I think Tim changed Apple from a customer company to an investor company. As a customer I don't like the "lock me in / CSAM" company anymore...
I see Cook as taking two of Jobs passions for better or for worse and amping them up turn was was a good computer to being a status symbol that with huge profit margins for Apple. Difference between Jobs and Cook is Jobs knew not to over do either one.
In the latest episode of the Apollo Effect podcast series, Morgan Stanley analyst Katy Huberty discussed the potential for a so-called "Apple Car" to disrupt the auto industry through vertical integration of hardware, software, and services. Huberty also praised Apple CEO Tim Cook, noting that the late Steve Jobs would have been proud.
Apple Car's Vertical Integration
While some reports over the years have indicated that Apple's automotive ambitions might be limited to software and services, Huberty said Apple is most successful when there is vertical integration, as evidenced by the iPhone. Huberty said Apple would want a hand in the design of the vehicle, in how the software communicates with the hardware, and in choosing the right components and technologies to use.
"When you think about what will differentiate the car of the future, it's certainly being creative around new supply chains," said Huberty. "It's about vertical integration of different components, hardware design, software, and ultimately, the services that can be delivered in that automobile. It's about consumer trust and credibility, and certainly brand when it comes to a consumer product. And all of those categories are ones where Apple is a leader."
Huberty said once Apple manages to "get the car right," the company can then introduce services on top. While she did not provide any examples, one could imagine an "Apple Car" having everything from full Apple Music integration like in the Porsche Taycan to built-in displays for rear passengers to watch Apple TV+ shows or play Apple Arcade games.
In a December 2020 research note, Apple analyst Ming-Chi Kuo said an "Apple Car" is unlikely to hit the market until 2025–2027 at the earliest.
Tim Cook's Legacy
Last week marked the 10th anniversary of Cook being named Apple's CEO after Steve Jobs stepped down from the post due to declining health. Huberty reflected on Cook's era in the podcast interview, noting that Jobs would be proud.
"I really think that Tim Cook has done a pretty phenomenal job allowing for Steve's legacy to carry on, protecting that legacy while building his own very separate legacy," said Huberty. "Steve was very much about design and innovation and getting in the weeds in those two areas. Tim has allowed the culture of the company to continue on that front, but at the same time, he's layered in some of the softer aspects that are harder to measure," she added, noting that Cook has successfully scaled operations while placing a greater focus on areas like employee benefits, charitable giving, and environmental responsibility.
"I think if Steve was looking down, he would be very proud of the way that Tim has built his own legacy while protecting the culture and the differentiation around design and innovation that Steve started," she concluded.
Article Link: Analyst Discusses Apple Car's Key to Success, Says Steve Jobs Would Be Proud of Tim Cook's Legacy
What do you mean by "quality" -- design philosophy (e.g., thinness at the expense of all else, or increasing lack of upgradeability), failure rate (e.g., the butterfly keyboard, or software bugs), or product focus (e.g., that period of time when it seemed that Macs were being relegated to the back burner)? And is it objectively worse under Cook than it was under Jobs? I remember when the general advice used to be to avoid the first release of a new hardware product because it would have bugs that needed to be ironed out. That doesn't seem to be the case as much anymore. And Jobs gave us the hockey-puck mouse and Apple Cube, which were beautiful but impractical. I'm sure there were other less-than-shining moments under Jobs.He has not done a great job - he has constantly managed the bottom line at the expense of quality product releases.
Absolutely. It's as presumptuous as the writer to assume the way Steve would have felt as it is for MR posters to claim what Steve would or would not have done or approved or rolled over in his grave, etc.It's pretty presumptuous for an analyst to claim what Steve Jobs would be proud of (or not proud of).
It's not an underdog any more. Everyone loves an underdog. Once Apple achieved the success people claimed to want for it, it became another corporation. Once it achieved the success no one dreamed of at the time, it became suspect.Cook's certainly done well at Apple, but it isn't in any way still Steve Jobs' company. It's different because Cook had a different way of looking at the business, and did things quite differently from Jobs. So much of the feel - the nostalgia, the "revolution" that Apple firsties felt in the early years is long gone. It's a much more conventional lasers-and-spaceships corporation now. Still a lot of good things, but the magic left a long time ago, it seems.
Not to mention Jobs would have survived had he followed the advice of the Doctors, but he thought the holistic approach was better.
One of the best replies on MR ever! Nailed it.lol the F he would. The butterfly keyboard debacle alone would have had Steve rolling in his grave. People forget the man was a perfectionist. Look at the Gen 2 iPod with capacitive touch controls. It was a good idea but it just didn't work in real world use so Steve tossed it immediately and released the much loved Gen 3 with Clickwheel, a design that became the hallmark for every iPod released afterward other than the Touch or Shuffle. Steve lived the mantra "Do it right or do something else," something that Human Dialtone Cook has struggled with since Day One.
And no, the "that was Ive's fault" argument doesn't work either as Steve was able to keep Ive under control, making sure all his grand ideas worked in the real world and didn't just look pretty, something Cook was never able to do because he never understood Ive and has zero artistic imagination himself.
As for the capital gains Apple has made under Cook, Steve never cared about such things. He was more interested in making the best products around. He was fine being the underdog in overall sales so long as everyone agreed what he made was the best on the market.
Sorry but this analyst clearly didn't understand Steve Jobs at all and is talking squarely out of his rear with this nonsense.
Who the heck says stuff like that? It's fine to say that about a child that graduated or achieved something with a deceased parental figure.Huberty reflected on Cook's era in the podcast interview, noting that Jobs would be proud.
I love this Messianic idea that jobs, a man sick with pancreatic cancer, was running Apple until his very last breath, then and only then Cook, the pretender, took over the reigns!!
I suspect Cook was doing most of the heavy lifting for years before Jobs passed away.
Cook is Apple.
The above is a strawman. Cook brought a bunch of new products to market that are innovative and are big with consumers. For example, Cook turned wearables into fortune 500 revenue.If Cook had been running Apple, secretly, there would never have been an iPad or iPhone because Cook, unlike Jobs, can't see two inches past his own nose. One look at the list of things Apple brought to market while Jobs was in command should be enough to dispel any belief that Cook had his hand on the wheel prior to Jobs getting sick.
The gulf between wearable computers and something as disruptive and revolutionary as the Mac, iPod, iPhone and iPad --is quite wide.The above is a strawman. Cook brought a bunch of new products to market that are innovative and are big with consumers. For example, Cook turned wearables into fortune 500 revenue.
The wearables were just as disruptive as the iPhone. Although it seems tgst is not your opinion.The gulf between wearable computers and something as disruptive and revolutionary as the Mac, iPod, iPhone and iPad --is quite wide.
The post is fun reading, but the above really? What’s the break in period? How do you know or not that Steve and Tim didn’t discuss how to move forward with the App Store? All those things may “suck” according to you, but by every objective metric, Tim has crushed it as ceo.,[…] charging a 30% cut for the App Store long after it was necessary to break-even sucked, not bribing Congress to prevent antitrust legislation and bad PR sucked, […]