"Look at the scoreboard, son?" Really, that's your way of judging a CEO who takes over what's ALREADY one of the world's most successful and valuable companies, with ALREADY a dominant position in every market it plays in? You watch that CEO for a few years, look at the company's stock price and profits, and declare him a winner?
That's incredibly simplistic, foolish and it shows deep inexperience on your part. The fact is, Tim Cook inherited Apple at the top of its game, with a ton of momentum going forward. That momentum would make A TON of generic, caretaker CEOs look good for a while (hence your thumbs up for Tim Cook).
So we know the shallow measurements you use to judge Tim Cook. Let's now look at how a deeper thinker would evaluate him. Let's see, a deeper thinker knows:
1) a company's stock price is irrelevant, because the market is often the last to know about what's really going on with a company, and a lot of buyers follow a herd mentality. I was a deep Apple user who could tell Apple was firing on all cylinders when I bought the stock at $100 years ago (it's gone up 7-8 times in value since then). Clearly, I knew more about Apple than the overall market did, or else I would not have been able to buy those shares so cheaply.
2) a company's strong financial performance can easily cover up deep, longer term rot going on inside -- that's why Blackberry/RIM's sales and stock reached its all-time highs well after the iPhone shipped. Many looked at RIM and said "sales are booming, the stock's doing fine, maybe this whole iPhone thing (and Android) isn't a big threat after all!" We know how that turned out. As it turned out for Nokia, Microsoft, etc. etc.
3) Apple's whole success over THE LONG TERM was based on making products that were easy for your average non-techy, and that "Just Worked" when competitors like Microsoft were pilling on features that didn't really matter, shipping too many confusingly similar products, and not putting them through tough quality control before shipping. Apple's unique focus on ease and quality set it up for all of its success. People trusted new Apple products in a way they would never trust a new Microsoft or Palm or Google product.
4) Tim Cook's Apple is losing that focus on simplicity, clarity, and quality. Anyone who has been a close Apple follower for the last 15 years or so can tell. Apple is moving more slowly, the products are getting more complicated, and they don't work as well as they used to (i.e., obscure bugs). You won't see it reflected in the stock price or even sales for a while yet, maybe years. But the slippage and rot is there.
Tim Cook was an operations guy, put in charge of essentially a creative company that was all about its consumer products. I gave Cook the benefit of the doubt for a while, largely based on my trust of Jobs, but sorry, Jobs was wrong and Tim Cook is not the right guy to lead Apple, because he's letting its most important asset (simplicity and reliability) be slowly tarnished.
I'll give Cook credit for making Apple better at worldwide launches and opening China up, but again, that's something you'd expect from an Operations guy. Product-wise, he doesn't have the instincts to lead Apple, and it will tell over the long haul (sadly).
Or, if I'm more optimistic, I suppose he can still wake up and realize he needs to pay more attention to those critical aspects of the business, before it's too late and Apple loses what's really special about it in the Public's mind. That's always possible, I guess, but does seem unlikely.
I searched for a single shred of empirical evidence in your non-sensical rant, and couldn't find a damn thing. It's easy to throw around words like "rot", "tarnished", etc, but eventually you'll have to back that up with some REAL indicators in the REAL world, not just the little talking voices in your head. More slowly? Anyone with a shred of context and history can see otherwise, and the host of new foundational, software, and hardware technologies Apple has released in the past couple years has been beyond significant. Apple is moving faster than it ever has been. Also, how exactly are iOS, or OSX more "complicated" than before?
If anything, Apple has done a masisve effort in hiding additional functionality, so that the basic experience (ie. homescreen) remains identical, consistent, and intuitive. The iOS homescreen looks fundamentally the same in iO9 as iOS1.0, is this something a company that couldn't give a **** about simplicity, and simply wants to add "complexity" would do? I've been using OSX and iOS for a long time, and there's not a single thing I find is more "complicated" to do today, we just have more, and more powerful features, IF we choose to use them.
Again, your tired rant is the same one we've heard for a long time, the one penned by trolls who have run out of low-hanging fruit on which to criticize Apple, have given up on the "Apple is doomed tomorrow" bandwagon, and have resorted to exactly what you wrote, which is to just vomit out unprovable, subjective drivel with the "Apple may be successful now, but one day they will fall" cop-out conclusion, making sure not to give Tim Cook or the Apple team a SHRED of credit for exploding Apple's success and brand equity in the 4 years (an eternity in tech) after SJ's death. How sad, that you're so spiteful against Cook that you're too petty to give credit where credit is due, and wish to re-invent history by pretending that Apple software and hardware was somehow perfect under SJ (it actually had major problems).
My new Mac and my new iPhone are the best Apple products I've ever owned, with easily the best hardware and software. But I guess I have the magical versions without the "rot" you speak of.
Apple has been more and more successful and expanded their user base each year with Cook. Under Sculley Apple almost went bankrupt.
Apple may not be your cup of tea, but it is for hundreds of millions.
Maybe the NEW Apple just isn't for you?
Like they say in sports - "Look at the scoreboard son, look at the scoreboard"
And since Cook has been CEO the scoreboard is looking mighty fine.
So maybe the problem is not with Apple but with you. You are stuck in the past, stuck in your old ways. Maybe its time for you to move on.
The scoreboard looks pretty good before he took over. Tim Cook taking over as CEO was like a pitcher coming into a game that is 35-0 and taking credit for the win. Does Cook also take credit for Apple losing about 90 Billion in market cap in the last two weeks?
Isn't that a bit hyperbolic? I have a Watch now and love it. The only issue I've had so far is it not recognizing my Bluetooth headphones one day.
Honestly I think Eddy Cue has too much on his plate and Tim Cook should hire a SVP to run iCloud services.
I've been saying that for a while. Cue is a deals guy, Apple needs a strong product guy for Internet software and services. (And I'm not sure Iovine is that guy.)
I'm so offended. A proven bigot, racist, xenophobe, liar, and troll has blocked me? Not sure how I'm gonna sleep at night. And we're all just shocked that you believe another poster who rants about Apple's impending demise "gets it". The only consistent ideology in every single one of your posts, is "I hate Tim Cook". Beyond that, it's all random, non-sensical garbage.
Let's see, zero facts, zero honest rebuttal of my point, personal attacks, inaccuracies, yep, it's a Slurpy post.
In five years Apple will be a disaster and Tim will be on the street.
Who cares? I don't need some apple person to tell me what music I wanna listen too. I already know. I don't want to listen to beats 1 with there crappy ass DJ's and bad music. I already have the stations I love and the DJ's which are awesome.
What Apple Music needs is a more immersive experience, that makes music valuable again and realizes music is a huge part of our lifes as human beings.
Better ways to connect to the artists directly so I can get content and information,
- Live concert streams as well as archive footage, (concert DVD's etc)
- Concert tickets with integrated ticket buying and ticket systems (via apple pay, NFC), then with the ability to stream the concert recording added to your account (perhaps as an exclusive for just the people that were there! and bought tickets via apple music)
- Live acoustic sessions
- Live periscope like connection with artists for things like backstage before shows, studio recordings etc
- Video programing like with the radio, but music channels, maybe tailored weekly music news segments that stitches a video report together with next and interviews that are relevant to you.
- Scheduled interviews like REddit AMA sessions built into the app.
- Also if Apple are going to keep the crappy headphones, then please make them AWESOME instead of lame and perhaps lets see more beats branded audio devices that are linked to Apple music, perhaps connected speaker hifi systems linked exclusively to apple music content.
Go big or go home Apple, and right now your service is just a little "me too!"
"crappy a** DJs and bad music"?!?
Hate to embarass you but Apple hired world famous DJs who have a refined ear and are FINALLY allowed to play any song in any genre or format. Beats 1 has gotten rave reviews everywhere with the focus being great DJs and good music. Zane Lowe, Pharrell, Dr. Dre not good enough? IDK maybe you're a cranky old man who hates anything them younsters in their 40's play.
Who cares? I don't need some apple person to tell me what music I wanna listen too. I already know. I don't want to listen to beats 1 with there crappy ass DJ's and bad music. I already have the stations I love and the DJ's which are awesome.
What Apple Music needs is a more immersive experience, that makes music valuable again and realizes music is a huge part of our lifes as human beings.
Better ways to connect to the artists directly so I can get content and information,
AppleMusic isn't meant for you.
Next.
If you say "Apple Music isn't meant for you" enough times then it means that Apple Music isn't meant for lots and lots and lots of people. That is kind of a problem from Apple's perspective.
That is not to say Music won't be successful enough, it likely will be. But there is obviously some work to be done before many people get on board and have the legitimate issues with the service solved before they pay for it. One would imagine Apple is working hard at solving those issues. I consider the free three month trial as beta testing. Other people get a sour taste and may not ever try it again.
Also it appears from your first comment in this thread that you are hoping that Spotify or Pandora disappear. That seems to be a little bit anti-consumer/anti-choice. Competition and choice is good.
Comments
"Look at the scoreboard, son?" Really, that's your way of judging a CEO who takes over what's ALREADY one of the world's most successful and valuable companies, with ALREADY a dominant position in every market it plays in? You watch that CEO for a few years, look at the company's stock price and profits, and declare him a winner?
That's incredibly simplistic, foolish and it shows deep inexperience on your part. The fact is, Tim Cook inherited Apple at the top of its game, with a ton of momentum going forward. That momentum would make A TON of generic, caretaker CEOs look good for a while (hence your thumbs up for Tim Cook).
So we know the shallow measurements you use to judge Tim Cook. Let's now look at how a deeper thinker would evaluate him. Let's see, a deeper thinker knows:
1) a company's stock price is irrelevant, because the market is often the last to know about what's really going on with a company, and a lot of buyers follow a herd mentality. I was a deep Apple user who could tell Apple was firing on all cylinders when I bought the stock at $100 years ago (it's gone up 7-8 times in value since then). Clearly, I knew more about Apple than the overall market did, or else I would not have been able to buy those shares so cheaply.
2) a company's strong financial performance can easily cover up deep, longer term rot going on inside -- that's why Blackberry/RIM's sales and stock reached its all-time highs well after the iPhone shipped. Many looked at RIM and said "sales are booming, the stock's doing fine, maybe this whole iPhone thing (and Android) isn't a big threat after all!" We know how that turned out. As it turned out for Nokia, Microsoft, etc. etc.
3) Apple's whole success over THE LONG TERM was based on making products that were easy for your average non-techy, and that "Just Worked" when competitors like Microsoft were pilling on features that didn't really matter, shipping too many confusingly similar products, and not putting them through tough quality control before shipping. Apple's unique focus on ease and quality set it up for all of its success. People trusted new Apple products in a way they would never trust a new Microsoft or Palm or Google product.
4) Tim Cook's Apple is losing that focus on simplicity, clarity, and quality. Anyone who has been a close Apple follower for the last 15 years or so can tell. Apple is moving more slowly, the products are getting more complicated, and they don't work as well as they used to (i.e., obscure bugs). You won't see it reflected in the stock price or even sales for a while yet, maybe years. But the slippage and rot is there.
Tim Cook was an operations guy, put in charge of essentially a creative company that was all about its consumer products. I gave Cook the benefit of the doubt for a while, largely based on my trust of Jobs, but sorry, Jobs was wrong and Tim Cook is not the right guy to lead Apple, because he's letting its most important asset (simplicity and reliability) be slowly tarnished.
I'll give Cook credit for making Apple better at worldwide launches and opening China up, but again, that's something you'd expect from an Operations guy. Product-wise, he doesn't have the instincts to lead Apple, and it will tell over the long haul (sadly).
Or, if I'm more optimistic, I suppose he can still wake up and realize he needs to pay more attention to those critical aspects of the business, before it's too late and Apple loses what's really special about it in the Public's mind. That's always possible, I guess, but does seem unlikely.
I searched for a single shred of empirical evidence in your non-sensical rant, and couldn't find a damn thing. It's easy to throw around words like "rot", "tarnished", etc, but eventually you'll have to back that up with some REAL indicators in the REAL world, not just the little talking voices in your head. More slowly? Anyone with a shred of context and history can see otherwise, and the host of new foundational, software, and hardware technologies Apple has released in the past couple years has been beyond significant. Apple is moving faster than it ever has been. Also, how exactly are iOS, or OSX more "complicated" than before?
If anything, Apple has done a masisve effort in hiding additional functionality, so that the basic experience (ie. homescreen) remains identical, consistent, and intuitive. The iOS homescreen looks fundamentally the same in iO9 as iOS1.0, is this something a company that couldn't give a **** about simplicity, and simply wants to add "complexity" would do? I've been using OSX and iOS for a long time, and there's not a single thing I find is more "complicated" to do today, we just have more, and more powerful features, IF we choose to use them.
Again, your tired rant is the same one we've heard for a long time, the one penned by trolls who have run out of low-hanging fruit on which to criticize Apple, have given up on the "Apple is doomed tomorrow" bandwagon, and have resorted to exactly what you wrote, which is to just vomit out unprovable, subjective drivel with the "Apple may be successful now, but one day they will fall" cop-out conclusion, making sure not to give Tim Cook or the Apple team a SHRED of credit for exploding Apple's success and brand equity in the 4 years (an eternity in tech) after SJ's death. How sad, that you're so spiteful against Cook that you're too petty to give credit where credit is due, and wish to re-invent history by pretending that Apple software and hardware was somehow perfect under SJ (it actually had major problems).
My new Mac and my new iPhone are the best Apple products I've ever owned, with easily the best hardware and software. But I guess I have the magical versions without the "rot" you speak of.
Hundreds of Millions of Apple customers disagree.
Apple has been more and more successful and expanded their user base each year with Cook. Under Sculley Apple almost went bankrupt.
Apple may not be your cup of tea, but it is for hundreds of millions.
Maybe the NEW Apple just isn't for you?
Like they say in sports - "Look at the scoreboard son, look at the scoreboard"
And since Cook has been CEO the scoreboard is looking mighty fine.
So maybe the problem is not with Apple but with you. You are stuck in the past, stuck in your old ways. Maybe its time for you to move on.
The scoreboard looks pretty good before he took over. Tim Cook taking over as CEO was like a pitcher coming into a game that is 35-0 and taking credit for the win. Does Cook also take credit for Apple losing about 90 Billion in market cap in the last two weeks?
You don't understand business and just use caps and tell people to shut up.
Sculley didn't bankrupt Apple, just FYI. He actually made it very profitable after Jobs left. He also increased the user base.
Didn't he also basically give away the crown jewels (through licensing) to MS? I thought Jobs said he ruined the company.
I've been saying that for a while. Cue is a deals guy, Apple needs a strong product guy for Internet software and services. (And I'm not sure Iovine is that guy.)
Who exactly are you status signaling to?
I'm so offended. A proven bigot, racist, xenophobe, liar, and troll has blocked me? Not sure how I'm gonna sleep at night. And we're all just shocked that you believe another poster who rants about Apple's impending demise "gets it". The only consistent ideology in every single one of your posts, is "I hate Tim Cook". Beyond that, it's all random, non-sensical garbage.
Let's see, zero facts, zero honest rebuttal of my point, personal attacks, inaccuracies, yep, it's a Slurpy post.
In five years Apple will be a disaster and Tim will be on the street.
"crappy a** DJs and bad music"?!?
Hate to embarass you but Apple hired world famous DJs who have a refined ear and are FINALLY allowed to play any song in any genre or format. Beats 1 has gotten rave reviews everywhere with the focus being great DJs and good music. Zane Lowe, Pharrell, Dr. Dre not good enough? IDK maybe you're a cranky old man who hates anything them younsters in their 40's play.
someone should screenshot this and bring it up in 5 years.
Meh.
Who cares? I don't need some apple person to tell me what music I wanna listen too. I already know. I don't want to listen to beats 1 with there crappy ass DJ's and bad music. I already have the stations I love and the DJ's which are awesome.
What Apple Music needs is a more immersive experience, that makes music valuable again and realizes music is a huge part of our lifes as human beings.
Better ways to connect to the artists directly so I can get content and information,
AppleMusic isn't meant for you.
Next.
If you say "Apple Music isn't meant for you" enough times then it means that Apple Music isn't meant for lots and lots and lots of people. That is kind of a problem from Apple's perspective.
That is not to say Music won't be successful enough, it likely will be. But there is obviously some work to be done before many people get on board and have the legitimate issues with the service solved before they pay for it. One would imagine Apple is working hard at solving those issues. I consider the free three month trial as beta testing. Other people get a sour taste and may not ever try it again.
Also it appears from your first comment in this thread that you are hoping that Spotify or Pandora disappear. That seems to be a little bit anti-consumer/anti-choice. Competition and choice is good.
I don't think he was spilling the beans on TV show curation. One does not consume TV in the same way one consumes music.