[JohnDonahue]

My guess is that even though they have done everything they can to denounce the rumors of Steve's health problems, it can no longer be physically hidden. Otherwise, why in the world would Steve miss the chance to bask in the limelight of the Mac faithful? The annual keynote is the one chance he has to put that great face on before the public.
I can only imagine that Apple's pulling out of the expo is due mostly in part to the fact that if Steve can not be the face in front than nobody will be. His ego cannot take someone else becoming the Dahlia Lama to the Mac supplicants. There is no choice for this year's expo, commitments have been made and it is too late to back out without the threat of being sued, short of admitting to his health issues.
Without Apple's involvement there is little hope of the expo's continuation. True this is a trade show and Apple has been able to generate as much press interest in their almost quarterly events, but the annual expo was the one event that the entire industry was represented in, not just Apple and the general public could gain access to.
I know that technically the expo was not open to the public, but it is not hard to come up with a creative way to show yourself worthy of deserving entrance. I have attended past expos and have longed to return.
The quarterly press events that Apple holds are just that, press events, and they represent only Apple's interests and whatever limited and very select group of third party groups Apple deems worthy of being included. The Expo is open to everyone who wants hitch their wagon to Apple's shooting star.
Without Apple being at the Expo man large and small vendors won't be attracted to the show because the traffic of press and public will be less and less each year. It is just the nature of the beast.
Apple is making a very calculated mistake. The industry is not the only ones who look towards the January expo with bated breath. We Mac faithful gleefully watch as the AppleStore website goes down and comes back up with new additions on that day, following the keynotes. We anxiously await iTunes addition of the Keynote addresses, after we have followed the live blogging from the editors of MacLife and MacWorld (via their iPhones).
Steve's ego aside, someone could take his place at the keynote lectern. He has been the reinvigorating life of Apple for the last thirteen years and nobody has been able to make us so excited about minimalist simplicity like he has, but after an expo or two we would adjust and be back in full swing with a new dance partner. What's more important keeping an ego alive or the legacy that ego built?

[molex]

Quote

My guess is, the Jobs no-show is health-related.

Actually, I think it's more likely that his no-show is because he finally got the OK from the illuminati to go ahead and dig up Kennedy's corpse so that the Tri-Beta-Zagbor aliens (who are due to arrive on the vernal equinox of 2009, natch) can take it up to their high-level, goverment cloaked US run orbiting re-invigoration satellite platform and bring him back to life, to be ensconced with other dead heroes such as Elvis and Ghandi.

This will serve as the final mission in Job's ascension and now, after lo these many decades, Job's will join the Tri-Force Dictum Sanctorum, the elite team of 10 individuals who've never met and don't know each other's names who actually make all decisions for everyone on the planet by communicating with each other through an elaborate code based on the names of new flavors of Starbucks coffee.

So with all that in mind, it becomes quite clear that Macworld isn't on Job's priority list, and the "health related" idea... well when it comes to utterly ABSURD conspiracy theories you're just not using your imagination.

[JohnDonahue]

As an attempt at hilarity you score a dead center bulls-eye, but in trying to make a satirical response, you miss the remark completely. Where in the world do you get a conspiracy theory tone from what I wrote?

I was speaking directly to the heart of Jobs' ego complex, which I have had the chance to observe, firsthand, as well as have had the benefit of hearing the numerous secondhand accounts of those who have worked in close proximity to him at Apple.

That is not a conspiracy theory, it is a judgement assessment based on actual information. Jobs' ego is largely well known in the industry and around the Silicon Valley. Anyone who has had to deal with him and not seen by him as an equal has a tale to tell about his arrogance and smallness or character.

Over the past two years He has begun to progressively take on the look of a walking skeleton. This, combined with his lack of face time at the events he is known to headline and dominate, makes it look like the rumors of his physical demise could have a ring of truth to them. If this is not due to a health problem, a lot of faith could be bolstered in the Mac faithful by going public with a definite plan of succession and a pledge to maintain a continued commitment to public goodwill during this time of transition, not cutting it off completely.

Where is the conspiracy theory in that? It is just analysis and nothing else. Get a clue before you get arrogant next time.

[molex]

Okay, since you asked, here's some quotes of yours from the SAME post where you ask this question:

"Where in the world do you get a conspiracy theory tone from what I wrote?"

1. "I was speaking directly to the heart of Jobs' ego complex"

What does his "ego complex" have to do with a health related issue keeping him from giving the keynote? In life, the simple answers are almost always the right ones. Jobs either a) doesn't WANT to do it, and/or b) doesn't need to any longer. Talking about his "ego complex" and trying to tie it to a keynote speech he's not giving is exactly the kind of conspiracy mumbo-jumbo I'm talking about.

2. "He has begun to progressively take on the look of a walking skeleton."

Uhm... ok. I really can't even comment on how absurd it is to leap to conclusions about why someone is or isn't giving a speech based on a string of pictures that may (or may not) show a person losing weight. There's any number of reasons a person can lose weight that have nothing to do with any serious illness.

3. " makes it look like the rumors of his physical demise could have a ring of truth to them." Rumors. You said it, not me. A rumor is just that: A rumor. A lie make it half way around the world while the truth is still lacing up it's shoes, isn't that the saying?

4. "...a lot of faith could be
bolstered in the Mac faithful by going public with a definite plan of
succession and a pledge to maintain a continued commitment to public
goodwill during this time of transition..."

This is just flat out conspiracy talk, plain and simple. What "time of transition" are you referring to? You're presupposing Job's death before there's even a verifiable hint of truth to the INTERNET rumor that he's even sick!

Maybe you're right, maybe Jobs is sick as a dog and about to die. Maybe. But until there's some kind of facts to be had about it, what's the point of immediately jumping on the "Job's is sick!!!" bandwagon when he decides to not give a speech? Arrogant or not, people sometimes just don't feel like doing something, is that so hard to believe that we have to assume the guy is an animated corpse already?