I just want to know why someone would take a company so successful, that has used this formula to pull out of such a trench in the marketplace to rise to the biggest company in the world in market capitalization, and change it? Why change what isn't broken?
For one thing there are stagnant areas within Apple that need to be addressed. For example Mac desktops. Mac Software in general is being ignored, one example is no iBooks for Mac OS/X.
Quote:
Alan Mulally once said that the problem with most CEOs is that they're driving by the shareholders instead of the product. If you have the product, you have the sales, you have the revenue, you have the profits, and therefore you have the shareholders.
Tell that to RIM or HP who have tablets that don't sell. Having product does not assure profits or even sales. You need to market that stuff and people need to want it.
There is one thing that worries me slightly and that is that there's no "Mac OS" equivalent to Scott Forstall.
In case you forgot, the guy who you're searching for is Craig Federighi. We haven't seen much of him save for a few keynotes, but he's an Apple veteran with ample experience. I do agree that it's a bit worrisome to not see his name up there, and what that could mean for the Mac OS long-term. I posted this next bit on another site, but I'll add it here just to give some perspective on why I think they made Cook CEO, comments were in reaction to a BusinessWeek story on iOS SVP Scott Forstall:
Quote:
Cook was the only choice that made sense. They needed someone with global knowledge, anyone else would be inappropriate. Sure, Apple has a deep bench with many smart people, but consider the alternatives:
Schiller - He's a marketing guy, so no (See Ballmer at Microsoft)
Ive - Probably doesn't have the software engineering chops to do it properly
Cue - Knows the software (after all, he led the teams that built iTunes), less so on hardware
Mansfield - Background is in hardware, even before he came to Apple
Giving Forstall the job would be like a big 'FU' to the Mac teams, implying that iOS is the only thing that matters now; unless they found a way to shape the role such that he HAD to be involved with the Mac, to make sure it was still being developed.
I was about to say the same thing. Steve loved the gadgets he was creating and dreamed of them at night. His enthusiasm was obvious and contagious. When the passion and driving force move along, we get today's Microsoft.
Many companies fall on hard times after that driving force leaves. A ship needs a captain even if the winds are favorable and the sky's clear. You see this all the time with smaller companies. When the owner leaves and transfers the company to somebody else the operation often falls apart. Conversely if you're owner loves the business he is in they can drive the company through thick and thin.
Any new CEO worth his/her salt has to put their stamp if they wish to be effective. They usually have a short window to do it. What Cook seems to be doing overall seems minor - in part because he knows Apple so well and vice versa - but hopefully, will still reflect his persona and tell us something about his management style.
In the longer haul, he will be judged by the next couple of major product introductions. All other judgments are premature, and probably immaterial, if that goes well.
Cook is also a strong believer in Apple's culture of product development and design, though his colleagues and friends say that he is "not a product guy," an observation also noted by Jobs in Walter Isaacson's recently published biography about the former Apple chief. In a briefing of a new service Cook asked an employee, "tell me again how this helps me sell more phones?"
Tim is just watching for what Sales Support is giving to Sales. Unlike another poster, featureitis does not improve sales
Especially watch out for a new service that pushes more people away than pulls towards your product.
Add an "expert" mode to your stuff and let your customers do what they want.
The persons that want Apple to think for then don't need to use "expert" mode. They can use the best end user experience in the business.
BTW. If you are going to make all you computers non upgradeable: ok, but please have reasonable prices for upgrades in Apple store. I can pay a 25% Apple tax, but 200 dollar for a hard drive that cost Apple 25 is ridicules.
Your "expert mode" is knowing to buy a hard disk from a third party. I'm all for those not knowing better paying a little more for convenience.
If Tim Cook is not a "product guy" then who is, now that Steve is gone? That's what concerns me the most, looking at the 10-year picture.
I believe that the picture over a ten year trajectory is probably pretty clear. Where Apple needs to be particularly diligent is in keeping pace with new technologies, the post-ten year horizon. Apple has, whether one agrees with the expression or not, pretty much created the culture of a post PC age. The term is in the main stream. Steve sought to do an end-run around Microsoft's dominance in PC's and as a consequence, Apple is in the news and minds today with not much mention of MS.
New technologies could usher in new players who might themselves circumvent Apple's dominance. However, the profound nature of new developments might make it difficult for Apple to play catch-up should this occur and so, the leadership needs to do what Steve did in one respect and apprise themselves of developments on the periphery and in other fields.
I hope that Apple uses some of its cash to get into outside labs and to help get new technologies out, thereby remaining relevant. Perhaps Apple might fund fellowships for bright young researchers and generate good will in universities.
I like Tim Cook. I think that he is the right person to lead after such a profound loss. He strikes me as being a very humane person, an excellent manager and someone who probably understands that to replace Steve Jobs, the people Steve trusted need to be given considerable responsibility and authority. This was apparently instigated by Steve himself in respect of Jonny Ive and possibly Scott Forstall and maybe others.
If you want to keep Apple going down the same path there is one thing that absolutely must be done. Keep the marketing department in check. Never let them decide what products get produced. Never let them have any say in the design of the products. Put a firewall around those people and keep them away from everyone else. If you don't they will eventually escape their bonds and gradually take over the company. And then they will turn it into GM.
Jobs thought plenty clear. He wanted to make the best consumer products possible. He also went after education, and creative markets.
Microsoft was given the business field by IBM. Government and big business would only use IBM products for the longest time. IBM put Microsoft's product on its computers and the rest was history. It didn't have to work too hard to capture that market.
Going after enterprise was a losing battle for Apple. That has been changing for a while. Apple is now selling iPhones and iPod Touches as point of sale devices to third party companies like Lowes. The IPad is becoming entrenched in the medical field. Businesses are starting to embrace Macs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blastdoor
The biggest thing holding the Mac back in the enterprise right now is Apple's total lack of effort. If Apple would just start providing better sales, support, and IT-oriented management tools, I think the Mac could enjoy years of strong growth in the enterprise. Macs/PCs may be "trucks", but there are an awful lot of trucks being sold, and there always will be. Even though it's not a growing market, a growing share of a large market is still a good way to make money. I'm guessing Cook can see that more clearly than Jobs did.
... (many I know have used MobileMe/.mac for 9 years. Since Apple closes MobileMe we are forced to use 10.72 + a new mac. Somehow Apple manage to make Vista version of iCloud, but their most loyal fans they screw)
"Loyalty", as a customer is measured by how often you buy a company's products. If you were one of Apple's "most loyal" customers, you'd already own a Mac that can run Lion. Being a fan is nice, but companies make products for customers.
Ive is talented incredibly talented in multi-dimensions. But I've seen nothing to indicate that he has the skill set required for a CEO. And knowing his incredible design skill set, I doubt he even entertains an interest in being the CEO.
It's good to remember that Jobs wasn't a designer. Although he used design thinking, he was really a leader and visionary who understood the importance of design.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TechNewb
Apple needs a product driven CEO, we have seen their buisness model with out one. Is Ive the only senior exec capable of the job? Cook has been great in the back seat, And should remain there. Look out for a Walmart style sell out of Apple, where profits are a more important capital than humans and innovation.
Scary quote:
how about a better phone sells more phones? A better mp3 player sells more mp3 players. A better OS sells more. A better design sells more. A better product sells more. Apple is already a charity, they don't need to give donations, the greatness in their products is their donation to society. Lose that, lose everything, again...
Tell that to RIM or HP who have tablets that don't sell. Having product does not assure profits or even sales. You need to market that stuff and people need to want it.
The point is RIM and HP are concentrating on sales rather than the products.
They *don't* put the product first as a goal, so the products they end up with have no internal sense, integrity, charm, emotion or attraction (and therefore, poor sales.)
Any new CEO worth his/her salt has to put their stamp if they wish to be effective. They usually have a short window to do it. What Cook seems to be doing overall seems minor - in part because he knows Apple so well and vice versa - but hopefully, will still reflect his persona and tell us something about his management style.
In the longer haul, he will be judged by the next couple of major product introductions. All other judgments are premature, and probably immaterial, if that goes well.
It's obvious that Cook is already a failure. Look at everything that has happened under his watch:
1. the release of the 4S was late
2. Apple has dropped to #3 in smartphones in the US
3. iTunes Match has missed its deadline
4. Ron Johnson has left
It's obvious that Apple under Cook is going into the toilet!
Comments
I just want to know why someone would take a company so successful, that has used this formula to pull out of such a trench in the marketplace to rise to the biggest company in the world in market capitalization, and change it? Why change what isn't broken?
For one thing there are stagnant areas within Apple that need to be addressed. For example Mac desktops. Mac Software in general is being ignored, one example is no iBooks for Mac OS/X.
Alan Mulally once said that the problem with most CEOs is that they're driving by the shareholders instead of the product. If you have the product, you have the sales, you have the revenue, you have the profits, and therefore you have the shareholders.
Tell that to RIM or HP who have tablets that don't sell. Having product does not assure profits or even sales. You need to market that stuff and people need to want it.
Haven't people put iKol on ignore? O_o
I have yet to find a setting to ignore this guy and the other troll. Do we just do this manually?
There is one thing that worries me slightly and that is that there's no "Mac OS" equivalent to Scott Forstall.
In case you forgot, the guy who you're searching for is Craig Federighi. We haven't seen much of him save for a few keynotes, but he's an Apple veteran with ample experience. I do agree that it's a bit worrisome to not see his name up there, and what that could mean for the Mac OS long-term. I posted this next bit on another site, but I'll add it here just to give some perspective on why I think they made Cook CEO, comments were in reaction to a BusinessWeek story on iOS SVP Scott Forstall:
Cook was the only choice that made sense. They needed someone with global knowledge, anyone else would be inappropriate. Sure, Apple has a deep bench with many smart people, but consider the alternatives:
Schiller - He's a marketing guy, so no (See Ballmer at Microsoft)
Ive - Probably doesn't have the software engineering chops to do it properly
Cue - Knows the software (after all, he led the teams that built iTunes), less so on hardware
Mansfield - Background is in hardware, even before he came to Apple
Giving Forstall the job would be like a big 'FU' to the Mac teams, implying that iOS is the only thing that matters now; unless they found a way to shape the role such that he HAD to be involved with the Mac, to make sure it was still being developed.
Any thoughts?
I was about to say the same thing. Steve loved the gadgets he was creating and dreamed of them at night. His enthusiasm was obvious and contagious. When the passion and driving force move along, we get today's Microsoft.
Many companies fall on hard times after that driving force leaves. A ship needs a captain even if the winds are favorable and the sky's clear. You see this all the time with smaller companies. When the owner leaves and transfers the company to somebody else the operation often falls apart. Conversely if you're owner loves the business he is in they can drive the company through thick and thin.
I have yet to find a setting to ignore this guy and the other troll. Do we just do this manually?
Profile > userlists > add to ignore.
Doubt you can see it since I'm allegedly a troll and thus either ignored or about to be.
In the longer haul, he will be judged by the next couple of major product introductions. All other judgments are premature, and probably immaterial, if that goes well.
Profile > userlists > add to ignore.
Doubt you can see it since I'm allegedly a troll and thus either ignored or about to be.
Welcome, troll. Have you seen a pair of Hobbits pass by here?
Cook is also a strong believer in Apple's culture of product development and design, though his colleagues and friends say that he is "not a product guy," an observation also noted by Jobs in Walter Isaacson's recently published biography about the former Apple chief. In a briefing of a new service Cook asked an employee, "tell me again how this helps me sell more phones?"
Tim is just watching for what Sales Support is giving to Sales. Unlike another poster, featureitis does not improve sales
Especially watch out for a new service that pushes more people away than pulls towards your product.
Dear Tim:
Please stop treating your customers as idiots.
Add an "expert" mode to your stuff and let your customers do what they want.
The persons that want Apple to think for then don't need to use "expert" mode. They can use the best end user experience in the business.
BTW. If you are going to make all you computers non upgradeable: ok, but please have reasonable prices for upgrades in Apple store. I can pay a 25% Apple tax, but 200 dollar for a hard drive that cost Apple 25 is ridicules.
Your "expert mode" is knowing to buy a hard disk from a third party. I'm all for those not knowing better paying a little more for convenience.
Welcome, troll. Have you seen a pair of Hobbits pass by here?
Few hours ago. Nice fellows. They were with a man an elf a dwarf and a wizard.
If Tim Cook is not a "product guy" then who is, now that Steve is gone? That's what concerns me the most, looking at the 10-year picture.
I believe that the picture over a ten year trajectory is probably pretty clear. Where Apple needs to be particularly diligent is in keeping pace with new technologies, the post-ten year horizon. Apple has, whether one agrees with the expression or not, pretty much created the culture of a post PC age. The term is in the main stream. Steve sought to do an end-run around Microsoft's dominance in PC's and as a consequence, Apple is in the news and minds today with not much mention of MS.
New technologies could usher in new players who might themselves circumvent Apple's dominance. However, the profound nature of new developments might make it difficult for Apple to play catch-up should this occur and so, the leadership needs to do what Steve did in one respect and apprise themselves of developments on the periphery and in other fields.
I hope that Apple uses some of its cash to get into outside labs and to help get new technologies out, thereby remaining relevant. Perhaps Apple might fund fellowships for bright young researchers and generate good will in universities.
I like Tim Cook. I think that he is the right person to lead after such a profound loss. He strikes me as being a very humane person, an excellent manager and someone who probably understands that to replace Steve Jobs, the people Steve trusted need to be given considerable responsibility and authority. This was apparently instigated by Steve himself in respect of Jonny Ive and possibly Scott Forstall and maybe others.
Haven't people put iKol on ignore? O_o
Where is the ignore function on this board anyway?
edit: never mind, I found it!
Microsoft was given the business field by IBM. Government and big business would only use IBM products for the longest time. IBM put Microsoft's product on its computers and the rest was history. It didn't have to work too hard to capture that market.
Going after enterprise was a losing battle for Apple. That has been changing for a while. Apple is now selling iPhones and iPod Touches as point of sale devices to third party companies like Lowes. The IPad is becoming entrenched in the medical field. Businesses are starting to embrace Macs.
The biggest thing holding the Mac back in the enterprise right now is Apple's total lack of effort. If Apple would just start providing better sales, support, and IT-oriented management tools, I think the Mac could enjoy years of strong growth in the enterprise. Macs/PCs may be "trucks", but there are an awful lot of trucks being sold, and there always will be. Even though it's not a growing market, a growing share of a large market is still a good way to make money. I'm guessing Cook can see that more clearly than Jobs did.
... (many I know have used MobileMe/.mac for 9 years. Since Apple closes MobileMe we are forced to use 10.72 + a new mac. Somehow Apple manage to make Vista version of iCloud, but their most loyal fans they screw)
"Loyalty", as a customer is measured by how often you buy a company's products. If you were one of Apple's "most loyal" customers, you'd already own a Mac that can run Lion. Being a fan is nice, but companies make products for customers.
It's good to remember that Jobs wasn't a designer. Although he used design thinking, he was really a leader and visionary who understood the importance of design.
Apple needs a product driven CEO, we have seen their buisness model with out one. Is Ive the only senior exec capable of the job? Cook has been great in the back seat, And should remain there. Look out for a Walmart style sell out of Apple, where profits are a more important capital than humans and innovation.
Scary quote:
how about a better phone sells more phones? A better mp3 player sells more mp3 players. A better OS sells more. A better design sells more. A better product sells more. Apple is already a charity, they don't need to give donations, the greatness in their products is their donation to society. Lose that, lose everything, again...
Tell that to RIM or HP who have tablets that don't sell. Having product does not assure profits or even sales. You need to market that stuff and people need to want it.
The point is RIM and HP are concentrating on sales rather than the products.
They *don't* put the product first as a goal, so the products they end up with have no internal sense, integrity, charm, emotion or attraction (and therefore, poor sales.)
I have yet to find a setting to ignore this guy and the other troll. Do we just do this manually?
Profile > userlists > add to ignore.
Doubt you can see it since I'm allegedly a troll and thus either ignored or about to be.
Welcome, troll. Have you seen a pair of Hobbits pass by here?
Few hours ago. Nice fellows. They were with a man an elf a dwarf and a wizard.
Where is the ignore function on this board anyway?
edit: never mind, I found it!
Please people stick to the thread topic.
If Cook is going to streamline Apple why doesn't he start by streamlining iTunes first?
(btw terrible sunglasses)
Any new CEO worth his/her salt has to put their stamp if they wish to be effective. They usually have a short window to do it. What Cook seems to be doing overall seems minor - in part because he knows Apple so well and vice versa - but hopefully, will still reflect his persona and tell us something about his management style.
In the longer haul, he will be judged by the next couple of major product introductions. All other judgments are premature, and probably immaterial, if that goes well.
It's obvious that Cook is already a failure. Look at everything that has happened under his watch:
1. the release of the 4S was late
2. Apple has dropped to #3 in smartphones in the US
3. iTunes Match has missed its deadline
4. Ron Johnson has left
It's obvious that Apple under Cook is going into the toilet!
[/sarcasm]
It's obvious that Cook is already a failure. Look at everything that has happened under his watch:
1. the release of the 4S was late
2. Apple has dropped to #3 in smartphones in the US
3. iTunes Match has missed its deadline
4. Ron Johnson has left
It's obvious that Apple under Cook is going into the toilet!
[/sarcasm]
Are you vying for a spot on the "trolly" ignore list as you basically copied my prior post?