The amount of stories pushing Steve Jobs toward early retirement (and even death) has been quite shocking. After all, this is the guy, right? Wired, for example, joins many in thinking he won't return in June after his leave of absence. Unless his health really is in a bad way, we believe that's mischief/headline making – he'll be back, even if the media glare might get a bit too much.

Jobs won't want to bow out like this. He's more likely to announce iPhone 4 and tell the world he's outta here than simply succumb to what he referred to before Macworld as "a hormone imbalance that has been 'robbing' me of the proteins my body needs to be healthy."

Citing that his medical problems that are "more complex than I originally thought", Jobs has now decided to take a medical leave of absence until June. He had decided to stay on as Apple's CEO while recovering, but it's clear not all is well – especially as there were just nine days between the two statements. Jobs has previously had pancreatic cancer.

"Major strategic decisions"

However, we prefer to take Steve at his word. After all, Jobs even says he plans to stay involved in "major strategic decisions while I am out," though we'd understand if this was a ploy to keep Apple's already tumbling share price in check. The temporary leave of absence does provoke thought on what Apple would be like without Jobs. Shorn of the charismatic CEO, would Apple be just another tech giant?

In many ways, the answer is simply 'no' but if it gets the wrong personnel, there's always a danger of things flipping round. Jobs' return to Apple in 1997 was clearly the start of something massive and though the company was clever to hit upon the holy grail with the iPod in 2000, the company has had a clear mission ever since Jobs' return.

If something's not working, get out of it. If there are too many products, get rid of them. If something's doing well, improve on it. The key example of this was the iPod mini - selling phenomenally well in 2005, yet mercilessly culled off to make way for the nano. That's what Jobs does. And that bloody single-mindedness is what Apple would miss.

The danger for Apple would come from any diversion from this strong-mindedness. Even if the replacement for a successful football manager speaks of consistency, they still want to make their mark on the team. And that's the danger at a company like Apple, so famed for its core values but vulnerable to attack.

Apple is a very strong company, but Jobs has undoubtedly been the driving force behind that and it would be hard to believe that Apple wouldn't miss him – even if the person that takes over is Apple through-and through.

Temporary replacement Tim Cook is Apple to the core and he is the most likely internal candidate to become CEO when Jobs eventually does retire from Apple. Read our full profile of Cook now.