Apple having trouble finding ex-iOS head Scott Forstall for Epic testimony

13»

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 46
    Not sure how this is Apple's problem to fix.  He (Scott) is a former employee, and is obviously not wanting to be bothered by Epic's BS.  I'm not sure that he can be compelled to testify anyway.
  • Reply 42 of 46
    Sorry if everyone missed my sarcasm. I forgot to put the /s at the end of my previous comment. 
    Sarcasm works decently in spoken conversation, but it's much less effective in message boards. I've learned through years of experience to avoid sarcasm on message boards. In fact, I've learned it's important not only to be clear to myself, but to be unambiguously clear to any reader, which is a different thing.

    I typically write, then reread, the rewrite everything, then pause and do something else, then come back and reread every word in every sentence in my draft posts several times. Just like I did for this message. Most of the time I end up deleting entire sentences if I think they are repetitive or distracting or just inferior.

    Even though lots of people disagree with me, I don't find too many people misunderstanding what I said. I think those are different things.
    muthuk_vanalingammaltz
  • Reply 43 of 46
    k2kwk2kw Posts: 2,074member
    elijahg said:
    blastdoor said:
    I wonder if mini-Steve imagined that Cook would be another Sculley, that Apple would tank, and that he (mini-Steve) would be brought back to save the company, just like big Steve did.

    if so, it doesn’t seem to be working out 


    No, he took the high road and hasn’t publicly bad mouthed Apple after making him the scapegoat of Apple Maps being a total
    piece of shit and being fired for not apologizing. 

    In contrast, what happened to whoever decided to throttle the processor on iPhones when your battery was failing? I didn’t see an apology from them. 
    I suspect Cook wanted rid of him too because he was a potential threat to Cook's position. Blaming him for Maps was just a convenient way to get rid of him. Apple needs someone sharp and enthused like Forstall, who will question things, push boundaries and  push employees to be their best. Not mushy Cook who is quite happy with minor iteration and employing people for diversity targets rather than employing the best - as long as it brings in more $$$$ anyway.
    Cooks just going to keep milking the ecosystem.   Don’t expect innovation.   Cooks scared of Risks.  That’s why he passed on buying Tesla, but now we get these Fake rumor stories about an Apple Car.
  • Reply 44 of 46
    k2kwk2kw Posts: 2,074member

    elijahg said:
    blastdoor said:
    I wonder if mini-Steve imagined that Cook would be another Sculley, that Apple would tank, and that he (mini-Steve) would be brought back to save the company, just like big Steve did.

    if so, it doesn’t seem to be working out 


    No, he took the high road and hasn’t publicly bad mouthed Apple after making him the scapegoat of Apple Maps being a total
    piece of shit and being fired for not apologizing. 

    In contrast, what happened to whoever decided to throttle the processor on iPhones when your battery was failing? I didn’t see an apology from them. 
    I suspect Cook wanted rid of him too because he was a potential threat to Cook's position. Blaming him for Maps was just a convenient way to get rid of him. Apple needs someone sharp and enthused like Forstall, who will question things, push boundaries and  push employees to be their best. Not mushy Cook who is quite happy with minor iteration and employing people for diversity targets rather than employing the best - as long as it brings in more $$$$ anyway.
    Bullshit, it's all pretty well documented that he led the Maps project and wouldn't own it when it failed and that Jony Ive and others had issues with him to the point they couldn't be in the same meetings. You'd think maybe Jobs would've given him CEO if he was so much better as you project in your fantasy here. 
    It’s still failed.  Like Siri.   When will Cook own that.
  • Reply 45 of 46
    maestro64maestro64 Posts: 5,039member
    Usually when execs leave a company for any reason they are still under some sort of contract which says if they are required to support the company on legal maters the exec is required to support the company. However, many times these agreement sun set and the company can no longer compel the exec to do anything on the companies behave. I am wondering if Scott agreement timed out and thus the reason Apple can not longer get hold of him, or more likely he is not returning their calls. I am not sure Epic could compel Scott to talk to them since he has not responsibilities with Apple at this point. This is civil mater not criminal, Epic may be limited in this regard to talk to Scott.
  • Reply 46 of 46
    BeatsBeats Posts: 3,073member
    I’m sure Scott learned his lesson. Get him back on board when you find him!!
Sign In or Register to comment.