Bob Mansfield stayed at Apple after CEO Tim Cook offered him 'exorbitant' $2M-per-month

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 60

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by MusicComposer View Post


    John C. Reilly works at Apple?





    Steve Ballmer moonlighting, actually.

  • Reply 22 of 60
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,331member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    Might also explain the travesty of iMac, Mac Mini, and Mac Pro releases.


     


    Just leave well enough alone, Cook. Let the people who've done so well for Apple pick their own replacements.



     


    Nothing more rich that Tallest Skil condascendingly giving Tim Cook advice. Just amazing on so many levels. Mansfield is responsible for the A6 chip, which is clearly an insanely good product and an incredible feat of engineering. Same goes for other internal hardware on iOS devices, going back the past several years. Mansfield is worth definitely alot more than 2 million/month to Apple, and clearly he's shown himself to be uniquely skilled in his position. The 'stay with us cause we're changing the world' only works for so long. So really, what real issue do you have with additional compensation as motivation? Because you're butt-hurt by lack of iMac updates? Maybe, just MAYBE Tim Cook has more insight into this particular situation than you, which you have zero real information on yet feel inclined to attack Cook. Apparently the hardware team had an 'insurrection' about reporting to his replacement- and Cook wanted Mansfield to stay on as an advisor for as long as needed to make a smooth transition. Who are you to say it was a wrong move?

  • Reply 23 of 60
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,889member
    "But to a surprising degree, it's doing fine."

    What kind of BS line is this? Surprising? Really? Tim Cook managed the Supply Chain to almost perfection. Jobs will be missed but it isn't surprising that his hand picked exec would be fine for the job.
  • Reply 24 of 60
    juandljuandl Posts: 230member
    Apple might be making a ton more money and be different than most companies to a certain extent. But it will never be the same without S. Jobs.
    It will seem like its coasting along fine with the iPhones and iPads for a few more years (5 or 6). And people around the globe will marvel at the new Headquarters when its finished. But the new products that need to come out, to make Apple the innovator that it has proved to be will suffer.
    There will be the butting of heads as far as where they want to direct their talents. How much change they will be willing to make in the different fields they want to 'attempt' to take over. It will not be a given. Things will tighten up as far as what they might think they can conquer again.
    The iPhone makes a big chunk of money for them, it also shows off their superior foundation to make possible the continued improvement for upgrades.
    But that can only survive with the carriers funding the profits needed for the company to remain as the most richest in the world. It will be interesting to see how long China Mobile (whenever they come on board) will pay for the subsidies. You know very well that Verizon and ATT are having secret meetings somewhere about what to do exactly about that. Exxon and several other companies will probably overtake them by then.
    But, that is not the most important thing. Once the new attempt at a different field starts to show that it is not as easy to conquer. Like what has happened with the A TV,
    and perhaps even what is happening with the Car integration system. You keep hearing about them, but nothing seems to appear in the horizon. Right now, if iTunes was not as appealing, or better yet as all consuming and as simple to use, more people would be trying out Android then are already doing.

    Guess what I am I am trying to say. That without a personality like Steve Jobs. But also with the all powerful position that he had. The letting all others know that they would attack the market with an item like the iPod. You have to believe that when the Bob Manfields, the Scott Forstalds, and even the Jonny Ives, were perhaps to impressed with that idea (or perhaps some were). But you cannot fully appreciate how much that power to make that decision, and have the whole ship follow that direction, makes it possible for good things happen. But also the humongous possibility that a certain 'hail mary' decision might NOT be the right decision.
    WHO WILL MAKE THAT CALL WHEN IT COMES UP?

    (just wondering)
  • Reply 25 of 60
    gustavgustav Posts: 826member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    Apple has distorted what everyone considers a meaningful release cycle into what becomes an arduous wait for new computers for the entire latter half thereof. Should the next revisions of these products have little to no changes to them that previous, shorter cycle releases had to their predecessors, particularly since chips usable for meaningful updates have long since been released, it would be absurd. 


     


    I don't like him turning computers into a 'once a year, if that' prospect.


     


    So where ARE all these halo sales? Why have Mac sales been going down? Shouldn't they have 25% marketshare in the US by now?



    Tim Cook has been CEO for approximately one year. For you to assert with any validity that he is the cause of the "once a year, if that" prospect, you need at least a few years. Apple is not a PC vendor where they issue speed bumps and spec changes every month all for the sake of a couple percentage points of performance increase. They haven't done that in a long time. I don't know why you expect it now. They'll wait until there's a meaningful performance or architectural change.


     


    Besides, given the whining from people who bought a Mac a month before a new model comes out, I can't blame them for constantly upgrading their products for the sake of a little speed bump.


     


    And Apple's Mac sales have been increasing for the past few years. Mac sales have not been going down at all. I don't know where you got that figure.

  • Reply 26 of 60
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,889member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by waldobushman View Post



    Apple is doing fine -- no more late night phone calls?

    Given Apple's many failures with iOS 6 and perhaps iPhone 5, all of which can and should have been caught prior to public sale, I'd say Apple is definitely not doing fine.

    It may be that Jobs was a pain the asymptote but perhaps this is what is required to come close to building truly great products.




    Jobs released MobileMe in all its infamous glory. What "many" failures in iOS 6? the only complaints I see is with Maps. You gotta start somewhere. Apple should have said it's a work in progress.

  • Reply 27 of 60


    Originally Posted by antkm1 View Post


    Duh, I know that...the real question is why?  I suppose speculation is pointless since we probably will never know beyond what this article states.



     


    Exactly. I don't figure we'll ever know why he wanted to retire or why he came back unless he himself explains in an interview or book or whatever.


     



    Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post

    Mansfield is responsible for the A6 chip, which is clearly an insanely good product and an incredible feat of engineering.


     


    Is he? It wasn't the PA Semi team?


     



    So really, what real issue do you have with additional compensation as motivation?


     


    None. I'm just curious why someone who wanted to retire would come back for more money as just a consultant, title-free.






    Because you're butt-hurt by lack of iMac updates?



     


    Grow up.


     


    Cook isn't infallible.






    Originally Posted by Gustav View Post

    Tim Cook has been CEO for approximately one year. For you to assert with any validity that he is the cause of the "once a year, if that" prospect, you need at least a few years.



     


    What does THAT have to do with Tim Cook? I said no such thing.


     




    Apple is not a PC vendor where they issue speed bumps and spec changes every month all for the sake of a couple percentage points of performance increase. They haven't done that in a long time.



     


    Yeah, June 2012. Long time. Never mind the dozens of times before that. You don't remember the early Core 2s, even, where the charts would show 15-20% improvement over the last model? That's not "just a speed bump", even when they DID do just clock speed bumps while staying in the same chipset? 


     



    They'll wait until there's a meaningful performance or architectural change.


     


    Yes, it's called Ivy Bridge and was released at the beginning of this year. Only the laptops have those chips while the Mac Mini, which uses laptop chips, does not. The iMac's Ivy Bridge chips were released before the laptop ones, even.


     



    Besides, given the whining from people who bought a Mac a month before a new model comes out…



     


    Those people really just need to do research before buying. I don't have much sympathy for them either, and it's not like their computers instantly break or something.


     




    And Apple's Mac sales have been increasing for the past few years. Mac sales have not been going down at all.




     


    Oh, guess they didn't last quarter. But I don't think an increase of 3k units, particularly when they DID go down just this year's first quarter, isn't very helpful. 


     


  • Reply 28 of 60
    antkm1antkm1 Posts: 1,441member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gustav View Post


    Tim Cook has been CEO for approximately one year. For you to assert with any validity that he is the cause of the "once a year, if that" prospect, you need at least a few years. Apple is not a PC vendor where they issue speed bumps and spec changes every month all for the sake of a couple percentage points of performance increase. They haven't done that in a long time. I don't know why you expect it now. They'll wait until there's a meaningful performance or architectural change.


     


    Besides, given the whining from people who bought a Mac a month before a new model comes out, I can't blame them for constantly upgrading their products for the sake of a little speed bump.


     


    And Apple's Mac sales have been increasing for the past few years. Mac sales have not been going down at all. I don't know where you got that figure.



    Agreeing with you and...Seriously, with the products that TS mentions (iMac, Mac Mini & Pro)  What else is there to innovate?  Form-Factor Change? Thinner? Lighter? Faster?  Well, faster will come when they think it's necessary.  But the other three are probably at it's end with Apple.  Spend the time and resources on the products that are thriving.  Thinner and Lighter are for Laptops and Tablets and smartphones.  Who would want an iMac or a Mac Mini that's thinner anyway?  If you want a thinner iMac, get a Macbook and an TB Display.  The options are there for you.  It's been shown that desktop sales have lessened now that tablets and Laptops are taking over the world.  So, why bother updating something just to try and spark a few extra sales?  They're doing fine, not to mention that those three devices are already light-years faster and more powerful than the laptops and tablets anyway.

  • Reply 29 of 60
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,889member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    Apple has distorted what everyone considers a meaningful release cycle into what becomes an arduous wait for new computers for the entire latter half thereof. Should the next revisions of these products have little to no changes to them that previous, shorter cycle releases had to their predecessors, particularly since chips usable for meaningful updates have long since been released, it would be absurd. 


     


    Happy? 


     


     


    I don't like him turning computers into a 'once a year, if that' prospect.


     


    So where ARE all these halo sales? Why have Mac sales been going down? Shouldn't they have 25% marketshare in the US by now?





    Macs refresh every 18-24 months. I believe it's always been that way.


     


    Mac Sales have been going up, outpacing the PC industry.

  • Reply 30 of 60
    antkm1antkm1 Posts: 1,441member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    Oh, guess they didn't last quarter. But I don't think an increase of 3k units, particularly when they DID go down just this year's first quarter, isn't very helpful. 


     




    There's more to these figures than what you imply.  Consider all the rumors going on this year prior to WWDC about updated Macs.  Another point to those figures might be that people were holding off until Apple makes their scheduled yearly announcement for updated Mac HW.  Few expected Apple to announce Mountain Lion, a major OSX update, so soon after Lion.  Many users and Companies already purchased Lion-based machines last year when Sandy Bridge came out and probably won't update.  There are many other factors than just desktop sales.  As for the Pro, Who knows.  The Pro and the Mini seem to be the two desktops that are always behind on updates.

  • Reply 31 of 60
    charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,217member
    Might also explain the travesty of iMac, Mac Mini, and Mac Pro releases.

    Unless you have some kind of insider information that there has been a delay etc that comment is out of line. Yeah some folks don't like how the Mac Pro was updated. Yes it's been a while since the iMac and Mini were updated. But we know nothing about why things are the way they are. Perhaps everything is on the original schedule because Apple is waiting for some element, controlled by another company, to be ready. They never revel way in advance so they wouldnt tell us that there will be this or that once X is ready for release. They just wait until it is.

    So give up your source with name, position etc to the contrary or stop acting like those hit whoring hyperbole writing bloggers on every site. I would like to think some skeezy behavior is well beneath you
    Just leave well enough alone, Cook. Let the people who've done so well for Apple pick their own replacements.
    Bob likely did, with Tim's blessing, and said replacement is still in place. Those sources could be taking smack and the truth is that they might be the folks, and the only folks, that don't want Dan as a boss. Or they might be pulled out of the writers butt and don't exist.

    Similar to what was done with Woz, Steve had he lived, etc Bob was offered an advisors position which might have actually had nothing to do with this alleged issue and everything to do with rewarding Bob with a job well done. He gets a nice 'pension', gets a stock bonus and probably ends up working one day a month for all of that. The rest he gets to spend doing retiree stuff. It would also be a way to keep him from going to another company. If they are paying him then he is still Apple's employee and would have to have Apple's permission to work in anything that could be a conflict of interest.

    In the tv industry we do a similar thing with show stars. We might not end them for every single episode but we want to make sure if the writers change their mind they aren't off doing something else so we pay them for every episode so they are still 'on the clock' with us. If some old show wants them to do a one off, those producers have to contact us to arrange schedules around us. And so on.
  • Reply 32 of 60
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 5,858member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jungmark View Post




    Macs refresh every 18-24 months. I believe it's always been that way.


     


    Mac Sales have been going up, outpacing the PC industry.





    Yes, they're going up relative to PC industry.  However, I'm not a fan of the delayed iMac refresh.  Once a year was the max, and now it's even longer.  I'm curious what's up with that.  I hope it means they've got something serious in skunkworks planned for the iMac.  I really hope so.



    I also think iMac sales have been going down simply because everyone is waiting for the new one to come out.  I'm certainly not going to buy one right now - as nice as they are - knowing that a refresh is imminent.  I know I'm not the only one and there are thousands, if not tens or hundreds of thousands thinking the exact same thing.



    I'd really like to get a new iMac to retire my 2009 27" i7.  It's time.  My ideal skunkworks iMac:  27" Retina w/SSD ala MBA blade cards, and whatever high-horsepower CPU/GPU they can cram into it.



    The conspiracy theorist in me is telling me they're holding off due to Retina screens testing and yield quantities.  :)



    Come on Apple, get with the program.

  • Reply 33 of 60
    charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,217member
    Apple has distorted what everyone considers a meaningful release cycle into what becomes an arduous wait for new computers for the entire latter half thereof.

    Ah there it is. It's not about Apple but your ego. You think you are sooooo important that Apple should do what you want, when you want it. And, despite years of not telling their plans in advance unless it requires FCC or other approvals that will leak it anyway, you are mad that they haven't told you what is going on because you demand that information. So you are making baseless assumptions etc.

    I take it back, Forbes etc should hire you today. Hyperbolic hit whoring is not beneath you.
  • Reply 34 of 60
    What Talkest Skill says makes perfect sense - if the iMac was to get an upgrade without Retina it should have been out months ago.
  • Reply 35 of 60


    Originally Posted by antkm1 View Post

    But the other three are probably at it's end with Apple.  Spend the time and resources on the products that are thriving. So, why bother updating something just to try and spark a few extra sales?  They're doing fine, not to mention that those three devices are already light-years faster and more powerful than the laptops and tablets anyway.


     


    They're not doing fine, and I don't see how abandoning the video and audio production markets, the CAD market, and other high- and even mid-range stuff by not updating the Mac Pro or the iMac will help the rest of their products 'thrive'. 


     


    Do we really want professionals of all fields using PCs and only consumers using Macs?





    Originally Posted by jungmark View Post

    Macs refresh every 18-24 months. I believe it's always been that way.


     


    Unless you're talking about the Mac Pro, that's way off.


     






    Originally Posted by antkm1 View Post

    Consider all the rumors going on this year prior to WWDC about updated Macs.


     


    And when that didn't happen, defying logic and past experience, people were upset and either waited or bought something else. MANY waited.






    Another point to those figures might be that people were holding off until Apple makes their scheduled yearly announcement for updated Mac HW.



     


    What?





    Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

    Unless you have some kind of insider information that there has been a delay etc that comment is out of line.


     


    That's why I said "barring any significant, heretofore unknown change that will come with the next updates".






    The rest he gets to spend doing retiree stuff. It would also be a way to keep him from going to another company. If they are paying him then he is still Apple's employee and would have to have Apple's permission to work in anything that could be a conflict of interest.



     


    I buy your take on this, particularly that part.


     



    Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

    Ah there it is. It's not about Apple but your ego. You think you are sooooo important that Apple should do what you want, when you want it.


     


    Ri~ght. I'm the only one that thinks this. Certainly explains Mac sales recently and the great number of people unsatisfied with current offerings because they're over a year old at the LEAST.






    Originally Posted by iSheldon View Post

    What Talkest Skill says makes perfect sense - if the iMac was to get an upgrade without Retina it should have been out months ago.


     



    Tha~t's not at all what I'm saying.

  • Reply 36 of 60
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,331member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    Grow up.


     


    Cook isn't infallible.


     


     




    Not sure what's more pathetic, you telling me to grow up, or assessing performance of a product by comparing sales QoQ instead of YoY. You just don't do that, it's not indicative of anything. 


     


    And no, Tim Cook isn't infallible, and you know damn well I wasn't implying he was. What I was saying was how ridiculous it is for you to bash him over a decision in which you're completely unaware of the internal factors and dynamics at play. You're not educated in the least about the environment in which that decision was made, so why state as a fact that it was the wrong call? It's something you do over and over again- about everything. I don't need to believe that Cook is infallible, for me to believe that he's in a much better position to make an educated, correct call on retaining talent than someone like you, who at the best of times has only bits and pieces of rumors with which to guide your opinions, instead of the entire picture, with the real facts, in crystal clarity that Tim Cook can see. Isn't that a reasonable asessment? Not that difficult of a concept, yet you always act purposely obtuse when you refuse to aknowledge someone's point. 

  • Reply 37 of 60
    gazoobeegazoobee Posts: 3,754member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    Might also explain the travesty of iMac, Mac Mini, and Mac Pro releases.


     


    Just leave well enough alone, Cook. Let the people who've done so well for Apple pick their own replacements.



     


    This seems over the top to me.  "Travesty"?  Really?  


     


    Also, as I read this article (and others), your assertion that Tim somehow "interfered" with the process of choosing the replacement is way off.  No one else has suggested anything of the kind as far as I'm aware.  The replacement guy, was the guy that was always going to be the replacement, not someone Tim Cook picked over and above the objections of Mansfield on a whim as you seem to imply. 

  • Reply 38 of 60
    gazoobeegazoobee Posts: 3,754member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by NeilM View Post



    "Travesty" has become one of those internet words that people keep writing without knowing what they mean.


     


    Indeed.  A small delay in the updating of a popular computer line is hardly in the same league as most things one would want to label "travesties." 

  • Reply 39 of 60


    Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

    This seems over the top to me.  "Travesty"?  Really?  


     


    When the parts have been available for months… 




    I get your point on the other part.

  • Reply 40 of 60


    Drop in a bucket... I mean drop in a barrel. He deserves it and it's helping Apple, so the man is doing Apple a favor by agreeing to stay.  Nothing exorbitant here!

     

Sign In or Register to comment.