Apple was quick to update its executive profiles page, after Steve Jobs’s announcement late Wednesday that he will step down from his position as Apple CEO. The page now reflects the new organizational structure of the company.

Tim Cook is now listed as the CEO of Apple, while Steve Jobs’s new position as chairman of the board at Apple is listed at the bottom of the page. Tim Cook is now also on the board of directors.

The last time Steve Jobs’s picture wasn’t on that list was in 1997, before he became the interim CEO and began leading Apple to profitability once again. For a quick trip down memory lane, here are snapshots of the Apple executive profiles page from 1998, 2001, 2005 and 2009.

Lenovo is the fastest growing PC maker in the world. The Chinese computer company outgrew every other PC maker for the past seven quarters and is now the third largest PC maker by volume. There’s no questioning Lenovo is a major player in the desktop and notebook fields — and soon tablets, or so says the CEO, Yang Yuanquing.

Lenovo recently announced three tablets, the Honeycomb ThinkTab and IdeaPad K1 along with the Windows-powered IdeaPad P1. The first two just hit the market with the Windows tab coming this fall. With these three tablets, each with a distinct target demographic, Lenovo hopes to surge to the front of the tablet race. Of course that means going head-to-head with the iPad, a product Lenovo’s CEO sees as a top-tier item and whose $500 price puts it out of reach of those in “the small cities, townships, low salary class, low-income class.” Someone should probably tell Yuanquing that his craptastic IdeaPad is only $50 less.

Let’s look at the full quote, courtesy of the Financial Times:

“Apple only covers the top tier. With a $500 price you cannot go to the small cities, townships, low salary class, low-income class. I don’t want to say we want to significantly lower the price, rather our strategy is to provide more categories, to cover different market segments.”

It’s hard to argue against that strategy. Different consumers want their tablets to do different things and one product cannot cover all the bases. The Lenovo IdeaPad K1 targets consumers with a curvy exterior and Netflix app. The prosumer ThinkPad packs a strong security suite, active digitizer stylus, and enough straight lines to look right in any corner office. The IdeaPad P1 is there for consumers and companies that still need/want Windows on a tablet for some reason.

This multi-demographic approach is widely different from what other companies are doing. But it’s not off to a good start.

IdeaPad P1 reviews started popping up. I turned down a review sample; all Honeycomb tablets are essentially the same right now. Engadget gave it a 6/10 while Joanna Stern over at ThisIsMyNext awarded it a more honest 4.5/10. The only notable feature on the consumer-oriented Honeycomb tablet is the Netflix app but is effectively countered by Honeycomb itself and a cheap build. The IdeaPad P1 will likely make a few owners happy but it’s a hard sell at $449 when the iPad is only $50 more. It’s hard to see how Lenovo views their tablet hitting the lower-income demographic when there’s only a $50 price difference.

Lenovo is hitting the tablet market running but it’s still unclear if it will pay off. The IdeaPad K1 is just another stale Honeycomb tab while the remaining two-thirds of Lenovo’s tablet offering targets businesses with tablets that replicate notebook functionality. If Lenovo wants to set their tablets apart from the iPad – and they should – the Android tablets should first prove how they increase productivity and fit in business world – that’s a trick even the iPad hasn’t pulled off.

One of the giants to survive the dotcom crash, Amazon.com is as much of a landmark on the web as the Eiffel Tower is to Paris. In 16 years, “Wall Street Wunderkind” Jeff Bezos has grown the business from a tiny startup operating on second-hand computers in his garage to a global company with 12 major retail websites.

Amazon.com may account for around a third of all U.S. ecommerce sales, boast over 33,000 employees around the world and own such big names as IMDB, Zappos.com, Woot and LOVEFiLM, but how much do you really know about the web’s largest retailer?

We’ve dug deep and found 10 fascinating facts about the etailing behemoth that you may not know. Take a look through the slide show and let us know in the comments any Amazon.com tidbits you find interesting.

1. How Amazon.com Got Its Name

Amazon.com was very nearly called “Cadabra,” as in “abracadabra.” Founder Jeff Bezos rapidly re-conceptualized the name when his lawyer misheard the word as “cadaver.”

Bezos instead named the business after the river reportedly for two reasons. One, to suggest scale (Amazon.com launched with the tagline “Earth’s biggest book store”) and two, back then website listings were often alphabetical.

2. The First Book Sale

Amazon.com sold its first book from Jeff Bezos’ Seattle area garage in July of 1995. The book was Fluid Concepts & Creative Analogies: Computer Models of the Fundamental Mechanisms of Thought.

During its first month in business, Amazon.com received orders from people in 50 U.S. states and 45 countries across the world.

3. The Dotcom Crash & Jeff Bezos' Optimism

Amazon.com survived the dotcom crash, but was hit hard. From a high of around $100, at one point its shares reached a low of just $6.

In fact, Amazon.com saw losses of $3 billion in its early years and didn’t report a profit until the last quarter of 2001 — six years after launch. It didn’t see full-year profit until 2003.

Bezos, however, was not fazed by the drop. Fast Company reported on a presentation the Amazon.com founder made to a PC Forum conference in 2001:

“First, Bezos showed a slide focusing on Amazon’s stock as it fell from its $100-a-share peak (adjusted for splits) to its $6 nadir. If you look at things this way, he said, you’re a pessimist. Then he displayed a slide charting Amazon’s cumulative wealth creation as a sharp upward line between two points: the day the stock went public ($1.50, split-adjusted) and that day ($11.64). I prefer to look at it this way, Bezos told the tough crowd, and that’s why I’m an optimist.”

4. Amazon.com’s “Door Desks”

One of the reasons that Amazon.com managed to survive was that it didn’t go for the dotcom excesses to which other startups of the time succumbed.

In fact, Amazon.com’s offices boasted cheap “door desks,” described by former Amazon.com employee (and creator of the site’s recommendation engine) Greg Linden as “the quintessential example of Amazon’s frugality.”

“Buy a wooden door, preferably a hollow core wooden door with no holes predrilled. Saw a couple 4″ x 4″ x 6′ pillars in half. Bolt them to the door with a couple of scary looking angle brackets. Put it in front of a programmer. Door desk,” explains Linden.

Some of the desks are still around today. The example in the photo above was caught on camera at Amazon.com’s PAC-MED offices in Seattle.

5. The Meaning Behind the Amazon.com Logo

As you can see in slide two, the Amazon.com logo began as an abstract river design. After a few design changes, in 2000 the logo was re-imagined as the Turner Duckworth design we see today.

In the words of the brand design agency, the smile and arrow say “we’re happy to deliver anything, anywhere.”

In an Amazon.com press release from the time, the retailer stated “a smile now begins under the a and ends with a dimple under the z, emphasizing that Amazon.com offers anything, from A to Z, that customers may be looking to buy online.”

When introduced in the early ’00s, the logo was sometimes animated with the arrow moving under the letters, but it was nixed after some suggested the arrow looked a little, er, phallic.

6. Call the Service Desk and You Might Get the CEO

To help understand the customer service process, every Amazon.com employee spends two days every two years on the service desk handling calls — even the CEO.

“It’s both fun and useful,” Jeff Bezos told Bloomberg Business Week. “One call I took many years ago was from a customer who had bought 11 things from 11 sellers — and typed in the wrong shipping address.”

7. Amazon.com Once Sold a CD-ROM for $2,904,980,000

In 2010, Brian Klug saw an unusually expensive item for sale from an Amazon.com affiliate — for almost $3 billion. Out of curiosity Klug decided to try and buy the item, despite the $3.99 shipping cost.

Although the order for the CD-ROM initially appeared to have been processed, Klug later received an email from Amazon.com saying it was “unable to complete the order.” Klug also received a follow-up phone call from Amazon.com to make sure he had received the order cancellation notice.

8. Susan Boyle Broke Amazon.com Records

In October 2009 Britain’s Got Talent’s Susan Boyle was the unlikely star to smash Amazon.com records.

Her album, I Dreamed a Dream, became the largest CD pre-order both in the U.S. and globally. It beat Norah Jones, U2, Bruce Springsteen and Coldplay to nab the top slot.

9. Jeff Bezos is Building a 10,000 Year Clock

It might sound like a mad scientist’s magnum opus, but Amazon.com boss Bezos is currently involved in a project to build a 10,000 Year Clock.

The clock will tick once a year, the century hand will advance once every 100 years, and the cuckoo will make an appearance on the millennium.

In Bezos’ own words “It’s a special clock, designed to be a symbol, an icon for long-term thinking.” Described as being “of monumental scale” it’s being built inside a mountain in West Texas.

10. Amazon’s Own Brands

As well as AmazonBasics and the Kindle brand, Amazon.com has three more “house” or “private” labels. The “Pike Street” and “Pinzon” ranges are made up of kitchen and household goods while “Strathwood” covers garden furniture.

As far as the names go, speculation suggests “Pinzon” is named after Vicente Yanez Pinzon, a Spanish explorer who discovered an estuary of the Amazon River. We guess “Pike Street” is named after the Seattle location, but aren’t sure where “Strathwood” comes in. If you have an idea then shout it out in the comments
below.

Thanks to a weakening business, painful talent exodus and stagnant stock price, Yahoo is a house divided. And as many great figures have proclaimed before, “a house divided against itself cannot stand.”

It’s no secret that Yahoo is struggling. The company hasn’t staged the dramatic turnaround that its investors envisioned CEO Carol Bartz would lead. Almost half of its market value is derived from its 40% stake in Alibaba, the China Internet giant with a market cap of approximately $8 billion. Most importantly, Yahoo hasn’t been able to create growth or articulate a clear vision for substantive growth.

The result has been turmoil. Yahoo is fighting with Alibaba over online payment system Alipay (the two sides have yet to settle) and the former Internet giant has been experiencing a massive talent drain (Yahoo ranks as the worst in terms of talent retention when compared to other tech giants).

The calls for Bartz’s head have been rising as well, and that has created more headaches for a company that already has a migraine. And it’s not just from the media; investors are publicly and privately questioning the former Autodesk CEO’s leadership. At Yahoo’s annual shareholder meeting on Thursday, one investor took the microphone and made scathing remarks about Yahoo’s chief executive:

“The last thing Yahoo needs right now is a lame-duck CEO. The buyout talks over your contract need to start today and a search needs to be accelerated,” investor Steve Landry said. After railing into Bartz for several minutes, the meeting was brought to an abrupt close.

For their part, the board is giving Bartz its full public support. And to Bartz’s credit, Yahoo’s stock price is up a respectable 30% since her arrival (the company’s share price was 11.59 the day before her appointment was announced). Still, an argument can be made that much of Yahoo’s growth comes from Alibaba and not Yahoo’s core businesses.

The Battle for Yahoo

“The hard-won progress that we have made is why this board is very supportive of Carol and the management team,” Yahoo Chairman Roy Bostock stated at Thursday’s investor meeting. “I want to make it very clear about that support. We are confident that Yahoo is headed in the right direction.”

It’s no surprise that Bostock came out strongly in favor of his company’s CEO, especially given the rumors that Yahoo is quietly looking at replacements. He really can’t say anything else if he wants to keep the confidence of Yahoo’s employees, executives and shareholders intact.

Two factions are beginning to form at Yahoo though, despite Bostock and Bartz’s upbeat tone at Thursday’s investor meeting. One side advocates staying the course (or at least not changing captains in the middle of a voyage). The other demands an immediate change at the top so that new ideas can be infused into the momentum-less company.

Let’s be clear: unless Yahoo suddenly collapses, Bartz’s job is safe. She’s approaching the fourth year of a four-year contract, giving Yahoo’s board the opportune time to either retain the often-bombastic CEO or give her the boot. Multiple reports confirm that Bartz is probably safe for now.

Yet as long as Bartz is in charge, there will be two camps battling for the future of Yahoo: the group that wants to give Bartz a chance, and the faction that wants change now. This internal battle will only create more friction and distractions for the company, unless Bartz can find a dramatic way to silence the growing chorus of critics.

Neither side seems to have an answer to a more fundamental question, though: how Yahoo becomes “the world’s premier digital media company,” the company’s recently stated goal? Bartz had better find an answer to that question soon, before Yahoo’s shareholders start looking to someone else for the answer.

Square is still working on raising its $50 million-or-so next round of venture capital, and we’ve heard from several sources why it’s taking so long. It seems Square is no longer content to be in the $1 billion valuation club, which is admittedly getting a little crowded. I mean, once they’ve let Spotify in, they’ll let any hot app in, right?

Square is now angling for a whopping $2 billion valuation. That’s caused some well-heeled investors to balk, while others are still listening.

Momentum aside, Square is trying to do something that’s incredibly hard and expensive. Everyone agrees that payments need to be disrupted again (except maybe eBay and the credit card companies), and given the general antipathy towards to financial sector, the time is right. And Square seems to have the best shot of anyone out there.

In addition to a sexy device and UI, Square CEO/Twitter founder Jack Dorsey has a major edge in promoting a brand, because he’s reached that rarified level of status where he could be interviewed by Charlie Rose, Oprah or Howard Stern on any given week. That’s important because Square needs mass market promotion, and that can get expensive if you have to pay for it.

But Square is still a long way from pulling off the necessary network effects for the business model to work. And Dorsey also represents one thing that worries potential investors: A CEO who is splitting his time between two companies, in Dorsey’s case Twitter and Square.

Editor’s note: James Altucher is an investor, programmer, author, and entrepreneur. He is Managing Director of Formula Capital and has written 6 books on investing. His latest book he’s giving away free. He built and sold Reset, Inc in 1998 and Stockpickr.com in 2007, among others. You can follow him @jaltucher.

I know through hard experience that I’m one of the dumbest investors I know. Here are two examples: the time I cost Yasser Arafat $2 million (and lost investors another $100 million in the process) and the worst VC decision ever made (of course, it was made by me). Both happened around the same time period (2000-2001) and solidified my reputation in history as possibly the worst investor ever.

However, I learn from my experiences. After a few successful startups following that period (Stockpickr.com notably, which sold to thestreet.com in 2007) I’ve started to do more angel investing and, in doing so, have figured out a check list to help me avoid my prior mistakes. If you follow this checklist I think you can do well as an angel investor.

Everyone trashes angel investors but angels have one critical edge over VC investors: we don’t have to do anything. I don’t have to put any money to work ever if I don’t want to. I can pass on deals all day long. VCs, because its their job, often have a strong financial incentive to eventually (say, over a 5-year period) put money to work since they take fees on the money that’s out there. VCs also have a psychological reason to put money to work. It’s their job. So if they are doing a good job they often feel the need (for better or worse) to put money to work.

The Angel Checklist

1. Invest with co-investors smarter than you. I don’t invest now unless there is a co-investor going in at the same terms as me who has significantly more experience in the field as well as experience with the entrepreneurs we are investing in. I can’t give examples in each case here but with Buddy Media, for example, I went in with many successful co-investors.
2. Invest in CEOs who have done it before. Buddy Media is another great example. I knew Michael Lazerow because after I started Stockpickr he met with me with the possible idea to become CEO. His lock-up after selling Golf.com to Time Warner was coming to an end and he wanted something new to do. Rather than let him be CEO, I blatantly stole all his ideas and then was lucky enough to back him in the venture he shortly thereafter started, Buddy Media. He had already done at least two successful startups so I was confident he knew what he was doing. Another example is Ticketfly where Andrew Dreskin had basically built and sold the same idea before, improved on it, and started again, and had great co-investors. BAM! I couldn’t ask for anything better.
3. Invest in strong demographic trends. 76 million baby boomers are retiring in the next few years. Other than the Internet (and subsidiary to that, Facebook alone) there’s no bigger demographic tidal wave happening in the United States. Personalized medicine is quickly becoming a standard technique for diagnosing and treating the elderly on illnesses ranging from cancer to depression. I look for companies tapping into this demographic trend and co-invest with several biotech investors who have done it successfully dozens of times over. The only thing I make sure is that I get in at their terms. Else, I get back to my mantra: “I’m too stupid to determine if this is a good value for me to get into.”
4. Get in at a low valuation. 1-3 are often good enough. But I like the added flourish of getting a good deal. I pass on about 19 out of every 20 deals I see. Maybe I pass on more. I should keep track of the statistics, but I don’t. There’s no one way to determine if a valuation was low. Clearly Twitter was low at its first round valuation of $20 million. That didn’t seem low to me and would probably have passed if I had the opportunity. Everything depends on the size of the market, what revenues one gets, etc. Again, though, this is related to (1) above. If I can get in where the best investors are getting in, along with other favorable terms (warrant coverage, full ratchet, favorable comps compared with other valuations in the space) then I feel like I have an edge. These deals are out there. The critical thing is sitting on your hands. Again, being an angel, I don’t have to do anything.

If you have 1-4 you almost don’t have to do anything else. If I’m co-investing with Kleiner Perkins I can usually assume their team of MBAs is hard at work doing all the due diligence for me. But often, to provide an extra layer of safety, I do my own work. And here’s the due-diligence checklist. To be honest, this checklist is often more about giving me comfort that I did something intelligent since I don’t really expect to uncover anything new, but every now and then something pops up.

Due diligence checklist

• Talk to CEO
• Talk to heads of sales in each region
• Talk to customers
• Talk to end users (since sometimes the customers are resellers)
• Do background checks on CEO, CFO, heads of sales
• Talk to all of the other investors

Although my general rule of thumb is, I don’t want to have any meetings. You know the secret to a quick meeting? No chairs and no donuts. Even quicker? Just use the phone and stay at home. That’s my meeting of preference.

With the above checklist I actually think angel investors have a strong edge over “professional” venture capital investors. They have a strong network but good angels have a strong network too (particularly with the rise of companies like AngelList). And if you follow rule No. 1 and piggyback with the best venture capitalists, then it’s the best of every world.

And look, the more VCs who make money, the more I will. On top of that, I hope to God we have a pretty strong bubble. Go Groupon!

Photo credit: Alan Cleaver.