Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Who would run Apple If...

P

paxtonandrew

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Hello all,

If Steve's prognosis wasn't what it is, and he had the more common form of cancer, who would you like to see as the new head at Apple? I believe Phil Schiller, but I would like to hear your thoughts. This is only a hypothetical post, so nobody start to panic.

Thanks for your inputs.
 
paxtonandrew said:
Hello all,

If Steve's prognosis wasn't what it is, and he had the more common form of cancer, who would you like to see as the new head at Apple? I believe Phil Schiller, but I would like to hear your thoughts. This is only a hypothetical post, so nobody start to panic.

Thanks for your inputs.
Click to expand...


I would.
 
Underpants Gnomes.

They fit into Apple's secrecy trend by keep Phase 2 a mystery to even themselves, and Phase 3 is profit, the ultimate goal of all business.
 
"BATMAN!!!!"

"No Homer we need a scientist"

"BATMAN's a scientist!"

"Its not Batman!"

lol! back when the Simpsons was good!

How about Duffman, the keynotes would be good...oh yeah!
 
Kinda strange nobody can imagine Apple without Steve at the top (forgetting the fact that Sculley was the longest serving Apple CEO).

I know we all love the guy, and surely hope he will stay around for a long time! But, for the sake of the company, there must be someone (besides me 😛 ) capable of running the company with the same charisma, flare, vision, and personality as him..... or is there?

Phil Schiller is not the same type of guy.

Maybe Jonathan Ive would be more of a Steve II....
 
No you guys got it all wrong.

Its going to be ME!!!!!!! First thing i would do is buy freescale semi. second close back the O.S just like the good ole days of os 9. more to come have to keep something secret 😀
 
first thing i would do would be make os x open source and secondly make apple sell atx parts so you can build your own mac, oh and sell mare nvidia retail cards and make ati sell more cards too, oh and bring back the cube, and remove the 5200 from all macs and replace it with either a 9600 or a 5700 ultra.

oh and clock the emac how it's ment to be clocked, and remove the screen spaning lock on emacs, ibooks and imacs
 
Hector said:
first thing i would do would be make os x open source and secondly make apple sell atx parts so you can build your own mac, oh and sell mare nvidia retail cards and make ati sell more cards too, oh and bring back the cube, and remove the 5200 from all macs and replace it with either a 9600 or a 5700 ultra.

oh and clock the emac how it's ment to be clocked, and remove the screen spaning lock on emacs, ibooks and imacs
Click to expand...


And watch what plummets first, the brand value or the bottom line. I suspect that such a program would be lead boots for both. DIY parts and indeed an all-free OS X would cause great devaluation from the current quality level -- Apple is a name people can trust at this time.

Removal of the screen spanning lock is so trivial that anyone who really needs it can either Google it or afford the pro-level computer.

The only part of your plan that is really good business is not underclocking the eMac; with iMac G5 around the corner, a fast, cheap desktop G4 is a Good Thing (tm).
 
JeffTL said:
And watch what plummets first, the brand value or the bottom line. I suspect that such a program would be lead boots for both. DIY parts and indeed an all-free OS X would cause great devaluation from the current quality level -- Apple is a name people can trust at this time.

Removal of the screen spanning lock is so trivial that anyone who really needs it can either Google it or afford the pro-level computer.

The only part of your plan that is really good business is not underclocking the eMac; with iMac G5 around the corner, a fast, cheap desktop G4 is a Good Thing (tm).
Click to expand...

the 5200 pisses me off and so dose paying £100 to update.

why would selling parts harm apple? it would just expand the market for amd fanboy types and people with the skills to do that type of thing, and remove most of the mac myths that if they break you have to shell out for a pro repair instead of walking to pc world for a new motherboard.

the screen spanning is silly i know of the hack and i use it but you should not have to bother.
 
Hector said:
the 5200 pisses me off and so dose paying £100 to update.

why would selling parts harm apple? it would just expand the market for amd fanboy types and people with the skills to do that type of thing, and remove most of the mac myths that if they break you have to shell out for a pro repair instead of walking to pc world for a new motherboard.

the screen spanning is silly i know of the hack and i use it but you should not have to bother.
Click to expand...
There's not a whole lot Apple can do about being stuck with GeForce 5200s - it's because Apple chose Open Firmware instead of a "standard" PC BIOS; therefore, Mac versions of graphics cards have to be written to communicate with OF, a task that only Apple seems to find worthwhile (ATI and nVidia can't be bothered, it seems - they hand the work over to Apple).
 
Hector said:
first thing i would do would be make os x open source and secondly make apple sell atx parts so you can build your own mac, oh and sell mare nvidia retail cards and make ati sell more cards too, oh and bring back the cube, and remove the 5200 from all macs and replace it with either a 9600 or a 5700 ultra.
Click to expand...

You allready have this, its called Linux. Because that is exactly what OS X would become if it went open source.

Apple is all about a quality built together solution. The OS and hardware are designed to work together. You won't get that with open source.
 
superbovine said:
ask these guys:

http://www.apple.com/pr/bios/bod.html

considering the "father of the internet" is on the board, I worry who the board would push.
Click to expand...


Maybe Gore would get it. He'd be a capable administrator -- most voters nationwide in 2000 wanted him for President of the United Staes, if that's worth anything -- and he would have the vision. He's charismatic, but he's no Steve Jobs.

More likely though we'd be looking at Schiller, Ive, or some floating manager.


Wozniak might be interesting, though.
 
Al Gore in charge of Apple would be terrible. Gore is a politician. Not an innovator (I wouldn't call him in an innovator even in his field :/). Sorry. Give me Ives or even Schiller any day.
 
As long as we have been told the truth then Steve will be around for another decade or two. Jonathan Ives would be a good choice. I agree on Al Gore he is the polar opposite to Steve, no charisma at all.
 
JeffTL said:
Maybe Gore would get it. He'd be a capable administrator -- most voters nationwide in 2000 wanted him for President of the United Staes, if that's worth anything -- and he would have the vision. He's charismatic, but he's no Steve Jobs.

More likely though we'd be looking at Schiller, Ive, or some floating manager.


Wozniak might be interesting, though.
Click to expand...

i was implying that the board of directors of apple would have a say in who would be the new CEO, not that Albert Core would be. I was just worried that someone who claimed to be the "father of the internet" would have a say in selecting the new CEO.
 
im the real father of the internet!!!

i suppose the board would try to find someone who wouldnt shake things up too much from the direction steve was going; but the problem is trying to find someone with steves creative vision and drive because that in itself shakes things up; i dont know if im making sense here but steve would be hard to replece

maybe we could get mad man steve balmmer.. DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS DEVELOPERS hehe
 
Ooooo... Scary. I just read Jurassic Park and I clicked on that Apple Board of Directors link and there was the President and CEO of Genentech, a corporation in the Jurassic Park book. Maybe Apple is has an island near Costa Rica and they're cloning dinosaurs! 😀
 
Has anyone read good to great by jim collins??
It's all about companies that remain successful over a span of years and improve upon those successes, and what makes them work...and across the board, companies with ceos that defined the company failed as soon as the ceo stepped down/died/retired etc. Companies who succeeded and bested themselves over the years were the companies whose ceo was someone who ran the company well, and who never lost sight of the fact that the biggest part of his/her job was finding their replacement.
I love apple, but I worry about their future sans Steve.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back