"I don't want Apple to be another talking head, we should only speak when we have certain knowledge to bring to the subject," Cook said. "I always ask myself, 'Do we have standing, do we have a right to talk about this issue?'”
Aha. That one comment explains everything about their actions around the world. We can point people to this article/interview any time a question of hypocrisy (or “hypocrisy”) arises. Very helpful!
…a company can never really achieve complete diversity.
Nor should it try.
Instead, the service is looking for content from a wide variety of outlets that "has a reason to be out there.”
Hmm.
The CEO also fielded a few questions about Screen Time, the new usage monitoring and management feature set to debut with iOS 12 this fall.
Who wants to bet that Screen Time comes to 10.15 Death Valley next year? Alongside a related announcement that “the Mac as we know it is ending,” that is. Then again, there’s still not even iCloud syncing of alarms and timers between OS X and iOS…
To all you old guys leaving comments here that just can't stand how the world is changing so you decided to stay behind and dig in your heels, Apple is not for you any longer, it's for the next generation or at least the younger gen who don't come with your tired baggage. Apple know's trying to make you happy is not a winning strategy going forward so grab a comfy chair, close the curtains and pretend it's 2006.
I can't stand TC any longer. The way he betrayed Steve and his Mac legacy (that nade him what he is, beyond a very grey man) is beyond my imagination. The guy simply lost all his credibility - whatever his financial achievements, or despite. My first intent towards any political stance from his side will be to oppose.
And then he’ll bring his buddy Elon on board take over Apple’s quixotic software only automotive efforts.
Now there’s a thought experiment: Elon Musk as CEO of Apple. It would have to be a very non-standard arrangement, though. The execution of all of his ideas and actions would have to be approved by the board AND the senior VPs. Musk has proven himself to be… let’s say too much of a visionary and too little of an economist to be able to actually manage a corporation. But that vision? Hoo boy, that’d be interesting to see directed toward computing. Something tells me that Musk as Apple CEO would call for Apple to make all of its own chips in-house. And hell, that might just be the best way to go. Then again, he would probably also demand that the chips be quantum processors (which… might just be the best way to go).
The idea that Apple is about specific policies rather than a particular party must be new, because during the last presidential campaign Tim Cook did a fundraiser for Hillary Clinton.
I also often hear Apple being dubbed a "gay brand", and even here where gay marriages has been a legal fact for almost 25 years, a lot of people (including businesses) won't be seen alive with, or be seen as supporting that brand because of that. That goes all they way up to telco management and large brand chains.
So what are you saying? Apple should stop standing up for equal rights for all because people in your country are hateful bigots?
Apple can and should stand up for any social issue popular enough to increase their profits. Apple should not touch any other social issues with a ten-foot pole because they might reduce Apple's profits.
Tim, a bit of advice: You work for Apple. Talk about Apple products and services. If conversations stray to whatever social concern of the week comes up, redirect the conversation to Apple products and services. Otherwise, take off the CEO hat and just speak as Tim Cook, private citizen.
You probably should have actually watched the interview before commenting. Most of the time is spent explaining (very well, I might add) exactly why Apple doesn't take that approach. If you'd watched the interview, you'd understand that Apple/Cook comments on *policies* rather than politics, and only in areas that affect their business or which they have some expertise on -- and your comment would look a lot less foolish.
So what are you saying? Apple should stop standing up for equal rights for all because people in your country are hateful bigots?
What I'm saying is that people across the globe are to a large extent hateful bigots despite the advances that we have seen particularly here in western European countries. His standing up will make people hate the company even more (often for irrational reasons) and hurt their business bad over time.
What he does on his private time is one thing, but not in the name of the company and the brand.
Preserving the integrity of Apple's brand and reputation is more important than the sexuality of some employees.
Man so clueless. It’s not about sexuality, it’s about equal civil rights, which we don’t yet have everywhere in the US even.
Also, considering the continued, historic profits Apple is earning, just when is it you believe the gay haters are going to hurt the bottom line!? Any day now, right?
I can't stand TC any longer. The way he betrayed Steve and his Mac legacy (that nade him what he is, beyond a very grey man) is beyond my imagination. The guy simply lost all his credibility - whatever his financial achievements, or despite. My first intent towards any political stance from his side will be to oppose.
What delusion. Jobs was the king of cutting product, some in their prime.
But good to know you’ll base your political stances on the opposite thing Cook desires, because that makes fucking sense, right.
The idea that Apple is about specific policies rather than a particular party must be new, because during the last presidential campaign Tim Cook did a fundraiser for Hillary Clinton.
I also often hear Apple being dubbed a "gay brand", and even here where gay marriages has been a legal fact for almost 25 years, a lot of people (including businesses) won't be seen alive with, or be seen as supporting that brand because of that. That goes all they way up to telco management and large brand chains.
So what are you saying? Apple should stop standing up for equal rights for all because people in your country are hateful bigots?
Apple can and should stand up for any social issue popular enough to increase their profits. Apple should not touch any other social issues with a ten-foot pole because they might reduce Apple's profits.
Wrong. Sorry sogg, but that isn’t how Cook and Apple manage themselves. Reread the article.
The idea that Apple is about specific policies rather than a particular party must be new, because during the last presidential campaign Tim Cook did a fundraiser for Hillary Clinton.
Tim Cook appearing in images like this has the potential of alienating half the US population from doing business with Apple (it could equally swing the other way if he appeared as actively supporting the other candidate during an election campaign.)
For the international customer base it could be even worse as a large section of the world has a very different view of US political "leadership" than the US domestic one. Very many places the US is seen as an aggressor, and for a brand to associate themselves with the political leadership could be catastrophic.
I also often hear Apple being dubbed a "gay brand", and even here where gay marriages has been a legal fact for almost 25 years, a lot of people (including businesses) won't be seen alive with, or be seen as supporting that brand because of that. That goes all they way up to telco management and large brand chains. Even media will (consistency) prefer to show a Samsung product in their images and video clips rather than Apple, which they often find reasons to bash.
He has also held them for Paul Ryan and Rob Portman, both Republicans.
You could say that's being balanced, but it's also another example of backing the wrong horse. Clinton lost and Ryan is retiring. Meanwhile the guy who (as your article states) they snubbed at the convention, won. 3 wrong bets out of 3 - they might have been better off just keeping out of it.
Of course big companies inevitably have to work with whoever is in power and there's nothing wrong with a major CEO visiting the President or Speaker, but they don't have to get involved in campaigns.
Tim, a bit of advice: You work for Apple. Talk about Apple products and services. If conversations stray to whatever social concern of the week comes up, redirect the conversation to Apple products and services. Otherwise, take off the CEO hat and just speak as Tim Cook, private citizen.
You probably should have actually watched the interview before commenting. Most of the time is spent explaining (very well, I might add) exactly why Apple doesn't take that approach. If you'd watched the interview, you'd understand that Apple/Cook comments on *policies* rather than politics, and only in areas that affect their business or which they have some expertise on -- and your comment would look a lot less foolish.
FWIW Patently Apple's Jack Purcher was no fan of the interview nor Cook's responses: When I want a great hamburger, I personally go to Fatburger. Thank god their napkins don’t preach that Jesus Loves Me or that Black Lives Matter or else I’d simply find another burger joint. I go to Fatburger for the food, not for their core beliefs or bloody politics.
Neither was Philip Elmer-Dewitt: I agree with Purcher: Less preaching, more CEOing. Personally, my questions would have been very different than those put to Cook by my friend Adam (“Inside Apple”) Lashinsky...
Tim, a bit of advice: You work for Apple. Talk about Apple products and services. If conversations stray to whatever social concern of the week comes up, redirect the conversation to Apple products and services. Otherwise, take off the CEO hat and just speak as Tim Cook, private citizen.
You probably should have actually watched the interview before commenting. Most of the time is spent explaining (very well, I might add) exactly why Apple doesn't take that approach. If you'd watched the interview, you'd understand that Apple/Cook comments on *policies* rather than politics, and only in areas that affect their business or which they have some expertise on -- and your comment would look a lot less foolish.
Not that I necessarily agree with what SpamSammy said, but to claim that policy is not the same as politics is disingenuous, if not outright rubbish. Policy is implemented via politics. If it isn’t, you don’t have a democracy, you have at the very least a technocracy, if not a dictatorship of the elite, where our betters tell us what to do.
Apple can and should stand up for any social issue popular enough to increase their profits. Apple should not touch any other social issues with a ten-foot pole because they might reduce Apple's profits.
Wrong. Sorry sogg, but that isn’t how Cook and Apple manage themselves. Reread the article.
Yeah I kinda suspect Nunzy may be a Sog35 resurrection.
I can't stand TC any longer. The way he betrayed Steve and his Mac legacy (that nade him what he is, beyond a very grey man) is beyond my imagination. The guy simply lost all his credibility - whatever his financial achievements, or despite. My first intent towards any political stance from his side will be to oppose.
Wow you live and act in "opposite world" congrats letting other's actions pre-decide your own.
Comments
why exactly, does a homosexual CEO frighten you?
The way he betrayed Steve and his Mac legacy (that nade him what he is, beyond a very grey man) is beyond my imagination.
The guy simply lost all his credibility - whatever his financial achievements, or despite.
My first intent towards any political stance from his side will be to oppose.
Now there’s a thought experiment: Elon Musk as CEO of Apple. It would have to be a very non-standard arrangement, though. The execution of all of his ideas and actions would have to be approved by the board AND the senior VPs. Musk has proven himself to be… let’s say too much of a visionary and too little of an economist to be able to actually manage a corporation. But that vision? Hoo boy, that’d be interesting to see directed toward computing. Something tells me that Musk as Apple CEO would call for Apple to make all of its own chips in-house. And hell, that might just be the best way to go. Then again, he would probably also demand that the chips be quantum processors (which… might just be the best way to go).
Also, considering the continued, historic profits Apple is earning, just when is it you believe the gay haters are going to hurt the bottom line!? Any day now, right?
Youre responding to the wrong person. I’m not Mike54.
What delusion. Jobs was the king of cutting product, some in their prime.
But good to know you’ll base your political stances on the opposite thing Cook desires, because that makes fucking sense, right.
Wrong. Sorry sogg, but that isn’t how Cook and Apple manage themselves. Reread the article.
When I want a great hamburger, I personally go to Fatburger. Thank god their napkins don’t preach that Jesus Loves Me or that Black Lives Matter or else I’d simply find another burger joint. I go to Fatburger for the food, not for their core beliefs or bloody politics.
Neither was Philip Elmer-Dewitt:
I agree with Purcher: Less preaching, more CEOing. Personally, my questions would have been very different than those put to Cook by my friend Adam (“Inside Apple”) Lashinsky...
Even hard-core Apple fans can disagree.