Naraxus
macrumors 68030
How many times does it need to be explained that the AVP is anything but a flop before it sinks in?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple CEO Tim Cook Stepping Down, John Ternus Taking Over
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Optimistically, take Apple back to the fundamentals that made it great in the first place, but this time with the money to do great things.
Realistically…more services revenue, probably.
I mean…if it has to be repeatedly and constantly explained that something isn’t a flop…
Kind of like a joke that is definitely funny but has to be explained in detail every time…
Dark_Omen
macrumors 6502a
Tim will be remembered as the guy who couldn't get AI right... At all.
Siri came out right after Tim was appointed interim CEO and will still suck as he heads into retirement.
Dark_Omen
macrumors 6502a
Everyone that knows what they're talking about knew it would happen this year. Those that didn't know what they were talking about, thought otherwise.
Jetscreamer
macrumors regular
sjsharksfan12
macrumors 68030
The Apple watch came under Cook's leadership? I think that was one of the more positive things he's done. It is an end of an era, and I have a wish for WWDC. Either Tim Cook hosts it and gives a very enthusiastic Good Morning with Prayer hands for old times sake, or Ternus hosts as his first of many WWDC. Also, maybe they can finally use the Steve Jobs Theater again and do it live?
I'm not saying they get a pass. I'm saying that, compared to others, they are still doing a much better job. I don't think a new CEO is going to fix the problem, however. Apple's software team needs this generation's Avie Tevanian, not Hair Force One. You're right. It is a generational issue. Craig's generation needs to move on.
Nothing against Tim, but I'm not sure he would have taken that risk if Apple hadn't successfully switched Mac processors twice before. Given that track record, it made sense as a business decision when Apple could no longer differentiate their products using the same Intel CPUs as everyone else.
Dark_Omen
macrumors 6502a
The watch was designed under Steve Jobs' era.
TVreporter
macrumors 68030
Pssss hey John, win the MR forums over, bring back the 27-inch iMac - or go 32-inch.
You’ll be a god here!
You’ll be a god here!
Off topic, but I saw an interesting discussion recently where one of the panelists drew parallels between the AVP and the original 1984 Macintosh. Both were very expensive for their time ($2500 in 1984 = nearly $8000 now), both were underpowered, and both were plagued by a lack of third party "content" (or software, as it was called in 1984) during their early days. In the case of the Mac, it wasn't until the third version, the 1986 Mac Plus, that it gained the power and market momentum to become a serious computer and not just a curiosity. Time will tell what happens with the AVP, whether it follows the Mac, or the Newton.
He will. The transition takes place September 1.
Tim Cook will still be the Executive Chairman of the Board. A fancy advisor.
sjsharksfan12
macrumors 68030
Good riddance to the era of 'innovation' through hardware reuse. Let’s hope for some actual new designs now.
iMac The Knife
macrumors 65816
Hip hip hooray! Cook ended up being the worst possible choice to succeed Steve Jobs as Apple's CEO - at least in terms of product design, user experience, and genuine innovation.
If you disagree, name two products released under Cook's tenure — not products already in Steve's pipeline (which typically stretched five years into the future) — that have proven more profitable than the iPhone or the iPad. And please spare me the "there's nothing left to invent" excuse.
To be fair, Cook delivered financially in some ways. There's no disputing that. But consider this: Steve Jobs built the ship, launched it, walked away, came back, and posted revenue growth numbers Cook can only dream about. When Jobs passed, Cook took the helm of the already highly successful F/V Apple as Captain Miser — penny-pinching his way to the top, with profits as his true north star rather than products. In short, Jobs built the ship, Cook just sailed it. I'm thrilled to see him go. I've been waiting years for this.
Oh, and for anyone pointing to Apple's rising market cap as one of Cook's crowning achievements, consider the following:
Jobs - 1997 to 2011 (14 years):
$2.3 billion → $337 billion, a 146x increase
Cook - 2011 to 2025 (14 years):
$348 billion → $4 trillion, an 11.5x increase
Apple stock you say? Here are some numbers for you (split adjusted):
Steve Jobs era (as CEO) 1997 to 2011:
Starting point - 1997:
$0.12–$0.15 per share (split-adjusted)
Ending point - 2011:
$12-14 per share
% gain: Approximately 6,000%–7,000%
Tim Cook era as CEO 2011 to 2025 (14 years):
Starting point 2011:
$12–$14 per share
Ending point (comparing the same 14 year tenure, ending in August of 2025):
$190-210+ per share
% gain: Approximately 1,300%-1,600%
Apple also became the world's most valuable company for the first time under Jobs.
Regardless of these numbers, it's far more impressive to essentially lead the building of what would become a billion dollar company in less than a decade out of your garage when you're 21 years old with a few thousand dollars and a dream, only to get fired by a joke of a CEO and board of directors, and yet still come back to turn it into the world's most valuable company, than it is for a 50 year old to take a multi billion dollar, globally popular company with a cult following, that was already valued well over a quarter trillion dollars, and penny-pinch his way to a 4 trillion dollar company.
If you disagree, name two products released under Cook's tenure — not products already in Steve's pipeline (which typically stretched five years into the future) — that have proven more profitable than the iPhone or the iPad. And please spare me the "there's nothing left to invent" excuse.
To be fair, Cook delivered financially in some ways. There's no disputing that. But consider this: Steve Jobs built the ship, launched it, walked away, came back, and posted revenue growth numbers Cook can only dream about. When Jobs passed, Cook took the helm of the already highly successful F/V Apple as Captain Miser — penny-pinching his way to the top, with profits as his true north star rather than products. In short, Jobs built the ship, Cook just sailed it. I'm thrilled to see him go. I've been waiting years for this.
Oh, and for anyone pointing to Apple's rising market cap as one of Cook's crowning achievements, consider the following:
Jobs - 1997 to 2011 (14 years):
$2.3 billion → $337 billion, a 146x increase
Cook - 2011 to 2025 (14 years):
$348 billion → $4 trillion, an 11.5x increase
Apple stock you say? Here are some numbers for you (split adjusted):
Steve Jobs era (as CEO) 1997 to 2011:
Starting point - 1997:
$0.12–$0.15 per share (split-adjusted)
Ending point - 2011:
$12-14 per share
% gain: Approximately 6,000%–7,000%
Tim Cook era as CEO 2011 to 2025 (14 years):
Starting point 2011:
$12–$14 per share
Ending point (comparing the same 14 year tenure, ending in August of 2025):
$190-210+ per share
% gain: Approximately 1,300%-1,600%
Apple also became the world's most valuable company for the first time under Jobs.
Regardless of these numbers, it's far more impressive to essentially lead the building of what would become a billion dollar company in less than a decade out of your garage when you're 21 years old with a few thousand dollars and a dream, only to get fired by a joke of a CEO and board of directors, and yet still come back to turn it into the world's most valuable company, than it is for a 50 year old to take a multi billion dollar, globally popular company with a cult following, that was already valued well over a quarter trillion dollars, and penny-pinch his way to a 4 trillion dollar company.
Last edited:
Apple has had a few CEOs not named Jobs.
Sculley
Spindler
Amelio
When Steve Jobs first held the CEO spot, Apple was an infant company.
When those others were CEO, and when Steve came back the 2nd time, there was very deep fear, uncertainty, doubt, and existential dread expecting Apple’s impending failure. I recall Michael Dell’s statement about Apple’s condition back then. Pretty bad.
Only 2X in Apple’s history has there been a CEO transition in which the exiting CEO left the company financially stronger, and with an exceptional and recognized product line, and globally admired, such that the new CEO could come in free of worry to dramatically grow that foundation.
- Steve Jobs as CEO the 2nd time … passing a very revitalized Apple CEO role to Tim Cook.
- Tim Cook who has made Apple orders of magnitude larger, more dominant, more integrated, and wealthier than when Steve passed the role to him. Tim Cook is passing an exceptionally stable and healthy CEO role to John Ternus.
It is quite an accomplishment. Only 2 Apple CEOs have succeeded to this degree and Tim is the second.
Ternus is now in a honey position… a great if not comfortable position to come in and direct or guide Apple in its next era. Cook has done 4 trillion times better for his successor than Sculley, Spindler, or Amelio did.
I applaud Tim Cook. Few could do what he has done.
Sculley
Spindler
Amelio
When Steve Jobs first held the CEO spot, Apple was an infant company.
When those others were CEO, and when Steve came back the 2nd time, there was very deep fear, uncertainty, doubt, and existential dread expecting Apple’s impending failure. I recall Michael Dell’s statement about Apple’s condition back then. Pretty bad.
Only 2X in Apple’s history has there been a CEO transition in which the exiting CEO left the company financially stronger, and with an exceptional and recognized product line, and globally admired, such that the new CEO could come in free of worry to dramatically grow that foundation.
- Steve Jobs as CEO the 2nd time … passing a very revitalized Apple CEO role to Tim Cook.
- Tim Cook who has made Apple orders of magnitude larger, more dominant, more integrated, and wealthier than when Steve passed the role to him. Tim Cook is passing an exceptionally stable and healthy CEO role to John Ternus.
It is quite an accomplishment. Only 2 Apple CEOs have succeeded to this degree and Tim is the second.
Ternus is now in a honey position… a great if not comfortable position to come in and direct or guide Apple in its next era. Cook has done 4 trillion times better for his successor than Sculley, Spindler, or Amelio did.
I applaud Tim Cook. Few could do what he has done.
It was a public company when steve was at the helm too.
Profit margins were much lower, but innovation was much higher. They were hitting it out of the park with new products on rapid fire, and investors were happy with that.
Dark_Omen
macrumors 6502a
Agreed on everything else... But that Apple polishing cloth seems pretty profitable.
While I have nothing against Tim as a person, and I think he seems like an amazing person; it’s his business decisions that have bothered me. When Steve Jobs was alive, I LOVED his business decisions. He made a lot of aggressive decisions with excellent vision of needs for consumers. And ironically, he was not the nicest person to some people (reminds me of someone currently in high leadership.. HA); but his decisions were VERY effective for Apple, and consumers. When Tim took over, he generally did a great job executing Steve’s vision for Apple. But as time went on, and the Steve Jobs checklist was achieved, Tim lacked an aggressive vision for the future in some areas of the ecosystem; and that lack of vision started showing itself more and more each year. When Tim purchased “Beats” for $3 BILLION!!!!, it was a sign of weakness. While Beats had a nice product, with some star power behind it, Steve Jobs (or Me) would have directed our R&D to create a better version of Beats, then hire star power to promote it, and out marketed them, out distributed them; and achieved that for 10% of the cost; saving 90% of the $3 billion. When Tim could not effectively manage the 20 different sku’s; where the company was efficiently stocked for the holiday quarter, and did not have sold out products during the holiday quarter; when we have enough metrics to know, to not fail at that. We know when the holiday season is, for about 100 years. We have seen enough sales trends on market, to know the manufacturing pace to hit the metric. Apple could take 1% of the profitability, and hire 50,000 workers in 5 markets - America, Mexico, India, China and Vietnam. Doing this would help the effective footprint to all global markets efficiently to cover regions, with little shipping costs. It also would help balance manufacturing if/when there are labor disputes and global issues (wars, earthquakes, labor issues, taxing issues, etc..). Then we turn to product timelines. When Steve Jobs was alive, I witnessed how he mastered the product release timeline. 1- The build up, people lined up everywhere around the world. 2 - Steve personally showed the world the new product to a live audience. 3 - It was available, starting today (or within a week). 4 - The inventory was there to satisfy the high demand. 5 - The media was all over the event and product, essentially giving Apple FREE media, globally, for each new product Apple released. 6 - Marketing, TV ads, billboards hit aggressively. 7 - The financials showed on the balance sheet in one quarter, effectively proving the impact of the new product. A full cycle of product to market. When Tim took over, that entire algorithm was diluted in various financial quarters, and the impact was also diluted. I am surprised no-one around him pointed that out to him.
I tried to inform Apple, but my message was denied when I sent it in. Now let’s go to developers, when Steve was alive, Steve understood the marriage of developers with manufactures with the Apple OS. The excellent communication helped the entire ecosystem thrive with amazing growth across the board. When we look at that today, Tim’s lack of executing that has directly affected the pace of growth. It also has impacted the effectiveness of the ecosystem, where it seems like it’s going backwards in SOME software aspects. When Tim makes decisions to lock out developers with some technologies, then the end user suffers. Not everything Tim has done was bad, but his batting average needed improvement. It has A LOT of impact on WHY the Apple stock has been stalled. Apple SHOULD be over $400 by now, and should have had another split. But consistent volume influx has stalled that growth as well. Let’s look at products. Apple should not have ended the MacPro. The MacPro ecosystem is full of content creators. Music, Video and High End Graphic users, that wan PCI slots for daughterboard cards to run their systems. (I am one of those users, that has two MacPros for those things, with PCI slot needs). The iPhone should be offered in a smaller size, for those who do not want a large phone. The Apple Vision Pro came in at a too-high price point, and that product was a flop. The AppleTV has not been updated in too long, and is WAY late for a refresh. Let’s go to software. The OS has taxed the chip sets, on older macs with memory leaks, and slowed any mac older than a year, down. The AppleTV software is getting worse and worse with every update. To have to dig for your assets, is stupid. Consumers should not have to dig thru numerous pages, to get to content; it should be on page one. iTunes has become bloated, with a confusing navigation/search aspect for what you want to hear. Is it streaming on. Apple music? Is it in your library? Are you buying a song? Are you just streaming it? Search re-directs you to who knows where. A mess. And speaking of Apple TV and iTunes, a HUGE issue Tim has allowed, is the mismanagement of copyright content people have purchased from Apple. A purchase of content is a closed transaction. The distributors have been paid in in the transaction (Apple and the entity owning the copyright Sr, and then the artist, or whoever owns the copyright PA). The PURCHASE is a closed, final transaction. BUT, Apple has been quietly taking some of those purchase assets back from people, without their knowledge, and then does not refund the purchase. This defies copyright law. And Tim has allowed that to happen. It is just a matter of time until a class action lawsuit comes to light on that action. So those are just SOME of my issues with Apple. I have studied numerous metrics on Apple for over 25 years. I understand their ecosystem better than most. I think like Steve Jobs. I own, and operate 15 vertically integrated companies; and I understand effective utilization of how that operates. I always understood Steve’s vision, even before he said his vision, based on his prior actions to announcements. Apple is a monster corporation because of Steve’s aggressive approach. His ability to see vertical utilization on ecosystems, that can connect to a nucleus within Apple. I really hope the new CEO understands how Apple has to utilized. Build talent around the company, and effectively progress with vision. Apple has a lot of life left in it, it just needs someone to bring it to life. I could easily fix that companies directives. Hopefully the next CEO achieves that, and stays focused. One thing Tim did great is, The MacBook Neo is Tim’s best achievement he has brought to market. So, I am glad to see Tim head into retirement. Thanks for taking care of Apple, but the time has come to kick Apple into high gear.
Richard Hofherr
I tried to inform Apple, but my message was denied when I sent it in. Now let’s go to developers, when Steve was alive, Steve understood the marriage of developers with manufactures with the Apple OS. The excellent communication helped the entire ecosystem thrive with amazing growth across the board. When we look at that today, Tim’s lack of executing that has directly affected the pace of growth. It also has impacted the effectiveness of the ecosystem, where it seems like it’s going backwards in SOME software aspects. When Tim makes decisions to lock out developers with some technologies, then the end user suffers. Not everything Tim has done was bad, but his batting average needed improvement. It has A LOT of impact on WHY the Apple stock has been stalled. Apple SHOULD be over $400 by now, and should have had another split. But consistent volume influx has stalled that growth as well. Let’s look at products. Apple should not have ended the MacPro. The MacPro ecosystem is full of content creators. Music, Video and High End Graphic users, that wan PCI slots for daughterboard cards to run their systems. (I am one of those users, that has two MacPros for those things, with PCI slot needs). The iPhone should be offered in a smaller size, for those who do not want a large phone. The Apple Vision Pro came in at a too-high price point, and that product was a flop. The AppleTV has not been updated in too long, and is WAY late for a refresh. Let’s go to software. The OS has taxed the chip sets, on older macs with memory leaks, and slowed any mac older than a year, down. The AppleTV software is getting worse and worse with every update. To have to dig for your assets, is stupid. Consumers should not have to dig thru numerous pages, to get to content; it should be on page one. iTunes has become bloated, with a confusing navigation/search aspect for what you want to hear. Is it streaming on. Apple music? Is it in your library? Are you buying a song? Are you just streaming it? Search re-directs you to who knows where. A mess. And speaking of Apple TV and iTunes, a HUGE issue Tim has allowed, is the mismanagement of copyright content people have purchased from Apple. A purchase of content is a closed transaction. The distributors have been paid in in the transaction (Apple and the entity owning the copyright Sr, and then the artist, or whoever owns the copyright PA). The PURCHASE is a closed, final transaction. BUT, Apple has been quietly taking some of those purchase assets back from people, without their knowledge, and then does not refund the purchase. This defies copyright law. And Tim has allowed that to happen. It is just a matter of time until a class action lawsuit comes to light on that action. So those are just SOME of my issues with Apple. I have studied numerous metrics on Apple for over 25 years. I understand their ecosystem better than most. I think like Steve Jobs. I own, and operate 15 vertically integrated companies; and I understand effective utilization of how that operates. I always understood Steve’s vision, even before he said his vision, based on his prior actions to announcements. Apple is a monster corporation because of Steve’s aggressive approach. His ability to see vertical utilization on ecosystems, that can connect to a nucleus within Apple. I really hope the new CEO understands how Apple has to utilized. Build talent around the company, and effectively progress with vision. Apple has a lot of life left in it, it just needs someone to bring it to life. I could easily fix that companies directives. Hopefully the next CEO achieves that, and stays focused. One thing Tim did great is, The MacBook Neo is Tim’s best achievement he has brought to market. So, I am glad to see Tim head into retirement. Thanks for taking care of Apple, but the time has come to kick Apple into high gear.
Richard Hofherr
Last edited:
"hey is that the new polishing cloth? i've never even gotten to see one of these in the wild, is it everything that people say it is?"
- no one, ever.
The way to achieve great success is to not focus on the investors. The investors invest because they like what they see with innovation and growth. So the focused needs to be in those two areas. NOT on caring what wall street thinks or wants.