Not any one person. Steve was Apple. He was a one man company who delegated his work to other people but they did what he wanted.
In the Steveless Apple, several people whom he groomed have taken over areas of their expertise.
Here is what your "new Steve Jobs" looks like:
It's not one person, it's many people.
Tim Cook is the best at running the ship, but somebody like Jony Ive for example has taken a leadership role in his area of expertise: industrial design. Steve and him used to confer on designs. Now Ive does it himself. Jobs used to brainstorm all ads and marketing strategies with the agencies Apple dealt with. Phil Schiller was part of that. Now Phil is solely in charge.
If you're looking for a single person who will do all that Jobs did, you won't find one, but the sum of all the men (no women strangely) does make for a very competitive Steve replacement. Upset at the word "replacement"? Don't be. Steve himself designed it.
Interesting (in a bad way) that there's no Senior Vice President of Computer Software - there's one for Internet Software and one for iOS Software.
The one area Apple has gone downhill in is its computer software - lots of mistakes and bad design decisions.
There is one thing that worries me slightly and that is that there's no "Mac OS" equivalent to Scott Forstall.
I just posted the same idea before reading yours. Well, it's worth saying again - Apple needs to improve and tighten up its computer software development.
As long as Ive, Schiller and Forstall are at high levels and never leave the company - I have faith in Apple. If more than one of them leaves then my faith declines greatly.
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?
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.
Because Steve's genius and personality, while it made Apple the incredible success it is today, also hurt Apple and its employees in some respects and what we don't know is how many great minds Apple lost because they didn't want to deal with Steve's tantrums and behavior, which in any other company, could be considered to be "hostile working conditions."
Especially because Steve is gone, it is important for Apple to retain its best employees. If Cook improves communication and makes it more pleasant to work at Apple, I think that's a good thing.
My question is this: While Ive is there to drive industrial design, who is the person at Apple who drives new product ideas? Who decides how the next generation OS is going to work? Who decides if the iOS and OS X should be merged or separated? Who is strategizing on what OS XI should be? Who is creating whatever new product comes after the iPhone, whether it's a television or something else? These are the things that Steve was great at. If Tim Cook is not a "product guy", then he needs someone at the most senior level aside from Ive who is.
Fist off, the 'tell me how this sells more iphones' quote is so without context that it's impossible to say what's really going on there. As someone who's spent a decade at Apple, on teams reporting up to Tim, I can tell you first-hand that he know's what the heck is going on and probably has less patience with underperformance and time-wasting endeavors than Steve did so I'm guessing he was making someone explain the reasons for wanting to spend time on a particular project. One of the things I'm sure he's dealing with is how Apple's (unparalleled) growth has affected it's organization and no doubt he is doing what he needs to do to make it work. Apple will be fine with Cook at the helm (as long as Ive stays, of course)
Also, don't let Tim Cook's soft spoken nature fool you. There will be zero f-ing around at Apple.
This is a valuable perspective on that shred of a quote that was missing from anybody else's handwringing over it here. How could anyone presume to worry about it without knowing even the basic context, not to mention any of the ten or so imaginable subtle contexts?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
He used "who's". He used it incorrectly, but he used it. That implies 'who has', 'not who had', meaning ongoing.
Actually he used "who's" correctly. In the next phrase, "know's" is not correct.
All software could use some tweaks here and there, but by far, it's the best thing Apple makes, including OSX and iOS. iTunes is literally the only Apple product (hardware or software) where I can say, "yes, that is exactly what I want".
The only thing I can think of that I would change is perhaps adding native support for other file formats such as Divx or FLAC.
Do I like or use everything that is in there? No, but I just turn those things off. Unlike a lot of Apple products, at least I actually have a choice instead of them arbitrarily taking features away that I might want.
I find it slow,I find it locks my Mac up quite a lot, I find it heavy, there is too many functions in the one App, I think they should have continued on the iTunes for media, iSync for syncing route. One example is, why do they release a whole new copy of iTunes for a new iPod, why?
One example is, why do they release a whole new copy of iTunes for a new iPod, why?
New hardware uses new USB profiles. The software must be updated to know how to see them, how to sync to them, and how to manage their software and hardware configurations.
I find it slow,I find it locks my Mac up quite a lot, I find it heavy, there is too many functions in the one App
If it's slow for you, there's something wrong with your Mac. I've never had an iTunes lock-up, and I've been using it since day one on several different machines. iTunes is one of the sleekest, most efficient apps that exists for OS X.
It's fully-functional aspect is its greatest strength. I don't need a bunch of different apps that do all kind of things, everything is right there. That's my biggest beef with the iOS implementation of it, I have to keep going back and forth between different apps to do things that are integrated on the desktop version. I have to use two different apps to use different episodes of the same podcast feed!
There are plenty of bad apps out there, OS X's iTunes is not one of them. It's one of the very best apps that exists for any purpose.
Syncing? OF COURSE that should be in iTunes. That's where the library that I'm syncing from is! It allows me to control what I want and how I want it. If anything, iCloud is the problem. It should have just been a feature of iTunes. If you are logged to your iTunes account, you could just check off cloud sync, and it's done. The way it is now, there are all kinds of people who can't even figure out how to sign up for iCloud, never mind use it.
New hardware uses new USB profiles. The software must be updated to know how to see them, how to sync to them, and how to manage their software and hardware configurations.
So if they had a seperate app for syncing they would only need to update it, not the entire iTunes apps
If it's slow for you, there's something wrong with your Mac. I've never had an iTunes lock-up, and I've been using it since day one on several different machines. iTunes is one of the sleekest, most efficient apps that exists for OS X.
I've been through this with you guys tonnes of times, I'm sick of it. I find iTunes crap. There is nothing wrong with my Mac other than it being over 6 months old. If you have a number of items in your library it slows down a lot, and it has been getting slower and slower for the last number of releases, version 7 and 8 were ok, 9 started going downhill.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsenka
It's fully-functional aspect is its greatest strength. I don't need a bunch of different apps that do all kind of things, everything is right there. That's my biggest beef with the iOS implementation of it, I have to keep going back and forth between different apps to do things that are integrated on the desktop version. I have to use two different apps to use different episodes of the same podcast feed!
I don't own any iOS devices, I'll have to take your word on it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsenka
There are plenty of bad apps out there, OS X's iTunes is not one of them. It's one of the very best apps that exists for any purpose.
That's your opinion, you are welcome to it, but I insist you know that your opinion is wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsenka
Syncing? OF COURSE that should be in iTunes. That's where the library that I'm syncing from is! It allows me to control what I want and how I want it. If anything, iCloud is the problem. It should have just been a feature of iTunes. If you are logged to your iTunes account, you could just check off cloud sync, and it's done. The way it is now, there are all kinds of people who can't even figure out how to sign up for iCloud, never mind use it.
Why should syncing be in iTunes? That is one of the reasons iTunes is getting so far, more and more stuff is thrown at it. You don't sync constantly, it doesn't need to be open constantly, a small application that does nothing by syncing is fine. And I don't really care about iCloud, my iPod classic can't use it, my capped internet connection has no want to use it
I've been through this with you guys tonnes of times, I'm sick of it. I find iTunes crap. There is nothing wrong with my Mac other than it being over 6 months old. If you have a number of items in your library it slows down a lot,
I have 20,995 items in my iTunes library (363.14 GB). How many more until I start to see it slow down?
Comments
you an insider now?
I so wish.
"Yeah, that way you'd be overcome with a self-righteous sense of morality and wouldn't post anymore!"
No.
Not any one person. Steve was Apple. He was a one man company who delegated his work to other people but they did what he wanted.
In the Steveless Apple, several people whom he groomed have taken over areas of their expertise.
Here is what your "new Steve Jobs" looks like:
It's not one person, it's many people.
Tim Cook is the best at running the ship, but somebody like Jony Ive for example has taken a leadership role in his area of expertise: industrial design. Steve and him used to confer on designs. Now Ive does it himself. Jobs used to brainstorm all ads and marketing strategies with the agencies Apple dealt with. Phil Schiller was part of that. Now Phil is solely in charge.
If you're looking for a single person who will do all that Jobs did, you won't find one, but the sum of all the men (no women strangely) does make for a very competitive Steve replacement. Upset at the word "replacement"? Don't be. Steve himself designed it.
Interesting (in a bad way) that there's no Senior Vice President of Computer Software - there's one for Internet Software and one for iOS Software.
The one area Apple has gone downhill in is its computer software - lots of mistakes and bad design decisions.
Such a good post it's worth posting again
There is one thing that worries me slightly and that is that there's no "Mac OS" equivalent to Scott Forstall.
I just posted the same idea before reading yours. Well, it's worth saying again - Apple needs to improve and tighten up its computer software development.
He used "who's". He used it incorrectly, but he used it. That implies 'who has', 'not who had', meaning ongoing.
I took another look. You're right.
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?
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.
Because Steve's genius and personality, while it made Apple the incredible success it is today, also hurt Apple and its employees in some respects and what we don't know is how many great minds Apple lost because they didn't want to deal with Steve's tantrums and behavior, which in any other company, could be considered to be "hostile working conditions."
Especially because Steve is gone, it is important for Apple to retain its best employees. If Cook improves communication and makes it more pleasant to work at Apple, I think that's a good thing.
My question is this: While Ive is there to drive industrial design, who is the person at Apple who drives new product ideas? Who decides how the next generation OS is going to work? Who decides if the iOS and OS X should be merged or separated? Who is strategizing on what OS XI should be? Who is creating whatever new product comes after the iPhone, whether it's a television or something else? These are the things that Steve was great at. If Tim Cook is not a "product guy", then he needs someone at the most senior level aside from Ive who is.
Fist off, the 'tell me how this sells more iphones' quote is so without context that it's impossible to say what's really going on there. As someone who's spent a decade at Apple, on teams reporting up to Tim, I can tell you first-hand that he know's what the heck is going on and probably has less patience with underperformance and time-wasting endeavors than Steve did so I'm guessing he was making someone explain the reasons for wanting to spend time on a particular project. One of the things I'm sure he's dealing with is how Apple's (unparalleled) growth has affected it's organization and no doubt he is doing what he needs to do to make it work. Apple will be fine with Cook at the helm (as long as Ive stays, of course)
Also, don't let Tim Cook's soft spoken nature fool you. There will be zero f-ing around at Apple.
This is a valuable perspective on that shred of a quote that was missing from anybody else's handwringing over it here. How could anyone presume to worry about it without knowing even the basic context, not to mention any of the ten or so imaginable subtle contexts?
He used "who's". He used it incorrectly, but he used it. That implies 'who has', 'not who had', meaning ongoing.
Actually he used "who's" correctly. In the next phrase, "know's" is not correct.
Actually he used "who's" correctly.
There's no subject-verb agreement. You think it's correct because that's how people talk now, which is wrong grammatically.
In the next phrase, "know's" is not correct.
Thought I'd give him a pass on that.
There's no subject-verb agreement. You think it's correct because that's how people talk now, which is wrong grammatically.
Thought I'd give him a pass on that.
Well, you're the last someone whom I'd argue with. And I doubt there's anyone around here who's willing to either.
If anyone's out there who'd like to mediate, he or she'd be doing us a favor.
Debating the importance of iTunes is moot. It is becoming irrelevant with iCloud.
Please explain...
All software could use some tweaks here and there, but by far, it's the best thing Apple makes, including OSX and iOS. iTunes is literally the only Apple product (hardware or software) where I can say, "yes, that is exactly what I want".
The only thing I can think of that I would change is perhaps adding native support for other file formats such as Divx or FLAC.
Do I like or use everything that is in there? No, but I just turn those things off. Unlike a lot of Apple products, at least I actually have a choice instead of them arbitrarily taking features away that I might want.
I find it slow,I find it locks my Mac up quite a lot, I find it heavy, there is too many functions in the one App, I think they should have continued on the iTunes for media, iSync for syncing route. One example is, why do they release a whole new copy of iTunes for a new iPod, why?
One example is, why do they release a whole new copy of iTunes for a new iPod, why?
New hardware uses new USB profiles. The software must be updated to know how to see them, how to sync to them, and how to manage their software and hardware configurations.
I find it slow,I find it locks my Mac up quite a lot, I find it heavy, there is too many functions in the one App
If it's slow for you, there's something wrong with your Mac. I've never had an iTunes lock-up, and I've been using it since day one on several different machines. iTunes is one of the sleekest, most efficient apps that exists for OS X.
It's fully-functional aspect is its greatest strength. I don't need a bunch of different apps that do all kind of things, everything is right there. That's my biggest beef with the iOS implementation of it, I have to keep going back and forth between different apps to do things that are integrated on the desktop version. I have to use two different apps to use different episodes of the same podcast feed!
There are plenty of bad apps out there, OS X's iTunes is not one of them. It's one of the very best apps that exists for any purpose.
Syncing? OF COURSE that should be in iTunes. That's where the library that I'm syncing from is! It allows me to control what I want and how I want it. If anything, iCloud is the problem. It should have just been a feature of iTunes. If you are logged to your iTunes account, you could just check off cloud sync, and it's done. The way it is now, there are all kinds of people who can't even figure out how to sign up for iCloud, never mind use it.
New hardware uses new USB profiles. The software must be updated to know how to see them, how to sync to them, and how to manage their software and hardware configurations.
So if they had a seperate app for syncing they would only need to update it, not the entire iTunes apps
If it's slow for you, there's something wrong with your Mac. I've never had an iTunes lock-up, and I've been using it since day one on several different machines. iTunes is one of the sleekest, most efficient apps that exists for OS X.
I've been through this with you guys tonnes of times, I'm sick of it. I find iTunes crap. There is nothing wrong with my Mac other than it being over 6 months old. If you have a number of items in your library it slows down a lot, and it has been getting slower and slower for the last number of releases, version 7 and 8 were ok, 9 started going downhill.
It's fully-functional aspect is its greatest strength. I don't need a bunch of different apps that do all kind of things, everything is right there. That's my biggest beef with the iOS implementation of it, I have to keep going back and forth between different apps to do things that are integrated on the desktop version. I have to use two different apps to use different episodes of the same podcast feed!
I don't own any iOS devices, I'll have to take your word on it.
There are plenty of bad apps out there, OS X's iTunes is not one of them. It's one of the very best apps that exists for any purpose.
That's your opinion, you are welcome to it, but I insist you know that your opinion is wrong.
Syncing? OF COURSE that should be in iTunes. That's where the library that I'm syncing from is! It allows me to control what I want and how I want it. If anything, iCloud is the problem. It should have just been a feature of iTunes. If you are logged to your iTunes account, you could just check off cloud sync, and it's done. The way it is now, there are all kinds of people who can't even figure out how to sign up for iCloud, never mind use it.
Why should syncing be in iTunes? That is one of the reasons iTunes is getting so far, more and more stuff is thrown at it. You don't sync constantly, it doesn't need to be open constantly, a small application that does nothing by syncing is fine. And I don't really care about iCloud, my iPod classic can't use it, my capped internet connection has no want to use it
I've been through this with you guys tonnes of times, I'm sick of it. I find iTunes crap. There is nothing wrong with my Mac other than it being over 6 months old. If you have a number of items in your library it slows down a lot,
I have 20,995 items in my iTunes library (363.14 GB). How many more until I start to see it slow down?
I have 20,995 items in my iTunes library (363.14 GB). How many more until I start to see it slow down?
When you hit a terabyte total, you start to see it slow down.
I have 20,995 items in my iTunes library (363.14 GB). How many more until I start to see it slow down?
Mine is over 1TB