Apple execs Scott Forstall and John Browett to leave company [u] - Page 6

Scott Forstall had a presentation delivery better than Steve Jobs. He speaks measured and eloquently. I thought he exuded a certain intelligence that any company would be glad to have. I should imagine he has the BIG picture of iOS like no other. Those will be a hard shoes to fill. 

It looks like Browett's early release reflects poorly on Tim Cook's judgement of character. 

Unlike Steve, Scott Had to report to somebody, as a follower there's only so much disruption or polarizing you can initiate before the real leader kicks you out... while steve was around he could have succeeded with his personality because steve was a stronger leader and could iron out the issue... Scott should have re-strategised the moment cook came into office... or before, if he is too arrogant (Which i believe is short-sighted) because Jobs was then it's his fault there are repercussions like this... 

And politics isn't a bad thing in an organisation, infact anyone who is not politically savvy will get marginalised or ousted and Jobs discovered early on!

Quote:

Originally Posted by pembroke 

Scott Forstall had a presentation delivery better than Steve Jobs. He speaks measured and eloquently. I thought he exuded a certain intelligence that any company would be glad to have. I should imagine he has the BIG picture of iOS like no other. Those will be a hard shoes to fill. 

It looks like Browett's early release reflects poorly on Tim Cook's judgement of character. 

Nobody in the industry had a presentation delivery better than Jobs.  He is one a of kind.  And personally, I think Schiller comes the closest.  As far Tim's judgement of character, or lack thereof, it's still early to tell.  Remember Mark Papermaster, the guy Jobs personally hired from IBM to lead the iPhone team? How well did that turn out?

Quote:

Originally Posted by pembroke 

It looks like Browett's early release reflects poorly on Tim Cook's judgement of character. 

I can tell you from personal experience that sometimes a person that seems like a great hire doesn't turn out to be what they appeared to be once you get them on the job.  The best "judgement" is to recognize the mistake and take corrective and decisive action. 

If I had a complaint about Browett, it's that they didn't terminate him immediately once it became evident he was cutting back retail store staffing at the expense of the customer experience. 

i thought cook hired papermaster while jobs went for hist first medical leave.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lovitt 

suddenly newton: If Ive is in charge of UI then you can say goodbye to skeuomorphic designs, which I *really* like!

"Goodbye skeuomorphic designs."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sabon 

I think the thing with Forstall is that he rubbed a lot of people too hard and the wrong way. His HUGE ego couldn't fit in a stadium. But then could Steve Job's ego?

I think the final straw was Bob Mansfield saying he was retiring. I think that Tim Cook heard things from other top people in Apple saying they were thinking about leaving too if Forstall was going to stay and Mansfield was leaving.

Notice the timing of this and when Forstall sold almost all (95%?). I think he found out then that he wasn't going to be around long term anymore.

And I think the "advisor" roll isn't really that at all. It is just a title to keep him out of the way but employed until he hits another stock option and/or to pay him hush money so he doesn't directly compete and also that he doesn't start saying bad things about Apple.

I'm serious that I think there is a tie-in with Mansfield leaving and then coming back plus the hard feelings Forstall has been creating all around Apple for years. As someone else said on another site, I think it was only a matter of time before Forstall was out after Steve Jobs, his protector, was gone.

 

Of all the comments here, your thought regarding Bob Mansfield makes the most sense from the perspective of recent history, although I don't think it was "the last straw." Bob earned the reputation for being a straight shooter - a guy who kept his head down, plugged away - and anything you hear form him when he chooses to speak is something you can take to the bank. He grew up in the boiler room of manufacturing, turning technology into huge volumes of quality products - something that is also right up Tim Cook's alley. Moreover, nobody has bad things to say about Bob Mansfield, which gives you the strong impression that he excelled at teamwork - a stocky guy who didn't stand out but you can always depend on to play tackle and block effectively for the quarterback. That's why it came as a shock in June when Bob, long before his time, announced his retirement following several months of transition. Despite speculation, no logical reason ever materialized. Then in August, in an apparent reversal, it's announced that Mansfield will stay on, working on "future projects" and reporting directly to Cook. Does that sound like Mansfield tossed in his towel in disgust when work became a chore due to lack of teamwork with Forstall? It's possible.

People get canned for royal screwups, like Browett, but they also get separated when they become too much of a thorn in the sides of their colleagues, regardless of their work performance. That well could be what happened in Forstall's case. Consider the wording of the headline in the Apple news release: "Apple Announces Changes to Increase Collaboration Across Hardware, Software & Services." Why wouldn't Forstall be an integral part of that effort to "increase collaboration"? His omission speaks volumes. If Forstall is going to continue for some time as a personal advisor to to Cook, if I were him I wouldn't be holding my breath waiting for the phone to ring.

Quote:

Originally Posted by initiator 

The Forstall announcement is a bit of a surprise. I'd be interested to learn what's behind it. It has to be more than "mapgate". Given that he'll stay on as an advisor, it may have been Forstall's own desire to leave, rather than Apple wanting him to go. Letting Ive take on responsibility for the UI is welcome news. Someone needs to reign in the craziness and rampant inconsistency.

 

The only thing surprising about the announcement of the departure of Browett is how soon it came. Based on what I read and heard about his reputation, and his moves in his tenure at Apple, I knew he wouldn't last long. But, I thought he'd last longer than he did. My question is, why the hell did Cook even hire him in the first place? Was he so desperate to replace Johnson that he overlooked Browett's baggage? Browett always seemed like a terrible fit for the role at Apple. I think his hasty departure proves that out.

Your comment got me thinking... maybe he made a move to leave Apple just like Bob Mansfield did. I remember reading an article about Bob Mansfield new role and how he was being paid a hefty amount just to stay on as an advisor.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer 

 

You won't be able to test for the PE until you have the years under the PE in the first place to sign off on your work.

 

Hardware Engineering is a completely different beast than Mechanical Engineering and sorry, but Software Engineer is a title, not a discipline. There are no Laws of Software Engineering. We aren't discussing universal applications of Heat Transfer or Power Systems. Just because you've had morons graduate in Hardware Engineering takes nothing away from reality--Computer Science is not an Engineering Discipline.

 

There is a reason it takes decades before disciplines become Engineering Disciplines. It took Mechanical. Electrical, Chemical, Structural, Civil and more 60+ years for their status to be codified.

 

Software Engineer is a major Universities are pushing because the IT Industry called Software Programming and Engineering title long before it could justify it. They still cannot. It is the same reason Electrical Engineering in most ABET accredited US Universities oversee the CS Departments and how come half of the curriculum is EE based.

 

With your Undgrad in 1982 you damn well know there was no such thing as a Software Engineering Field. It was Computer Science. Hell, when I graduated in '93 and later in '96 it was just at the tail end of '98 when Computer Engineering was beginning to be recognized as an Engineering Field.

http://ncees.org/About_NCEES/News/News_Pages/New_PE_Software_exam.php

There's probably a waiver for the FE exam and given that the first tests are next year I think they'll have to waive the 4 year requirement for working under another SwE PE.  I've gone through the SwE PE exam topics and I'm fairly confident I've gotten the requisite education and experience.  But it's not really what I want to do when I grow up but my wife tells me I can't be a coder forever.  She's right in that there are few coders over 50.  Most hang up their spurs and go into management.  Been there, done that, hated it.

There is too a SwE field...there's been one since 1968 to serve the military industrial complex's voracious appetite for software.  IEEE has a SWEBOK and of course there's all the CMMI crap.  So 45 years of existence as a discipline.

For the development of large, complex systems and/or those that require very high quality (weapon systems, space systems, etc) you need a great deal of rigor or you have a high probability of ending up as an example for others as to what a software disaster looks like.  

For pretty much all other forms of software products it's a negative in terms of time to market and ROI to go beyond the basics of common "good" software development practices (CM, some form of requirements management, simple code reviews, etc).  You need a SwE on those dev teams like another hole in the head.

I went to Maryland...the other major CS school besides CMU with an excessive (some might have said unhealthy) focus on SwE.  In the early 80s our freshmen CS courses were two weeder courses designed by Harlan Mills (there's an iEEE award for software engineering named after him).  Proofs for algorithmic speed and correctness, formal methods, etc.  Needless to say the ranks were winnowed quite a bit.  

Complain all you like, I'll even agree that its not really engineering but NCEES disagrees with both of us.  Next year there will be SwE PEs licensed (okay tested...the state boards do the licensing) by the same organization that licenses all other PEs in the US...at least in Alabama, Delaware, Florida, Michigan, Missouri, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Texas, and Virginia.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shameer Mulji 

No disrespect to Ive, but what does a hardware design guy know about software UI design? they're two different worlds.

They aren't two completely different worlds.  Some of the best human factors folks have a industrial engineering background.  His focus on design, prototyping and the complete user experience is the same general process as for UI designs.

MDA gave Ive a personal achievement award in 2008 for 

"his design of the Apple IPhone and its user interface. The physical design of the IPhone and its intuitive user interface has completely redefined the mobile phone as we know it. The IPhone is arguably the most talked about consumer-electronics device that has hit the market in the last 5 years.

Ive has designed the best implementation of a touch UI, this with the Safari web browser has definitely pushed mobile content into the forefront of the consumer consciousness. It sets the bar very high for all present and future competitors and as such, is shaking the mobile phone industry. We look forward to seeing Ive's design innovation continuing to challenge the mobile world."

http://www.themda.org/latest/mda-awards-2008.php

He'll have UI designers under him.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carthusia 

I had just begun to use the Reminders app in iOS 5. In iOS6, however, the ability to swipe right-to-left between Reminders lists was lost. Now, I need to tap a drop down list in the upper-left corner and the switch to a new list-ruined it for me. That lost iOS 5 feature borked my workflow.

It's not gone. You just have to swipe the list name. It made deleting item easier since you can now swipe to delete on an item.

I've seen potential for Forstall as well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pedromartins 

Maybe Scott will come back and start Apple 3.0 one day...

 

He looks like a maniac, and Apple is too big now for someone like him (maybe). Let him create his own NEXT.

There are similarities.

Jobs was ousted from Apple because he was acting like he was the CEO when he wasn't. Even though he started the company, he really didn't have the skills to run it. His days in the wilderness (Next, Pixar, etc.) were when he really learned his most important lessons on how to run and lead companies. He could never have reached his potential without that experience. On the other hand, that failure didn't break him, as it would most people. After an understandable reflective pause, he bounced back, used it as a learning experience, and moved ahead.

The question is, what will Scott do? Can he understand and deal with his limitations, learn from his mistakes, master his ego, and leverage his talents? Or will he lower the blinkers and just get bitter?

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by JBHoule 

Forstall's exit says a lot about who is in control at Apple. This is a strong, gutsy move by Cook, one I would have never predicted given Forstall's long tenure and key position. But Jobs wouldn't and didn't hand over the company to someone not up to the job. 

 

Today, John Gruber suggested that Forstall's "design taste, engineering management, abrasive style and the whole iOS Maps thing" led to his demise. Gruber described him as a polarizing executive.

 

 

Originally Posted by SpamSandwich 

 

Steve Jobs was a polarizing figure.

"Forstall forgot that he was Steve's guy, not Steve Jobs."

.

    I hope one of those guys is pushing for OSX on a tablet.

    Microsoft is about to force the issue with the Surface.

.

Originally Posted by AvraamJDectis 
I hope one of those guys is pushing for OSX on a tablet.

Terrible and pointless idea.

No, they've already proven it's a terrible and pointless idea.