I do hope Mr Cook keeps healthy. For fifty-two, he looks very thin, and has aging skin beyond his years. Steve experimented with his diet to his detriment and could it be that Tim has some interesting food peculiarities?
Tim Cook is a health nut! He starts his day at 5am with a vigorous workout. He is also an avid cyclist and friends with Lance Armstrong and on the board of directors of Nike. He does have one curious dietary habit. He eats a lot of protein/energy bars throughout the day.
He's not Steve and in today's world we expect the CEO to be very technical and visionary.
You mean unlike "tech visionary" CEOs like Ballmer, Page, Bezos, Kwon, Dell or Ellison? Because the last time I checked, Wall St wanted CEOs to run their companies well, not be chief tastemaker & "product guy." Jobs was in a class by himself; he is not the "new standard" for tech CEOs.
FUD or not. Some hardware engineers are leaving Apple. In general, talent retention is a challenge for every successful Silicon Valley company. Everyone of them. To deny this is not just ignorant but is in fact a form of trolling in itself.
"Trolling," there's that word. Interesting you should bring it up . . .
Anyway, the Reuters piece clearly wishes to implant a meme in susceptible brains that hardware engineers are jumping ship because of Tim Cook's leadership. No one is quoted by name, just sources with ties to Apple, or some such bullshit.
If you want to let that stand as legitimate journalism, go ahead on. A decent news organization would fact-check that all kinds of ways and back it up somehow with names or stats from a checkable source. As it stands it's just gossip of a very suspect kind.
And yes, your niggling detail is awesomely obvious, but irrevelant. Engineers are leaving Apple all the time, before and after Tim Cook took over.
You mean unlike "tech visionary" CEOs like Ballmer, Page, Bezos, Kwon, Dell or Ellison? Because the last time I checked, Wall St wanted CEOs to run their companies well, not be chief tastemaker & "product guy." Jobs was in a class by himself; he is not the "new standard" for tech CEOs.
Last time I checked, running a company well meant also having a vision.
Ballmer and Dell don't seem to get it. The share price seems to reflect that... either flat, MSFT, or down, DELL, over the last 10 years.
Ellison runs his company well, keeps his nose to the grindstone, knows his company's core strengths. Share price of Oracle is up over the last 10 years.
Page, Bezos and Kwon Oh Hyun seem to have at least some vision and they all appear to run their respective companies quite well...
and the share price of each of these companies seems to reflect that over the last 10 years.
"Trolling," there's that word. Interesting you should bring it up . . .
Anyway, the Reuters piece clearly wishes to implant a meme in susceptible brains that hardware engineers are jumping ship because of Tim Cook's leadership. No one is quoted by name, just sources with ties to Apple, or some such bullshit.
If you want to let that stand as legitimate journalism, go ahead on. A decent news organization would fact-check that all kinds of ways and back it up somehow with names or stats from a checkable source. As it stands it's just gossip of a very suspect kind.
And yes, your niggling detail is awesomely obvious, but irrevelant. Engineers are leaving Apple all the time, before and after Tim Cook took over.
It's Reuters. No one should expect legitimate journalism from them. Lets not forget they gave us this:
Too bad Google is going the way of GE when it comes to using productivity matrices to measure daily work performance instead of actually just meeting project deadlines.
Then Apple tanked under the helm of a soda salesman.
Then, he REDEFINED Apple.
Then leadership was handed to a proven leader and supply chain master and apple sold more than ever.
Time Cook REFINES Apple.
The last thing Apple needed was another "rock star" CEO. they needed a corporate genius who loves, respects, and thoroughly represents the inherent DNA set in place. not only that, but it seems he carries that DNA too. he is not a man trying to prop up a corporate corpse filled with that DNA. He carries it. And he propogates it. that is the difference that is confusing "analysts" everywhere today. Every company wants to do that. Apple is actually succeeding.
Apple is and always has been about being the best there is at what they do.
Steve Jobs said a while back that they aren't concerned with being the biggest. But they Apple existed to make the best products in the world.
And now they are doing that better than ever.
Much respect to Tim Cook. He is a man who earned the respect of Steve Jobs, the board, and every employee who has talked about him, whether on his good side or bad.
I don't think there could be a better man for the job,.
I do hope Mr Cook keeps healthy. For fifty-two, he looks very thin, and has aging skin beyond his years. Steve experimented with his diet to his detriment and could it be that Tim has some interesting food peculiarities?
A junk food or SAD, Standard American Diet (high carbohydrate grains, legumes and starchy vegetables lead the pyramid) can be lacking in nutrients, especially as one ages, and could lead him down the trail that did Steve in if he is also so inclined to follow. Many just assume because of the food guide and media debate that animal products are bad and plant source foods are the better, healthy alternative.
Here is not the place to argue the superiority of Vegan versus Paleo diets. It's just that from pictures and videos he does look far older than most men his age.
Actually thin is the healthiest way to be from a long life perspective. Unless you have an underlying issue such as cancer, digestive issues, or an eating disorder (some may point out that Jobs had all three) if you are 52 and still thin, then you are probably going to outlive your counterparts. How thin is too thin, you may ask? Well, if you look up that information, it turns out that the ideal weight from a long life standpoint is a lot thinner than most people would assume. For instance, ideal weight for a 6 foot 48 year old man is only 166. Sounds too skinny to me, but I do believe that our expectations for what is "normal" or "healthy" in the developed world are completely skewed by our observations of what people tend to look like (which is generally overweight and unhealthy).
From what we know of Cook, he is an avid health freak. He gets up every morning before sunrise and runs long distances. And he eats healthily and doesn't drink (which saves a load of calories). My interpretation of this is that Tim Cook is thinner than you might expect because he is a heck of a lot healthier than 99% of the rest of us. So in this case, for all these reasons, I would assert that Cook's thinness is a reason to have faith in his health rather than question it.
I mean in the upper tier 15" models Tallest if rumors are to be believed. I know the base level 13" models have always been integrated. You know me better than to believe I have fallen into the trap of becoming of those "Steve Jobs was perfect and he would never do A, B, or C."
While Steve was there, they introduced a 15" model with integrated graphics:
Integrated graphics are fine if they do the job they need to do, the label itself doesn't automatically make them bad. The PS4 has integrated graphics:
it depends on which version you listen to, this doctor (youtube) says Steve didn't die because of his food diet
The criticism many people had wasn't anything to do with diet but the delay in having surgery. That doctor was suggesting that Steve being forced to eat meat to increase his protein intake made things worse.
I want to know what he say's that makes you want to feel like you should crawl back into a hole and die
It says it in the source article:
"He would say something along the lines of 'I don't think that's good enough' and that would be the end of it and you would just want to crawl into a hole and die."
Anyway, the Reuters piece clearly wishes to implant a meme in susceptible brains that hardware engineers are jumping ship because of Tim Cook's leadership. No one is quoted by name, just sources with ties to Apple, or some such bullshit.
It's the editors of those articles mainly that have pushed this anti-Apple tone to multiple sites.
News these days, especially online news isn't about delivering facts, it's about selling the most interesting stories in exchange for traffic. They can hide behind anonymous sources because they are just posting blogs online, exactly the same as someone with no sources at all. They muddle it in with fact-based reports and you can't tell when they are lying or the reliability of each source.
This particular article was reported back in April:
"Reached via email, Gruber said that in the month or so since he sounded the alarm, departures from Apple have not "accelerated."
"But it hasn’t slowed down either."
Gruber said: "The consensus among the people I’ve spoken to is that this is in no way a "rats leaving a sinking ship" scenario, but rather the inevitable churn of talented people capitalizing on the success of the company."
"Apple employees are in high demand, pure and simple. That’s why retention is going to be such a tricky problem for the company."
If you were an entry level engineer that had worked at Apple for a few years and had that name on your resumé, you'd probably get a better offer outside the company than inside because inside, you'd be competing with the senior level. The other thing is that conditions inside a company aren't always reflected by the products they make. Electronic products all over the world are built in factories with poor conditions regardless of the quality of the products. Even at Apple's HQ, they will have long working hours and maybe a lot of the work isn't that interesting. A company that allows their workers to be lazy might not have great products but the employees could be much happier - people generally don't prefer longer hours and more stress.
How often can Apple create or redefine an entire industry? That is what people seem to be expecting. I might be naive but that level of innovation seems quite difficult to achieve. It's quite amazing that it has done this more than once, much less massive changes at least 3-4 times within the last 10 years.
Let me make a quick list just in the past 10 years:
...
* eBooks market
...
I give that one to Amazon and the Kindle. Apple will push ebooks and where the market goes, but Amazon mainstreamed the ebook with the Kindle.
When Tim took over after Steve died and people were saying that this is the end, I said "Don't be so negative and give him some time." That statement may be coming back to bite me.
Just as an example and not to sound like an angry nerd but integrated graphics in a pro notebook? Mr Cook, "That is not only not good enough. That is deplorable."
Apple won't go downhill though I believe much like the iconic Pink Floyd song, it will just become "another brick in the wall."
If ur following there patent filings alone u would know better than that. They are finding ways to make the iPhone something it's competitors haven't even wildly imagined.
Clearly says u do not track apples R&D areas.
How often can Apple create or redefine an entire industry? That is what people seem to be expecting. I might be naive but that level of innovation seems quite difficult to achieve. It's quite amazing that it has done this more than once, much less massive changes at least 3-4 times within the last 10 years.
Let me make a quick list just in the past 10 years:
* music players/music retail (music stores no longer exist),
* mobile phone/mobile industry: smart phones, cut the phone companies' legs out from control of phone features,
* GPS: on phones, tag pictures with location, dedicated devices less needed
* gaming platform
* Application development industry for mobile devices
* Tablet market
* eBooks market
* Delivery of apps for both mobile devices and laptop/desktops via internet
* Elimination of floppy disks
* Elimination of serial and parallel ports
* WiFi as standard equipment on all devices
* Touch devices along with standard touch screen "language"
* Quality design of devices
* Quality of manufacturing of devices
* Replacement of moveable storage media with solid state storage
* Automatic backup (Time Machine)
* All-in-one desktops (elimination of wires connecting separate components)
Exactly and they are making such important choices and the rest just follow.
* Oh wait how about the choice to ditch adobe Flash and instead go with Html 5?
Remember at that point android banked on flash as there strengths. Now look were flash is.
*How about Micro sims and Nano sims ? That's pretty much now a standard among others.
*introduction of iTunes Radio as both a platform for music discovery and music purchase. U see they are doing an end to end music solution.
*Use of Apple TV to stream content from iOS devices. They make a break in that too. The rest of them are now building hardware for it.
* hopefully biometrics will again show how user authentication can be done.
* lets not also forget, the education industry will see an overhaul with iPads as a medium to learn on.
* what about high pixel density screens like the retina on a mobile device. I like to hear how many phones had anything like it before.
* and finally iOS efficiency. Explain how lower clock speed processors on iOS still cranks out more performance in applications like games and others compared to there processor intensive counterparts that run an OS that's not as efficient. When those that think Apples not innovating, realize the answer to this the answer is obvious. Not innovating my ass !
Everyone must realize the next big innovation uses all these stepping stones we talked about here to build that next giant thing upon.
iOS and iPhones wouldn't have been the big hits they were unless OSX had matured from the Unix platform it first started a decade ago.
These things take time to mature.
And you know what I'm saying is true, just look at the long list of industry turners the competition has come up with other than making cheap clones.
When Sculley was forced out of Apple, the company's share price was still 5 X what it was when he came in 10 years earlier.
During Sculley's tenure as CEO, Apple did much better financially than it had ever done before.
Don't forget who it was that brought Sculley into Apple. Hand picked.
Knowing Wall Street I'd say a company's share price is a horrible representation of its value. It doesn't matter that AAPL was up 5X when Sculley was running the place, the man drained innovation out of Apple, he merely churned out products Steve set in motion and failed to deliver the Newton.
Overall he was more concerned with the financials and bottom line of the company than he was with the technical vision and products. He's the marketing guy who ends up almost ruining the world's best product company.
Steve had to bring him in because the old board thought he needed a babysitter, look at Sheryl Sandberg's role at Facebook, Sculley's role was somewhat similar
Knowing Wall Street I'd say a company's share price is a horrible representation of its value. It doesn't matter that AAPL was up 5X when Sculley was running the place, the man drained innovation out of Apple, he merely churned out products Steve set in motion and failed to deliver the Newton.
Overall he was more concerned with the financials and bottom line of the company than he was with the technical vision and products. He's the marketing guy who ends up almost ruining the world's best product company.
Steve had to bring him in because the old board thought he needed a babysitter, look at Sheryl Sandberg's role at Facebook, Sculley's role was somewhat similar
You do realize that, according to a few people on this board, one in particular, you made Sculley sound just like their representation of who they think Tim Cook is/should be. Leave technical vision and products up to the rest of the team. Just run the damn company really well.
Of course, Sculley/Spindler/Amelio showed us where that can lead... eventually.
[Your mention of the Newton is a very apt point which could well be used as an analogy for the current situation at Apple... but we need about another 4 years at the very least to see how things go]
Is Apple in the same spot as it was in 1985? Is Apple merely churning out products Steve set in motion? People can say what they want about a better team etc. etc., but all we can do is postulate. Steve is really gone this time. We'll see how it goes.
... and, by the way, if AAPL makes a run to $700 again... will that be a horrible representation of its real value? Is $500 a horrible representation of its real value?
It is also troubling what has been done with their desktop computer line. So much focus on mobile (iOS devices and laptops) because they seem to be outselling desktop hardware. Their take on why this is happening is that everyone wants mobile stuff. However, I think the more obvious reason is because their desktop line (Mini, iMac and Mac Pro) simply aren't compelling.
-kpluck
"leader who isn't afraid to make tough decisions"
I'll believe that when he kicks the dust of the ingrained Apple off his boots and we see a headless mid range Mac that Mac users have been asking for.
You do realize that, according to a few people on this board, one in particular, you made Sculley sound just like their representation of who they think Tim Cook is/should be. Leave technical vision and products up to the rest of the team. Just run the damn company really well.
Of course, Sculley/Spindler/Amelio showed us where that can lead... eventually.
Difference is Jobs worked with Cook for 10+ years and Jony Ives.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhikl
I do hope Mr Cook keeps healthy. For fifty-two, he looks very thin, and has aging skin beyond his years. Steve experimented with his diet to his detriment and could it be that Tim has some interesting food peculiarities?
Tim Cook is a health nut! He starts his day at 5am with a vigorous workout. He is also an avid cyclist and friends with Lance Armstrong and on the board of directors of Nike. He does have one curious dietary habit. He eats a lot of protein/energy bars throughout the day.
You mean unlike "tech visionary" CEOs like Ballmer, Page, Bezos, Kwon, Dell or Ellison? Because the last time I checked, Wall St wanted CEOs to run their companies well, not be chief tastemaker & "product guy." Jobs was in a class by himself; he is not the "new standard" for tech CEOs.
"Trolling," there's that word. Interesting you should bring it up . . .
Anyway, the Reuters piece clearly wishes to implant a meme in susceptible brains that hardware engineers are jumping ship because of Tim Cook's leadership. No one is quoted by name, just sources with ties to Apple, or some such bullshit.
If you want to let that stand as legitimate journalism, go ahead on. A decent news organization would fact-check that all kinds of ways and back it up somehow with names or stats from a checkable source. As it stands it's just gossip of a very suspect kind.
And yes, your niggling detail is awesomely obvious, but irrevelant. Engineers are leaving Apple all the time, before and after Tim Cook took over.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
You mean unlike "tech visionary" CEOs like Ballmer, Page, Bezos, Kwon, Dell or Ellison? Because the last time I checked, Wall St wanted CEOs to run their companies well, not be chief tastemaker & "product guy." Jobs was in a class by himself; he is not the "new standard" for tech CEOs.
Last time I checked, running a company well meant also having a vision.
Ballmer and Dell don't seem to get it. The share price seems to reflect that... either flat, MSFT, or down, DELL, over the last 10 years.
Ellison runs his company well, keeps his nose to the grindstone, knows his company's core strengths. Share price of Oracle is up over the last 10 years.
Page, Bezos and Kwon Oh Hyun seem to have at least some vision and they all appear to run their respective companies quite well...
and the share price of each of these companies seems to reflect that over the last 10 years.
Your Money: The Apple Tax - America's costly obsession
Too bad Google is going the way of GE when it comes to using productivity matrices to measure daily work performance instead of actually just meeting project deadlines.
Thanks, I had missed that one. Reuters used to be a serious world news company.
So it goes.
Wow- a gay man who can make tough decisions.
What a novelty.
Steve Jobs DEFINED Apple.
Then Apple tanked under the helm of a soda salesman.
Then, he REDEFINED Apple.
Then leadership was handed to a proven leader and supply chain master and apple sold more than ever.
Time Cook REFINES Apple.
The last thing Apple needed was another "rock star" CEO. they needed a corporate genius who loves, respects, and thoroughly represents the inherent DNA set in place. not only that, but it seems he carries that DNA too. he is not a man trying to prop up a corporate corpse filled with that DNA. He carries it. And he propogates it. that is the difference that is confusing "analysts" everywhere today. Every company wants to do that. Apple is actually succeeding.
Apple is and always has been about being the best there is at what they do.
Steve Jobs said a while back that they aren't concerned with being the biggest. But they Apple existed to make the best products in the world.
And now they are doing that better than ever.
Much respect to Tim Cook. He is a man who earned the respect of Steve Jobs, the board, and every employee who has talked about him, whether on his good side or bad.
I don't think there could be a better man for the job,.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhikl
I do hope Mr Cook keeps healthy. For fifty-two, he looks very thin, and has aging skin beyond his years. Steve experimented with his diet to his detriment and could it be that Tim has some interesting food peculiarities?
A junk food or SAD, Standard American Diet (high carbohydrate grains, legumes and starchy vegetables lead the pyramid) can be lacking in nutrients, especially as one ages, and could lead him down the trail that did Steve in if he is also so inclined to follow. Many just assume because of the food guide and media debate that animal products are bad and plant source foods are the better, healthy alternative.
Here is not the place to argue the superiority of Vegan versus Paleo diets. It's just that from pictures and videos he does look far older than most men his age.
Actually thin is the healthiest way to be from a long life perspective. Unless you have an underlying issue such as cancer, digestive issues, or an eating disorder (some may point out that Jobs had all three) if you are 52 and still thin, then you are probably going to outlive your counterparts. How thin is too thin, you may ask? Well, if you look up that information, it turns out that the ideal weight from a long life standpoint is a lot thinner than most people would assume. For instance, ideal weight for a 6 foot 48 year old man is only 166. Sounds too skinny to me, but I do believe that our expectations for what is "normal" or "healthy" in the developed world are completely skewed by our observations of what people tend to look like (which is generally overweight and unhealthy).
From what we know of Cook, he is an avid health freak. He gets up every morning before sunrise and runs long distances. And he eats healthily and doesn't drink (which saves a load of calories). My interpretation of this is that Tim Cook is thinner than you might expect because he is a heck of a lot healthier than 99% of the rest of us. So in this case, for all these reasons, I would assert that Cook's thinness is a reason to have faith in his health rather than question it.
Thompson
Quote:
Originally Posted by 9secondko
Steve Jobs DEFINED Apple.
Then Apple tanked under the helm of a soda salesman.
Let's not rewrite history.
When Sculley was forced out of Apple, the company's share price was still 5 X what it was when he came in 10 years earlier.
During Sculley's tenure as CEO, Apple did much better financially than it had ever done before.
Don't forget who it was that brought Sculley into Apple. Hand picked.
While Steve was there, they introduced a 15" model with integrated graphics:
http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/macbook_pro/specs/macbook-pro-core-2-duo-2.53-aluminum-15-mid-2009-sd-unibody-specs.html
Integrated graphics are fine if they do the job they need to do, the label itself doesn't automatically make them bad. The PS4 has integrated graphics:
http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/154924-secrets-of-the-ps4-heavily-modified-radeon-supercharged-apu-design
The criticism many people had wasn't anything to do with diet but the delay in having surgery. That doctor was suggesting that Steve being forced to eat meat to increase his protein intake made things worse.
It says it in the source article:
"He would say something along the lines of 'I don't think that's good enough' and that would be the end of it and you would just want to crawl into a hole and die."
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/22/usa-apple-cook-idUSL1N0G91GF20130822
Maybe it's the way he says it or the accompanying frownsmile of terror, which is so unreadable you go mad trying to figure out he really feels.
It's the editors of those articles mainly that have pushed this anti-Apple tone to multiple sites.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/23/apple-earnings-july-2012_n_1693509.html
http://www.itpro.co.uk/643996/apple-shares-hit-by-iphone-5-supply-chain-problems
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/comment/poornima-gupta-apples-iphone-5-will-have-to-dazzle-in-crowded-market-26897180.html
http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/Latest-News-Wires/2013/0123/Is-Apple-losing-its-footing-video
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2013-01-28/business/sns-rt-us-apple-partnersbre90r11m-20130128_1_iphone-ceo-tim-cook-abi-research
http://business.iafrica.com/businessday/companies/838671.html
http://www.ibtimes.co.in/articles/281654/20120114/apple-audit-show-s-supplier-used-child.htm
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2336967,00.asp
News these days, especially online news isn't about delivering facts, it's about selling the most interesting stories in exchange for traffic. They can hide behind anonymous sources because they are just posting blogs online, exactly the same as someone with no sources at all. They muddle it in with fact-based reports and you can't tell when they are lying or the reliability of each source.
This particular article was reported back in April:
http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-executives-are-suddenly-more-willing-to-quit-the-company-to-work-at-startups-2013-4
The same content was recycled for an article with a different heading this month:
http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-engineers-are-looking-for-new-jobs-2013-8
They refer to John Gruber:
"Reached via email, Gruber said that in the month or so since he sounded the alarm, departures from Apple have not "accelerated."
"But it hasn’t slowed down either."
Gruber said: "The consensus among the people I’ve spoken to is that this is in no way a "rats leaving a sinking ship" scenario, but rather the inevitable churn of talented people capitalizing on the success of the company."
"Apple employees are in high demand, pure and simple. That’s why retention is going to be such a tricky problem for the company."
If you were an entry level engineer that had worked at Apple for a few years and had that name on your resumé, you'd probably get a better offer outside the company than inside because inside, you'd be competing with the senior level. The other thing is that conditions inside a company aren't always reflected by the products they make. Electronic products all over the world are built in factories with poor conditions regardless of the quality of the products. Even at Apple's HQ, they will have long working hours and maybe a lot of the work isn't that interesting. A company that allows their workers to be lazy might not have great products but the employees could be much happier - people generally don't prefer longer hours and more stress.
Quote:
Originally Posted by waldobushman
How often can Apple create or redefine an entire industry? That is what people seem to be expecting. I might be naive but that level of innovation seems quite difficult to achieve. It's quite amazing that it has done this more than once, much less massive changes at least 3-4 times within the last 10 years.
Let me make a quick list just in the past 10 years:
...
* eBooks market
...
I give that one to Amazon and the Kindle. Apple will push ebooks and where the market goes, but Amazon mainstreamed the ebook with the Kindle.
If ur following there patent filings alone u would know better than that. They are finding ways to make the iPhone something it's competitors haven't even wildly imagined.
Clearly says u do not track apples R&D areas.
Exactly and they are making such important choices and the rest just follow.
* Oh wait how about the choice to ditch adobe Flash and instead go with Html 5?
Remember at that point android banked on flash as there strengths. Now look were flash is.
*How about Micro sims and Nano sims ? That's pretty much now a standard among others.
*introduction of iTunes Radio as both a platform for music discovery and music purchase. U see they are doing an end to end music solution.
*Use of Apple TV to stream content from iOS devices. They make a break in that too. The rest of them are now building hardware for it.
* hopefully biometrics will again show how user authentication can be done.
* lets not also forget, the education industry will see an overhaul with iPads as a medium to learn on.
* what about high pixel density screens like the retina on a mobile device. I like to hear how many phones had anything like it before.
* and finally iOS efficiency. Explain how lower clock speed processors on iOS still cranks out more performance in applications like games and others compared to there processor intensive counterparts that run an OS that's not as efficient. When those that think Apples not innovating, realize the answer to this the answer is obvious. Not innovating my ass !
Everyone must realize the next big innovation uses all these stepping stones we talked about here to build that next giant thing upon.
iOS and iPhones wouldn't have been the big hits they were unless OSX had matured from the Unix platform it first started a decade ago.
These things take time to mature.
And you know what I'm saying is true, just look at the long list of industry turners the competition has come up with other than making cheap clones.
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit
Let's not rewrite history.
When Sculley was forced out of Apple, the company's share price was still 5 X what it was when he came in 10 years earlier.
During Sculley's tenure as CEO, Apple did much better financially than it had ever done before.
Don't forget who it was that brought Sculley into Apple. Hand picked.
Knowing Wall Street I'd say a company's share price is a horrible representation of its value. It doesn't matter that AAPL was up 5X when Sculley was running the place, the man drained innovation out of Apple, he merely churned out products Steve set in motion and failed to deliver the Newton.
Overall he was more concerned with the financials and bottom line of the company than he was with the technical vision and products. He's the marketing guy who ends up almost ruining the world's best product company.
Steve had to bring him in because the old board thought he needed a babysitter, look at Sheryl Sandberg's role at Facebook, Sculley's role was somewhat similar
Quote:
Originally Posted by dnd0ps
Knowing Wall Street I'd say a company's share price is a horrible representation of its value. It doesn't matter that AAPL was up 5X when Sculley was running the place, the man drained innovation out of Apple, he merely churned out products Steve set in motion and failed to deliver the Newton.
Overall he was more concerned with the financials and bottom line of the company than he was with the technical vision and products. He's the marketing guy who ends up almost ruining the world's best product company.
Steve had to bring him in because the old board thought he needed a babysitter, look at Sheryl Sandberg's role at Facebook, Sculley's role was somewhat similar
You do realize that, according to a few people on this board, one in particular, you made Sculley sound just like their representation of who they think Tim Cook is/should be. Leave technical vision and products up to the rest of the team. Just run the damn company really well.
Of course, Sculley/Spindler/Amelio showed us where that can lead... eventually.
[Your mention of the Newton is a very apt point which could well be used as an analogy for the current situation at Apple... but we need about another 4 years at the very least to see how things go]
Is Apple in the same spot as it was in 1985? Is Apple merely churning out products Steve set in motion? People can say what they want about a better team etc. etc., but all we can do is postulate. Steve is really gone this time. We'll see how it goes.
... and, by the way, if AAPL makes a run to $700 again... will that be a horrible representation of its real value? Is $500 a horrible representation of its real value?
Quote:
Originally Posted by kpluck
It is also troubling what has been done with their desktop computer line. So much focus on mobile (iOS devices and laptops) because they seem to be outselling desktop hardware. Their take on why this is happening is that everyone wants mobile stuff. However, I think the more obvious reason is because their desktop line (Mini, iMac and Mac Pro) simply aren't compelling.
-kpluck
"leader who isn't afraid to make tough decisions"
I'll believe that when he kicks the dust of the ingrained Apple off his boots and we see a headless mid range Mac that Mac users have been asking for.
How tough is it to listen to your customers?
Originally Posted by MacTac
How tough is it to listen to your customers?
No company listens to ten customers. Give it a freaking rest already.
Difference is Jobs worked with Cook for 10+ years and Jony Ives.