And come on, this has nothing to do with Maps. If Apple didn't have faith in Maps or thought it had failed, they would have simply switched back.
On skeuomorphism, it has a place, period. Yellow leather is garish, I agree, but do you people REALLY want Windows 8-style minimalism in your applications? I don't care if the answer is yes; the answer's no. I think Jony will still do skeuomorphism, but beautifully, simplistically, incorporating raw "materials" and a contrast between them.
"What, you mean like the brushed metal UI in Panther/Tiger?"
We must never speak of that again.
"At least it wasn't pinstripes…"
Well, there's that.
No disrespect to Ive, but what does a hardware design guy know about software UI design? they're two different worlds.
I disagree! Hardware and UI design have a single objective... To get out of the way!
I think the reason for this is hiding in plain sight. iOS and OS X are being integrated. There can only be one guy in charge of OS development and they chose Federighi over Forstall. There will still be two different operating systems for consumers but they'll share much more code, be developed in tandem by the same team and will be a single platform as far as developers are concerned.
Disagree completely.
The answer, arguably, is in plain sight. The Maps fiasco and copious bugs in new iOS releases would be enough to get an executive fired at other companies too.
Scott Forstall had a presentation delivery better than Steve Jobs. He speaks measured and eloquently. I thought he exuded a certain intelligence that any company would be glad to have. I should imagine he has the BIG picture of iOS like no other. Those will be a hard shoes to fill.
It looks like Browett's early release reflects poorly on Tim Cook's judgement of character.
Unlike Steve, Scott Had to report to somebody, as a follower there's only so much disruption or polarizing you can initiate before the real leader kicks you out... while steve was around he could have succeeded with his personality because steve was a stronger leader and could iron out the issue... Scott should have re-strategised the moment cook came into office... or before, if he is too arrogant (Which i believe is short-sighted) because Jobs was then it's his fault there are repercussions like this...
And politics isn't a bad thing in an organisation, infact anyone who is not politically savvy will get marginalised or ousted and Jobs discovered early on!
Scott Forstall had a presentation delivery better than Steve Jobs. He speaks measured and eloquently. I thought he exuded a certain intelligence that any company would be glad to have. I should imagine he has the BIG picture of iOS like no other. Those will be a hard shoes to fill.
It looks like Browett's early release reflects poorly on Tim Cook's judgement of character.
Nobody in the industry had a presentation delivery better than Jobs. He is one a of kind. And personally, I think Schiller comes the closest. As far Tim's judgement of character, or lack thereof, it's still early to tell. Remember Mark Papermaster, the guy Jobs personally hired from IBM to lead the iPhone team? How well did that turn out?
I can tell you knowing Scott that the leave would be amicable and one where he has planned for some time to allow him the opportunity to run his own start-up. I've known Scott since '96 so it makes sense for him to finally leave the nest from NeXT/Apple and try his own vision out from start to finish.
Best wishes. I know of several of my former colleagues working on start ups.
Your's is probably the closest assessment of what actually happened that we will ever know!
It looks like Browett's early release reflects poorly on Tim Cook's judgement of character.
I can tell you from personal experience that sometimes a person that seems like a great hire doesn't turn out to be what they appeared to be once you get them on the job. The best "judgement" is to recognize the mistake and take corrective and decisive action.
If I had a complaint about Browett, it's that they didn't terminate him immediately once it became evident he was cutting back retail store staffing at the expense of the customer experience.
If I had a complaint about Browett, it's that they didn't terminate him immediately once it became evident he was cutting back retail store staffing at the expense of the customer experience.
Even if in some odd scenario that reducing the retail staff made the customer experience better I would still be against the laying off of any employee of any company that is thriving so much. Create more training to enrich their knowledge base, promote some to new positions, and/or create new positions and titles to help focus expertise but don't lay off anyone in this prosperous time because it destroys positive mindshare that can take a long time to be built back up. That is my problem with Browett, regardless of his 'legitimate" reason that it will save a few dollars on the books at the end of the quarter.
I had heard speculation that something was up when Forstall didn't show up on stage the other day. Now we know.
I was so upset by Browett's direction that I did what I've only done once before, sent an email to Tim. Meant nothing of itself, but I suspect that it was one of very many, and that may have had some effect. At least I like to believe so. Gives me a good feeling that Apple, as big as it is, is still responsive to the faithful.
What about iWork? GarageBand? Final Cut Pro? All of the other apps that only occasionally receive a touch-up, but largely sit idle until a big push internally comes along?
iWork works- always has. Added improvement, sure. But it did SOMETHING day one. Saw with the other apps. Passbook you can umm... Use for MLB games?
Why do people assume that leading human interface design Is merely just getting rid of skeumorphic design language in iOS? My guess is what Ive is being asked to do is more than that. Will be interesting to see how that syncs up with Federighi and the software engineering team.
I think the thing with Forstall is that he rubbed a lot of people too hard and the wrong way. His HUGE ego couldn't fit in a stadium. But then could Steve Job's ego?
I think the final straw was Bob Mansfield saying he was retiring. I think that Tim Cook heard things from other top people in Apple saying they were thinking about leaving too if Forstall was going to stay and Mansfield was leaving.
Notice the timing of this and when Forstall sold almost all (95%?). I think he found out then that he wasn't going to be around long term anymore.
And I think the "advisor" roll isn't really that at all. It is just a title to keep him out of the way but employed until he hits another stock option and/or to pay him hush money so he doesn't directly compete and also that he doesn't start saying bad things about Apple.
I'm serious that I think there is a tie-in with Mansfield leaving and then coming back plus the hard feelings Forstall has been creating all around Apple for years. As someone else said on another site, I think it was only a matter of time before Forstall was out after Steve Jobs, his protector, was gone.
Of all the comments here, your thought regarding Bob Mansfield makes the most sense from the perspective of recent history, although I don't think it was "the last straw." Bob earned the reputation for being a straight shooter - a guy who kept his head down, plugged away - and anything you hear form him when he chooses to speak is something you can take to the bank. He grew up in the boiler room of manufacturing, turning technology into huge volumes of quality products - something that is also right up Tim Cook's alley. Moreover, nobody has bad things to say about Bob Mansfield, which gives you the strong impression that he excelled at teamwork - a stocky guy who didn't stand out but you can always depend on to play tackle and block effectively for the quarterback. That's why it came as a shock in June when Bob, long before his time, announced his retirement following several months of transition. Despite speculation, no logical reason ever materialized. Then in August, in an apparent reversal, it's announced that Mansfield will stay on, working on "future projects" and reporting directly to Cook. Does that sound like Mansfield tossed in his towel in disgust when work became a chore due to lack of teamwork with Forstall? It's possible.
People get canned for royal screwups, like Browett, but they also get separated when they become too much of a thorn in the sides of their colleagues, regardless of their work performance. That well could be what happened in Forstall's case. Consider the wording of the headline in the Apple news release: "Apple Announces Changes to Increase Collaboration Across Hardware, Software & Services." Why wouldn't Forstall be an integral part of that effort to "increase collaboration"? His omission speaks volumes. If Forstall is going to continue for some time as a personal advisor to to Cook, if I were him I wouldn't be holding my breath waiting for the phone to ring.
"Forstall came over from NeXT when it was purchased by Apple in 1997 and is regarded as one of the original architects of the Mac OS X operating system as well as the Aqua user interface. He was promoted to Senior Director in January 2003. In 2006 Forstall became responsible for Mac OS X releases after Avadis Tevanian stepped down as the company's Chief Software Technology Officer and before being named Senior Vice President of iPhone Software." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Forstall
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich
Not quite. Besides, Mitt's wife insisted he won't run again after this election.
LOL!
I disagree! Hardware and UI design have a single objective... To get out of the way!
Quote:
Originally Posted by poke
I think the reason for this is hiding in plain sight. iOS and OS X are being integrated. There can only be one guy in charge of OS development and they chose Federighi over Forstall. There will still be two different operating systems for consumers but they'll share much more code, be developed in tandem by the same team and will be a single platform as far as developers are concerned.
Disagree completely.
The answer, arguably, is in plain sight. The Maps fiasco and copious bugs in new iOS releases would be enough to get an executive fired at other companies too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
And he has one. He's the advisor to the CEO.
What part of 'leaving Apple next year' did you miss?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich
But Craig Federighi will actually be in charge of iOS and OSX, right? So Federighi will report to Ive?
Federighi reports to Tim Cook as do all SVP's.
Scott Forstall had a presentation delivery better than Steve Jobs. He speaks measured and eloquently. I thought he exuded a certain intelligence that any company would be glad to have. I should imagine he has the BIG picture of iOS like no other. Those will be a hard shoes to fill.
It looks like Browett's early release reflects poorly on Tim Cook's judgement of character.
Unlike Steve, Scott Had to report to somebody, as a follower there's only so much disruption or polarizing you can initiate before the real leader kicks you out... while steve was around he could have succeeded with his personality because steve was a stronger leader and could iron out the issue... Scott should have re-strategised the moment cook came into office... or before, if he is too arrogant (Which i believe is short-sighted) because Jobs was then it's his fault there are repercussions like this...
And politics isn't a bad thing in an organisation, infact anyone who is not politically savvy will get marginalised or ousted and Jobs discovered early on!
Quote:
Originally Posted by pembroke
Scott Forstall had a presentation delivery better than Steve Jobs. He speaks measured and eloquently. I thought he exuded a certain intelligence that any company would be glad to have. I should imagine he has the BIG picture of iOS like no other. Those will be a hard shoes to fill.
It looks like Browett's early release reflects poorly on Tim Cook's judgement of character.
Nobody in the industry had a presentation delivery better than Jobs. He is one a of kind. And personally, I think Schiller comes the closest. As far Tim's judgement of character, or lack thereof, it's still early to tell. Remember Mark Papermaster, the guy Jobs personally hired from IBM to lead the iPhone team? How well did that turn out?
Your's is probably the closest assessment of what actually happened that we will ever know!
Quote:
Originally Posted by pembroke
It looks like Browett's early release reflects poorly on Tim Cook's judgement of character.
I can tell you from personal experience that sometimes a person that seems like a great hire doesn't turn out to be what they appeared to be once you get them on the job. The best "judgement" is to recognize the mistake and take corrective and decisive action.
If I had a complaint about Browett, it's that they didn't terminate him immediately once it became evident he was cutting back retail store staffing at the expense of the customer experience.
i thought cook hired papermaster while jobs went for hist first medical leave.
Even if in some odd scenario that reducing the retail staff made the customer experience better I would still be against the laying off of any employee of any company that is thriving so much. Create more training to enrich their knowledge base, promote some to new positions, and/or create new positions and titles to help focus expertise but don't lay off anyone in this prosperous time because it destroys positive mindshare that can take a long time to be built back up. That is my problem with Browett, regardless of his 'legitimate" reason that it will save a few dollars on the books at the end of the quarter.
I was so upset by Browett's direction that I did what I've only done once before, sent an email to Tim. Meant nothing of itself, but I suspect that it was one of very many, and that may have had some effect. At least I like to believe so. Gives me a good feeling that Apple, as big as it is, is still responsive to the faithful.
iWork works- always has. Added improvement, sure. But it did SOMETHING day one. Saw with the other apps. Passbook you can umm... Use for MLB games?
I did not know that... I retired in 1989!
So... That means other methods must be used to protect company plans, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovitt
suddenly newton: If Ive is in charge of UI then you can say goodbye to skeuomorphic designs, which I *really* like!
"Goodbye skeuomorphic designs."
deleted
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabon
I think the thing with Forstall is that he rubbed a lot of people too hard and the wrong way. His HUGE ego couldn't fit in a stadium. But then could Steve Job's ego?
I think the final straw was Bob Mansfield saying he was retiring. I think that Tim Cook heard things from other top people in Apple saying they were thinking about leaving too if Forstall was going to stay and Mansfield was leaving.
Notice the timing of this and when Forstall sold almost all (95%?). I think he found out then that he wasn't going to be around long term anymore.
And I think the "advisor" roll isn't really that at all. It is just a title to keep him out of the way but employed until he hits another stock option and/or to pay him hush money so he doesn't directly compete and also that he doesn't start saying bad things about Apple.
I'm serious that I think there is a tie-in with Mansfield leaving and then coming back plus the hard feelings Forstall has been creating all around Apple for years. As someone else said on another site, I think it was only a matter of time before Forstall was out after Steve Jobs, his protector, was gone.
Of all the comments here, your thought regarding Bob Mansfield makes the most sense from the perspective of recent history, although I don't think it was "the last straw." Bob earned the reputation for being a straight shooter - a guy who kept his head down, plugged away - and anything you hear form him when he chooses to speak is something you can take to the bank. He grew up in the boiler room of manufacturing, turning technology into huge volumes of quality products - something that is also right up Tim Cook's alley. Moreover, nobody has bad things to say about Bob Mansfield, which gives you the strong impression that he excelled at teamwork - a stocky guy who didn't stand out but you can always depend on to play tackle and block effectively for the quarterback. That's why it came as a shock in June when Bob, long before his time, announced his retirement following several months of transition. Despite speculation, no logical reason ever materialized. Then in August, in an apparent reversal, it's announced that Mansfield will stay on, working on "future projects" and reporting directly to Cook. Does that sound like Mansfield tossed in his towel in disgust when work became a chore due to lack of teamwork with Forstall? It's possible.
People get canned for royal screwups, like Browett, but they also get separated when they become too much of a thorn in the sides of their colleagues, regardless of their work performance. That well could be what happened in Forstall's case. Consider the wording of the headline in the Apple news release: "Apple Announces Changes to Increase Collaboration Across Hardware, Software & Services." Why wouldn't Forstall be an integral part of that effort to "increase collaboration"? His omission speaks volumes. If Forstall is going to continue for some time as a personal advisor to to Cook, if I were him I wouldn't be holding my breath waiting for the phone to ring.
Wasn't Forstall the father of iOS?
"Forstall came over from NeXT when it was purchased by Apple in 1997 and is regarded as one of the original architects of the Mac OS X operating system as well as the Aqua user interface. He was promoted to Senior Director in January 2003.In 2006 Forstall became responsible for Mac OS X releases after Avadis Tevanian stepped down as the company's Chief Software Technology Officer and before being named Senior Vice President of iPhone Software."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Forstall