or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Analyst says Steve Jobs' spirit has been institutionalized
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Analyst says Steve Jobs' spirit has been institutionalized

post #1 of 38
Thread Starter 
Investment bank Kaufman Bros. on Tuesday downplayed renewed concerns over the health of Apple chief executive Steve Jobs, arguing that although the co-founder has been critical to the company's resurgence, his spirit and drive have since been instilled in thousands of other Apple employees.

After recovering to $100 per share earlier this month, Apple's stock again came under downward pressure last week when the company announced that next month's Macworld Expo would be its last and that Jobs would not delivering his traditional keynote presentation.

Apple attributed the decision to end its near 25-year commitment to the annual Mac conference to a move away from trade shows in general, saying the increasing popularity of its retail stores and website enable the company to "directly reach more than a hundred million customers around the world in innovative new ways."

Some industry watchers poked fun at the decision, mocking the company in a parody press release titled "Apple Announces Last Year of Christmas," joking that while the Cupertino-based firm has been honored to work with the North Pole for the last several years, it has decided "that this is the last year for Christmas."

"Apple has been steadily scaling back on holidays in recent years, including Valentine's Day, Columbus Day, President's Day and Grandparents Day in Japan," the mock release said.

Others didn't take the announcement so lightly, like those within the Apple community who feel an exit from Macworld serves as a slap in the face to an industry that has supported the Mac maker for more than two decades, arguing that the decision could ultimately prove detrimental to the Apple ecosystem going forward.

The biggest concerns came from Apple investors, however, some of which couldn't help but wonder if the move had anything to do with the health of Jobs, which has been a topic of public scrutiny ever since the cancer surviver appeared overly gaunt at this year's Apple Worldwide Developers Conference. They also question why the company waited until just three weeks before the conference to make its plans known.

In a note to clients, Kaufman Bros. analyst Shaw Wu offered his own thoughts and perspective on the situation, arguing against the notion that Apple is one man show but rather a vast family of enthusiastic professionals who share Jobs' leadership skills and penchant for innovation.

"While CEO Steve Jobs deserves a lot of credit for the revival and success of Apple and, as one of the founding fathers of technology, helping revolutionize the world with the Apple I, Apple II, Lisa, Macintosh, NeXT, Pixar, Mac OS X, the Apple Store, iTunes, iPod, and iPhone, we believe Apple today has a deep bench and its culture of innovation and execution or 'spirit' has more or less been institutionalized," he wrote.

Wu said that, in his view, Apple has an uncanny ability to attract and hire "fanatics" who are "entrepreneurial, work hard, and are looking to change the world." He believes that unlike years past, the Apple of today is not only innovative but a company with world-class operations and execution, driven by many people other than Jobs, from its senior management team down to its 32,000 individual employees.

"We believe Apple has always been an innovative company and we would like to note that most overlook that the company actually had some hit products while Mr. Jobs was not there that defined the computer industry, including the Macintosh Quadra, QuickTime, PowerMac and PowerBook, and Apple IIgs," the analyst added.

Wu maintained his Buy rating and $120 price target on shares of Apple, saying the most recent pull back in shares makes the risk-to-reward more favorable for long term investors.
post #2 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

While CEO Steve Jobs deserves a lot of credit..... 'spirit' has more or less been institutionalized"

Warning.... clown alert.
post #3 of 38
I think some analysts need to be institutionalized...
post #4 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by mazola View Post

I think some analysts need to be institutionalized...

I agree. The Press is all about the headlines and skinny or deceptive on the facts
post #5 of 38
In a press release today, AppleInsider announced that rumor readers' favourite analyst - Shaw Wu - has taken up a position at a different firm. When asked about his move, Wu muttered something about having being institutionalized, followed by what AppleInsider thinks was a reference to the ghost of Steve Jobs.

Whether the analyst was making a forward looking statement or is privy to inside information on the Apple, Inc. CEO is not currently known.
post #6 of 38
I wonder if some of these changes are just designed to remove some of the rabid instability from Apple's stock price. It must drive the shareholders mad to see the price drop on the crazy speculation from the press, analysts and bloggers. Less Steve in the news, less events to speculate about and more products released in their own time have got to help a little.

Many of the most important software concepts were invented in the 70s and forgotten in the 80s.

Reply

Many of the most important software concepts were invented in the 70s and forgotten in the 80s.

Reply
post #7 of 38
Actually, and although poorly stated by Kaufman Bros., the gist is that Apple has a "succession plan." This is paramount for the future success of Apple. Jobs' prominence will have to be scaled back, and others allowed to rise to new heights if Apple is to continue to thrive. The referenced "spirit" is not unlike what used to be the "The HP Way," that at one time was a genuine HP company belief held and adhered to by its employes. Unfortunately, HP did not have succession plan when Bill and Dave passed leading to the internal rot lead by Mark Hurd (and ultimately HP's demise). Apple "spirit" can carry it forward to even greater heights if it is genuine. If fact, this is Apple's most critical period and should not be downplayed by enthusiast or investor alike.
post #8 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREB View Post

Actually, and although poorly stated by Kaufman Bros., the gist is that Apple has a "succession plan.".... Apple "spirit" can carry it forward to even greater heights if it is genuine. If fact, this is Apple's most critical period and should not be downplayed by enthusiast or investor alike.

Well, plans are all well and good, but without good leadership, a plan quickly goes by the wayside. The spirit and the plan have to be executed by the chief executive, and if that is a dull man like the guy doing the Macworld keynote, Apple will lose its sparkle no matter how much talent they hire. Look at Microsoft. They have talent to spare, but no sparkle. If Apple doesn't come up with another Steve Jobs, I'll be selling my stock.
post #9 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by PXT View Post

I wonder if some of these changes are just designed to remove some of the rabid instability from Apple's stock price. It must drive the shareholders mad to see the price drop on the crazy speculation from the press, analysts and bloggers. Less Steve in the news, less events to speculate about and more products released in their own time have got to help a little.

Good call. I think 2009 will be the year Apple attempts to be viewed as a fundamentally strong
company, rather than a personality cult. It would really help if someone other than Steve Jobs
would announce an unexpected great new product at MacWorld. Minds would be blown.
post #10 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by wealthychef View Post

Well, plans are all well and good, but without good leadership, a plan quickly goes by the wayside. The spirit and the plan have to be executed by the chief executive, and if that is a dull man like the guy doing the Macworld keynote, Apple will lose its sparkle no matter how much talent they hire. Look at Microsoft. They have talent to spare, but no sparkle. If Apple doesn't come up with another Steve Jobs, I'll be selling my stock.

Hmmmmm. Investing based upon the sparkle of a company. I can't say I have heard of that
before, but I do know a woman who bets on horse races based upon the colors the jockeys
are wearing. Please post again when you do sell. I have been looking for a good buy signal.
post #11 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by wealthychef View Post

Well, plans are all well and good, but without good leadership, a plan quickly goes by the wayside. The spirit and the plan have to be executed by the chief executive, and if that is a dull man like the guy doing the Macworld keynote, Apple will lose its sparkle no matter how much talent they hire. Look at Microsoft. They have talent to spare, but no sparkle. If Apple doesn't come up with another Steve Jobs, I'll be selling my stock.

Then you had better sell. Why would anyone want another Steve Jobs (I believe Jobs himself would be insulted if the Apple tried to replace him with another him)? Give the man his due, respect him for his accomplishments, and let history write the rest. Trying to emulate Steve Jobs, through his successor, is doomed to failure. One man alone cannot make a company. Apple has the right employees; without them Apple's, and Jobs' visions, would have never come to fruition.

BTW, MS has always been a third-rate company whose wealth is more a matter of legal enforcement than quality software.
post #12 of 38
Put one or two knuckle-headed morons in the right spot and Mr Jobs' "institutionalized spirit" will fly from Apple faster than you can say "Bondi blue." And Silicon Valley is full of knuckle-headed morons just itchin' for a crack at Apple.
post #13 of 38
Unfortunately, spirit and drive are not the same thing as vision. It is Steve's vision that makes Apple the company it is. When the time comes for Steve Jobs to retire, I'm sure there are very capable people at Apple who can carry on with the roadmap that Steve has set forth. What they can't do, however, is to continue with the "vision" thing. Only Steve sees what Steve sees until he tells everybody else!
post #14 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREB View Post

Actually, and although poorly stated by Kaufman Bros., the gist is that Apple has a "succession plan."

An analyst would have no insider information on that account. He's blowing smoke up everyone's skirts.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #15 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by alansky View Post

Unfortunately, spirit and drive are not the same thing as vision. It is Steve's vision that makes Apple the company it is. When the time comes for Steve Jobs to retire, I'm sure there are very capable people at Apple who can carry on with the roadmap that Steve has set forth. What they can't do, however, is to continue with the "vision" thing. Only Steve sees what Steve sees until he tells everybody else!

Plus, the "vision" has changed a number of times. Having one key decision-maker is good when it comes to keeping the direction of the company nimble and able to respond to market forces, but when the decisions are bad, they can bring a company down quicker.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #16 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREB View Post

Then you had better sell. Why would anyone want another Steve Jobs (I believe Jobs himself would be insulted if the Apple tried to replace him with another him)? Give the man his due, respect him for his accomplishments, and let history write the rest. Trying to emulate Steve Jobs, through his successor, is doomed to failure. One man alone cannot make a company. Apple has the right employees; without them Apple's, and Jobs' visions, would have never come to fruition.

BTW, MS has always been a third-rate company whose wealth is more a matter of legal enforcement than quality software.

Quote:
Originally Posted by imaman View Post

Put one or two knuckle-headed morons in the right spot and Mr Jobs' "institutionalized spirit" will fly from Apple faster than you can say "Bondi blue." And Silicon Valley is full of knuckle-headed morons just itchin' for a crack at Apple.

Quote:
Originally Posted by alansky View Post

Unfortunately, spirit and drive are not the same thing as vision. It is Steve's vision that makes Apple the company it is. When the time comes for Steve Jobs to retire, I'm sure there are very capable people at Apple who can carry on with the roadmap that Steve has set forth. What they can't do, however, is to continue with the "vision" thing. Only Steve sees what Steve sees until he tells everybody else!

All these comments are merited, but I think the manner of the transition to a new
CEO could alleviate some people's fears. It won't be like the first time Steve Jobs left.
This time, I think his role will diminish very gradually, rather than abruptly ending like
before. He will probably be a consultant (providing his vision) for a long period of
time after he ceases to be involved in day-to-day issues. The knucklehead factor
will be avoided, because Jobs will be heavily involved in choosing his successor,
unlike the case of his previous departure.
post #17 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by quinney View Post

All these comments are merited, but I think the manner of the transition to a new
CEO could alleviate some people's fears. It won't be like the first time Steve Jobs left.
This time, I think his role will diminish very gradually, rather than abruptly ending like
before. He will probably be a consultant (providing his vision) for a long period of
time after he ceases to be involved in day-to-day issues. The knucklehead factor
will be avoided, because Jobs will be heavily involved in choosing his successor,
unlike the case of his previous departure.

Well said. Happy Holidays!
post #18 of 38
I've been an Apple user since the Apple II+. There is definitely a change afoot in the culture. As evidence of that, I recently just upgraded to the new 15" MBP, and can't believe I've already had to return it for repair, where it is stuck awaiting parts. I'm upset with the fact that the computer is now broken as well as how Apple is treating this problem.

In the past, this machine would have been hot swapped in order to benefit the customer. This is especially true for buyers who, like me, who invested in AppleCare for their computers. Now, tech support refuses to consider a hot swap and instead wants to attempt to fix the machine. They couldn't even force a Genius appointment at my local Apple Store in order to have someone actually look at the computer claiming there were no available appointments. My machine is now lying fallow at an Apple Repair Center "...awaiting parts."

To the reader, this issue may seem unindicative of any change at Apple, which is the topic of this thread, but as proof that there is a change in the culture, check out all the issues with the MacBook Pro under the Apple Discussion groups, especially with the myriad of display issues that are plaguing this new computer. Apple's quality has been much better than this in the past, as has their customer service. When the bottom line is the only focus, quality suffers, and that appears to be a possibility here.

I hope this isn't the first indication of Apple's disregard of their customers. Look at the Big 3 automakers, Eastern Airlines and Pan Am. They were all big corporations, and they're all suffering or suffered from hubris. I sure hope Apple isn't in that same line.
post #19 of 38
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah

Finally, an analyst more idiotic than Kathryn Huberty!
post #20 of 38
Jobs will never die, he'll just go virtual. Or maybe Apple is telling us he has already (?)
post #21 of 38
All I wanted was a Pepsi.
post #22 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by quinney View Post

All these comments are merited, but I think the manner of the transition to a new
CEO could alleviate some people's fears.

Steve Jobs has been more than a CEO - he has been the face of Apple. It may be that he will stop being the face, but continue his CEO duties more privately. I think it would be great if he would let others be at the front for publicity... Maybe the speculation around his health would subside if he didn't make public appearances.
post #23 of 38
There are a lot of talents at Apple. There might even be a potential Steve Jobs replacement among them. But knowing how corporations work, it is unlikely that the right person will be in the right spot at the right time, even if this person exists.

Here is a real basic problem. Steve has never been a subordinate. Everybody else at Apple is. Steve would probably suck as an employee. He would not be a "team player". Would not suck up to the right people, or to anybody probably. He would not complete tasks he was uninterested in (we are talking about a college dropout here). He would likely be fired.

In fact, a guy exactly like Jobs would probably never get through Apple HR to begin with. Certainly not for any management post:

* He dropped out of college after one semester.
* He took LSD and considered this a valuable experience.
* He went backpacking around India to find philosophical enlightenment.
* He cheated Wozniak out of about $2000 on their first partnership doing some work for Atari.
* He has no MBA, never went to Harvard or Yale or anywhere like that.

Apple has talents. So do a lot of companies. But Apple has focus. Focus is something most companies talk about, but few have. Apple's product list is so small, a single person can memorize the whole thing, and even know the history of each product back several generations. This is the case for many of us here.

This is absolutely impossible with any other major electronics manufacturer.

There is a reason for this, two actually. One is that there is in fact exactly one person handling Apple's entire product line: Jobs. The other reason is that Jobs does not believe in being everything to all people, including Apple's employees.

There are probably tons of product ideas floating around at Apple. A lot of these have certainly cost money to develop. But if Steve says no, that's the end of it. With normal managers, this is impossible. They have to justify their budget. If they come up with a dud, they are losers who get sidetracked. There is a huge amount of pressure in most companies to push projects through long after everybody knows they no longer make sense.

Not only that, most employees feel strong pressure to adopt new buzzwords and concepts no matter how ill-advised or poorly defined they might be. The reason is that if they don't, it looks like they are losing their edge. Jobs, on the other hand, decides what he cares about and what he doesn't. And if he doesn't care about something, he's not going to work on it. He also doesn't care what the analysts say. These are people who never have an original idea.

What Jobs does is hard. More important than hard, it's fundamentally counter intuitive to corporate types.

I'd be seriously surprised if Apple without Jobs maintained its focus and vision for longer than the current roadmap. Tim Cook sure as heck isn't going to drive that, or anybody else that I can see.
post #24 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by mazola View Post

I think some analysts need to be institutionalized...

post #25 of 38
That's it, the new Apple product " iBorg" the essence of Steve implanted in
all Mac users by the automatic system update, ....wait for it,

That means now...... " WE THE MAN" !!!!! aw crap I ran out of hard drive space.....
post #26 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alonso Perez View Post

There are a lot of talents at Apple. There might even be a potential Steve Jobs replacement among them. But knowing how corporations work, it is unlikely that the right person will be in the right spot at the right time, even if this person exists.

Here is a real basic problem. Steve has never been a subordinate. Everybody else at Apple is. Steve would probably suck as an employee. He would not be a "team player". Would not suck up to the right people, or to anybody probably. He would not complete tasks he was uninterested in (we are talking about a college dropout here). He would likely be fired.

In fact, a guy exactly like Jobs would probably never get through Apple HR to begin with. Certainly not for any management post:

* He dropped out of college after one semester.
* He took LSD and considered this a valuable experience.
* He went backpacking around India to find philosophical enlightenment.
* He cheated Wozniak out of about $2000 on their first partnership doing some work for Atari.
* He has no MBA, never went to Harvard or Yale or anywhere like that.

Apple has talents. So do a lot of companies. But Apple has focus. Focus is something most companies talk about, but few have. Apple's product list is so small, a single person can memorize the whole thing, and even know the history of each product back several generations. This is the case for many of us here.

This is absolutely impossible with any other major electronics manufacturer.

There is a reason for this, two actually. One is that there is in fact exactly one person handling Apple's entire product line: Jobs. The other reason is that Jobs does not believe in being everything to all people, including Apple's employees.

There are probably tons of product ideas floating around at Apple. A lot of these have certainly cost money to develop. But if Steve says no, that's the end of it. With normal managers, this is impossible. They have to justify their budget. If they come up with a dud, they are losers who get sidetracked. There is a huge amount of pressure in most companies to push projects through long after everybody knows they no longer make sense.

Not only that, most employees feel strong pressure to adopt new buzzwords and concepts no matter how ill-advised or poorly defined they might be. The reason is that if they don't, it looks like they are losing their edge. Jobs, on the other hand, decides what he cares about and what he doesn't. And if he doesn't care about something, he's not going to work on it. He also doesn't care what the analysts say. These are people who never have an original idea.

What Jobs does is hard. More important than hard, it's fundamentally counter intuitive to corporate types.

I'd be seriously surprised if Apple without Jobs maintained its focus and vision for longer than the current roadmap. Tim Cook sure as heck isn't going to drive that, or anybody else that I can see.

While I certainly agree that it would be near impossible for someone like Steve Jobs to make it to a top position in Apple today, I think Steve's first departure taught him, in many ways, that such is a good thing. The one comment I hear most about him once he came back was how focused he was on making both innovative products and making innovative products that people (not just himself) would enjoy.

No one but Steve could have pulled Apple back from oblivion. But now that he's put Apple back where it deserves to be and hired the right people to succeed him, I don't see there being a huge issue. If you watch his keynotes, his engineers surpassed his knowledge long ago (just watch Steve talk about Mass Branch Predictors), but instilling people in the company that share his sense of minimalism and streamlined operational directives will go a long way in the end. He hired them for a reason, after all.

While losing Steve will certainly not be fun, I do believe Apple can live on and retain it's quality without him.
post #27 of 38
As grains of sand pass through the hourglass of time, we age As some have already touched on, succession is certain. The challenge for any company is to forecast, plan, and implement leadership transition.


From my outsiders perspective, part of Apples mountain to climb lies in adjusting the iconic public face of the company. Naturally, that face means different things to different people; and transforming it has different implications and consequences to different people. Knowing that the very character of the Apple engine that drives Wall Street speculation, that fuels the passion of its longstanding and newly arrived consumers, that captures press in ways like few others, it should not get lost on Apple that mixed messages and unexpected signals is unhealthy through and through. Some proactive press releases or a conference call or two on succession would go a long way in keeping the Apple Vision focused. This may run somewhat counter-intuitive to the companys corporate culture, but keeping product development a closely guarded secret is entirely different --- and necessary --- than medium and long term management direction, particularly for a company with such a flat hierarchy. In this case, Apple should tip its hand to disclose --- even in broad strokes --- where and how it will meet the succession-puck. As it follows this mantra for its products, so, too, should it follow it for itself.


.
post #28 of 38
Wow, just think of all the press that will be generated at the sight of 1000 dudes dressed in black, all with less than 10 percent body fat. I can see it now, "Health of entire Apple team in question, stock price drop!!!!"
post #29 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Halvri View Post

But now that he's put Apple back where it deserves to be and hired the right people to succeed him. He hired them for a reason, after all.

I don't see a lot of evidence he hired anybody to succeed him. I think he hired people to augment him, the way a good carpenter would buy the best tools. I think he's got brilliant people (this includes Cook, don't get me wrong), but they are all "vertical" to their task. I don't see any big-picture types, any philosophers.

So these guys would need to run the company by consensus, since none of them get the whole picture. But consensus is slow and is fraught with political dynamics. If executive A supports an initiative by executive B, then B will "owe" A support for the next thing A comes up with, even if it's crap. If not, A will feel betrayed. A will especially feel betrayed if his project is not crap, but is merely OK. If you work on something for a couple of years and it's not that bad, you are likely to convince yourself that it's great.

This isn't evil. It isn't even incompetence. It's just human nature. Today, Apple is actually a very large small business. It cannot become a corporation and stay the same.

Now if I'm reading things right Steve has been in trouble for some time now. He may or may not be seriously planning for the case of his own demise. If he is, he may have identified the right characteristics in some individual, maybe two, and may have picked one of these as his successor. But I don't see who that person could be, nor is there any obvious evidence.
post #30 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by wbrasington View Post

Warning.... clown alert.

Why do people insist on posting on things they have no concept of?

The analyst is right. Companies have cultures. A CEO's biggest role is to define and develop the culture of the company so that everyone is marching in the same direction. The analyst is simply saying that Jobs has done a great job of getting enough people on board that his changes are internalized ('institutionalized'). When a CEO manages to do that well, companies excel. They also survive times when the boss is unavailable for a period of time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wealthychef View Post

Well, plans are all well and good, but without good leadership, a plan quickly goes by the wayside. The spirit and the plan have to be executed by the chief executive, and if that is a dull man like the guy doing the Macworld keynote, Apple will lose its sparkle no matter how much talent they hire. Look at Microsoft. They have talent to spare, but no sparkle. If Apple doesn't come up with another Steve Jobs, I'll be selling my stock.

Apple doesn't need another Jobs. Jobs did something that you rarely see done so well - redefining the culture of the company so that the company stands for something - and everyone knows where the company is going. Another Steve Jobs would be a mistake. Rather, they need a nurturer (not in the HR sense, but in the culture sense) - someone who can build on a well established, successful culture and build a team which can use that culture.

Quote:
Originally Posted by quinney View Post

Hmmmmm. Investing based upon the sparkle of a company. I can't say I have heard of that
before, but I do know a woman who bets on horse races based upon the colors the jockeys
are wearing. Please post again when you do sell. I have been looking for a good buy signal.

Believe it or not, successful investors do it all the time. The culture of the company is one of the major factors in deciding which stocks to pick. If you show me two companies with identical financials while one has a poorly defined culture where employees are at odds with management and everyone's going in a different direction while the other one has a strong team culture and an culture of innovation which all the employees understand and respect, I'd bet on the latter any day of the week - just as most stock picking experts do.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Plus, the "vision" has changed a number of times. Having one key decision-maker is good when it comes to keeping the direction of the company nimble and able to respond to market forces, but when the decisions are bad, they can bring a company down quicker.

That is almost impossible to pull off in a company the size of Apple. Even for Jobs - who has been shown to be an incredible leader - it took many years to make Apple what it is today. A nimble leader with a slow- moving company will fail every time. They will find that they routinely make decisions and the troops are too slow to respond. A successful company is one where the leader has developed a company-wide culture of nimbleness. The leader's role is to define the culture and define the direction of the company, not make every decision every day. Jobs understands that. Early on, he made a large number of decisions - mostly to prove a point. As the company has rallied to what he's trying to do, the stories about him making every single decision have died out. He has developed an exceptional management team which thinks much as he does - and therefore negates the need for him to personally make every decision.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #31 of 38
Sounds like jragosta helped write this article! LOL

I've been a Mac fanatic since the very first Mac 128k rolling out in 1984. I've seen Apple develop through the years and have read just about every book on Apple and Jobs ever published. The fact is that Jobs is too unique to ever be complete institutionalized. Even so, Apple will not up and die when Steve does, although the idiots on Wall Street will certainly bash my AAPL holdings when Steve does go. However, it would be nice to get rid of Steve if it will also get rid of glossy screens, bring back Firewire on low end MacBooks, and make the Mini a power user machine with incredible expandability in a small form factor (anyone remember the SE/30? -- a machine designed during Steve Jobs absence at Apple).

I honestly think that in the future when Jobs is gone, we will see an Apple transition as Disney did without Walt. Yes, Walt still lives on at Disney as Jobs "spirit" certainly will at Apple. But the company much change with the times and construct a new path to greatness.
post #32 of 38
Didn't they once say the same thing about Henry Ford?
post #33 of 38
It is also worthwhile to note that there are various degrees of leadership. While Jobs has a lot of vision, he’s certainly not needed to carry out that vision. He has others doing most of the heavy lifting. I’m sure he put in very long hours in the last 10 years in turning around Apple; however, I don’t believe that’s required now that he has the infrastructure and people set up to carry out his wishes. So long as Jobs is alive, I believe he will ALWAYS be involved in guiding Apple. He might not be there every day because of his poor health but make no mistake that his imprint will still be felt throughout Apple.

What Jobs and the board want now is a way for Jobs to spend less time at Apple to tend to his health. There’s nothing wrong with that. It also will allow for a smoother transition if something were to happen to him. Hopefully, by doing this now, in a couple of years, investors would stop tying the stock price so much to Jobs’ well being. In the long run, it benefits all, including Jobs by not having his well being tied so much to the well being of the stock.
post #34 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by quinney View Post

The knucklehead factor will be avoided, because Jobs will be heavily involved in choosing his successor, unlike the case of his previous departure.

Actually, in a manner of speaking, he did choose his successor last time around. While it certainly wasn't Jobs intention to have Sculley replace him, Jobs did pressure him heavily to leave Pepsi: "Do you want to spend the rest of your life selling sugared water or do you want a chance to change the world?"
post #35 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDW View Post

The fact is that Jobs is too unique...

Jobs is too one-of-a-kind? I think that's how one's spirit gets institutionalized in the first place.

When will the governments realize it's got to be funky, sexy ladies?
-Flight of the Conchords
Reply
When will the governments realize it's got to be funky, sexy ladies?
-Flight of the Conchords
Reply
post #36 of 38
Send in the Steve Jobs Little Me.
post #37 of 38
I'm pretty sure the successor to Jobs will come from outside Apple. But will be brought in before he leaves. There's a word for it (I can't recall) that explains you can't see from inside, one must be on the outside looking in. Steve and Apple kinda had that relationship. He was outside the industry looking in. He had a vision and acted on it with the help from Woz. Together they created their vision, one that we all wanted to share and be a part of. 10 years later he was removed, place outside again. He created that vision again in NeXT but that vision later being OS X and it's abilities that extend to the user. So here we are 30+1 years later. His vision may be the same but the execution is changing with time, it's one we all want to be a part of. It's like life really, changing with time and being shaped and molded over and over again. While your location in life may change by both time and relation your vision and passion never do.

Finding someone like that...

They'll be no replacement to Steve, rather a change in drivers with the same vision. The vision will be the same although the the execution may change. That vision? Change the world and the way we use it. The execution? It's not diversity.
post #38 of 38
Although M$'s ad campaign didn't necessarily do what they wanted, they had a good idea with putting Gates into their commercials. Shows the Windoze fan base that he's still around.

Now, I'm not suggesting that Jobs should do the same kind of TV ads, but if he sticks around after the reigns have been handed over just to "touch base" with the base users (fanboys), that would be a good thing. Maybe pop in a single "I'm a Mac" commercial (for a short run).

I, too, will be sad to see him leave, but I have a feeling he'll still have some influence after retirement. Kind of like the old guy who retires and hands over the machine shop or construction biz to his son. He still gets in the son's face and tells him where he's screwing up , and offers some excellent advice (leaving the actual decision to the new boss) based on years of experience.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Analyst says Steve Jobs' spirit has been institutionalized