A new profile of Apple's chief executive, titled "Tim Cook, Making Apple his own" actually says little about Cook and virtually nothing noteworthy about how he is leading Apple. Instead, the <em>New York Times</em> simply recounts more predictions of doom for the company in a piece filled with fictions and fallacy.
Unsurprisingly, the article's authors Matt Richtel and Brian X. Chen have to admit early on that Cook "declined to be interviewed for this article." It's not hard to understand why.
Chen even more famously skewered Apple for even attempting to sell its iPhone in Japan, where he assured his <em>Wired</em> readers that the nation <a href="http://appleinsider.com/articles/09/02/28/japanese_hate_for_iphone_all_a_big_mistake">hated it</a>. He even crafted quotes from people <em>in Japan</em> saying how "lame" the iPhone was, even if those quotes were actually completely fabricated. <q>"I think you set out to write this story," Cook told the journalists. "There was nothing that we could have said that was going to change it."</q>
Even Yukari Iwatani Kane, who kicked off the "Japan hates the iPhone" meme and crafted a masterpiece of delusional Apple doomsaying in her widely panned book "Haunted Empire," could likely anticipate that Cook wasn't going to volunteer any insight to the <em>Times</em>, given <a href="http://fortune.com/2014/03/15/from-haunted-empire-tim-cook-blasts-the-new-york-times/">her recounting</a> of the aftermath of "iEconomy" in a meeting between Cook, the series' lead reporter Charles Duhigg and the <em>Times</em> editorial board.
"I think you set out to write this story," Cook told the journalists. "There was nothing that we could have said that was going to change it."
<h2>The bleak crisis of Apple's success</h2>
Without any access to write anything new about Cook, the <em>Times</em> simply begins recounting the tragic series of problems Apple now faces, the largest of which is that there isn't enough money in the world of consumer electronics to replicate the success of the iPhone.
"Its sales now are so large that many investors worry that it can't continue to match the growth that brought it from $65 billion in sales in the 2010 fiscal year to $171 billion in 2013," the article frets.
"In fiscal 2013, sales grew a mere 9 percent, far below an average just shy of 40 percent a year from 2004 to 2013. Profits slimmed. And the stock price fell nearly in half from its 2012 peak to the middle of 2013, vastly underperforming the market."
Apple's performance over the last year is leading the NASDAQ, the Dow and even beating Google, along with Microsoft, HP and of course, BlackBerry (Apple is the top blue line, above).
Apple wasn't beating the market last summer, and recounting that would have made for a good click-bait story one year ago. It wouldn't have been a very smart story, because it turned out to be a misleading trough based largely upon poor insight on the future, something that has since corrected itself, particularly each time Apple released its quarterly earnings.
Apple's stock had the same roller coaster valuations in 2008, when Apple's share price under Steve Jobs wildly fluctuated up and down, crashing in half before doubling. That was just two years after the fabled iPhone launched and two years before the iPad failed to impress journalists at launch. There is clearly no direct correction between Apple's stock price and the appearance of the next magical iProduct.
<h2>Where is the next iProduct?</h2>
The rest of the Richtel's and Chen's <em>Times</em> article focuses on citing various people with prestigious titles saying dismissive things about Apple. For example, "'Where is the grand design?' asks Laurence I. Balter, chief market strategist at Oracle Investment Research." And then again, "'Show me the product,' he says. 'Show me the ingenuity.'"
The article recounted several high-level hires Cook has made, and cites U2's Bono as saying Cook is 'trying to replace Jobs with five people.' But it can say nothing from Cook himself.
Richtel's and Chen's <em>Times</em> article is quite clearly the same sort of work Cook alluded to when he reportedly told the paper "I think you set out to write this story. There was nothing that we could have said that was going to change it."
<h2>A recap of stories from 2013</h2>
Instead of insight, the <em>Times</em> duo treat their audience to a series of demeaning observations from academics. Michael A. Cusumano, a Sloan School of Management professor at M.I.T., says "I think it's going to be very difficult for them to come up with the next big thing. They've lost their heart and soul."
There's no explanation of what that even means.
Next up: a recap of iEconomy style reporting, including the idea that "a quarter of a million people had signed a petition on Change.org urging Apple to improve working conditions in the factories."
In reality, however, the 2012 Change.org petition was organized by an uninformed individual who used a website to collect social media "likes" of a <a href="http://appleinsider.com/articles/12/02/14/slacktivism_groups_claim_credit_for_apple_supplier_audits_after_the_fact">slactivism idea</a> that wasn't accurate. Even the <em>Times</em> had to admit that Apple had already been commissioning public reports on the issues for more than six years before someone on the Internet demanded they start doing it.
Richtel and Chen then blow through Cooks' signature accomplishments at Apple in a couple paragraphs, briefly noting that a senior advisor to President Obama praised Cook's efforts to manufacture products like the <a href="http://appleinsider.com/topics/Mac+Pro">Mac Pro</a> and source components like A-series chips, glass and sapphire screen covers in the U.S.. There's a single line of praise from Greenpeace for being "the most aggressive of the companies that we evaluated in getting renewables online."
The article then segues from muted praise to unrelated accusations, first complaining that Apple employees don't donate enough money, then spending paragraphs on a right wing activist who at Apple's shareholder meeting tried to portray Cook as turning Apple in a "philanthropic-focused company" for daring to give consideration to climate change in the <a href="http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/03/25/apples-icloud-reigning-over-the-greenest-data-centers-on-the-planet">design of iCloud server installations</a>, that same subject Greenpeace lauded.
<h2>WWDC: what no hardware?</h2>
If the timing of an article that basically asks "what is Cook even doing!?" seems to be strangely out of place coming immediately after what virtually every <a href="http://appleinsider.com/topics/WWDC+2014">WWDC</a> attendee has called Apple's best show for developers ever, at least Richtel and Chen do manage to shoehorn in something from the event.
Their primary WWDC takeaway, under the subhead "Lennon vs Ringo," (which accounts for about a quarter of the piece) is that Cook is Ringo Starr, whereas Jobs was John Lennon. That's because a WWDC attendee fed them that witty observation. The people who run Apple are like the Beatles.
The <em>Times</em> duo then paired that with a grave warning from WWDC: Apple announced a new iOS 8 app named Health, "but did not also introduce a piece of hardware to measure those results."
"It's something Steve wouldn't have done," the <em>Times</em> cited their WWDC attendee as saying.
Actually, Jobs released iTunes in January 2001. The iPod wasn't delivered until October 2001.
All these comments from experts saying that Apple 'has lost its heart and soul' because of the death of one man are extremely insulting to all the amazing people that have worked on amazing products in the past and all people who are working at Apple now. It's like saying they count nothing.
And seriously, how can any sane person still doubt Cook now?
We can hate on the Times for this (and many other things) all we want but the bottom line is that they're right. Since Jobs died, what new items has Apple come out with?
Please just shut up and go away. You don't comprehend the topic of discussion, so why not just not reply?
...things that we've all been wondering why we didn't have them from the get-go.
THAT'S THE ENTIRE POINT, DINGUS. That's everything Apple is about. "Why haven't we had all of our music in our pockets already?" "Why haven't we had a phone that can do everything with a single touch?" "Why haven't we had an OS that can't get viruses?"
We can hate on the Times for this (and many other things) all we want but the bottom line is that they're right. Since Jobs died, what new items has Apple come out with? Cook's done little more than polish up what's already available with pieces that should've been in there to begin with! Look at WWDC- all these software enhancements that's disguised by "innovation" are just things that we've all been wondering why we didn't have them from the get-go. If you think I'm wrong, then take your apple stuff out of their boxes and actually use them. Oooooh TouchID is now open to devs- that's something for a .1 bump. Not a whole years worth of R&D.
We can hate on the Times for this (and many other things) all we want but the bottom line is that they're right. Since Jobs died, what new items has Apple come out with? Cook's done little more than polish up what's already available with pieces that should've been in there to begin with! Look at WWDC- all these software enhancements that's disguised by "innovation" are just things that we've all been wondering why we didn't have them from the get-go. If you think I'm wrong, then take your apple stuff out of their boxes and actually use them. Oooooh TouchID is now open to devs- that's something for a .1 bump. Not a whole years worth of R&D.
Okay, so basically products get updates and upgrades and you're mad why? That's a pretty natural swing of things in not just Apple products but all products. It's called product evolution. Its a continuous process.
Also, you can't be serious that you think we keep our Apple products in boxes, right? This isn't like Android. Our stuff is used all day everyday for everything. At least that's how it is in my house. Meanwhile, old former Androids and PC's collect dust. Now I wonder why that is? Though I just answered that for you.
Cook has successfully handled transition of the company from perhaps the most iconic CEO of the 20th and 21st centuries with nary a misstep for the past THREE YEARS. The volatility in the tech segment is such that he would have been out within six month if he wasn't a good fit.
If you compare the transitions from iconic corporate leaders/founders to that of their successors, the Tim Cook is being given short shrift.
Since Jobs died, what new items has Apple come out with? Cook's done little more than polish up what's already available with pieces that should've been in there to begin with!
Yes, Tim Cook has done a remarkable job of growing Apple while doing no harm. Despite what naysayers would have you believe, Tim Cook has done a good job.
If that were not the case, the NYT and others would be pointing out examples of other companies that have improved in transition from an iconic leader.
In fact, given the vitriol that is placed on the shoulders of Apple leadership, I can't help but wonder why the NYT has not regaled us with outstanding examples of leadership.
An open question to the NYT: when are you going to brag about or denigrate the transition of another tech giant, from an iconic leader to his successor? Specifically, I am talking about the transition at Microsoft, from Bill Gates to Steve Ballmer. How about fairly comparing the performance of Cook and Ballmer.
After Apple stopped inviting the NYT to its introductions and special events (likely due to the B.S. NYT was writing about them), I have stopped reading anything this former stalwart of the industry had to say about Apple. Now I've just stopped reading it altogether. It's not the NYT I loved for years. It feels more like a tabloid dressed in the garb of respectability, but it's just another rag.
The power of the press (sadly) belongs to those who have one!
We can hate on the Times for this (and many other things) all we want but the bottom line is that they're right. Since Jobs died, what new items has Apple come out with? Cook's done little more than polish up what's already available with pieces that should've been in there to begin with! Look at WWDC- all these software enhancements that's disguised by "innovation" are just things that we've all been wondering why we didn't have them from the get-go. If you think I'm wrong, then take your apple stuff out of their boxes and actually use them. Oooooh TouchID is now open to devs- that's something for a .1 bump. Not a whole years worth of R&D.
So on the market now, how many phones and tablets have 64 bit operating systems and the powerful software that comes with it?
Being "disappointed" is a relative perception and not really something you can measure with pure numbers. A company being measured by meeting or failing to meet "expectations" is another relative thing that can't be measured, but this is how Apple is being measured by the news media and Wall Street. Even having more than enough can certainly make humans feel disappointed. It's hard for me to understand how Wall Street can be disappointed with the most valuable publicly traded company on the planet by a huge amount. It doesn't quite make sense if you measure the numbers, but yet the feelings of disappointment still exist in an overbearing way. People still argue that Tim Cook isn't doing "enough" for Apple and "investors". I suppose it's all a matter of greed that causes Apple to be considered a disappointment or failing to meet expectations. I'm sure it can't be much more than that because Apple's actual financial numbers should be considered impressive to practically anyone. They're huge numbers unless you compare them to the number of stars in the sky or grains of sand on a beach.
Whether Steve Jobs could have done better than Tim Cook we will never know but as Apple stands now, as a company, it still looks pretty impressive to me. However, I've learned to temper my expectations and look at Apple compared to most tech companies and Apple doesn't seem to come up short to any of them.
We can hate on the Times for this (and many other things) all we want but the bottom line is that they're right. Since Jobs died, what new items has Apple come out with? Cook's done little more than polish up what's already available with pieces that should've been in there to begin with! Look at WWDC- all these software enhancements that's disguised by "innovation" are just things that we've all been wondering why we didn't have them from the get-go. If you think I'm wrong, then take your apple stuff out of their boxes and actually use them. Oooooh TouchID is now open to devs- that's something for a .1 bump. Not a whole years worth of R&D.
And it took how many years to get cut/copy/paste on iOS under Jobs and you're saying Cook is doing nothing because TouchID was opened up to devs at the very next iOS cycle after its release. You're going to have to try a lot harder than that if you're going to troll.
64-bit ARM, all the HW advances on the A-series chip that best high-end smartphone performance per Watt, and Retina IPS displays at an affordable price also come to mind.
How can you say they got shut out by Apple when Jony Ive was quoted several times in the article?
[QUOTE]Jonathan Ive, the head of design at Apple and a name nearly as adored by its followers as Steve Jobs, says Cook has not neglected the company's central mission: innovation. "Honestly, I don't think anything's changed," he said. And that includes the clamor for some exciting new thing. "People felt exactly the same way when we were working on the iPhone," Ive added.
"It is hard for all of us to be patient," Ive said. "It was hard for Steve. It is hard for Tim."[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Almost daily, employees would spot Jobs having lunch on Apple's campus with Ive. These days, Ive said, he meets three days a week with Cook, generally in each other's offices. But Ive said the design processes are essentially unchanged.
"Steve established a set of values, and he established preoccupations and tones that are completely enduring," Ive said. Chief among them, he said, is a reliance on small creative teams whose membership remains intact to this day. The philosophy that materials and products are intertwined also continues under Cook. For instance, when the company decided to use titanium to build a laptop, Ive said, he and Cook and Jobs thought extensively about how to push the boundaries of the metal to get the look and feel they wanted. And Ive pointed to another enduring value: a complete focus on the product.
If Jobs was maniacal about design, Cook projects "quiet consideration," Ive said. Cook digests things carefully, with time, which Ive said "testifies to the fact he knows it's important."[/QUOTE]
How can you say they got shut out by Apple when Jony Ive was quoted several times in the article?
The only redeeming quality of the article is the one quote that proves Steve Jobs was not at all receptive to a smaller iPad, contrary to what was said before.
That doesn’t mean Mr. Cook is uninvolved in product decisions. Since he took over, the company has released a number of upgrades, including a smaller tablet, the iPad Mini. Mr. Cook “thought the world would love a smaller and less expensive tablet,” said Robert A. Iger, the chief executive of Disney and a member of Apple's board. It was a product that Mr. Jobs thought did not have a market, he said.
The only redeeming quality of the article is the one quote that proves Steve Jobs was not at all receptive to a smaller iPad, contrary to what was said before.
Comments
And seriously, how can any sane person still doubt Cook now?
Please just shut up and go away. You don't comprehend the topic of discussion, so why not just not reply?
THAT'S THE ENTIRE POINT, DINGUS. That's everything Apple is about. "Why haven't we had all of our music in our pockets already?" "Why haven't we had a phone that can do everything with a single touch?" "Why haven't we had an OS that can't get viruses?"
The Mac Pro.
Poof, there goes all your lame 'argumentation'.
Okay, so basically products get updates and upgrades and you're mad why? That's a pretty natural swing of things in not just Apple products but all products. It's called product evolution. Its a continuous process.
Also, you can't be serious that you think we keep our Apple products in boxes, right? This isn't like Android. Our stuff is used all day everyday for everything. At least that's how it is in my house. Meanwhile, old former Androids and PC's collect dust. Now I wonder why that is? Though I just answered that for you.
If you compare the transitions from iconic corporate leaders/founders to that of their successors, the Tim Cook is being given short shrift.
Yes, Tim Cook has done a remarkable job of growing Apple while doing no harm. Despite what naysayers would have you believe, Tim Cook has done a good job.
If that were not the case, the NYT and others would be pointing out examples of other companies that have improved in transition from an iconic leader.
In fact, given the vitriol that is placed on the shoulders of Apple leadership, I can't help but wonder why the NYT has not regaled us with outstanding examples of leadership.
An open question to the NYT: when are you going to brag about or denigrate the transition of another tech giant, from an iconic leader to his successor? Specifically, I am talking about the transition at Microsoft, from Bill Gates to Steve Ballmer. How about fairly comparing the performance of Cook and Ballmer.
This Chen guy sounds like an Asian Jayson Blair.
But race has nothing to do with what he wrote.
The power of the press (sadly) belongs to those who have one!
We can hate on the Times for this (and many other things) all we want but the bottom line is that they're right. Since Jobs died, what new items has Apple come out with? Cook's done little more than polish up what's already available with pieces that should've been in there to begin with! Look at WWDC- all these software enhancements that's disguised by "innovation" are just things that we've all been wondering why we didn't have them from the get-go. If you think I'm wrong, then take your apple stuff out of their boxes and actually use them. Oooooh TouchID is now open to devs- that's something for a .1 bump. Not a whole years worth of R&D.
So on the market now, how many phones and tablets have 64 bit operating systems and the powerful software that comes with it?
I'm sure none of us will be surprised at the results.
Being "disappointed" is a relative perception and not really something you can measure with pure numbers. A company being measured by meeting or failing to meet "expectations" is another relative thing that can't be measured, but this is how Apple is being measured by the news media and Wall Street. Even having more than enough can certainly make humans feel disappointed. It's hard for me to understand how Wall Street can be disappointed with the most valuable publicly traded company on the planet by a huge amount. It doesn't quite make sense if you measure the numbers, but yet the feelings of disappointment still exist in an overbearing way. People still argue that Tim Cook isn't doing "enough" for Apple and "investors". I suppose it's all a matter of greed that causes Apple to be considered a disappointment or failing to meet expectations. I'm sure it can't be much more than that because Apple's actual financial numbers should be considered impressive to practically anyone. They're huge numbers unless you compare them to the number of stars in the sky or grains of sand on a beach.
Whether Steve Jobs could have done better than Tim Cook we will never know but as Apple stands now, as a company, it still looks pretty impressive to me. However, I've learned to temper my expectations and look at Apple compared to most tech companies and Apple doesn't seem to come up short to any of them.
And it took how many years to get cut/copy/paste on iOS under Jobs and you're saying Cook is doing nothing because TouchID was opened up to devs at the very next iOS cycle after its release. You're going to have to try a lot harder than that if you're going to troll.
64-bit ARM, all the HW advances on the A-series chip that best high-end smartphone performance per Watt, and Retina IPS displays at an affordable price also come to mind.
[QUOTE]Jonathan Ive, the head of design at Apple and a name nearly as adored by its followers as Steve Jobs, says Cook has not neglected the company's central mission: innovation. "Honestly, I don't think anything's changed," he said. And that includes the clamor for some exciting new thing. "People felt exactly the same way when we were working on the iPhone," Ive added.
"It is hard for all of us to be patient," Ive said. "It was hard for Steve. It is hard for Tim."[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Almost daily, employees would spot Jobs having lunch on Apple's campus with Ive. These days, Ive said, he meets three days a week with Cook, generally in each other's offices. But Ive said the design processes are essentially unchanged.
"Steve established a set of values, and he established preoccupations and tones that are completely enduring," Ive said. Chief among them, he said, is a reliance on small creative teams whose membership remains intact to this day. The philosophy that materials and products are intertwined also continues under Cook. For instance, when the company decided to use titanium to build a laptop, Ive said, he and Cook and Jobs thought extensively about how to push the boundaries of the metal to get the look and feel they wanted. And Ive pointed to another enduring value: a complete focus on the product.
If Jobs was maniacal about design, Cook projects "quiet consideration," Ive said. Cook digests things carefully, with time, which Ive said "testifies to the fact he knows it's important."[/QUOTE]
The only redeeming quality of the article is the one quote that proves Steve Jobs was not at all receptive to a smaller iPad, contrary to what was said before.