Not gonna watch that, because if I read (or hear) just one more "talker" opine about the inner-workings of Apple and/or who will be the next "Steve Jobs", it will be one opinion too many. Not only are their answers usually speculative to a fault, but I even find the question ill-posed. It's the latter part that bugs me. The conversation is ridiculous to start with at this point in time. (I realize that Wall Street is impatient, but that's their problem. I don't have to bite, even though I, too, am a shareholder.) The performance of Apple (the company) is amazing, and the stock is not performing well only because of the self-fulfilling prophecy of those who are fretting. The performance will win out in the long run.
With respect to "vision", until we find out otherwise, I would think that the presence of Jony Ive would be good enough to match up against the competition. Vision doesn't have to come from the CEO, provided the CEO realizes his strengths and weaknesses and gives the appropriate authority for other aspects to those who have those strengths. Tim strikes me as having the wherewithal to do just that.
In other words, Apple does not need to get anyone to replace Steve Jobs. They appear to have an excellent team in place, acting just like Steve Jobs did for many years (between big product launches). When they finally release whatever new things are in the pipeline, we can finally judge if their team (and vision) is sufficient. If the products flop, or if they never arrive, then it will be right to question Tim Cook. But not before then.
TC is hardly riveting but in spite of appearing as somewhat 'presenting by numbers' with well rehearsed enthusiasm he still comes across as a 'normal guy' as opposed to a corporate bigwig, which I think is very important for Apple. The best presenter they have is Craig Federighi, hands down, but I think Ahrendts will be a great addition to the on stage mix of presenting execs. The fact that she comes across as genuine (not corporate), speaking from her heart rather from a company textbook, and that she clearly is super smart, and very very important - female, all bodes well future presentations.
I'm still wondering if she ever will present. I don't remember Ron Johnson being up on stage. They might keep her off stage just to quell any speculation that she's being groomed for Cook's job.
The Guardian is not a tabloid, unless you count breaking the News Corp. phone hacking scandal, PRISM, and the Edward Snowden revelations as "tabloid journalism."
Frankly, all the papers are tabloids these days, regardless of their broadsheet origins. It's a sad state of affairs.
Nonsense. What is tabloid about, say, the New York Times or The Economist?
This lady is a powerhouse! Apple is long overdue for a brand makeover and this is the lady to do it. If they are wise, they will re-distribute the internal power structure to give this amazing lady the ability to make the changes so desperately needed. She can do it...but will Tim and Jony let her do it? This is the key question particularly because the internal divisions within Apple are so tightly integrated and centrally controlled....the outcome of this will give the market a clear indication of whether Apple is going to be able to reinvent itself in order to stay relevant. Since Steve passed away they have been coasting. Angela can really fill the void Steve left....she's that good!!
This lady is a powerhouse! Apple is desperately in need of a brand makeover and if anybody can do it she can. Apple is the result of a marketing genius....Steve Jobs of course. Angela is as equally gifted and apparently much better at working with people. This all hinges on whether Steve and Jony are willing to trust her and not keep her under their thumb. Apple barley escaped extinction and flourished because it was lead by a charismatic marketing genius. They need to step aside and really let her take a prominent leadership role. However, since Apple is so tightly integrated internally and centrally controlled it remains to be seen if they will move over and make room for her. If this doesn't pan out I fear it might confirm that Apple is "stuck in a rut", will continue stagnating and begin a period of decline. Apple needs her far more than she needs Apple.
Who knows, maybe one reason she's waiting is to let the school year finish up. She has three kids, I believe at least one is still school age.
The most likely answer is that Apple and Mrs Ahrendts agreed the start date when they offered her the job, and the Guardian has no idea what that date is.
Quality paper or not, the Guardian likes to make sales, and Apple speculation is a huge draw for online readers.
You've read all of the named papers for the past 24 years while considering them all to be tabloids? I smell bullshit, and my spidey sense tells me that your snippy retorts and hyper sensitive (gratuitous insults indeed " src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />) are omens of a person not worth engaging with.
You've read all of the named papers for the past 24 years while considering them all to be tabloids? I smell bullshit, and my spidey sense tells me that your snippy retorts and hyper sensitive (gratuitous insults indeed ) are omens of a person not worth engaging with.
Comments
Not gonna watch that, because if I read (or hear) just one more "talker" opine about the inner-workings of Apple and/or who will be the next "Steve Jobs", it will be one opinion too many. Not only are their answers usually speculative to a fault, but I even find the question ill-posed. It's the latter part that bugs me. The conversation is ridiculous to start with at this point in time. (I realize that Wall Street is impatient, but that's their problem. I don't have to bite, even though I, too, am a shareholder.) The performance of Apple (the company) is amazing, and the stock is not performing well only because of the self-fulfilling prophecy of those who are fretting. The performance will win out in the long run.
With respect to "vision", until we find out otherwise, I would think that the presence of Jony Ive would be good enough to match up against the competition. Vision doesn't have to come from the CEO, provided the CEO realizes his strengths and weaknesses and gives the appropriate authority for other aspects to those who have those strengths. Tim strikes me as having the wherewithal to do just that.
In other words, Apple does not need to get anyone to replace Steve Jobs. They appear to have an excellent team in place, acting just like Steve Jobs did for many years (between big product launches). When they finally release whatever new things are in the pipeline, we can finally judge if their team (and vision) is sufficient. If the products flop, or if they never arrive, then it will be right to question Tim Cook. But not before then.
Thompson
If only everyone had your wisdom.
The Guardian is not a tabloid, unless you count breaking the News Corp. phone hacking scandal, PRISM, and the Edward Snowden revelations as "tabloid journalism."
Frankly, all the papers are tabloids these days, regardless of their broadsheet origins. It's a sad state of affairs.
Nonsense. What is tabloid about, say, the New York Times or The Economist?
You must not read much.
Who knows, maybe one reason she's waiting is to let the school year finish up. She has three kids, I believe at least one is still school age.
This lady is a powerhouse! Apple is desperately in need of a brand makeover and if anybody can do it she can. Apple is the result of a marketing genius....Steve Jobs of course. Angela is as equally gifted and apparently much better at working with people. This all hinges on whether Steve and Jony are willing to trust her and not keep her under their thumb. Apple barley escaped extinction and flourished because it was lead by a charismatic marketing genius. They need to step aside and really let her take a prominent leadership role. However, since Apple is so tightly integrated internally and centrally controlled it remains to be seen if they will move over and make room for her. If this doesn't pan out I fear it might confirm that Apple is "stuck in a rut", will continue stagnating and begin a period of decline. Apple needs her far more than she needs Apple.
I was referring to English papers.
Who knows, maybe one reason she's waiting is to let the school year finish up. She has three kids, I believe at least one is still school age.
The most likely answer is that Apple and Mrs Ahrendts agreed the start date when they offered her the job, and the Guardian has no idea what that date is.
Quality paper or not, the Guardian likes to make sales, and Apple speculation is a huge draw for online readers.
The Economist is also English.
Nonsense. What is tabloid about, say, the Financial Times, The Times or The Guardian?
The Economist is also English.
The content.
Other than for the past twenty-four years, you're correct.
You've read all of the named papers for the past 24 years while considering them all to be tabloids? I smell bullshit, and my spidey sense tells me that your snippy retorts and hyper sensitive (gratuitous insults indeed
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />) are omens of a person not worth engaging with.
Good day.
?