And if he hated the skewmorphic designs they would have been DOA and ended up in the digital dumpster. The designer at the top of food chain sets the tone for the entire team. If he or she doesn't then you end up with a jumbled ass of a UI.
Most CS majors consider themselves coders.
Good coders are worth more than good "software engineers" of which you generally only need a few on any given project. As far as people going where the "money flows" as near as I can tell an insufficient number of people are going comp sci. And I haven't been overly impressed with "engineers" who do coding because they couldn't find real work as a EE, AE, ME, etc.
You are right that software development is not an engineering discipline so applying engineering practices against it generally leads to poor results outside of mission/life critical domains that demands a high level of rigor.
As a CS and Software Engineer (yah, that's really a major and engineering discipline*) I'd say you have an overinflated opinion of engineers and engineering. I've seen just as many craptastic results and dysfunctional hardware engineering teams as for software.
* SE PE exams start in 2013 which I might decide to do but probably won't since it's been 15 years since grad school and I'd have to refresh some stuff I don't do much of and there are no study materials for it. The FE exams will actually be harder. Undergrad was 30 years ago.
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.
What is relevant is that apple is the only tech company that "get's it" and is willing to do something better. The others are parasites.
I fail to see why this cannot be a great move in every way.
The day-to-day stock price is something that shouldn't be worried over for longs, however a strong stock that continues an upward trend is important for Apple employees and the massive numbers of AAPL shareholders.
Google around. Forstall is known for being a corporate infighter and a total a**hole.
What the **** is your point? SJ was also known to be an asshole. That doesn't take away from the other qualities he had. These are character flaws that you put up with, when the person brings so much else to the table. You don't look for Mother Theresa in these positions. You find people who have vision, drive, skill, and can execute. He's also the only guy I think can do a half decent job in presenting, compared to Steve.
My guess is that it takes a strong, driving personality like Steve's to keep Scott's similar personality focused on the task at hand. Tim has a different personality and management style and, likely, Scott was disruptive to the new management order.
Not too unusual to see this kind of management reshuffle following the loss of a strong leader.
I think the reason for this is hiding in plain sight. iOS and OS X are being integrated. There can only be one guy in charge of OS development and they chose Federighi over Forstall. There will still be two different operating systems for consumers but they'll share much more code, be developed in tandem by the same team and will be a single platform as far as developers are concerned.
As noted by someone on Twitter this might be the first time the comment 'This wouldn't have happened if Steve Jobs were alive" might actually be reasonable.
To put this in a political perspective, I'd equate Steve Jobs to Saddam Hussain, a leader who kept his people and neighboring countries roiling in terror. Once the leader was gone, the power struggles began in earnest. In the case of the Middle East, the entire region became unbalanced.
Of course this is an extreme comparison for entertainment only, but a strong leader removed from a company has the same effect on the internal balance of a company's people and political structure.
I like the direction of these changes. Ive and Mansfield both getting more influence and responsibility. Browett is out, thank Tim. Forstall? Not sure about that one, but Jony Ive should have say over UI design.
It's indeed good that Browett is out. It shows that Tim doesn't tolerate deviation from the game plan. Didn't Mansfield become a special adviser not long ago? Now he has more responsibilities than ever. Wonder if Forstall will follow in those footsteps.
I disagree about the last part. It's rare that an individual truly gets mechanical/industrial design and UI design. Jobs was sort of talented that way but only at an experiential level. The head of mobile development (or desktop) has to be a software person, one with a strong UI background. There are many talents out there who would dearly love to join Apple.
Permanent advisor = demotion and a that "Your department's being downsized." "You're part of an outplacement." "We're going in a different direction." "We're not picking up your option." Take your pick. I got more.
Yah think Scott will stick around for that? Nah, I think he's rather go out and try to form the next NeXT.
Yep. He has the money and ambition to make his own mark.
• My worst fears are finally coming true. It is because of SCOTT FORSTALL that the Mac's UX is peerless (and not for lack of trying by competitors).
• It is because of SCOTT FORSTALL that iOS is OS X based. It is because of SCOTT FORSTALL that there is an App Store with 700,000+ Apps (Steve Jobs originally wanted only a handful of Apple-made apps [I]à la[/I] a P.I.M./Phone), creating an [I]annual[/I] [B]multi-billion dollar[/B] revenue stream for Apple.
• It is SCOTT FORSTALL that led the creation of the [insert your own superlative] iOS SDK.
• If not for SCOTT FORSTALL, "App" would not be a word in America's common vernacular. (The ad campaign that put the word on the map: "Yeah, there's an App for that.")
• Apple customers and shareholders will rue this day, marking the end of Scott Forstall's removal from the Apple Inc. ecosystem.
• Politics drove this decision. To get things done, you have to ruffle a few feathers, and Scott indeed did his share of that. What if Steve Jobs had not?
• The "bean counters" are in charge at Apple now, and it will show — glaringly. Kill innovation, focus on numbers. Apple Inc. is a Balance Sheet.
• Cook: "I want to thank Scott for all of his many contributions to Apple over his career." The understatement of the century.
• When Scott leaves Apple, he will, of course, sign a non-compete clause and a promise not to use Apple IP at any other company. Those agreements are usually a joke. Scott is young, and whatever company gets him after Apple will be hugely fortunate, and Apple's dominant position (it IS possible for fortunes to change — especially in the volatile tech market. Witness Palm, RIM Blackberry, Motorola, Nokia, Microsoft, HP, Dell, the IBM PC, and on...) is NOT a given, in perpetuity. No company is too big to fail (unless they are thrown bushels of T.A.R.P. dollars).
• Don't expect to see another new Apple Store that is a spectacle and an international tourist attraction. Those stores were all money foolishly wasted, of course. Time to crack down!
• Tim Cook will surely make sure "the trains run on time."
This was bound to happen whenever there was a CEO change. Truth is, in most companies, a good number of people who report to the CEO will think they themselves could do the job and should be successor. That being the case, when the CEO goes, some people are going to be disappointed. Some react well and stay, some react badly and leave. Weak CEOs allow the ones who act badly to not leave, then they have a disaster on their hands.
When I was at Applied Materials there was a CEO change, and one guy in particular, Sass Somekh, who was one of the most important hardware guys in the history of AMAT was clearly put out by not being given the CEOs role. He spent some time kicking up a fuss about various things until he left to be President at Novellus, where by all accounts he proved to be un-inspired. Sadly for AMAT, the CEO they did get proved to be un-inspired as well, but there we go.
Maybe that's happened here. If Forstall was acting up because he was upset at Cook getting the CEO role over him, then Cook has done the right thing. A loose cannon at the top can be a dangerous thing.
Whether Cook will prove to be the right choice as CEO, who knows? It'll take longer than 18 months to find out.
Forstall sold off all of his Apple Stock a few months ago, long before the Maps drama. This has been in planning for a while, probably since Job's exit as CEO.
He sold a large chunk of it, if I recall correctly, but he did not sell all of it.
I think the reason for this is hiding in plain sight. iOS and OS X are being integrated. There can only be one guy in charge of OS development and they chose Federighi over Forstall. There will still be two different operating systems for consumers but they'll share much more code, be developed in tandem by the same team and will be a single platform as far as developers are concerned.
I wonder if Jony will be pushing his minimalist ethos to the UI, or will he simply set the general direction and let Federighi drive development.
Whatever happens, I hope to goodness they fix their buggy, non-intuitive iOS dev tools.
I doubt Forstall's departure had anything to do with Maps. He's been there forever and was close to Jobs. If he's leaving, I'm guessing it was his own decision.
Browett, however, seems like it wasn't a good fix and Tim dropped the axe.
That seems most likely to me too. Sometimes you just get fed up working on the same things. He has over $40m, I'm pretty sure most people here would have retired much sooner.
It must be funny working at Apple having loads of random people talking about you like this, deciding what kind of people they are, based on really small amounts of information. How bad would people feel if that was them going into work every day just doing their job and thousands of strangers start blogging about them?
There were only minor issues with Maps, iOS is awesome and Scott always made great presentations. It's sad to see him go but I expect more senior staff will want to be moving on soon.
Of course he might just be looking for the kind of deal Mansfield got.
you're going to have a go at it no matter how much you screw it up. He probably didn't get anywhere near that but his pay was likely in the millions for just the few months he was there. Most people in the world will work their entire lives and not make anything near that.
There are lots of people that float around between these big companies for short periods. Given half the chance, we'd all do the same.
option a: work for 40 years doing a tedious job making an average salary
option b: work for 6 months, possibly screw it up and walk away a multi-millionaire
What's funny is that in reading this- I totally forgot about passbook. What a collossal failure. I actually love maps, turn by turn, etc. no qualms at all.
But passbook has even MORE potential, but is completely useless. Completely. And it could've and should be a game changer!
What's funny is that in reading this- I totally forgot about passbook. What a collossal failure. I actually love maps, turn by turn, etc. no qualms at all.
But passbook has even MORE potential, but is completely useless. Completely. And it could've and should be a game changer!
What about iWork? GarageBand? Final Cut Pro? All of the other apps that only occasionally receive a touch-up, but largely sit idle until a big push internally comes along?
I think the reason for this is hiding in plain sight. iOS and OS X are being integrated. There can only be one guy in charge of OS development and they chose Federighi over Forstall. There will still be two different operating systems for consumers but they'll share much more code, be developed in tandem by the same team and will be a single platform as far as developers are concerned.
if it means i don't have to pay for iOS & OSX apps separately, I'm all for it. Don't be surprised if iOS remains for the iPhone & OSX ( in some form) comes "down" to the iPad.
It's indeed good that Browett is out. It shows that Tim doesn't tolerate deviation from the game plan. Didn't Mansfield become a special adviser not long ago? Now he has more responsibilities than ever. Wonder if Forstall will follow in those footsteps.
I disagree about the last part. It's rare that an individual truly gets mechanical/industrial design and UI design. Jobs was sort of talented that way but only at an experiential level. The head of mobile development (or desktop) has to be a software person, one with a strong UI background. There are many talents out there who would dearly love to join Apple.
"There are many talents out there who would dearly love to join Apple."
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht
And if he hated the skewmorphic designs they would have been DOA and ended up in the digital dumpster. The designer at the top of food chain sets the tone for the entire team. If he or she doesn't then you end up with a jumbled ass of a UI.
Most CS majors consider themselves coders.
Good coders are worth more than good "software engineers" of which you generally only need a few on any given project. As far as people going where the "money flows" as near as I can tell an insufficient number of people are going comp sci. And I haven't been overly impressed with "engineers" who do coding because they couldn't find real work as a EE, AE, ME, etc.
You are right that software development is not an engineering discipline so applying engineering practices against it generally leads to poor results outside of mission/life critical domains that demands a high level of rigor.
As a CS and Software Engineer (yah, that's really a major and engineering discipline*) I'd say you have an overinflated opinion of engineers and engineering. I've seen just as many craptastic results and dysfunctional hardware engineering teams as for software.
* SE PE exams start in 2013 which I might decide to do but probably won't since it's been 15 years since grad school and I'd have to refresh some stuff I don't do much of and there are no study materials for it. The FE exams will actually be harder. Undergrad was 30 years ago.
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pedromartins
Let it be... The stock is irrelevant.
What is relevant is that apple is the only tech company that "get's it" and is willing to do something better. The others are parasites.
I fail to see why this cannot be a great move in every way.
The day-to-day stock price is something that shouldn't be worried over for longs, however a strong stock that continues an upward trend is important for Apple employees and the massive numbers of AAPL shareholders.
My guess is that it takes a strong, driving personality like Steve's to keep Scott's similar personality focused on the task at hand. Tim has a different personality and management style and, likely, Scott was disruptive to the new management order.
Not too unusual to see this kind of management reshuffle following the loss of a strong leader.
I think the reason for this is hiding in plain sight. iOS and OS X are being integrated. There can only be one guy in charge of OS development and they chose Federighi over Forstall. There will still be two different operating systems for consumers but they'll share much more code, be developed in tandem by the same team and will be a single platform as far as developers are concerned.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
As noted by someone on Twitter this might be the first time the comment 'This wouldn't have happened if Steve Jobs were alive" might actually be reasonable.
To put this in a political perspective, I'd equate Steve Jobs to Saddam Hussain, a leader who kept his people and neighboring countries roiling in terror. Once the leader was gone, the power struggles began in earnest. In the case of the Middle East, the entire region became unbalanced.
Of course this is an extreme comparison for entertainment only, but a strong leader removed from a company has the same effect on the internal balance of a company's people and political structure.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
I like the direction of these changes. Ive and Mansfield both getting more influence and responsibility. Browett is out, thank Tim. Forstall? Not sure about that one, but Jony Ive should have say over UI design.
It's indeed good that Browett is out. It shows that Tim doesn't tolerate deviation from the game plan. Didn't Mansfield become a special adviser not long ago? Now he has more responsibilities than ever. Wonder if Forstall will follow in those footsteps.
I disagree about the last part. It's rare that an individual truly gets mechanical/industrial design and UI design. Jobs was sort of talented that way but only at an experiential level. The head of mobile development (or desktop) has to be a software person, one with a strong UI background. There are many talents out there who would dearly love to join Apple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht
Permanent advisor = demotion and a that "Your department's being downsized." "You're part of an outplacement." "We're going in a different direction." "We're not picking up your option." Take your pick. I got more.
Yah think Scott will stick around for that? Nah, I think he's rather go out and try to form the next NeXT.
Yep. He has the money and ambition to make his own mark.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
I liked Forstall... But I guess he was not a good team player -- and that is required in the absence of Steve Jobs
I certainly hope that Scott's employment agreement has a strong non-compete clause!
You above most people should know that non-competes are unenforceable in California. NDAs are a different matter.
Bye Scott,
Bye Apple,
• My worst fears are finally coming true. It is because of SCOTT FORSTALL that the Mac's UX is peerless (and not for lack of trying by competitors).
• It is because of SCOTT FORSTALL that iOS is OS X based. It is because of SCOTT FORSTALL that there is an App Store with 700,000+ Apps (Steve Jobs originally wanted only a handful of Apple-made apps [I]à la[/I] a P.I.M./Phone), creating an [I]annual[/I] [B]multi-billion dollar[/B] revenue stream for Apple.
• It is SCOTT FORSTALL that led the creation of the [insert your own superlative] iOS SDK.
• If not for SCOTT FORSTALL, "App" would not be a word in America's common vernacular. (The ad campaign that put the word on the map: "Yeah, there's an App for that.")
• Apple customers and shareholders will rue this day, marking the end of Scott Forstall's removal from the Apple Inc. ecosystem.
• Politics drove this decision. To get things done, you have to ruffle a few feathers, and Scott indeed did his share of that. What if Steve Jobs had not?
• The "bean counters" are in charge at Apple now, and it will show — glaringly. Kill innovation, focus on numbers. Apple Inc. is a Balance Sheet.
• Cook: "I want to thank Scott for all of his many contributions to Apple over his career." The understatement of the century.
• When Scott leaves Apple, he will, of course, sign a non-compete clause and a promise not to use Apple IP at any other company. Those agreements are usually a joke. Scott is young, and whatever company gets him after Apple will be hugely fortunate, and Apple's dominant position (it IS possible for fortunes to change — especially in the volatile tech market. Witness Palm, RIM Blackberry, Motorola, Nokia, Microsoft, HP, Dell, the IBM PC, and on...) is NOT a given, in perpetuity. No company is too big to fail (unless they are thrown bushels of T.A.R.P. dollars).
• Don't expect to see another new Apple Store that is a spectacle and an international tourist attraction. Those stores were all money foolishly wasted, of course. Time to crack down!
• Tim Cook will surely make sure "the trains run on time."
• I'm glad I sold all of my AAPL shares at $700.
• Now begins the slow torturous decline of Apple.
This was bound to happen whenever there was a CEO change. Truth is, in most companies, a good number of people who report to the CEO will think they themselves could do the job and should be successor. That being the case, when the CEO goes, some people are going to be disappointed. Some react well and stay, some react badly and leave. Weak CEOs allow the ones who act badly to not leave, then they have a disaster on their hands.
When I was at Applied Materials there was a CEO change, and one guy in particular, Sass Somekh, who was one of the most important hardware guys in the history of AMAT was clearly put out by not being given the CEOs role. He spent some time kicking up a fuss about various things until he left to be President at Novellus, where by all accounts he proved to be un-inspired. Sadly for AMAT, the CEO they did get proved to be un-inspired as well, but there we go.
Maybe that's happened here. If Forstall was acting up because he was upset at Cook getting the CEO role over him, then Cook has done the right thing. A loose cannon at the top can be a dangerous thing.
Whether Cook will prove to be the right choice as CEO, who knows? It'll take longer than 18 months to find out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tyler82
Tim Cook is the Mitt Romney of Apple. Nobody really likes him, he doesn't have much charisma, but he's here to stay, so get used to it!
Not quite. Besides, Mitt's wife insisted he won't run again after this election.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tyler82
Forstall sold off all of his Apple Stock a few months ago, long before the Maps drama. This has been in planning for a while, probably since Job's exit as CEO.
He sold a large chunk of it, if I recall correctly, but he did not sell all of it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jca666us
The problem with Scott Forstall was that Steve Jobs had his back and Steve Jobs is now dead.
I think Jony Ive having full control over UI and hardware design is a masterful decision.
But Craig Federighi will actually be in charge of iOS and OSX, right? So Federighi will report to Ive?
Quote:
Originally Posted by poke
I think the reason for this is hiding in plain sight. iOS and OS X are being integrated. There can only be one guy in charge of OS development and they chose Federighi over Forstall. There will still be two different operating systems for consumers but they'll share much more code, be developed in tandem by the same team and will be a single platform as far as developers are concerned.
I wonder if Jony will be pushing his minimalist ethos to the UI, or will he simply set the general direction and let Federighi drive development.
Whatever happens, I hope to goodness they fix their buggy, non-intuitive iOS dev tools.
That seems most likely to me too. Sometimes you just get fed up working on the same things. He has over $40m, I'm pretty sure most people here would have retired much sooner.
It must be funny working at Apple having loads of random people talking about you like this, deciding what kind of people they are, based on really small amounts of information. How bad would people feel if that was them going into work every day just doing their job and thousands of strangers start blogging about them?
There were only minor issues with Maps, iOS is awesome and Scott always made great presentations. It's sad to see him go but I expect more senior staff will want to be moving on soon.
Of course he might just be looking for the kind of deal Mansfield got.
From his point of view, if someone offers you $56m:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/electronics/9641863/Former-Dixons-boss-John-Browett-leaves-Apple-after-just-six-months.html
you're going to have a go at it no matter how much you screw it up. He probably didn't get anywhere near that but his pay was likely in the millions for just the few months he was there. Most people in the world will work their entire lives and not make anything near that.
There are lots of people that float around between these big companies for short periods. Given half the chance, we'd all do the same.
option a: work for 40 years doing a tedious job making an average salary
option b: work for 6 months, possibly screw it up and walk away a multi-millionaire
But passbook has even MORE potential, but is completely useless. Completely. And it could've and should be a game changer!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andysol
What's funny is that in reading this- I totally forgot about passbook. What a collossal failure. I actually love maps, turn by turn, etc. no qualms at all.
But passbook has even MORE potential, but is completely useless. Completely. And it could've and should be a game changer!
What about iWork? GarageBand? Final Cut Pro? All of the other apps that only occasionally receive a touch-up, but largely sit idle until a big push internally comes along?
Quote:
Originally Posted by poke
I think the reason for this is hiding in plain sight. iOS and OS X are being integrated. There can only be one guy in charge of OS development and they chose Federighi over Forstall. There will still be two different operating systems for consumers but they'll share much more code, be developed in tandem by the same team and will be a single platform as far as developers are concerned.
if it means i don't have to pay for iOS & OSX apps separately, I'm all for it. Don't be surprised if iOS remains for the iPhone & OSX ( in some form) comes "down" to the iPad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harbinger
It's indeed good that Browett is out. It shows that Tim doesn't tolerate deviation from the game plan. Didn't Mansfield become a special adviser not long ago? Now he has more responsibilities than ever. Wonder if Forstall will follow in those footsteps.
I disagree about the last part. It's rare that an individual truly gets mechanical/industrial design and UI design. Jobs was sort of talented that way but only at an experiential level. The head of mobile development (or desktop) has to be a software person, one with a strong UI background. There are many talents out there who would dearly love to join Apple.
"There are many talents out there who would dearly love to join Apple."
Maybe that will happen now.