Defending Tim Cook: Why Apple remains in good hands

124»

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 75
    jccjcc Posts: 220member
    The people defending Cook are really confused. Even that super bozo Sculley ran Apple very successfully with record beating quarters for many years after he fired Jobs. We all know how well that worked out!

    The fact if the matter is, bureaucrats like Cook and Sculley can run a company for only so long before the crap hits the fan. It’s already starting to at Apple. This was about how long Sculley ran Apple after jobs before it ran aground.

    Jobs was an entrepreneur. That’s a completely different animal. For example, people keep asking why Apple kept so much cash around. This was before Jobs died and Cook started giving it away. Every entrepreneur knows why. Bozos and bureaucrats don’t. They don’t have a clue why a company needs to hoard cash.
    buzdotsSpamSandwichcgWerks
  • Reply 62 of 75
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 2,296member
    mattinoz said:
    Agree but don't think Apple needs the next Steve Jobs to get back there, they need the next 8 (made up number) potential design leaders at various stages of career to spread round the business and see so who excels. It would nice on both fronts if they didn't leave the narrative so open to speculation for basically half the year.  
    I couple of things give me hope, currently.

    First, that they really are building some serious Macs (at least at the pro end) now. If that filters down a bit to the prosumer models, that will give me more confidence.

    Second, was Tim's comments about keeping Mac and iOS separate platforms. That was really good to hear, so long as he was being honest about it. I suppose one could still add a  '... until we phase the Mac out.' to that, but at least this looks like another decade of better Macs and Mac support.

    Third, their focus on fixing stuff in this go-around of the OSs. That shows me they recognize things went downhill, at least for QC, and they are going to fix some stuff. Whether they will also fix some of their neglect in terms of UI, remains to be seen though. But, they are still superior to the competition in that regard.

    ascii said:
    Something that's much more important today than it was during Jobs' era is digital privacy, and I think we're fortunate to have at least 1 big tech company whose CEO has that as a personal value.
    Agreed. And, so long as we can trust what Apple is saying, this is a huge Apple advantage right now.

    mike54 said:
    A few a good products has been released under TIm's watch, such CPU's, airpods, 13in iPad, but for the most part, the product range has been reduced, some products haven't been updated for years or forgotten about, constant improvements and promotion of existing HW/SW/technologies has slowed, and quality in both HW/SW have slipped. I believe that Apple making TV shows are a complete and utter waste. There is enough rubbish on the box already.
    For sure. One would hope they can get things back under control and maybe make this a both-and. While I also think the TV show stuff is silly, it isn't entirely crazy for Apple to be expanding their content offerings and reach to add to music-subscription and their devices.

    ATP podcast had a good discussion about this recently, in terms of what Apple's hay-days were and what each host liked about them most. I really resonated with their discussion, as I've been around for the 4 hay-days they highlighted, and I also agreed with them about what era (even if it wasn't Apple at their best) was the most magical. I remember when I couldn't wait for the next keynote and was mostly wowed by much of what Apple was doing. I just don't feel that way any longer.

    Part of that is my focus more on the Mac, but I'm also just not ever going to be as wowed by emojis, music-mixes, and TV shows. Hence, my biggest concern is Apple's shift from insanely great products to pleasing the average consumer. That might be good for the bottom line, but it sucks for those of us who remember when Apple changed the world regularly (for the better).

    GeorgeBMac said:
    BULL!
    The fact is, Tim is not only very different from Steve, but he lacks some of the key attributes that enabled Steve to accomplish the things that he accomplished -- chief among them was his uncanny ability to bring together bleeding edge technology, see its potential and put it out as a revolutionary, but highly refined and polished product.   Another of his attributes was that he simply would not tolerate mediocrity.  Period.
    Agreed. Steve was a technology and ideas guy at the core. Tim is a master business operator. I don't think Steve would have let the Mac languish (which is of huge concern to me), but Steve just loved computers. Steve would be running the Mac Pro or iMac Pro in his office, and it would have to be the best of the best. Tim is fine with his iPad and keyboard, or probably about any Mac with a couple external monitors for the spreadsheets. Even their own needs, wants, and interests push the company differently.

    AppleZulu said:
    The truth is that Jobs’ famous “One more thing...” was almost always an introduction of an incremental improvement. Jobs’ charisma made it seem more amazing initially, but the realization that incremental improvements were in fact game-changing innovations were almost always slow-burn successes best seen through a rose-colored rear-view mirror. ... The watch was billed by the critics as a failure at first, but now you see them everywhere. Now people are criticizing underperforming sales of the HomePod. Wait a couple of years, and it’ll probably be a different story...
    Baloney. No, it won't because the Apple Watch and HomePod, no matter how wildly successful, simply aren't game-changing gadgets. The iPhone and touch devices were game-changing, no matter how you see their incremental nature. I was using Palm device when the iPhone came out. There was nothing non-revolutionary about that.

    But, the main argument about Jobs vs Cook isn't the lack of revolutionary leaps, but the degradation of product lines and shift from making the best stuff to consumer products, profit margins and fashion.

    It still just destroys me when the argument the Apple-haters use to level at me - that I only used Apple because it was fashionable - is now being made a primary reason to buy Apple, by Apple. I hate fashion! It's a horrible reason to buy anything, and ruins most products it touches (ex: BMW).

    frac said:
    Great article tho’ for this oldie who has been all in since the Apple][, it’s all a bit of a yawn. I’ve seen every argument put forward in this thread, come and go...at least a dozen times. 
    What is impressive about Apple, is the sheer passion it has provoked over the decades. Pro or anti, Apple still excites, still does dumb stuff and is as remote as ever. Dull? - not even a real question.
    Hmm, I've been around Apple since then as well, and I'd say Dull is a great descriptor of the last several years. Heck, I haven't even watched an Apple keynote for like 2 years. What's the point? I just end up disappointed.
  • Reply 63 of 75
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 2,296member
    jcc said:
    Jobs was an entrepreneur. That’s a completely different animal. For example, people keep asking why Apple kept so much cash around. This was before Jobs died and Cook started giving it away. Every entrepreneur knows why. Bozos and bureaucrats don’t. They don’t have a clue why a company needs to hoard cash.
    Yes, unfortunately, Apple is on the public market. That pretty much guarantees, stupid. The difference is that Jobs with his 'magic' and RDF was able to somewhat keep the stupid influence of the public markets at bay.
  • Reply 64 of 75
    jccjcc Posts: 220member
    cgWerks said:
    jcc said:
    Jobs was an entrepreneur. That’s a completely different animal. For example, people keep asking why Apple kept so much cash around. This was before Jobs died and Cook started giving it away. Every entrepreneur knows why. Bozos and bureaucrats don’t. They don’t have a clue why a company needs to hoard cash.
    Yes, unfortunately, Apple is on the public market. That pretty much guarantees, stupid. The difference is that Jobs with his 'magic' and RDF was able to somewhat keep the stupid influence of the public markets at bay.
    But Steve knew why and that’s why he didn’t pay any attention to bottom feeding, green mailing dirt bags like Icahn and why Cook immediately submitted to Icahn’s demands. Icahn also knew that he would have no chance going up against a strong leader like Jobs. Cook is another story.
  • Reply 65 of 75
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 2,296member
    Or, maybe to put this another way...
    The internet is now littered with articles like this:
    https://hackernoon.com/why-i-owned-a-macbook-pro-for-a-day-and-what-it-says-to-me-about-the-future-of-apple-75b84458d86c

    I run across them every few days without even looking for them. They aren't written by the Apple-haters, but by people like me who've used Apple products for years, and love the company (and truly want to see them succeed!).

    As that old saying goes... the proof is in the pudding. Apple has plenty of money, and at least temporary success, they can certainly just choose the to ignore the signs and problems. All the Apple fanboys can chide people like me who complain on Apple-related forums. But, they can't run from reality... it always wins.
  • Reply 66 of 75
    jccjcc Posts: 220member
    cgWerks said:
    Or, maybe to put this another way...
    The internet is now littered with articles like this:
    https://hackernoon.com/why-i-owned-a-macbook-pro-for-a-day-and-what-it-says-to-me-about-the-future-of-apple-75b84458d86c

    I run across them every few days without even looking for them. They aren't written by the Apple-haters, but by people like me who've used Apple products for years, and love the company (and truly want to see them succeed!).

    As that old saying goes... the proof is in the pudding. Apple has plenty of money, and at least temporary success, they can certainly just choose the to ignore the signs and problems. All the Apple fanboys can chide people like me who complain on Apple-related forums. But, they can't run from reality... it always wins.
    Right, I for one thinks that if Steve were alive he’d be furious at Cook, Ive, the the rest of sr management. One of the things  Steve always stressed was the ability to focus. Unfortunately, Cook and Ive have completely forgotten that philosophy. They seem preoccupied with frivolous vanity projects like joining foundations, giving interviews, getting into politics. Time spent on that bs means time not spent on Apple products which is quite apparent to anyone who has been paying attention.
    cgWerks
  • Reply 67 of 75
    kiltedgreenkiltedgreen Posts: 499member
    If Steve made all the right decisions, then surely he made the right decision naming Tim as his successor, no?
  • Reply 68 of 75
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 2,296member
    jcc said:
    Right, I for one thinks that if Steve were alive he’d be furious at Cook, Ive, the the rest of sr management. One of the things  Steve always stressed was the ability to focus. Unfortunately, Cook and Ive have completely forgotten that philosophy. They seem preoccupied with frivolous vanity projects like joining foundations, giving interviews, getting into politics. Time spent on that bs means time not spent on Apple products which is quite apparent to anyone who has been paying attention.
    If my read of the situation is correct, he'd also be furious at the fundamental shift in priorities for the company in a matter of a couple of years. Steve loved profits, but I think he saw them as a result of excellence, not an end in themselves. And, Steve was definitely a style guy, not a fashion guy.

    If Steve made all the right decisions, then surely he made the right decision naming Tim as his successor, no?
    I don't think anyone is claiming Steve made all the right decisions or did everything right. But, he had his top priorities (at least in terms of Apple) straight, and had a drive to chase excellence, regardless who cared or what the rest of the world thought. I see Apple still using that as a marketing slogan, but it's getting kind of hollow.

    Tim is excellent at running the company aspect of Apple. I'm not sure Steve could have picked a better person, for sure. But, I get the impression Steve thought the Apple-ethos was baked into the company. When the first 'Steve's gone, Apple's doomed.' stuff started coming out, I also argued against it. I couldn't believe a culture could so quickly change, and realized that, obviously, the talent wasn't all Steve.

    But, cultures can change extremely rapidly (fast enough to shock even those of us who study culture). Just look at the rest of the world around us if you don't believe that. I think something similar happened at Apple. I hope and pray I'm wrong!
    edited May 2018
  • Reply 69 of 75
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 4,872administrator
    jcc said:
    cgWerks said:
    Or, maybe to put this another way...
    The internet is now littered with articles like this:
    https://hackernoon.com/why-i-owned-a-macbook-pro-for-a-day-and-what-it-says-to-me-about-the-future-of-apple-75b84458d86c

    I run across them every few days without even looking for them. They aren't written by the Apple-haters, but by people like me who've used Apple products for years, and love the company (and truly want to see them succeed!).

    As that old saying goes... the proof is in the pudding. Apple has plenty of money, and at least temporary success, they can certainly just choose the to ignore the signs and problems. All the Apple fanboys can chide people like me who complain on Apple-related forums. But, they can't run from reality... it always wins.
    Right, I for one thinks that if Steve were alive he’d be furious at Cook, Ive, the the rest of sr management. One of the things  Steve always stressed was the ability to focus. Unfortunately, Cook and Ive have completely forgotten that philosophy. They seem preoccupied with frivolous vanity projects like joining foundations, giving interviews, getting into politics. Time spent on that bs means time not spent on Apple products which is quite apparent to anyone who has been paying attention.
    I'm sure your employer and customers would rather you not do anything else but work for the company also.
  • Reply 70 of 75
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 31,398member
    If Steve made all the right decisions, then surely he made the right decision naming Tim as his successor, no?
    Is that really an argument? Anyone familiar with Apple and Steve knows he didn’t always make the right decisions, he just happened to make more right decisions overall than wrong ones.
  • Reply 71 of 75
    jccjcc Posts: 220member
    If Steve made all the right decisions, then surely he made the right decision naming Tim as his successor, no?
    No, that's not correct. Steve was a very selfish person. Anyone who has read his biographies or saw interviews with those who knew him can attest to. He didn't give a crap about having a successor at the helm because up until the last year of his life he still thought that his "magical thinking" was somehow going to save him. He didn't want anyone else to be better near him at Apple. He didn't want someone to Gil Amelio him. By the time he realized that he's a deadman walking it was too late to start looking and grooming. Cook was the most qualified at such short notice.
  • Reply 72 of 75
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 4,872administrator
    jcc said:
    If Steve made all the right decisions, then surely he made the right decision naming Tim as his successor, no?
    No, that's not correct. Steve was a very selfish person. Anyone who has read his biographies or saw interviews with those who knew him can attest to. He didn't give a crap about having a successor at the helm because up until the last year of his life he still thought that his "magical thinking" was somehow going to save him. He didn't want anyone else to be better near him at Apple. He didn't want someone to Gil Amelio him. By the time he realized that he's a deadman walking it was too late to start looking and grooming. Cook was the most qualified at such short notice.
    Nope.

    He was Apple's Chief executive in 2009 while Jobs was away on one of his medical leaves. Jobs resigned in 2011, and Cook was named CEO.

    Plenty of grooming time. Plenty of vetting time.
    cgWerks
  • Reply 73 of 75
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 31,398member
    jcc said:
    If Steve made all the right decisions, then surely he made the right decision naming Tim as his successor, no?
    No, that's not correct. Steve was a very selfish person. Anyone who has read his biographies or saw interviews with those who knew him can attest to. He didn't give a crap about having a successor at the helm because up until the last year of his life he still thought that his "magical thinking" was somehow going to save him. He didn't want anyone else to be better near him at Apple. He didn't want someone to Gil Amelio him. By the time he realized that he's a deadman walking it was too late to start looking and grooming. Cook was the most qualified at such short notice.
    Nope.

    He was Apple's Chief executive in 2009 while Jobs was away on one of his medical leaves. Jobs resigned in 2011, and Cook was named CEO.

    Plenty of grooming time. Plenty of vetting time.
    I think Tim may name a successor in the next 3-5 years. His public appearances suggest to me he may want to get into politics after Apple.
  • Reply 74 of 75
    Herbert LyeHerbert Lye Posts: 1unconfirmed, member
    Right, no one should ever compare one's charisma with another when it comes to assessing one's performance.

    I'll put aside all the technical analysis of Apple's stocks & sales figures since the reign of Tim Cook aside, and ask ourselves the real question, how many of us has been gradually walking further & further away from the iOS/MacOS ecosystem? I do of course, and to be specific, 10 months ago as I've sold my iPhone 6s Plus, an iPad Pro, a 15" MacBook Pro & an Apple TV, why? Honestly, there's nothing else that Apple could serve my daily computing purposes any better than what Google Pixel 2 on Android Oreo & a Windows Surface Pro do, and they do so much better  instantaneous synchronization, choices of softwares and applications that I finally could agree to disagree that purchased apps that I used to love so much on App Store, better versions are widely found on both Play Store & Microsoft Store, not to mention the prices did saved my bank account.

    And what I personally think about what Tim should be doing to save Apple from resenting more Apple users & fanboys is to get Steve Wozniak as an advisor.

    No one understands Jobs & Apple more than Jobs & Wozniak themselves. 
  • Reply 75 of 75
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 2,296member
    Herbert Lye said:
    I'll put aside all the technical analysis of Apple's stocks & sales figures since the reign of Tim Cook aside, and ask ourselves the real question, how many of us has been gradually walking further & further away from the iOS/MacOS ecosystem?
    I suppose the rebuttal would be that for every one of us drifting away from Cook's Apple, they are drawing in 10 other new iPhone/iOS people and even a few new Mac people to the platform. And, that's a fair argument, as Apple is making more money than ever.

    But, my rebuttal to that is that it makes a difference who Apple's customers are, what they do with the stuff, how loyal they are, etc. In the long run, a dozen teenie-boppers who like the emojis and Karaoke Car Pool aren't the same as one creative professional working on the next movie, product design, etc. 
Sign In or Register to comment.