Amazing how Apple / Tim Cook is pilloried over the Apple Car - a product that Apple never even acknowledged. It really is quite an amazing apportioning of criticism. The AI functionality that has been advertised, but not been delivered is very fair game for criticism.
But if the car, then why not blame Apple for their failures over their delayed TV set, the hot mess of the folding iPad, Macs still without a cellular connection, their flawed electric motorcycle, Apple ring, washing machine, solar powered router, 8” iPhone and all those other products Apple have never even announced. We know they were junk and were quietly shelved ….
How much money did he spend on the development of the car?
Amazing how Apple / Tim Cook is pilloried over the Apple Car - a product that Apple never even acknowledged. It really is quite an amazing apportioning of criticism. The AI functionality that has been advertised, but not been delivered is very fair game for criticism.
But if the car, then why not blame Apple for their failures over their delayed TV set, the hot mess of the folding iPad, Macs still without a cellular connection, their flawed electric motorcycle, Apple ring, washing machine, solar powered router, 8” iPhone and all those other products Apple have never even announced. We know they were junk and were quietly shelved ….
This. Exactly.
I’m incredibly glad Apple had the strength to say no to the boondoggle called Apple Car. $1 billion per year investigating that market was nothing for Apple. Few companies are well-run enough to say no to a product idea they’ve spent time investigating. Best decision Tim Cook could have made.
Cook was an outstanding COO. He became CEO of the most valuable company and kept it like that for the most. Car, AVP, TV+ expenses, panic move away from China, and AI… he is no product or project person. He won’t push Apple forward.
Holy cow, here comes the invasion of the drama queens and other self annointed armchair experts who think that can run Apple way better than Tim Cook runs Apple. Tim Cook has done a fabulous job for Apple's stakeholders and has created enormous wealth for so many people. That doesn't mean that Tim Cook should stay around forever. He's skippered the ship amazingly well and kept it out of harms way. All great leaders must eventually step down and the most important job that Tim Cook must do at this point in his leadership role is to ensure that a suitable successor is being prepared to assume the CEO role in as bump-less a fashion as possible. This is obviously something Tim Cook does not do alone and the planning for his transition has been in the works for a long time.
When I think about Siri and how it relates to Apple Intelligence my honest take on it is that I don't know what I'm missing. I mean that literally. I've never been a big user of Siri so I haven't been laying in bed at night staring at the ceiling and wondering "What is to become of our little cyber helper who hasn't been able to get past third grade?" Siri being stuck where it has been for more years than anyone at Apple would like to admit hasn't bothered me at all. I've undoubtedly enjoyed some of the ML conveniences that Apple has added here and there in their operating system, and quickly disabled other things that I found were annoying for me personally, but the future of Siri has never really been on my mind. That's just me, but I know there are lots of other people out there that do have legitimate needs and desires for Apple's automation and intelligent agents to bring more capabilities and conveniences to their lives.
That said, I have no reservations at all calling out Apple for how they handled the launch of the iPhone 16 product line. They overpromised and underdelivered on the value that Apple Intelligence meant to both the iPhone 16 and the latest operating systems. It was impossible to watch an Apple iPhone advertisement without a gushing pitch for Apple Intelligence and how it was a transformational addition that made buying the latest iPhone so very attractive. The problem was that Apple Intelligence was still doughy on the counter and had yet to be rolled out and baked. In the ensuing months it went from cookie dough to half baked, if we're being very generous. Those who got all excited when they smelled the cookies baking are still wondering when all those promised goodies are going to be taken out of the oven. If I bought an iPhone 16 to bring Apple Intelligence into my life, I would have a little twinge of buyer's remorse over the past several months. My exact thoughts would be, "Hell, I could've just waited for the iPhone 17 or maybe the iPhone 18, dammit, and be another year or two out from its obsolescence day of reckoning."
Finally, I will still admit that there is part of me that believes Apple calling their AI "Apple Intelligence" was more of a chaff cloud than a grand enlightenment by the Apple executives. It was easy to say that "Hey, we're not behind on our 'artificial intelligence' programs because we aren't doing 'artificial intelligence,' we are doing 'Apple Intelligence'." Yeah, sure, and that furry four legged barking and drooling mammal you just adopted from the pound is not a dog. It's a dog, admit it.
Could you imagine if Tim Cook would have had to demonstrate the feature live in real time like Jobs used to do instead of a nicely edited prerecorded video.
Tim is a great operations guy and he saw products for a couple of niches that made a ton of money but he’s also had a few missteps that were unfortunately loss leaders as well. This comes from a myopic and overly operations and profit driven view. He needs a creative counterpoint. Whether that person is ceo or co-ceo or something else title wise. He is the mind and he needs to find Apple’s soul. It can work out. But not as it is.
No lies involved, simply a delay in feature rollout due to last minute issues requiring reworking to fix. The ad clearly said “coming in a future update”. Apple never said that was currently possible with the public version of Siri, they said it will eventually be possible with a future software update, and there is absolutely no reason to believe that isn’t still the case… Apple says they anticipate rolling out the features within the next year. Now that they’re done whining about how bad the iPhone 16e supposedly is because it doesn’t have MagSafe, these tech writers need a new artificial scandal to whine about. And so they’ve turned a simple delay of feature rollout into claims of Apple “lying”, “misleading”, claiming the features “never existed”, were “never under development”, etc., when there’s zero evidence for any of those claims, and zero reason to believe them… We actually have many good reasons to believe Apple is developing these features, and simply ran into last minute issues that will require a delay. For one, Gurman cited internal sources numerous times about the features when saying they would release in 18.4, and then later when he said they were potentially looking at a delay to 18.5. I’m really getting sick and tired of tech writers making claims like this with absolutely zero evidence. It’s wrong to falsely accuse companies and/or people of “lying” and such when there is absolutely no evidence to support those accusations. It’s merely someone’s conjecture, and much of this comes across like school children throwing tantrums because they didn’t get what they wanted right now this instant and will have to wait…
Hmm… hasn’t Apple been criticized many times about not being an open book in terms of their product announcements in comparison to other companies like Google, Meta, Samsung or Microsoft (Recall AI, Blizzard acquisition, CloudStrike Kernel presence, Surface Computers, Billions-financing OpenAI) who usually blurt out everything before hand? And haven’t Apple been routinely criticized about not making huge blockbuster acquisitions over the years? It appears they can’t win no matter what they do….. Once again in comparison to their competition, Apple may be easily one of the best run companies in tech and Tim Cook is probably the best CEO going.
Notice: the five blunders by Microsoft within the last 12 to 18 months.
Six Microsoft blunders if you count the one in train that seems to have gotten little attention. The forcing of 365 accounts to pay for AI up upping the price of all the current plans. Then allowing you to downgrade to same features at same price when they could not sell AI by convincing people of it’s value
IMO, Apple does have to find a new big business because phones and services are not going to sustain them in the long run. Macs and iPads are already a relatively small part of the business.
I’ve been saying that Apple should buy Blackmagic Design for a while now but then again, I’m sure they use Red cameras for their productions but it would just make sense. I’m sure BM have been approached by several big players and it just feels sense for Apple to buy them before anyone else does.
I think part of this overblown outrage is because of Apple violating its own rule about not talking about unreleased products.
The Siri ad for Apple intelligence reminded me of the old 80’s AT&T ad where they showed you the future of technology with video phones and other things that weren’t available yet. If Apple didn’t mention Siri yet, and to not go ahead and make ads highlighting that feature, there wouldn’t be this outrage in the tech community that seems to always be flung at Apple, but others who do the same thing get a pass.
What’s more important is how the new Macs and iPads will be able to address AI and how apps that you use right now, can work better for you and help you accomplish what you want in a shorter amount of time.
Yes he has done great things at Apple. But that’s in the past. the last few years are filled with Apple Intelligence, Apple Car, Declining quality, and missed deadlines. Even Michael Jordan knew when it was time to hang it up. If Cook stays in the top seat he risks being the Willy Mayes falling down in the outfield.
Cook was the perfect person to replace Jobs, but that was a long time ago.
Love the way the Cook naysayers love to have it both ways. The EV business has been an absolute proven bloodbath for virtually every carmaker who's in it except the Chinese--and I'll bet Tesla will join the club once the latest U.S. and China sales figures are reported--but it's a "failure" that Cook made the smart business decision to cut his losses and not move forward. According to the naysayers, if's a "failure" that he didn't forge ahead and maybe joined Rivian (which is at least still in business unlike Fiskar) in losing nearly $40,000 on every vehicle sold for the most recently reported quarter, up from about a $30,000 loss YOY. Or maybe Ford, which was losing $130,000 for every EV sold. As the song lyrics go, "You've got to know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em, Know when to walk away." And Apple is FAR better off for Cook walking away. ........
Not only, as it turned out, is producing and selling EVs not a profitable venture, the only real valuable assent from selling EVs is for the carbon credit. The likes of Ford, GM, Mercedes and other gas auto makers depend on carbon credits, that allows them to sell more highly profitable gas guzzling SUV, while avoiding being fined by their government for exceeding over all emission standards. Even with Tesla, that don't make a gas auto, relies on selling their carbon credits to be as profitable as they are. And by most metric, they re not very profitable when factoring how much is being invested to make their EVs.
I can't imagine for a second that Apple Inc. would want to sell EVs, whose only way of being profitable, might be to sell their carbon credit to gas auto makers, so they can sell more gas guzzling SUVs. . Can you imagine the hate Apple is going to get for doing that. And probably from the same group that is now criticizing Apple CEO for not going through with producing an "Apple Car".
Cook was an outstanding COO. He became CEO of the most valuable company and kept it like that for the most. Car, AVP, TV+ expenses, panic move away from China, and AI… he is no product or project person. He won’t push Apple forward.
That is a misleading statement. Cook did not "....... became CEO of the most valuable company". When Cook took over as CEO (after Jobs passing in 2011), Apple, Inc. only had a market cap of about $375B. Apple Inc. did not become the most valuable company until over 7 years later, with Cook as CEO. Apple became the first $1T US company (by market cap) in 2018. The first $2T in 2020 and the first $3T in 2024. Not bad by any metric, for a CEO that bungled its EV venture.
People. Get a grip. Apple Intelligence is going to be a bit late. Do you really not have anything else to think about?
This is not important.
Apple Intelligence was late when announced and is in beta in 1 language while competitors are shipping in 80 languages.
The C-suite and board spent a decade on copying Musk with Car, Zuckerberg with AVP, and Netflix with TV+. They depleted other teams to make it happen. Replacing Cook is difficult and he is unique. They should go find better board members.
Robert Sugar (76, aerospace/defense), Wanda Austin (70, another aerospace/defense), Andea Jung (former Avon CEO - did the CEO of Tupperware decline?), Arthur D. Levinson (74, working for Google on health and his son is CTO for an Amazon project on autonomous cars..,). The current board is a horror cabinet!
Could you imagine if Tim Cook would have had to demonstrate the feature live in real time like Jobs used to do instead of a nicely edited prerecorded video.
That's comparing Apples to oranges.
Cook can not demo the feature live because the feature do not yet exist in any real product by Apple. or even in a product that is in production with a firm future release date.
While Jobs on the other hand had a real live product to demo. That were either immediately available after the demo or a firm release date usually not more than a few weeks away.
But in reality, there probably never have been or ever will be, a CEO that can demo a product as well as Jobs did. The "reality distortion field" lived and died with Jobs. Not only is it not possible for Cook to demo an Apple product like Jobs, there isn't any other CEO or any future CEO of Apple that can. Not demoing a product like Jobs, is not a point against having Cook as CEO.
Someone who “made what Apple is” is not necessarily the same as the person who can make Apple what it can be.
Cook needs to make a graceful exit, and soon. Otherwise he runs the risk of acquiring Ballmer status…
Tim Cook is an infinitely better CEO than (“Sweaty”) Ballmer ever was and the same applies to the current CEO’s of Microsoft and Google too…..
Apple under Tim Cook has successfully been able to build profitable new ecosystems while Meta, Microsoft and Google have been flopping, and in the hardware side of the equation, Apple is peerless among the four tech companies, the Me-too hardware isn’t working profit wise for the Three Stooges.
Comments
This. Exactly.
I’m incredibly glad Apple had the strength to say no to the boondoggle called Apple Car. $1 billion per year investigating that market was nothing for Apple. Few companies are well-run enough to say no to a product idea they’ve spent time investigating. Best decision Tim Cook could have made.
When I think about Siri and how it relates to Apple Intelligence my honest take on it is that I don't know what I'm missing. I mean that literally. I've never been a big user of Siri so I haven't been laying in bed at night staring at the ceiling and wondering "What is to become of our little cyber helper who hasn't been able to get past third grade?" Siri being stuck where it has been for more years than anyone at Apple would like to admit hasn't bothered me at all. I've undoubtedly enjoyed some of the ML conveniences that Apple has added here and there in their operating system, and quickly disabled other things that I found were annoying for me personally, but the future of Siri has never really been on my mind. That's just me, but I know there are lots of other people out there that do have legitimate needs and desires for Apple's automation and intelligent agents to bring more capabilities and conveniences to their lives.
That said, I have no reservations at all calling out Apple for how they handled the launch of the iPhone 16 product line. They overpromised and underdelivered on the value that Apple Intelligence meant to both the iPhone 16 and the latest operating systems. It was impossible to watch an Apple iPhone advertisement without a gushing pitch for Apple Intelligence and how it was a transformational addition that made buying the latest iPhone so very attractive. The problem was that Apple Intelligence was still doughy on the counter and had yet to be rolled out and baked. In the ensuing months it went from cookie dough to half baked, if we're being very generous. Those who got all excited when they smelled the cookies baking are still wondering when all those promised goodies are going to be taken out of the oven. If I bought an iPhone 16 to bring Apple Intelligence into my life, I would have a little twinge of buyer's remorse over the past several months. My exact thoughts would be, "Hell, I could've just waited for the iPhone 17 or maybe the iPhone 18, dammit, and be another year or two out from its obsolescence day of reckoning."
Finally, I will still admit that there is part of me that believes Apple calling their AI "Apple Intelligence" was more of a chaff cloud than a grand enlightenment by the Apple executives. It was easy to say that "Hey, we're not behind on our 'artificial intelligence' programs because we aren't doing 'artificial intelligence,' we are doing 'Apple Intelligence'." Yeah, sure, and that furry four legged barking and drooling mammal you just adopted from the pound is not a dog. It's a dog, admit it.
Because c-suite turf and ladder climbing wars become more important than the products.
That is a misleading statement. Cook did not "....... became CEO of the most valuable company". When Cook took over as CEO (after Jobs passing in 2011), Apple, Inc. only had a market cap of about $375B. Apple Inc. did not become the most valuable company until over 7 years later, with Cook as CEO. Apple became the first $1T US company (by market cap) in 2018. The first $2T in 2020 and the first $3T in 2024. Not bad by any metric, for a CEO that bungled its EV venture.
The C-suite and board spent a decade on copying Musk with Car, Zuckerberg with AVP, and Netflix with TV+. They depleted other teams to make it happen. Replacing Cook is difficult and he is unique. They should go find better board members.
Robert Sugar (76, aerospace/defense), Wanda Austin (70, another aerospace/defense), Andea Jung (former Avon CEO - did the CEO of Tupperware decline?), Arthur D. Levinson (74, working for Google on health and his son is CTO for an Amazon project on autonomous cars..,). The current board is a horror cabinet!
Apple under Tim Cook has successfully been able to build profitable new ecosystems while Meta, Microsoft and Google have been flopping, and in the hardware side of the equation, Apple is peerless among the four tech companies, the Me-too hardware isn’t working profit wise for the Three Stooges.