley into providing parts for the first Apple computers. It’s this ability that makes him valuable to Pixar, where Jobs isn’t so involved in the production side (that is handled by John Lasseter). Jobs’s role was to write the cheques (which nearly bankrupted him, until the company was floated) and barter with film studios. Which he did with accomplishment: Disney gave in to Pixar, and is presently trying to woo it back to a new distribution deal – a deal that Jobs is making Disney give up all sorts of favours for, like providing content in the form of TV shows for his Apple iTunes store. The giant Disney, kowtowing to the tiny Apple? A bizarre reversal.

Viewing his life, one feels that Jobs, a Buddhist, came into some serious karma in his previous existences. Not only is he a billionaire but last year he fought off pancreatic cancer, usually a quick and efficient killer. He had a scan and was told it was a tumour that would almost certainly be fatal. He was told to go home and “get his affairs in order” – “which is doctors’ code for ‘prepare to die’. It means to try to tell your kids everything you thought you’d have the next 10 years to tell them in just a few months. It means … to say your goodbyes.”

That evening he had a biopsy: it turned out to be a rare form of pancreatic cancer that makes up just 1 per cent of cases and, crucially, is curable with surgery. Talk about your karma payoff. And yet with all that karma accumulated and dissipated, Jobs doesn’t believe that technology is going to change the world. “This stuff doesn’t change the world. It really doesn’t … Technologies can make it easier, can let us touch people we might not otherwise. But it’s a disservice to constantly put things in a radical new light – that it’s going to change everything. Things don’t have to change the world to be important.”

So then finally, what is the last piece of technology that he acquired – not made by Apple – that really delighted him? He pauses for long seconds, looks down, puts his hands on his knees, looks away. “I actually bought a bicycle recently. It’s just … wonderful.”

And how did he choose it? What sort of bike? What’s so great about it?

He holds a hand up. “That’s as far into my private life as I want to go,” he says. And with that, Steve Jobs moves on again.

The Apple story

1976 Apple Computer founded with Steve Wozniak in Jobs’s parents’ garage. Apple I computer introduced.

1977 Apple II computer launched, the first mass-market personal computer with colour graphics. (IBM’s monochrome PC was still four years away.)

1983 The Lisa computer, the forerunner to the Macintosh, launched. It uses “windows” and a “mouse”.

1984 The Apple Macintosh, the first general-purpose computer to use windows and mouse, launched.

1985 Jobs fired from Apple. He founds NeXT Computer.

1986 Jobs co-founds Pixar Animation around the remnants of George Lucas’s computer graphics division, which he buys for $10m.

1989 The NeXT Computer – an expensive black cube – introduced.

1993 NeXT ceases making computers, having sold just 50,000 in four years, and concentrates on selling its software.

1995 Pixar releases Toy Story, the first feature-length film that is completely computer-generated.

1996 Deep in financial trouble, Apple Computer, led by Gil Amelio, buys NeXT for $402m, bringing Jobs back into the fold. He insists he is not trying to take over the company.

1997 Jobs replaces Amelio as “interim chief executive”.

1997 Apple introduces its first iMac.

2001 Apple introduces the first iPod. It is a slow-burning hit. In the first year it sells about 400,000. To date more than 21 million have been sold.

2005 Jobs unveils the tiny iPod nano and a new iPod capable of playing video.

看facebook別人的update也是一種學習。不同人有不同的論點是正確的，而大多數不同的論點是值得思考，就如昨天在立法會事件一樣。不幸地有一大班港人已下定論說梁議員和黃議員“出位，幼稚“之類，但早幾日前范女士說“六四是不幸”那句倒沒有人說出一句話指她“幼稚，出位”；在我的觀點，那兩位議員一點也不過份，而在那場合他有說錯話嗎？有出言侮辱嗎？ 反而那位性曾的傢伙骨子裏的問題更大。更加的傳統傳媒報道的跟事實又差多遠呢？

首先，我會明白他和他的行為，我會反問覺得他們有問題的人，若他們不這樣問性曾的傢伙，有什麼方法去表達自己和被代表選民的意見呢？更加不要只說三道四來說那人不對， 不要只說什麼暴力之類，若你有更好的意見就不妨說出吧，說出別人錯處是容易的，但要幫別人改正是困難的。

接著是深層的思考是須要的，反覆地思考為何香港我政治和民生會變成今天的面貌，那不是單一兩個人用所謂的”議會暴力“可以做成，事實上人們不想再看到他們那樣的行為只有兩個選擇：1．香港實行中國共產黨式的高壓政治，人們像活在沒有自由空間的地方，活著的意義就是賺錢。2．真真正正進行改革，改變。改變現今香港的價值觀，找回香港自己本身的權利，不過那可要付出很大。

再說到改革，改變，它們一向不是香港，和大多香港人的思維，在很多廣告中也知一二，如有個大保險公司的廣告找個”半紅不黑“的歌手大唱”安穩“之類；君不見香港創新的公司少之又少，因為創新的公司是需要不斷的改變。因為改革，和改變開始的付出往往很大，近視的港人永遠不會進行它們。

那總會有人問為何這樣？那可能是文化問題吧，但在一大班年青人中，那就是另外一種問題。現今的年青人們有太多”活動“，太多的“網絡”，連靜止的一刻也沒有；就如我在上文寫到深層的思考是須要的，反覆地思考是有需要的，但時間都沒有，又如何去思考？ 給自己一點時間，給自己一點空間去思考，研究有興趣的事情，離開社交圈子，把電腦關上，獨自感受一下身邊週邊的事物。需要有一種求知的精神，因為求知，尋找知識才令人進步，看清事情，和作出改變。舉例如剛離世的喬幫主，就是他那種求知的精神，離開社交圈，獨立的思考和一流的觀察力才能三次改變（個人電腦，音樂播放器iPod，智能手機iPhone)大多數人的本身習慣（在Alan Deutschman的The second coming of Steve Jobs中提及）。而很久前他買下那間Pixar，那公司的員工和理念也就是這樣，他們在每一次創作新動畫時把自己當作新人一般，找出創新，改變魔法，令自己的作品一次比人一好(在Leslie Iwerks的The Pixar Story中提及），那就是元素，若香港的政府，一些香港的年青人會那樣想的話，我想今天的香港會更美好。

最後，很多時不想寫那些負面的事，我也清楚這地方有很多優越之處，但無奈地管治者不去利用，只用今朝有酒今朝醉的態度去管治，那情況只會每況越下，若不去改變，改革，大家去迎接像中國共黨的新香港吧。

又是天朗氣晴的一天:)

天朗氣清，藍天白雲～

在Steve Jobs離職那一天，我跟別人說過他是一個工作狂的人，不是身體出現到不能工作的情況，他不會停止工作的，所以他的離職只說明他命不久已。

10月6日的早上，我從旅遊回到現實，早上打開twitter看，看見Steve Jobs離世的tweet，心中沉寂了，我知道今天總會來臨，但超出我想像中的快。在他還未發病時，我總會想他不會生病的，一個素食者，愛爬山的人不會有大病的，那我錯了，病是不分人種，時間的，要來的始終都要來。

以前說過Steve Jobs 和 Steve Woz改變了很多我對世界，事物的看法，特別是Steve Jobs。若沒有認識和深究，今天的我大概像十年前的我吧。今天他離世，他的態度是不會跟著離去，像跟我6年前說過，人是生命去影響生命的。他昨天作的，活著的要比他活得更精彩。就像他以前說過，”Your time is limited, so don’t waste it living someone else’s life. Don’t be trapped by dogma – which is living with the results of other people’s thinking. Don’t let the noise of other’s opinions drown out your own inner voice. And most important, have the courage to follow your heart and intuition. They somehow already know what you truly want to become. Everything else is secondary.” 。

後記，今天坐巴士的時候看到報紙刊登iPhone 4GS炒價過萬，而想起昨天回港打開facebook又有人post 賣iPhone 4GS過萬。相比今天的新聞，香港人真的是沒救。人們的行為是他們的自由，但人們拿起那產品有沒有想到那產品能為他們做些什麼？為何不正正常常地用那產品去改變你身邊的事物？60年代，美國人只用一部比今天的電話還要慢的電腦把人送到月球去；今天一部電話或產品只能為一些人帶來投機,淘金的機會。我心中只有一句shame on you。不過我還是那一句，你想make live for living 還是make life for living。

有一天晚上，我在別人的家食飯，談話間提到我還有沒在返教會？我答沒有了，當然沒有說出原因，因為實在太長和別人未必明白。

今天早上我如常在互聯網上找資料，找一個新樓盤資料，因不懂打“鴻”字，就找新 基，不知為何那文章就出現在我視線內。全文在那裏： http://www.fundamentalbook.com/booklet12.htm 。當中提及基要派，福音派，和新福音派，香港正正就充斥很多新福音派，而香港基督教，以我觀察看到的他們是向著妥協派的道路走，那是我簡單的不再返教會的原因，可能我是錯的，我是沒有充份了解，但看到的足夠令我相信香港教會有一些深層的問題。那是一點節錄：

Ockenga又說基督徒應決心與「妥協派」信徒、俗世之士在同一學術層面互相交流，他鼓勵基督徒的領袖在社會學科上、文藝上應如非信徒學者及「現代派」信徒一般，具有同等的教育水平和語文能力；這些建議是要基督教首領用人間的智慧及學識去造就人，而非藉著聖靈的力量和使徒昔日傳揚神話語的方法。不幸地，這種新思想的效果十分驚人，在短短五十年內福音派完全失去往日的純正、有力、和榮耀的面目。其實「新福音派」是瞎眼的、是裸露的，但自己對此卻一無所知。「新福音派」沾沾自喜，因為得到世界及離經叛道者的接納，又擁有大量物質財富、衛星通訊設備、滿佈全球的電視臺、廣播站網絡、大型的印刷機構及舉行不斷的大型會議。

我以保羅開始的地方開始，以保羅結束的地方結束。會後，領袖們把我拉在一旁，並告訴我：我的講道太「負面」(negative)。我事後想這是可以預料的，尤其是知道校園運動的「屬靈四定律」中的第一條是：『神愛你，並對你生命有一個奇妙的計劃』時；但這卻是我第一次直接面對排斥聖經中的「負面」訊息的人，他們無論如何要把正面的訊息加到每一個地方，我對他們斷然忽視聖經的態度大吃一驚。我告訴他們眾使徒其實都用十分負面的訊息去形容人的罪及述說神的愛和仁慈，但他們堅持他們的態度，認為當日的講章十分消極，我用聖經向他們爭辯，但他們不為所動。

「新福音派」可以用下面的字眼形容：柔軟、小心、猶豫、容忍、具彈性、不爭議、不得罪、不熱切、不理會、不堅持。倘若你遇上教會及牧者可用以上的字眼來形容，那你遇上了「新福音派」。在比對下，聖經中的基督教是：強壯、勇敢、無懼、堅持、平舖直敘、不容忍和不接納錯謬、在真理上沒有彈性可言、不懼爭議、不怕得罪不順服神的人、並且富有火熱的心。當真理和錯謬爭戰如火如荼時，「新福音派」卻選擇坐在一旁。

如果有心機讀完全文，如果讀者加點思考，他們大概會明白我所說的不再返教會的原因。而那些原因也是今天很多香港教會的問題所在，而產出一些口說是信徒但不斷行不義事的人。當然如果我能知道有一間香港教會是以基要為中心，我會說”you got me”。

Thursday Morning, I was just like usual turn on the TV, watching news and brushing teeth, and thats the news which shake me up, Steve Jobs’ resignation! I just like OMG, a guy I know since I have memory resigned my favor company in the world. Seriously I have no reason to believe that he will serve Apple in his entire life, but the thing is “that soon?”

I projected a bit early in the year, he will resign the CEO role after the building was done. I believed that once he get health again, he will be back on stage. But now, I m wrong, and I think he is suffering really really bad health due to his cancer, thats why I have nothing much to say, just want to give him a best wishes, stay health with his family.

Steve Jobs is my idol since grade 7 or 8, I remember the first time I saw the iMac, I remember the first time I felt it; when I went to collage, I remember my first mac and I remember that staied in front on the computer to watch the Keynote from him. Since I got my first mac, I start doing thing I haven’t done it before, such as web development, server management, Video editing, graphical development, and software development, which all of them aren’t my courses in collage, because I really try to reassamble him, my self learning skill is growing, books, magazine, and online learning video, because of him, my though just like I want to donate my life in this company and field. In fact Steve Jobs changed me a lot. I really look up on him, I consider myself want to be him in my career, and I sort of understand the concept behind his success, but in reality is hard to do it.

When I think of Steve Jobs, he is a entrepreneur, innovator, a pioneer, and a leadership. In 1977, Steve Wozand him made the first PC, Apple I and founded Apple Computer, in 1984, a GUI Personal Computer with mouse, 1986 he founded NeXT, which is a foundation of OS X since 1998. Around 1989, he bought a “almost” bankruptcy Software and Movie company Pixar, it turns out a blockbuster movies studio since Toy Store and acquire by Disney in 2008.

Gil Amelio bought NeXT and bought Steve Jobs back to Apple in 1996, and a year after Gil left and Steve Jobs become a interim CEO. Once he is back to Apple, he unveiled an iMac, iBook, PowerMac and G4Cube, make a nearly bankruptcy Apple become a profitable company since 1998. In year 2002 he changed the game in Music industry, an iPod and iTunes, the music industry was suffering the illegal download since internet blooming they were hardly made profit in that day, an iPod and iTunes Music store help them change the game in digital era, music industry was back on track since than.

In 2007, Apple and him did change the whole industry and world again, an iPhone. I remember what Steve Jobs said, “Every once in a while a revolutionary product comes along that changes everything. It’s very fortunate if you can work on just one of these in your career. … Apple’s been very fortunate in that it’s introduced a few of these.” In fact, they did, they change the whole cellular phone industry, and people behavior since than. I know the world is still running even if he was not coming along, and I believe that if there is without him the world and Apple is totally different vision now.

I know there is million of people don’t understand why I am saying this, but for myself he did change me a lot. In fact as an Apple fans, I did read a lot of books about Steve Jobs and Apple, it makes me to understand about Apple and kinda knew what Steve Jobs was thinking and why he made such decision, but still Apple and Steve Jobs did surprise my a lot. Now he resigned, hope he stay health and hope Apple continues his path in future.