Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
We should also ask why in other times — for example during Obama's — there were no manifs / demonstrations. Media was also very quiet 🤫
Sure there were!




Just from spending 15 seconds searching on Google.
 
I can respect Tim’s desire to be a part of the discussion with leaders from all political persuasions rather than rejecting the conversation. Having said that, there’s a real difference between sharing policy suggestions and being viewed as a crony. In my opinion, Tim has really tipped the scales in the favor of cronyism. My views, alone.
 
Something I would think would be a bigger point to people here of all places is that there have been rumors of Cook retiring for a while now, well before recent events.

Regardless of how Cook feels personally, he’s helming one of the biggest ships in the sea of capitalism, and bending the knee is keeping it afloat. And not just to Trump—China too. It seems like he’s doing an effective job of keeping everyone happy enough to allow Apple to keep expanding their Scrooge McDuck pool.

Then there’s the court of public opinion, where I’ve seen a lot of people saying “I won’t buy another Apple product until Cook is gone” and “they need to fire him,” and, well, what if he was already planning on leaving anyway?

What if Cook was already gonna retire in a year, and he decided to kiss the ring(s) to keep Apple rolling in it, then ride off into the sunset so the general public can feel like this terrible person was ousted and it’s okay to buy Apple again?

I personally think this administration is abhorrent and I would like to think Cook does too (as I’d like to think any decent person would, and as I’d like to think most people are decent), but the system makes him more the CEO of a company than a person—hello, Tim Apple—and he’s beholden to maximizing shareholder value. I know this is the “I don’t consider the bloody ROI” guy, but there are limits to that, I’m sure.
 
Something I would think would be a bigger point to people here of all places is that there have been rumors of Cook retiring for a while now, well before recent events.

Regardless of how Cook feels personally, he’s helming one of the biggest ships in the sea of capitalism, and bending the knee is keeping it afloat. And not just to Trump—China too. It seems like he’s doing an effective job of keeping everyone happy enough to allow Apple to keep expanding their Scrooge McDuck pool.

Then there’s the court of public opinion, where I’ve seen a lot of people saying “I won’t buy another Apple product until Cook is gone” and “they need to fire him,” and, well, what if he was already planning on leaving anyway?

What if Cook was already gonna retire in a year, and he decided to kiss the ring(s) to keep Apple rolling in it, then ride off into the sunset so the general public can feel like this terrible person was ousted and it’s okay to buy Apple again?

I personally think this administration is abhorrent and I would like to think Cook does too (as I’d like to think any decent person would, and as I’d like to think most people are decent), but the system makes him more the CEO of a company than a person—hello, Tim Apple—and he’s beholden to maximizing shareholder value. I know this is the “I don’t consider the bloody ROI” guy, but there are limits to that, I’m sure.
I very much hear what you’re saying but I think Cook has lived long enough to see himself become the “bloody ROI” guy. As vanilla as his public statement was, why wait so long after the first victim’s death? Is one death acceptable but two is a real problem?
 
I very much hear what you’re saying but I think Cook has lived long enough to see himself become the “bloody ROI” guy. As vanilla as his public statement was, why wait so long after the first victim’s death? Is one death acceptable but two is a real problem?
I guess what I’m saying is I don’t think it has to do with what he personally finds “acceptable”; he’s dealing with dictators who can hugely hamper the company. I think this is all business, and he’s trying to tightrope walk his way to retirement. I doubt there’d be a statement at all if it weren’t for the backlash to the news of his attending that screening.
 
I guess what I’m saying is I don’t think it has to do with what he personally finds “acceptable”; he’s dealing with dictators who can hugely hamper the company. I think this is all business, and he’s trying to tightrope walk his way to retirement. I doubt there’d be a statement at all if it weren’t for the backlash to the news of his attending that screening.
Also hear that take, I really do, and I don’t disagree with your line of thinking. My honest thought here, and this is just a sign of how spineless Apple PR is, is that the moment that Trump supported Bovino’s withdrawal was the moment that Apple decided to have Tim make a statement. It was the very easiest moment for him to make that vanilla statement, however many days after Renee Good’s death.
 
Also hear that take, I really do, and I don’t disagree with your line of thinking. My honest thought here, and this is just a sign of how spineless Apple PR is, is that the moment that Trump supported Bovino’s withdrawal was the moment that Apple decided to have Tim make a statement. It was the very easiest moment for him to make that vanilla statement, however many days after Renee Good’s death.
I agree with you; I think it sucks and I wish they weren’t just capitulating to a fascist regime, but that’s capitalism for you.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.