60 Minutes Airs 'Inside Apple' Special Providing Close Look at Company

[Pilgrim1099]

As a longtime fan of Apple, I've been extremely disappointed with the direction and decisions that Cook has taken Apple in. And yes, a good chunk of it would not have happened under Steve Jobs. Cook's mantra seems to be change for the sake of change. Apple had a good thing going with Jobs and Cook could've easily maintained it.

Here's the interesting thing. What would happen, theoretically, if Apple starts tanking and is almost run down to the ground like last time prior to Job's second chance at the company?

Would Microsoft lend out the money to save it again? Or Google? Something to think about because that should scare the hell out of the dumb ass Apple execs into some sense of urgency.

Complacency is never a good thing.

 

[Max(IT)]

It kinda helps to be a software developer to know how to design a proper UI given that their experience is generally related to such. As great as his work has been in hardware design, there is nothing that would ever have me believe that he's also capable of designing software considering he had no prior experience. His iOS redesign was nothing more than a poorly done vanity project. And yes, the UI still looks very unfinished. Many of the icons, app layouts and other elements of the design look like they never made it out of the beta stage. It's still not fully optimized for the iPad in the way that the old UI was. iOS had an element of playfulness and a fun factor with the old UI which is lost now with the current one.

Also I never said Scott Forstall was more talented than Ive. Two different people working in two separate area yet both very good at what they do (did) and Jobs recognized that both men were needed to continue Apple's success. Firing Scott Forstall was probably Tim Cook's first major mistake as CEO.

I really do hope iOS changes soon since it has a terribly designed UI, terrible performance and an especially terrible music app now which makes using an iPhone (or iPad) as an iPod essentially pointless. Otherwise I won't be considering a new iPhone anytime soon.

Apple's creativity definitely peaked a while ago and the only reason why they're so "high" is because they're simply riding on the brand recognition and good reputation that Steve Jobs established. The Watch isn't a runaway success like the last game-changing product (iPad) and the Retina MacBook may be beautiful but it's a complete ripoff for its price (only one port, SD webcam, slow Intel chip). The iPad Pro is also insanely overpriced and doesn't deserve the Pro moniker since it's essentially running a blown-up iPhone interface on a nearly 13" display and the Pencil is nothing more than an over-priced glorified stylus. Tim Cook just happened to become CEO at the right time. Otherwise, he'd be no different than John Scully or any of the other CEOs. Cook obviously isn't a visionary or hands-on with the development process the way Jobs was. He's just an average profit hungry CEO with no view of the bigger picture. Honestly, we're seeing a repeat of many of the same mistakes Apple make in the 90s before Jobs came back to save it: bloated product lineup, the idea that just releasing all new products (Watch, Pencil, etc.) is equivalent to innovation and releasing half-assed and half-baked software updates. They're just lucky that they now have mountains of cash to withstand a few product flops and whatnot.

As a longtime fan of Apple, I've been extremely disappointed with the direction and decisions that Cook has taken Apple in. And yes, a good chunk of it would not have happened under Steve Jobs. Cook's mantra seems to be change for the sake of change. Apple had a good thing going with Jobs and Cook could've easily maintained it.

I get that you're blindly loyal to Apple no matter what but it saddens me that even the most dedicated fanboys can't see that Tim Cook is turning a once-extraordinary company into just an ordinary company.

As a developer (well, I used to be actually) I can say NO, I don't know how to properly design a UI better a than a designer.
Your entire vision about Apple products is biased and distorted.
And not, Apple isn't doomed. This is not 1990 anymore. Apple is on a level it never has been, and still growing. And that because of the competent CEO and his staff. A CEO that Steve Jobs himself designed.
And not, I'm not a fanboy.
I'm just an happy Apple users.
Since 1989 or so .....

 

[Rogifan]

Agree. Ive is literally a genius in industrial design, and he's making an hell of a job in Apple. I can't be happier about Apple design lately.
Cook is a great CEO, and he succeeded in an almost impossible task: doing better than Jobs.

I'd like to see the curriculum of all these complainers here ...

It was good on low res screen. It was good for 4-5 years. Then it became stale.
And Apple, not only Ive , revolutioned iOS UI in a great way.
At the same time they introduced a number of functionalities we all asked for years.

Whatever anyone's personal opinions these are the facts: Jony Ive got a promotion into the C-suite and the guy who is in charge of user interface was promoted to Vice President. If you do a LinkedIn search you'll find there's not a lot of Vice Presidents at Apple so it's not like they just hand out that title to anyone.

 

[maflynn]

[MOD NOTE]
Please leave the PRSI material out of this thread, a number of posts have been removed since they're off topic and PRSI in nature.

 

[Big_Ant_TV_Media_LLC]

What's the car behind?

k.i.t.t

 

[markgpearse]

Is Angela Ahrendts sleeping in the photo? And where is her SmartWater??

They sure schlep around a lot of paper files. Not very eco friendly. You would think everything would be on their IPads. Maybe they need some SurfacePros.

 

[CFreymarc]

Is Angela Ahrendts sleeping in the photo? And where is her SmartWater??

IMO, the order of the execs showed a pecking order of the crew. While Angela is new, it looks like she has earned her place at Tim's right hand (in the pic literally) driving not just retail sales but also major feedback into product planning. The grimace on her face, to me, is a tell that all is not harmonic at the Apple top brass. Just Apple doing such an extended expose for 60-minutes is a major shift in Apple PR. Steve very rarely would do an interview in panel format while Tim and company is moving toward that style.

 

[dk001]

IMO, the order of the execs showed a pecking order of the crew. While Angela is new, it looks like she has earned her place at Tim's right hand (in the pic literally) driving not just retail sales but also major feedback into product planning. The grimace on her face, to me, is a tell that all is not harmonic at the Apple top brass. Just Apple doing such an extended expose for 60-minutes is a major shift in Apple PR. Steve very rarely would do an interview in panel format while Tim and company is moving toward that style.

I could not have put it better. As I watched that show (and the online replays) it was apparent that there was tension / dissension about the direction and quality of the current work.

 

[CFreymarc]

I could not have put it better. As I watched that show (and the online replays) it was apparent that there was tension / dissension about the direction and quality of the current work.

Appreciate the feedback. While Apple PR did a wonderful job showing harmony from Steve passing away to the current executive crew, many have said it has played out like acts of King Lear. Most notably, the departure of Scott Forestall and many others of Steve's NeXT crew. IMO, all hell will break loose come the next Federal election cycle.

 

[Rogifan]

Appreciate the feedback. While Apple PR did a wonderful job showing harmony from Steve passing away to the current executive crew, many have said it has played out like acts of King Lear. Most notably, the departure of Scott Forestall and many others of Steve's NeXT crew. IMO, all hell will break loose come the next Federal election cycle.

What does the US election have to do with anything? I'm confused by that cryptic comment. And aside from Forstall what other NeXT employees left the executive ranks? Avie Tevanian and Jon Rubinstein left a long time ago while Steve was still CEO.

I could not have put it better. As I watched that show (and the online replays) it was apparent that there was tension / dissension about the direction and quality of the current work.

What gave you that feeling? I guess I'm not seeing where the tension was. can you give an example?

 

[dk001]

What gave you that feeling? I guess I'm not seeing where the tension was. can you give an example?

Not any one specific thing, rather a myriad of them.

• Things like the interviewee being smiley and upbeat while most background folks were subdued or bland.
• Body language that was in contrast to the facial / vocal.
• Smiles or laughs that never reached the eyes.

It's kind of like when you are running a meeting / conference and you start seeing little things that say you aren't reaching your audience or their response is not indicative of the message you are sending.
I came from the show with the same feeling - hearing one thing; seeing another.

 

[Rogifan]

Not any one specific thing, rather a myriad of them.

• Things like the interviewee being smiley and upbeat while most background folks were subdued or bland.
• Body language that was in contrast to the facial / vocal.
• Smiles or laughs that never reached the eyes.

It's kind of like when you are running a meeting / conference and you start seeing little things that say you aren't reaching your audience or their response is not indicative of the message you are sending.
I came from the show with the same feeling - hearing one thing; seeing another.

You got all of that from a camera shot of one executive team meeting? A camera shot that lasted less than a minute? Why do I get the feeling people are just seeing what they want to see?

 

[navaira]

Actually I had this feeling from Ive and Cook segments. The smiles happened randomly and were really forced, like "oh damn we were told to smile and be all cozy with the interviewer".

 

[dk001]

You got all of that from a camera shot of one executive team meeting? A camera shot that lasted less than a minute? Why do I get the feeling people are just seeing what they want to see?

Not just one specific shot. This was my impression from the TC, Ive and other interview sessions. I have learned over the years to pay attention to my audience. This is especially true when you have a mix of management and non-management. Now some of it could have been due to the presence of cameras.
Still - that was my impression after watching it.

 

[satcomer]

I find the most interesting part is Ives' comment how the top bosses like to mingle amount the workers and seem interested in what they are doing!

To me Steve's greatest strength in management to look around the corner and to say no, do it better!

 

[Rogifan]

Not just one specific shot. This was my impression from the TC, Ive and other interview sessions. I have learned over the years to pay attention to my audience. This is especially true when you have a mix of management and non-management. Now some of it could have been due to the presence of cameras.
Still - that was my impression after watching it.

I think you're reading way too much into this interview.

 

[dk001]

I think you're reading way too much into this interview.

Your opinion.
I do think you telling me what I am reading/interpreting is comical, however it is your opinion

 

[thermodynamic]

Here's the interesting thing. What would happen, theoretically, if Apple starts tanking and is almost run down to the ground like last time prior to Job's second chance at the company?

Would Microsoft lend out the money to save it again? Or Google? Something to think about because that should scare the hell out of the dumb ass Apple execs into some sense of urgency.

Complacency is never a good thing.

Probably Google this time, if it cares to support a company that has leeched off of open source like how they all do nowadays, except Microsoft ironically. In 1997, times were different - Microsoft was seen as a big bully so to save a competitor rather than buying it out was a sign of good faith support of competition as opposed to eliminating it to be king of the hill (in a paradigm where earthquakes are so commonplace it's amazing the proverbial planet still exists). And Microsoft, Apple, and every other competitor knows that innovation and jackpots don't happen every second of every day. Years and decades can go buy before something is thought of - or even stumbled over like how the invention of the pretzel was.

But I didn't know Apple was being complacent, they seem to be coming out with lots of new stuff and trying to strike lightning again. Out here in real life, people have to take risks, learn new things, etc, all the time. Anyone sitting back and releasing new products that are little different to the old ones, or even entertainment like that polished retread of Star Wars, are the ones being complacent. Complacency can be cheap in the short term. Too expensive in the long-term. Of course, taking risks also costs money. Maybe the market is just scared silly over either having to take risks or eventually can't continue being so complacent and ripping off customers that it will eventually drown itself down a bathtub?

Besides, Jobs picked Cook. would Jobs really pick someone that was much different to him in philosophy and scope? Cook might be a little more cozy on the human nature side of things, but for corporate decisions he is not completely different (thought a little warmer in taking some responsibility for products with defects (e.g. ipad recall, 2010-2012 macbook pro warranty extension for a known hardware defect), rather than blaming the customers for them (e.g. iphone 4 antenna...))