... not being concerned at supporting the legacy crowd that will just weigh them down.:
Oh, you mean the developers, the resellers, the distributors, the customer base who carried them through all the bad years of "I’d shut it down and give the money back to the shareholders"?
Believe it or not, these are still the very spine of Apple. Without them, it would go the way of Nokia brutally fast!
It's insane for someone to suggest that an employee is unhappy with Cook as CEO because they no longer charge $999 for macOS Server and have moved nearly all of its features into the default macOS build for all customers.
Since you are the only one who have suggested that, you just characterized yourself.
... not being concerned at supporting the legacy crowd that will just weigh them down.:
Oh, you mean the developers, the resellers, the distributors, the customer base who carried them through all the bad years of "I’d shut it down and give the money back to the shareholders"?
Believe it or not, these are still the very spine of Apple. Without them, it would go the way of Nokia brutally fast!
Delusional nonsense. The vast majority of Apple revenue is from iOS devices, not Macs. Those days are gone.
It's insane for someone to suggest that an employee is unhappy with Cook as CEO because they no longer charge $999 for macOS Server and have moved nearly all of its features into the default macOS build for all customers.
Since you are the only one who have suggested that, you just characterized yourself.
You said it. You said they gutted macOS Server… which they did by putting the most used features into macOS for all customers to use and repeatedly dropped the price as they moved features into macOS or when 3rd-party, open source solutions were better up presented outside of Apple.
I still have an old iMac running Snow Leopard with the developer's build of the $999 version of Mac OS X Server which was required in order to use that iMac as a Time Machine server.
So would I give Apple bad marks for making macOS Server cost under $20 and making any modern macOS build work as a Time Machine server out of the box? Not at a fucking chance… but you would in your comment that said, and I quote, "gutted macOS Server."
It's insane for someone to suggest that an employee is unhappy with Cook as CEO because they no longer charge $999 for macOS Server and have moved nearly all of its features into the default macOS build for all customers.
Since you are the only one who have suggested that, you just characterized yourself.
You said it. You said they gutted macOS Server… which they did by putting the most used features into macOS for all customers to use and repeatedly dropped the price as they moved features into macOS or when 3rd-party, open source solutions were better up presented outside of Apple.
I still have an old iMac running Snow Leopard with the developer's build of the $999 version of Mac OS X Server which was required in order to use that iMac as a Time Machine server.
So would I give Apple bad marks for making macOS Server cost under $20 and making any modern macOS build work as a Time Machine server out of the box? Not at a fucking chance… but you would in your comment that said, and I quote, "gutted macOS Server."
You're still the only taking about price. I did not mention it and it is immaterial in this discussion.
... not being concerned at supporting the legacy crowd that will just weigh them down.:
Oh, you mean the developers, the resellers, the distributors, the customer base who carried them through all the bad years of "I’d shut it down and give the money back to the shareholders"?
Believe it or not, these are still the very spine of Apple. Without them, it would go the way of Nokia brutally fast!
Delusional nonsense. The vast majority of Apple revenue is from iOS devices, not Macs. Those days are gone.
If that is the case, Tim Cook better call an event and tell that to the face of the core base. Then let's see what happens to the company.
It's insane for someone to suggest that an employee is unhappy with Cook as CEO because they no longer charge $999 for macOS Server and have moved nearly all of its features into the default macOS build for all customers.
Since you are the only one who have suggested that, you just characterized yourself.
You said it. You said they gutted macOS Server… which they did by putting the most used features into macOS for all customers to use and repeatedly dropped the price as they moved features into macOS or when 3rd-party, open source solutions were better up presented outside of Apple.
I still have an old iMac running Snow Leopard with the developer's build of the $999 version of Mac OS X Server which was required in order to use that iMac as a Time Machine server.
So would I give Apple bad marks for making macOS Server cost under $20 and making any modern macOS build work as a Time Machine server out of the box? Not at a fucking chance… but you would in your comment that said, and I quote, "gutted macOS Server."
You're still the only taking about price. I did not mention it and it is immaterial in this discussion.
Apple moving features out of macOS Server to macOS is why they were able to reduce the price of so dramatically. This is a good thing for users. I don't know anyone that ever dropped $1000 on the feature-rich macOS Server nee Mac OS X Server. It was just too expensive so they found alternative options. Apple clearly saw this so they kept dropping the price and then moved core features into every build of macOS. You say this is a bad move and a reason why Cook is unpopular with employees (which is ridiculous on its face), but I champion it.
Apple would rather spend repatriated cash on dividends than employee raises and bonuses.
Sure they give their employees stock grants, but they are minuscule and have 5 year handcuffs before they vest. Meanwhile the board gets a huge stock bonus that vests next year. There is no one on the board that really needs the money, but there are a lot of employees who could use a fraction of that money to make their lives easier and help focus on making great products instead of worrying balancing their income between just surviving and thriving.
If employees want compensation beyond their already generous salaries, they can buy AAPL stock. There’s no justification for handing over money to employees for doing nothing. That would be a misuse of company funds..
You were doing a pretty good job up until this point of hiding your political leanings, but "fruity" is a major tell-tale sign that you're anti-gay. Here's the thing; Tim Cook is gay and was outed. He *had* to admit it and from that point forward he had little choice but to be an LGBTQ leader or he would have taken flack for abdicating his responsibility.
... not being concerned at supporting the legacy crowd that will just weigh them down.:
Oh, you mean the developers, the resellers, the distributors, the customer base who carried them through all the bad years of "I’d shut it down and give the money back to the shareholders"?
Believe it or not, these are still the very spine of Apple. Without them, it would go the way of Nokia brutally fast!
That customer base is now irrelevant. They are no longer in Apple's demographic. Just look at Apple's commercials.
You were doing a pretty good job up until this point of hiding your political leanings, but "fruity" is a major tell-tale sign that you're anti-gay. Here's the thing; Tim Cook is gay and was outed. He *had* to admit it and from that point forward he had little choice but to be an LGBTQ leader or he would have taken flack for abdicating his responsibility.
You have no idea what and who I am, but in international dealings fruity might make a heck of difference.
The entire point about the expression is that a very large section of the world "Don't care about how they do it in California"! If he "had to be" a LGBTQ leader - fine let him be that locally, but not on the world stage. Apple customers pretty much don't care about what he is apart from being a person who carries the legacy of Apple forward.
Although I'm only an outsider, it seems pretty clear what's likely affecting the perception of Tim's performance and/or his popularity (and as Rogifan is pointing out, it doesn't seem to be anything catastraphic, given the glassdoor rating, Apple's ongoing success, etc.).
Politics (maybe a little, but not in the way most think):
As I said in a previous post (that was deleted because apparently people are a bit sensitive), although I think Tim is pushing it a bit much with the virtue signaling (he's a bit eager at times, and although he seems to pick his topics thoughtfully, they do happen to fall on one partisan side every time), I think he's overall doing a really good job with that stuff, particularly given the EXTREMELY one-sided nature of politics in silicon valley (is that ok to say??). If I had to guess, I think Tim's relative *lack* of virtue signaling (e.g. taking a very logical, reasonable stance of working with Trump), is actually hurting his rapport with one particular side of the political spectrum that tends to be.. very vocal, and which tends to deeply personalize political views in general.
Apple performance:
Apple has done amazingly well under his leadership.
Work environment:
Can't comment much on that. While sunday conference calls sounds a bit demanding, I'd kill to be working at the spaceship, and for the worlds best company, if I was in the technology field.
Products:
-hardware seems to be doing great, still miles ahead of any competition (if you can call them that). Focus on iOS is logical and necessary (and preferred as a general consumer). There's a few annoyances, but I don't think that affects many people (where the hell is AirPower and the inductive Air Pod case?).
-core software: seems like that's gone along great, with the exception of this last keynote. This is the first keynote I've *ever* been bored with (since I started watching religiously in 2007/2008). Sill miles ahead of the so-called competition.
SERVICES:
I have to think that the stagnation and relative lack of improvement of so, so many of Apples services, which Apple consumers and employees depend on (and have/want to defend to others), must be the biggest morale killer. I'm sure I'm not the only one that's tried to be understanding and patient.. but we're almost 7 years out from siri's release, almost 6 years out from Maps release, and were still dealing with so many of the frustrations with basic functionality that should have been there, and was even promised, on day 1. Apple seems content to bury its head in the sand, consoling themselves with however many billions of siri queries they get (I wonder how many of those "queries" are: ""no, you dumb b____, I said ____ not ____"), or that that 50% of merchants use Apple Pay (that's why a coffee app, used at a place that accepts apple pay, beats them in transaction numbers, huh?), or think along the lines of "how hard could [Maps] be?" (cue) (yes, turns out they are difficult, and you've had nearly 7 years to fix it!). And am I not supposed to point out that the failures of carpool karaoke and planet of the apps doesn't bode well for Apple's future media ambitions? Also, a huge factor that no one seems to understand (absence does not mean it's not needed), is the lack of social integration in Apple's services: it was easy to predict animoji would't make much of a dent (lack of expression plus lack of personalization plus not very practical to use for social engagement), and I'm afraid mimoji (although finally getting to the personal expression part), may also be a failure due to impracticality (no one wants a goofy cartoon head on their real-life body, and sending video messages is impractical for 99% of social engagement); what Apple needs to do to make this work is to be able to 'freeze' and save your mimoji expressions to send on-the-fly during text messages (but, Apple never understands social, no matter what, for some reason). The lack of social is most glaring on apple's most social app: Apple Music (this would be a huge success if people were given the ability to create personal pages to express themselves and share with friends and family (currently, after nearly 3 years, all you can do is have a name, small circular profile pic, and share playlists; no other personalization, no ability to add commentary, no ability to customize layout or organize playlists.. on and on..).
As a fan and customer I'm still very loyal to Apple because of Apple's amazing hardware and core software, Apple's focus on privacy and security, and because of Apple's general (and impressive) integrity as a company. However, the ongoing issues with services are incredibly frustrating.
As a fan and customer I'm still very loyal to Apple because
I don't get why anyone is loyal to a company. My use of their products is based on my experience of their products. If they fail me or something better emerges I stop using them without question or hesitation. They owe me nothing else and I owe them nothing besides what is agreed upon ay the time of sale.
You were doing a pretty good job up until this point of hiding your political leanings, but "fruity" is a major tell-tale sign that you're anti-gay. Here's the thing; Tim Cook is gay and was outed. He *had* to admit it and from that point forward he had little choice but to be an LGBTQ leader or he would have taken flack for abdicating his responsibility.
Actually, Cook was “outed” before being “outed” again:
“On June 27, 2014, during his CNBC program "Squawk on the Street," Hobbs accidentally re-"outed" Apple CEO Tim Cook as gay.[32][33] Tim Cook was already "out," based on his appearance in out.com's Power List 2013.[34] Cook later publicly confirmed that he is gay in an opinion piece advocating for human rights and equality.”
Comments
Believe it or not, these are still the very spine of Apple. Without them, it would go the way of Nokia brutally fast!
No, that’s probably just some bullshit you made up on the spot.
I still have an old iMac running Snow Leopard with the developer's build of the $999 version of Mac OS X Server which was required in order to use that iMac as a Time Machine server.
So would I give Apple bad marks for making macOS Server cost under $20 and making any modern macOS build work as a Time Machine server out of the box? Not at a fucking chance… but you would in your comment that said, and I quote, "gutted macOS Server."
If that is the case, Tim Cook better call an event and tell that to the face of the core base. Then let's see what happens to the company.
You have no idea what and who I am, but in international dealings fruity might make a heck of difference.
The entire point about the expression is that a very large section of the world "Don't care about how they do it in California"!
If he "had to be" a LGBTQ leader - fine let him be that locally, but not on the world stage. Apple customers pretty much don't care about what he is apart from being a person who carries the legacy of Apple forward.
“On June 27, 2014, during his CNBC program "Squawk on the Street," Hobbs accidentally re-"outed" Apple CEO Tim Cook as gay.[32][33] Tim Cook was already "out," based on his appearance in out.com's Power List 2013.[34] Cook later publicly confirmed that he is gay in an opinion piece advocating for human rights and equality.”
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Hobbs