Apple Confirms Jobs Goes Back to Work

CloudDatacentreMacSoftwareWorkspace

Apple chief Steve Jobs has returned to work after a six-month medical leave that involved a liver transplant, a company spokesperson has said.

Steve Jobs, Apple chief executive is back at work after a six-month medical leave that included a liver transplant, according to the company.

“Steve is back to work,” an Apple spokesperson told Reuters yesterday. “He’s currently at Apple a few days a week, and working from home the remaining days. We are very glad to have him back.”

Steve Jobs underwent a liver transplant at the Methodist University Hospital Transplant Institute, in Tennessee, around two months ago, according to reports. Jobs was the “sickest patient on the waiting list at the time a donor organ became available,” according to a statement by the hospital.

“Jobs is now recovering well and has an excellent prognosis,” continued the hospital statement, which Jobs reportedly approved, and which contained no further details about his underlying medical condition. Jobs was also treated for a type of pancreatic cancer in 2004.

Despite his leave of absence, Apple continued to do well, with a highly successful June 19 rollout of the iPhone 3G S, of which one million were sold by its third day of release.

“Customers are voting and the iPhone is winning,” Jobs wrote in a statement accompanying the device’s release. “With over 50,000 applications available from Apple’s revolutionary App Store, iPhone momentum is stronger than ever.”

However, Apple’s original, terse statements concerning the circumstances of Jobs’ leave – that his condition was due to a “hormone imbalance,” and then that his medical issues were “more complex” than initially anticipated – still have the potential to generate trouble for the company.

The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) could potentially feel that due to Jobs’ position as Apple’s chief executive, the company should have revealed more about his condition, as his death or incapacitation would have had a potentially seismic effect on the company’s stock and thus its fortunes.