Apple's executive shakeup viewed as consolidation, not cause for concern - Page 2

 

Yeah but how could anyone with such a nailed on doleful gaze and a head permanently set at a jaunty angle, ever do anything mean.

I'm actually positive about these changes. It means that Apple/Cook is not going to stand by when the market or they themselves recognize that mistakes have been made. My only concern is giving Ive too much responsibility where he could be spread too thin.

Also, the issue with Maps was more of a development issue than a UI issue and since dumping Google Maps was largely driven by politics (although also by the fact that Apple wanted turn-by-turn), the Maps fiasco might not have completely been Forstall's fault.

And Browett seemed out of place from the start. Apple was probably upset at all the bad press the Apple stores have been getting lately.

In any case, even if these were bad changes, it means that Cook is not going to sit there and work off of Jobs' steam. That's a good thing. Sometimes company shakeups are good for everyone - it shakes people out of complacency. As Apple gets larger and larger, they might need that as large companies tend to slow down and be less aggressive.

"Anyone ever notice Scott was the only individual that ever used a scriptwhile presenting? How hard is it to know your product?"

You are kidding, right? Just go back to the last Keynote and watch Phil Schiller. Geez, he was pathetic. It might have almost been less obvious if he held an iPad and just read off of it.

 

Could you explain how using a script is in any way pathetic?

 

Steve Jobs used a script at every keynote. Guess he was pathetic, too.

I have a bad feeling about this.

Scott was obviously a very strong willed, intelligent, ambitious guy.

He knows ALOT about Apple, and now, may hold a grudge against Apple and its management.

 

He is now looking for a job . . .

All the other SVP's have been there almost as long (if not longer) as Forstall and know as much about Apple as he does.

 

"He is now looking for a job."

 

With his bank account, I don't think he's in any rush.  Some of his caliber and wealth does not look for a job.  They don't have to. They have offers thrown in their face or they start their own venture.

Perhaps - but more likely not. Fundamentally, Mansfield's Technology contribution will span such activities as scan, uncover, discover, develop, protect and incorporate. The question whether to make or buy would probably be dealt with on a case-by-case basis. However, recall that Cook drove Apple through a huge metamorphosis 10 years ago by getting it to shed the yoke of performing its own manufacturing. Being wedded to one's own manufacturing facilities and the in-process inventories they generate is a huge incentive for product inertia - the failure to evolve quickly and lead in the marketplace by continually introducing more advanced consumer goods. Of all the activities that Mansfield may oversee, self-manufacturing would seem to be out on the periphery.

Edited by Kibitzer - 10/30/12 at 9:00pm

Ive isn't a management type though, he's done actual work and has actual skills.. We can do plenty of things well in Britain, just not management.
 

Whatever... I am happy that Craig is head of iOS now because he is really a hard working guy. Those who talk less and work more, really give good results. At the same time, Forstall is a guy whom you should not leave. Fingers crossed.

 

Everyone uses script.  But its for rehearsal.  Not on the stage.  Steve never used script on stage.  He is the master.  How can you say that?

Apple is at the height of it's reign. Unless there's someone within the company who can passionately push a path forward and people will follow, I don't think you'll see anything drastic from Cupertino anytime soon. I get the feeling this company is now resting on its laurels and it's a great time to be an Apple consumer. Two or three years from now? I'm not so convinced these guys have what it takes without Jobs. I think next year's iOS 7 announcement will be a good indicator where Apple is heading.

 

Except what did I JUST say? He used a script every. single. time. on stage. 

 

He can say it because it is true. Steve had two forms of on stage "scripts":

 

1. Stage monitors that showed HIM what was on screen and probably notes and talking prompts and probably what was next to be shown.

2. During demos he had a nicely bound and printed booklet that worked as a script for the actual demo.

 

In the high res versions, you can see how pretty even that is. Little icons for everything and short notes about it. 

 

I disagree with that stereotype. I'm American, but I know plenty of successful and well-liked British managers. The fact was that Dixons is a failure, and his strategy, along with the strategy Tim advised him to follow both failed. Tim Cook has a lot of great ideas for improving the supply chain and distribution, but he screwed up as well. Tim's a great guy and he's going nowhere but someone had to go to the gallows for the failure and this guy made a couple of critical mistakes.

Bezos knows where Jobs kept the Kool-aid.  He is feeding the investors with a heavier dosage.

Within the last 10 years, Apple has 3 "OMG" products: iPod, iPhone and iPad.  Ive is probably the only person around in Apple that can produce one of those products in the absence of Jobs.  So this is definitely a move in the right direction.  If that OMG product does not come, the existing product lines will be commoditized and no longer be cool any more.  

 

Not the thinnest laptop on the market or the smallest, cheap desktop on the market or the first laptop to transcend resolutions?

Apple has said that Forstall will remain at Apple in the near term as an advisor to Apple CEO Tim Cook, though the position has been characterized as a "formality" intended to keep him from going to a competitor

Don't they have a deep basement there in Cupertino?

Forstall knows a lot about Apple, for sure. But, non-compete clauses, non-disclosure agreements will keep him far away from Apple competitors. 

In this context, Scott Forestall's role as an "advisor" to Tim Cook most likely means that his job is to advise Tim Cook of his whereabouts at all times and to refrain from making any Apple-related product decisions without first getting Tim Cook's approval.

You're comparing Steve Jobs' departure from Apple to Scott Forestall's?! PLEASE!!!

Why I am hearing all over the place that Scott Forstall's departure is "not for concern".  I think they protest too much !

Beside Steve, as a software designer myself, the only other manager I ever saw on stage that just ozzed software design was Scott.  I will miss him and I for one, am now worried that management has been taken over by people that just look to me like my local chemist behind the counter issuing nice looking grey labels while trying to smile.  I think the real question should be "is apple still a radical company ?"  Perhaps it has way too much money to loose now to be so radical, with money now being more important.  After all, it is the legally enforceable over riding nature of public companies to maximise yearly profits.  Unfortunately many people think this is always a good thing and design should be done in a nice group effort and not by visionary people with strong opinions about the future.

Glad to see CEO Tim acknowledging that he is vision-less. Why it took this long, we'll never know.