Bob Mansfield no longer on Apple's exec team, will continue work on special projects [u]

13»

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 57
    s.metcalfs.metcalf Posts: 880member


    Interesting information ulfoaf.


     


    I'm still struggling to see how an iWatch could be a successful product for Apple.  I just don't see it and perhaps this is what they're still struggling with.  It's hard to make a breakthrough device for something people don't actually need or want.


     


    I've long thought however that if they could just put a GPS in the Nano it would greatly enhance its functionality as a fitness tracker for your runs/rides/hikes etc.  I don't want to run with my AU $999 iPhone 5, but I'm perfectly happy to sweat over a $169 iPod.  Not even the iPod Touch has a GPS as far as I'm aware...it's really quite surprising and a silly oversight in my opinion. 

  • Reply 42 of 57
    charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,215member
    blackbook wrote: »
    According to rumors Mansfield was working on the iWatch wearable device, in some capacity, after Tim brought him back.

    Maybe this means that the device is completed or at least nearing completion, and Tim is allowing him to leave now?

    Part of his return was supposedly to oversee the transition to new leadership for his old crew. If he's no longer an exec, that is the part that is likely over
  • Reply 43 of 57
    charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,215member
    I think it is also an SEC violation for someone to be on the executive team of two companies. So he can't run Microsoft and be a Sr VP at Apple. :)

    Wrong person. Scott Forstall is going to run Microsoft.

    Wait until you see Metro in leather
  • Reply 44 of 57
    charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,215member
    ulfoaf wrote: »
    Generally when an executive appears to be demoted and put on a "special project," that special project was something he was already in charge of that isn't going well. He is then asked to put his full attention on it. I have seen this a number of times in different industries.

    Apple marches to its own drum to a degree that I would be careful about applying what you've seen in other places to them. Could be right, could be very wrong
  • Reply 45 of 57
    rayzrayz Posts: 814member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post





    Hmm...I still think it's odd that they'd create a SVP of Technologies position and 8 months later get rid of it. 


     


    IT pundits would have a field day with any company which paid that much money to a bod who wasn't a senior vice president of SOMETHING. 


     


    Bob's getting ready to retire so his responsibilities are being scaled back. I'll be sorry to see him go, but he's certainly earned his pension.

  • Reply 46 of 57
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    charlituna wrote: »
    Wrong person. Scott Forstall is going to run Microsoft.

    Wait until you see Metro in leather

    Is that a metrosexual joke? Please tell me it's a metrosexual joke. :lol:
  • Reply 47 of 57
    dick applebaumdick applebaum Posts: 12,520member
    Haven't read all the comments…

    My SWAG estimate would be:

    That Tim Cook and the board made "Big Bob" an offer he couldn't refuse!

    Bob was offered the presidency of a separate company to design and manufacture electronic components.

    A separate company would offer advantages in organization and flexibility not available within Apple's structure.

    Remember Claris?
  • Reply 48 of 57

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ankleskater View Post


    I think it is also an SEC violation for someone to be on the executive team of two companies.



    It is? Or are you just throwing it out there? (Serious question).

  • Reply 49 of 57
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,705member
    Bob probably semi retired.
  • Reply 50 of 57
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,438member
    Darn! Now there's no bio page for Andrea Jung ¡
  • Reply 51 of 57
    Apple needs to get some youth on their team. I did not know the requirement included being 50 plus.
  • Reply 52 of 57
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    Apple needs to get some youth on their team. I did not know the requirement included being 50 plus.

    Nice FUD.
  • Reply 53 of 57
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,705member
    Apple needs to get some youth on their team. I did not know the requirement included being 50 plus.

    Exactly. I don't know why recent college grads don't have 30+ years of experience when they graduate. Don't they teach that anymore?

    /s
  • Reply 54 of 57
    paul94544paul94544 Posts: 1,027member
    I wouldn't worry about Apple, now if I onwed MSFT stock I really would be crapping my pants
  • Reply 55 of 57
    quinneyquinney Posts: 2,525member
    I think it is also an SEC violation for someone to be on the executive team of two companies.
    It is? Or are you just throwing it out there? (Serious question).

    I guess Elon Musk is in deep shit.
  • Reply 56 of 57
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    I think it is also an SEC violation for someone to be on the executive team of two companies. So he can't run Microsoft and be a Sr VP at Apple. :)

    Steve Jobs ran Pixar and NeXT/Apple simultaneously.
  • Reply 57 of 57
    thepixeldocthepixeldoc Posts: 2,257member
    Interview on Bloomberg with Om Malik re: Bob Mansfield.

    Summary: nothing to worry about and Bob Mansfield is universally loved at Apple by the Exec Team and people that work with and around him. I'll ditto that!

    http://www.bloomberg.com/video/a-lot-of-love-for-mansfield-at-apple-malik-ID_XcKDHSnK6qVhsoqBUyA.html
Sign In or Register to comment.