You are the Thomas Edison, Henry Ford and Walt Disney of our Era.
You have inspired all of us.
Interesting point, but...
Henry Ford was a srong anti-Semite and racist (Hitler even praised him by name in his book "Mein Kampf"); Edison was a mean s.o.b. and stole patents from other people; and Walt Disney was probably okay, but he was accused of being anti-Semitic because of organizations he belonged to, but it's unclear.
You are the Thomas Edison, Henry Ford and Walt Disney of our Era.
You have inspired all of us.
Inspired yes but he is by no means equal to any of the fore mentioned people.
The Thomas Edison of personal computers is probably François Gernelle. Though I suspect that there was someone before him.
The team at Commodore could best be compared to Henry Ford.
Off the top of my head I can't think of how Walt Disney even compares. Bestowing God like qualities on the undeserving is ridiculous.
He is Steve Jobs. He has be apart of some amazing things. He DID NOT do anything by himself. It took many people to help bring about the vision that is Apple.
SEC regs require all companies to have a plan, but there is no requirement to tell it. Given Apple's cult of secrecy over products was anyone shocked they never told the pla outside of the informal but rather large hint of putting Cook in charge during all three leaves
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilbo63
I have no real problems with Phil as a presenter, but I like Scott better too.
I think Phil is a good MC type figure but Scott and Jonny are better at the explanations, perhaps because technospeak rolls off their tongues better
In fact I could see future keynotes basically being Phil comes out and greets the audience. Introduces Tim for the numbers. Comes back and briefly intros the first product item with a 'here's Scott/Jonny/video to tell us more about it" and so on. Maybe if it is something like iTunes Match that has been introduced in detail already Phil might do the bit himself since it would be basically the release date and a few more details. On something big they might surprised the audience and have Steve guest appear for the presentation. either in person or via something like FaceTime
I am tired of hearing for a bunch of analysts and unions and politicians ... Steve Jobs was one CEO who you actually heard from and saw routinely. Give the guy a break ... and give Apple some credit with regard to the succession.
Cook is in place ... a succession plan that was executed without a bunch of hype or distraction. Steve is Chairman ... good for him, great for Apple ... let's get on with it.
The article contradicts its own premise. Nobody ever seriously questioned whether Apple had a succession plan. The debate was over how much of it should be disclosed to shareholders.
The answer is, zero, if that's what the Board decides. As long as they have reported that they have one, there is no need to compromise the company, the position, or the person by revealing the details.
"Kasper's Automated Slave" is not actually a person AFAIK.
And good choice going for being mean at this particular time. Really classy.
DED wrote the article. which is who we was talking about in his comment. Whenever you go to the comments, you switch to the forum view, in which (as far as I can tell) every article is published by "kasper's automated slave" which is also known as the Apple Insider account. If you click on the article on the main page, however, you properly see author credit (in this case DED). I don't know why authorship isn't transferred to the forum topic, I wish it were, but I have no idea what type of publishing software they use.
He also said NOTHING negative about apple, steve jobs, or even AI in general in that statement, only about a single author on a single apple-related site.
Well said! I have been an Apple user since buying my first mac in 1984. Taking it to my office as my work computer to the chuckles of the techtards in our company. I remember a trio of wintel geeks telling me at the time that the Mac UI was no big deal, that they could easily build such a user interface for their DOS machines. Laughable - 11 years later was MSFT's lame response. Steve, through his genius and insight, has driven unparalleled innovation in the PC, music, tablet and mobile phone universe both inside Apple and outside. He has built an incredibly strong team to carry on that legacy.
Keep in mind that 1984 predates Windows by about a year, so "Wintel" didn't exist then. I don't know when it came to be a market force.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AHrubik
Inspired yes but he is by no means equal to any of the fore mentioned people.
The team at Commodore could best be compared to Henry Ford.
Curious, for what reason? Apple I predates the PET. Apple II only came a few months later than PET.
Or, given that Apple had the first consumer, mass market all-GUI computer, then I think a Henry Ford fits there.
Or it could be making smart phones accessible to consumers. Or making tablets work outside of niche uses and bringing them to mainstream uses.
Quote:
Off the top of my head I can't think of how Walt Disney even compares. Bestowing God like qualities on the undeserving is ridiculous.
He is Steve Jobs. He has be apart of some amazing things. He DID NOT do anything by himself. It took many people to help bring about the vision that is Apple.
None of the other big names did anything by themselves either, no one can accomplish anything without involving others in some way, so I don't know what your point is three. Also, Jobs' vision was Apple's vision. I'd say that, in many ways, Jobs was for Apple as Walt was for Disney. Both men were aggressive at persuing a well-defined vision, and both men had a well-known, relentless drive for excellence, and both men were the core of their respective businesses. Is Walt a god? I'm not sure what the "god like" comment addresses.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
The answer is, zero, if that's what the Board decides. As long as they have reported that they have one, there is no need to compromise the company, the position, or the person by revealing the details.
Out of curiosity, is that requirement even checked?
The answer is, zero, if that's what the Board decides. As long as they have reported that they have one, there is no need to compromise the company, the position, or the person by revealing the details.
If the board decides and the stockholders agree. A lot of them didn't. The deep irony is that the succession plan was hidden in plain sight. Everyone who cared to knew that Cook was the successor to Jobs and that Steve would be named board chair. The fact that it came down precisely that way puts the lie to the argument that Apple or anyone else would be "compromised" if they disclosed as much. The fact is, other public companies don't see the value of playing these mind games with investors. Apple is different in a lot of good ways, but this way of being different is not good.
Comments
You are the Thomas Edison, Henry Ford and Walt Disney of our Era.
You have inspired all of us.
Interesting point, but...
Henry Ford was a srong anti-Semite and racist (Hitler even praised him by name in his book "Mein Kampf"); Edison was a mean s.o.b. and stole patents from other people; and Walt Disney was probably okay, but he was accused of being anti-Semitic because of organizations he belonged to, but it's unclear.
Agreed. We must also take into account the author of this article. He may as well write articles titled:
Apple mocks fanboys by introducing video iPod.
Apple mocks fanboys by introducing App Store, allowing third parties to create native iPhone applications.
Apple mocks fanboys by adding copy and paste to iPhone.
Apple mocks fanboys by adding multitasking to iPhone.
Apple mocks fanboys by switching to Intel processors.
blah, blah, blah.
You are the Thomas Edison, Henry Ford and Walt Disney of our Era.
You have inspired all of us.
Inspired yes but he is by no means equal to any of the fore mentioned people.
The Thomas Edison of personal computers is probably François Gernelle. Though I suspect that there was someone before him.
The team at Commodore could best be compared to Henry Ford.
Off the top of my head I can't think of how Walt Disney even compares. Bestowing God like qualities on the undeserving is ridiculous.
He is Steve Jobs. He has be apart of some amazing things. He DID NOT do anything by himself. It took many people to help bring about the vision that is Apple.
I have no real problems with Phil as a presenter, but I like Scott better too.
I think Phil is a good MC type figure but Scott and Jonny are better at the explanations, perhaps because technospeak rolls off their tongues better
In fact I could see future keynotes basically being Phil comes out and greets the audience. Introduces Tim for the numbers. Comes back and briefly intros the first product item with a 'here's Scott/Jonny/video to tell us more about it" and so on. Maybe if it is something like iTunes Match that has been introduced in detail already Phil might do the bit himself since it would be basically the release date and a few more details. On something big they might surprised the audience and have Steve guest appear for the presentation. either in person or via something like FaceTime
Cook is in place ... a succession plan that was executed without a bunch of hype or distraction. Steve is Chairman ... good for him, great for Apple ... let's get on with it.
The article contradicts its own premise. Nobody ever seriously questioned whether Apple had a succession plan. The debate was over how much of it should be disclosed to shareholders.
The answer is, zero, if that's what the Board decides. As long as they have reported that they have one, there is no need to compromise the company, the position, or the person by revealing the details.
"Kasper's Automated Slave" is not actually a person AFAIK.
And good choice going for being mean at this particular time. Really classy.
DED wrote the article. which is who we was talking about in his comment. Whenever you go to the comments, you switch to the forum view, in which (as far as I can tell) every article is published by "kasper's automated slave" which is also known as the Apple Insider account. If you click on the article on the main page, however, you properly see author credit (in this case DED). I don't know why authorship isn't transferred to the forum topic, I wish it were, but I have no idea what type of publishing software they use.
He also said NOTHING negative about apple, steve jobs, or even AI in general in that statement, only about a single author on a single apple-related site.
Well said! I have been an Apple user since buying my first mac in 1984. Taking it to my office as my work computer to the chuckles of the techtards in our company. I remember a trio of wintel geeks telling me at the time that the Mac UI was no big deal, that they could easily build such a user interface for their DOS machines. Laughable - 11 years later was MSFT's lame response. Steve, through his genius and insight, has driven unparalleled innovation in the PC, music, tablet and mobile phone universe both inside Apple and outside. He has built an incredibly strong team to carry on that legacy.
Keep in mind that 1984 predates Windows by about a year, so "Wintel" didn't exist then. I don't know when it came to be a market force.
Inspired yes but he is by no means equal to any of the fore mentioned people.
The team at Commodore could best be compared to Henry Ford.
Curious, for what reason? Apple I predates the PET. Apple II only came a few months later than PET.
Or, given that Apple had the first consumer, mass market all-GUI computer, then I think a Henry Ford fits there.
Or it could be making smart phones accessible to consumers. Or making tablets work outside of niche uses and bringing them to mainstream uses.
Off the top of my head I can't think of how Walt Disney even compares. Bestowing God like qualities on the undeserving is ridiculous.
He is Steve Jobs. He has be apart of some amazing things. He DID NOT do anything by himself. It took many people to help bring about the vision that is Apple.
None of the other big names did anything by themselves either, no one can accomplish anything without involving others in some way, so I don't know what your point is three. Also, Jobs' vision was Apple's vision. I'd say that, in many ways, Jobs was for Apple as Walt was for Disney. Both men were aggressive at persuing a well-defined vision, and both men had a well-known, relentless drive for excellence, and both men were the core of their respective businesses. Is Walt a god? I'm not sure what the "god like" comment addresses.
The answer is, zero, if that's what the Board decides. As long as they have reported that they have one, there is no need to compromise the company, the position, or the person by revealing the details.
Out of curiosity, is that requirement even checked?
Out of curiosity, is that requirement even checked?
Not as far as I know. It's certainly not required disclosure, but most good companies talk about its existence.
The answer is, zero, if that's what the Board decides. As long as they have reported that they have one, there is no need to compromise the company, the position, or the person by revealing the details.
If the board decides and the stockholders agree. A lot of them didn't. The deep irony is that the succession plan was hidden in plain sight. Everyone who cared to knew that Cook was the successor to Jobs and that Steve would be named board chair. The fact that it came down precisely that way puts the lie to the argument that Apple or anyone else would be "compromised" if they disclosed as much. The fact is, other public companies don't see the value of playing these mind games with investors. Apple is different in a lot of good ways, but this way of being different is not good.