Forstall's exit says a lot about who is in control at Apple. This is a strong, gutsy move by Cook, one I would have never predicted given Forstall's long tenure and key position. But Jobs wouldn't and didn't hand over the company to someone not up to the job.
Today, John Gruber suggested that Forstall's "design taste, engineering management, abrasive style and the whole iOS Maps thing" led to his demise. Gruber described him as a polarizing executive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich
Steve Jobs was a polarizing figure.
Touché, dude, which leads me suspect Apple is betting the farm on the wrong horse...
IMHO, the "squares" are taking over and consolidating their positions at Apple...
More or less, which is what is so shit about all the things in iOS 5 that were working that are now broken, the cell data screw up etc. Forstall isn't some newbie after all.
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
But did Scott bring enough to the table to ignore that he was an asshole. Perhaps he didn't.
Scott Forstal will not leave. He will be given a different management position.
Perhaps permanent adviser to Tim Cook.
Time will tell.
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.
Despite his personality problems Forestall is probably the most important employee at Apple. He is to software what Ive is to hardware. This announcement should be treated in the same way as if it were announced that Jony Ive was leaving the firm. It's probably very bad news.
While Forstall deserves credit for doing amazing things for iOS early on, I think iOS has stagnated quite a bit in recent years. The look is sometimes gaudy and cartoonish. Everything is siloed and excessively app-centric. The lock screen, homescreen, etc. are stuck in 2007. Simple things like moving files are forced into a tedious iTunes syncing process. Not that it all falls on Forstall personally.
I don't know Ive's experience in UIs per se, but I trust his taste and intuition 110%. IMO Apple's software needs to be like its hardware more than vice versa. Personally, I'd love iOS to be more sophisticated and less cartoony.
Yes! Forstall's is going, thank god, I couldn't stand that smarmy s.o.b.
He was good at his job and while Maps was a disaster (which I think pushed the release of Aperture 4 back) he wouldn't be kicked for that, nope, he wants to leave, my guess is that he isn't "valued" as much now SJ has gone, he's that kind a guy.
As for the Dixons guy, well, what did ya expect from a Dixons guy, lettin' a fool like that in and look what he did, kick him the hell out!
I like the line up: no women and no political correctness, just the right people for the job!
I like all the trolls jumping in here proclaiming Forstall was 'holding iOS back'. Unbelievable. Didn't SJ promise him that he'd 'always have a place' at Apple before he left? I guess not.
As for the Dixons guy, well, what did ya expect from a Dixons guy, lettin' a fool like that in and look what he did, kick him the hell out!
I like the line up: no women and no political correctness, just the right people for the job!
So you can't have the right people for the job if there are any women? WTF?! Next you'll tell us that if Sandy is a legitimate hurricane that nature has ways of shutting it down.
Forstall's exit says a lot about who is in control at Apple. This is a strong, gutsy move by Cook, one I would have never predicted given Forstall's long tenure and key position. But Jobs wouldn't and didn't hand over the company to someone not up to the job.
Today, John Gruber suggested that Forstall's "design taste, engineering management, abrasive style and the whole iOS Maps thing" led to his demise. Gruber described him as a polarizing executive.
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.
Good thing if Jonny Ive oversees UI desiign, some of the recent decisions about icons and apps are just too literal and could do with a more streamlined and aesthetic makeover. If his hardware decisions are anything to go by he can do this. Pity about Scott Forstall though, he was a likeable guy and had enthusiasm and stage presence! Compared to him Tim Cook has the demeanour of John Hodgeman - the nice but uncool 'PC' actor. Steve is a hard act to follow. Sorry Tim!
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!
I'm not sure what you mean. I like Tim Cook quite a bit and I doubt that I'm the only one. On top of that, I don't know that he's flip flopped over and over again.
I like the Mapsgate comment. I have responded in other forums, who complained about how bad it was, and how Steve would have handled that. Well, now we know how Tim handled it. I liked Forstall's presentation skills, and he obviously did a HUGE amount for Apple, but we have all read stories how he had a big head, and was a pain in the ass to work with. The Maps?.........well, the buck stops (software wise) with Scott, and he screwed up big time IMHO.
I met him several years ago at Macworld, and was very impressed with him. However, stories started to build year after year, about him taking credit when credit was not totally due, and it might just have eventually bit him in the butt.
Oddly, I am using iOS 6 maps to quickly locate the areas of NYC that are in the Sandy.storm news (crane dangle, building facia collapse) and compare them in 3D Flyover... Really addicting...
As a former colleague of Scott's the comment is that of a fool. As a former colleague of his at NeXT and Apple the notion that one person [outside of Steve] makes the design decisions for the architecture and UI implementations is insulting to the teams of folks that do the heavy lifting. One only realizes how highly focused, detailed oriented and passionate the teams are at Apple, relative to the rest of the industry, after one leaves to try out new digs.
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.
Quote:
Most people in the industry are hacks. Most computer science majors consider themselves Engineers.
Most CS majors consider themselves coders.
Quote:
They aren't. They never will be. Completely different disciplines. Most people in this industry are ill-suited to being in this industry, much like the Medical world. People go where the money flows and it often results in a complete waste of time for them and confrontations with driven people who have zero tolerance for ill-suited bodies filling up slots other people more well-suited should occupy.
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.
Quote:
Being both a M.E. and CS gives me that unique understanding.
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 and honestly I only want P.E. on my business card so uppity MEs and EEs will STFU about how software engineering isn't engineering blah blah...
Actually SwE isn't really engineering IMO but I guess if they let Systems Engineers (IMO not really engineering either) into the club they had to let us in too.
Comments
Originally Posted by JBHoule
Forstall's exit says a lot about who is in control at Apple. This is a strong, gutsy move by Cook, one I would have never predicted given Forstall's long tenure and key position. But Jobs wouldn't and didn't hand over the company to someone not up to the job.
Today, John Gruber suggested that Forstall's "design taste, engineering management, abrasive style and the whole iOS Maps thing" led to his demise. Gruber described him as a polarizing executive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich
Steve Jobs was a polarizing figure.
Touché, dude, which leads me suspect Apple is betting the farm on the wrong horse...
IMHO, the "squares" are taking over and consolidating their positions at Apple...
The beginning of the end? Only time will tell.
More or less, which is what is so shit about all the things in iOS 5 that were working that are now broken, the cell data screw up etc. Forstall isn't some newbie after all.
But did Scott bring enough to the table to ignore that he was an asshole. Perhaps he didn't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleSauce007
Mark this post...
Scott Forstal will not leave. He will be given a different management position.
Perhaps permanent adviser to Tim Cook.
Time will tell.
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.
While Forstall deserves credit for doing amazing things for iOS early on, I think iOS has stagnated quite a bit in recent years. The look is sometimes gaudy and cartoonish. Everything is siloed and excessively app-centric. The lock screen, homescreen, etc. are stuck in 2007. Simple things like moving files are forced into a tedious iTunes syncing process. Not that it all falls on Forstall personally.
I don't know Ive's experience in UIs per se, but I trust his taste and intuition 110%. IMO Apple's software needs to be like its hardware more than vice versa. Personally, I'd love iOS to be more sophisticated and less cartoony.
He was good at his job and while Maps was a disaster (which I think pushed the release of Aperture 4 back) he wouldn't be kicked for that, nope, he wants to leave, my guess is that he isn't "valued" as much now SJ has gone, he's that kind a guy.
As for the Dixons guy, well, what did ya expect from a Dixons guy, lettin' a fool like that in and look what he did, kick him the hell out!
I like the line up: no women and no political correctness, just the right people for the job!
I certainly hope that Scott's employment agreement has a strong non-compete clause!
suddenly newton: If Ive is in charge of UI then you can say goodbye to skeuomorphic designs, which I *really* like!
And he has one. He's the advisor to the CEO.
So you can't have the right people for the job if there are any women? WTF?! Next you'll tell us that if Sandy is a legitimate hurricane that nature has ways of shutting it down.
I wouldn't count on that. Some of it might stay just a bit toned down. Some of the chintz like the 'knob' shadows that move will be what is sure to go
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBHoule
Forstall's exit says a lot about who is in control at Apple. This is a strong, gutsy move by Cook, one I would have never predicted given Forstall's long tenure and key position. But Jobs wouldn't and didn't hand over the company to someone not up to the job.
Today, John Gruber suggested that Forstall's "design taste, engineering management, abrasive style and the whole iOS Maps thing" led to his demise. Gruber described him as a polarizing executive.
I think you're right. Tim Cook is a strong man.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shameer Mulji
I don't put any stock, no pun intended, in the stock market or what Wall Street says. They're like vampires.
Goog point; I totally agree! Wall Street is like a tail and no way should we allow it to wag the dog.
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.
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!
I'm not sure what you mean. I like Tim Cook quite a bit and I doubt that I'm the only one. On top of that, I don't know that he's flip flopped over and over again.
I think Jony Ive having full control over UI and hardware design is a masterful decision.
Oddly, I am using iOS 6 maps to quickly locate the areas of NYC that are in the Sandy.storm news (crane dangle, building facia collapse) and compare them in 3D Flyover... Really addicting...
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer
As a former colleague of Scott's the comment is that of a fool. As a former colleague of his at NeXT and Apple the notion that one person [outside of Steve] makes the design decisions for the architecture and UI implementations is insulting to the teams of folks that do the heavy lifting. One only realizes how highly focused, detailed oriented and passionate the teams are at Apple, relative to the rest of the industry, after one leaves to try out new digs.
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.
Quote:
Most people in the industry are hacks. Most computer science majors consider themselves Engineers.
Most CS majors consider themselves coders.
Quote:
They aren't. They never will be. Completely different disciplines. Most people in this industry are ill-suited to being in this industry, much like the Medical world. People go where the money flows and it often results in a complete waste of time for them and confrontations with driven people who have zero tolerance for ill-suited bodies filling up slots other people more well-suited should occupy.
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.
Quote:
Being both a M.E. and CS gives me that unique understanding.
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 and honestly I only want P.E. on my business card so uppity MEs and EEs will STFU about how software engineering isn't engineering blah blah...
Actually SwE isn't really engineering IMO but I guess if they let Systems Engineers (IMO not really engineering either) into the club they had to let us in too.