History will be recorded as a world before Steve Jobs and a universe after his demise. America may forget JFK, Elvis, Henry Ford, Bill Gates, John Lennon and Warren Buffett. But the Apple icon will always stand as a figure whose charisma blew away audiences, who was a tech oracle beyond compare—and a person who stared at death at its face, and won the ultimate battle
“When the music’s over, turn off the lights.” That’s Jim Morrison from a different era. That’s the era that Steve Jobs came from. His was a one-act play that will never stop.
The accolades and epitaphs are of course pouring in now from across the world. But almost none of then can do justice to the man who always did it his way—and understood what the customer wants. He overshadowed one of America’s titans, Henry Ford, when he dismissed the market research that the suits had done for the iPad. Henry Ford (in what may be an apocryphal quote) had once said that he did not care what colour a Model T was as long as it was black. But Steve threw the market research for the iPad into the trashcan after commenting on what would go on to become one of Apple’s blockbusters: “It’s not the consumers’ job to know what they want.” If this was hubris, many of today’s tech (and marketing) gurus could surely do with a lot of it.
Do we have to name the products that rolled out of Steve’s imagination? The gallery includes the iMac, iPod, iTunes, iPad and operating systems that hit Microsoft (and may lesser players) like a ton of bricks.
Like a few humans who knew that their mortal existence would soon come to an end, Steve Jobs knew that it was coming. “I have always said if there ever came a day when I could no longer meet my duties and expectations as Apple’s CEO, I would be the first to let you know. Unfortunately, that day has come.” This was his farewell to the company. And maybe only he knew that it was his final goodbye to the world.
“And now, the end is here;
And so I face the final curtain.
“My friends, I’ll say it clear;
I’ll state my case, of which I’m certain.
“I’ve lived a life that’s full,
I travelled each and every highway.
“And more, much more than this, I did it my way.”
It’s this Frank Sinatra song (My Way) that will be playing in a few million iPods across the world now. And all of us will read Jay Elliot (The Steve Jobs Way) with a sinking heart—and think about what he achieved, and what more he could have done.
Till 4th October, export release orders for 4,21,808 tonnes have been issued to nearly 450 factories, according to data posted on the food ministry’s website
New Delhi: The government has issued export permits for 4.21 lakh tonnes of sugar, of the total five lakh tonnes of shipments that it allowed in August, reports PTI.
Last week, the food ministry had given an extension of 15 days to apply for export release order to those sugar mills which are sourcing the sweetener from other factories. The deadline had expired on 3rd October and now the last date for submitting application is 18th October.
In 2010-11 marketing year that ended last month, the government had allowed exports of 1.5 million tonnes of sugar in three equal tranches under Open General License (OGL). The release orders for earlier two tranches have been issued.
The exports were allowed as the country’s sugar production in 2010-11 marketing year (October-September) exceeded domestic demand after a gap of two years.
Till 4th October, export release orders for 4,21,808 tonnes have been issued to nearly 450 factories, according to data posted on the food ministry’s website.
India, the world’s second largest producer of sugar after Brazil and biggest consumer, had produced 24.3 million tonnes in 2010-11 marketing year as against 18.9 million tonnes in the previous year. In 2008-09 marketing year, sugar production stood at 14.6 million tonnes.
At present, the annual domestic demand is pegged at 21.5 million tonnes.
In the current sugar marketing year, production is likely to increase at 24.6 million tonnes as per the government’s conservative estimates. However, Indian Sugar Mills Association (ISMA)—the apex body of private mills—has projected output at 26 million tonnes.
Food minister KV Thomas had recently said that the government will consider export for this season after Diwali, which is later this month.
Under WTO rules, every member is obligated to submit information about all of its subsidy programmes on a regular basis. This information is required so that members may assess the nature and extent of the subsidy programmes of others
Washington: The United States on Thursday dragged China and India to the World Trade Organisation (WTO) over subsidy programmes implemented by the world’s two fastest growing economies, with a top Obama administration official terming the situation as intolerable, reports PTI.
“The situation was simply intolerable,” US trade representative Ron Kirk said.
Noting that every member of the WTO is required to come clean on their subsidy programmes on a regular basis, Mr Kirk said China has not notified its subsidy programmes in over five years.
“India only recently filed its first notification in almost ten years and even then, notified only three of the many subsidy programmes we know to exist,” he said.
“Because China and India have failed to meet their respective obligations, we had to act—as we are entitled to under the WTO rules—and provide the voluminous information we have developed regarding subsidy programmes in these two countries,” he said.
Mr Kirk announced that the US has submitted information to the WTO identifying nearly 200 subsidy programmes that China has failed to notify as per WTO rules.
Information was also submitted on 50 subsidy programmes in India not previously notified, he said. Through these actions at the WTO, the United States is seeking the prompt provision of detailed information and data from China and India regarding the operation of these subsidy programmes, the USTR said.
Under WTO rules, every member is obligated to submit information about all of its subsidy programmes on a regular basis. This information is required so that members may assess the nature and extent of the subsidy programmes of others.
The notification obligation is particularly significant for members like China, where inadequate transparency in so many areas places a tremendous burden on other WTO members seeking to better understand China’s trade policy measures, the USTR said.
China has submitted only one subsidy notification since becoming a WTO member in December 2001. That notification was noticeably incomplete, it said.
In the last ten years, India has submitted only one notification, which was also noticeably incomplete.
Previously, over the course of numerous meetings of the WTO Subsidies Committee, the United States has requested that China and India make full notifications of all of their subsidy programmes, it said.
Mr Kirk said the lack of transparency severely constrains the ability of WTO members to ensure that each government is playing by the rules.
“The United States would have preferred to avoid today’s filings, but we have done so to hold China and India accountable and to enforce the rules that all WTO members must follow,” the US Trade Representative said.
“It is past time for China and India to be transparent about their subsidy programmes and that includes meeting their notification obligations like other WTO members. China and India are among the largest exporters in the WTO and it is simply not acceptable that they continue to evade their transparency commitments,” Mr Kirk said.