Hello! So, you know how sometimes you want a cool new toy or game? Imagine if your favorite company made something really special and exciting, like say... an iPhone. But instead of buying one right away, you gave them some money now to help them make it, in exchange for one of the first ones when they're ready.

That's kind of like what happened here. A long time ago, Steve Jobs, a smart guy who made something called Apple, said he was going to create a super cool phone called an iPhone. Some people thought this would be amazing and gave Apple money upfront to help make it. In exchange, these people, called investors, got special certificates that let them own a tiny piece of the company.

So, if Apple did really well and made lots of iPhones, these investors could sell their certificates for more money than they paid. But if something bad happened, like nobody wanted the iPhone, they might not make as much, or even lose money. That's how investing works! It's like giving someone some of your allowance to buy toys now, so you can have super cool ones later. Read from source...

Here are some potential issues with the given text that a critically-minded reader might pick up on:

1. **Inconsistencies**:
- The title mentions "System," but it's unclear what this refers to in the context of the article.
- There's a sudden switch from first-person perspective ("I") to third-person narration (Steve Jobs' actions) without clear distinction.

2. **Biases**:
- The text seems heavily biased towards the narrative that Apple's success is primarily due to Steve Jobs and his innovative ideas, while ignoring or minimizing other factors such as market demand, Tim Cook's leadership, or other contributors to Apple's growth.
- It implies that every successful tech product or company is a result of a single visionary, which oversimplifies complex business realities.

3. **Irrational Arguments**:
- The text suggests that because Steve Jobs was a catalyst for Apple's success (which might be a valid point), he was also responsible for the success of other companies and products in the tech industry (which is debatable at best).
- It claims that "everyone" in Silicon Valley agrees with this narrative, which feels like an overgeneralization given the diverse opinions within the tech community.

4. **Emotional Behavior**:
- The text seems to evoke strong emotions by using hyperbolic language like "revolutionized," "magical," and "changed everything," but provides little concrete evidence or data to back up these claims.
- It also encourages emotive responses by appealing to "the people who have experienced the magic firsthand" rather than focusing on logical arguments.

Based on the article, the sentiment can be classified as **positive** and **neutral**. Here's why:

- **Positive**: The article highlights several bullish points about Apple Inc. and its stocks.
- Using the iPhone as a catalyst for growth and success since its introduction by Steve Jobs.
- Referring to the Benzinga Catalyst, which suggests a good outlook for Apple's stock (600/1000 rating).
- Mentioning that "If you invested $1,000" in Apple when they announced the iPhone, showcasing potential gains.

- **Neutral**: The article presents factual information without expressing much bias or opinion.
- It provides a general overview of how an investment in Apple around the time of the iPhone's announcement could have paid off.
- It doesn't contain any negative statements about Apple or its stocks.

The overall tone is positive due to the focus on Apple's successes and potential gains. However, it remains neutral as well because it doesn't engage in overly praising or condemning language.