At Apple Inc.'s May 10 annual shareholder meeting, a series of proposals were presented for voting after which CEO Steve Jobs answered a series of questions from the audience.

As has been the case over the last three years, a large portion of the questions and comments from the audience were presented by environmental groups who attended to present issues related to green conscious, non-toxic manufacturing goals along with e-waste takeback and recycling programs.

Two shareholder proposals pertaining to manufacturing and takeback were slated for a vote at the meeting but were withdrawn by their presenters in response to the recent public comments made by Jobs recognizing the need for the company to publicize its environmental efforts.

One of the withdrawn proposals belonged to Trillium Asset Management, a member of the Investor Environmental Health Network. Trillium holds over $5 million in Apple shares.

The second proposal, presented by the As You Sow Foundation, involved Apple's takeback and recycling efforts. Both groups praised Apple's new public commitments, saying that their their immediate concerns had been addressed satisfactorily, and that they hoped to continue progress on future goals with the company.

Jobs' Challenges Greenpeace Incompetence.

Those comments didn't stop Greenpeace representatives from using the meeting as an opportunity to advertise the groups anti-Apple campaign. Among the activists sent by Greenpeace was Iza Kruszewska, one of the key architects of the corporation's Apple-oriented fundraising program.

Kruszewska was wearing a Greenpeace t-shirt styled after the former iPod ads, presenting Apple's products as dangerously toxic and encouraging user donations to Greenpeace to somehow solve that issue.

After attempting to take credit for Apple's announcements, Kruszewska questioned Jobs about Apple's potential do more to advance Greenpeace's political goals in announcing principles, but Jobs insisted that such “flowery” announcements were not really doing anything for the environment.

Jobs suggested that Greenpeace hire staff with engineering backgrounds who could understand the issues involved, and insisted that Apple does more to push innovative manufacturing techniques than other PC makers.

When Apple talks to its manufacturers, he said, they report that no other companies are pushing for similar, real changes. He questioned the real efforts HP and Dell were making to back up their announcements.

Jobs also blasted the criteria behind Greenpeace's highly publicized Greener Guide to Electronics, which ranks a random assortment of manufactures according to commitments listed on their websites.

Jobs said Greenpeace needed to develop rankings that reflected what companies actually do, not just what they promise to do at some point in the future.

Questions About Options Backdating.

Many of the other questions presented related to Apple's stock options backdating issues, with one speaker dramatically presenting outraged comments about Apple's options backdating "shenanigans." He pointedly asked Jobs to refund Apple for the value of stock grants Jobs was awarded in exchange for giving up the tainted options he had been issued with disputed grant dates.

Jobs replied that reports about Apple's backdated options had not presented all the facts about a complex subject. He explained that Apple's board of directors had originally approved a stock option package for him, but that he was not awarded the grant until several weeks later, resulting in his options being priced higher than they had originally been approved. He stated that he did not demand Apple make good on the original price.

Along with the options discussion was a series of comments regarding transparent employee and executive compensation reporting, along with new shareholder proposals presented by the Teamsters and the AFL-CIO.

None of the five shareholder proposals passed the tentative shareholder vote, including the union proposals and the two proposals on manufacturing issues which were withdrawn prior to voting .

iPhone and Other Future Plans.

A member of the audience questioned Jobs on Apple's relatively low figure of reinvestment in R&D, saying that he felt the company was missing low handing fruit with new product opportunities, particularly with the delay of Leopard. Jobs responded, “I wish developing great products was as easy as writing a check. If that were the case, then Microsoft would have great products.”

Jobs also noted that his decision to delay Leopard was a difficult choice, made in part because hiring the right new people was a difficult task that took time. He stated that simply filling seats with unqualified employees was not an option for building the kind of projects Apple has underway, but that Apple is in a position to hire pretty much anyone the company finds who is talented and ready to work.

Another commenter asked about Apple's plans for the iPhone going forward, prompting Jobs to pull an iPhone out of his front pocket and describe the vast potential market for mobile phones. Jobs said that compared to the music player and PC markets, the much larger mobile phone market presented a critical opportunity for the company, despite it being an entirely new venture for Apple.

Questions from RoughlyDrafted.

I asked Jobs three questions. The first was about .Mac:

“With so much innovation and execution in hardware, software and in retail, what is Apple doing in online services? Apple is in a unique position to offer its customers personalized services, so why have we seen so little investment in this area of Apple's business? Is it not something the company recognizes as a potential revenue source, or is Apple leaving it to other companies like Google to provide? .Mac is a pretty weak offering that has made little advancement in the last half decade.”

Jobs acknowledged that Apple’s .Mac service was not a strong product but that improvements to Apple's online services were in the works and would show up shortly, leaving the impression with me that Leopard would deliver a stronger set of services. If that’s the case, next month’s WWDC may deliver new information on the issue.

I also asked about the iPhone:

"Comments from Steve Ballmer aside, I have many business clients very interested in the iPhone, and I'm working with a large government project interested in using consumer technologies in place of the expensive and problematic custom development of mobile devices. While Apple's closed platform policy may make sense for consumers, does Apple recognize the needs of large, institutional buyers who are excited about the prospect of applying low cost, handheld computers with their own custom development?"

Jobs stated that Apple is working to balance the needs of software security and deployment with demands for custom development on the iPhone.

There Is One More Thing.

I snuck in one more question:

"Will Apple be targeting developing countries with Mac OS X in the way that Microsoft is working to sell Windows Vista Starter, which is essentially Windows XP re-badged for the third world?"

Jobs jokingly asked if I thought Apple should sell Mac OS 9, eliciting some laughs from the audience. “No,” I said, “I think Apple could sell the developing world Tiger while selling Leopard here.”

Jobs paused for a moment and said that could be an option.

After the meeting, I briefly talked to Apple COO Tim Cook, who pulled out his own iPhone and scrolled around on it. This isn’t a prototype mockup; they actually use it as their regular phone. I'd seen the device in its dramatic glass hyperbaric chamber at Macworld Expo, but it looks even smaller in person.

I'm so ready to kill my Palm Treo to get one.

The SF Chronicle Goes Bananas.

Anyone actually at the meeting will find it hard to read the Ellen Lee's report in the SF Chron , which described the laidback Jobs as “feisty,” and characterized his joking comments as “fired back” into a purportedly embittered and hostile crowd. Lee actually managed to use “fired” twice in her article as a stand in for “said.”

It's too bad Lee didn't seek to capture the truth in her article, rather than invent a scandalous performance of arrogant tyranny out of Jobs.

Frequently making humorous asides during the question and answer session, Jobs’ made light of the the dollar salary he is assigned, quipping “I get 50 cents just for showing up. And 50 cents for my performance.” Lee repositioned the joke as a bitter remark “fired back” at the audience.

Rather than being launched into an angry mob, the comment really only drew laughs and applause, as did his comments to Greenpeace, where Jobs said, “We'd like to work with you to improve your measures.”

Lee suggested that audience comments demonstrated “a rare show of dissent.” Perhaps Lee has been under a rock for the last decade, but criticism of the company is nothing new, nor is it rare. Neither are the media exaggerations created to dramatize and vilify the company. Shame on the Chron .

Like reading RoughlyDrafted? Share articles with your friends, link from your blog, and subscribe to my podcast!

Did I miss any details?

Next Articles:

This Series

What do you think? I really like to hear from readers. Leave a comment or email me with your ideas.