Apple CEO Tim Cook Stepping Down, John Ternus Taking Over

[AndiG]

Call me troll all you want, but that is a very weak list. Has Garmin toppled Apple Watch with their one week battery life? No. Has anyone else broken the “novelty tech” barrier with a smart ring? No. The rest is a subjective list of software that Apple does provide but you don’t like (although I already agreed with AI - but the point of the question was hardware, although I was not explicit)

Debatable.

Enough for what? Need because of what? What is the success criteria?

I also miss Steve Jobs, but he won’t come back. The last thing I want is someone trying to be Steve Jobs.

You're wrong - you asking me which products Apple should have developed. But I'm not in charge. And when I give you examples, you don't like em.

There is a lot that could have been done. But the point is under Tim, Apple developed into a one trick pony. When Tim enters the stage, everyone know what he is going to say. "The best iPhone ever". Same story as last year? Same story as every year, Tim.

And yes, $4 trillion - but I'm with Jobs when I say Apple became to greedy and focussed on making money. Nice for the stakeholders, but bad in the long run.

 

[Wayfarer]

Good riddance

Good riddance indeed.

 

[CapitalIdea]

from a PR perspective, it should have just become an off-limits questions. Last week's WSJ video with Tim they asked him about it on camera. Tim's always on message but handlers should have forbid it as a question especially the last 6 weeks during the 50 years of Apple roadshow where people were constantly asking him about the future.

I disagree. By having handlers make it off limits, it only fuels speculation harder. I personally like that Tim has always been able to simply stay on message and give them nothing.

 

[Dirk Pieters]

Feel free to take the Vision Pro with you on the way out the door.

That was quite the dud Tim.

Pointless discussion. Many here say that Tim Cook did nothing innovative, played it safe, counted the pennies, while the Vision Pro is a completely new product. He also gave us the Watch and Apple Silicon.

The fact that Vision Pro was a dud is largely irrelevant. I'll give it to Steve Jobs that he struck gold with the iPhone, the right product at the right time for a very large market. But let's not forget that most of Jobs' products were duds as well, to the point of Apple going bankrupt.

If anyone here thinks that John Ternus is going to come out with a product that's as gold as the iPhone, just because he's a "product" guy, think again. It's not going to happen.

 

[CapitalIdea]

You're wrong - you asking me which products Apple should have developed. But I'm not in charge. And when I give you examples, you don't like em.

There is a lot that could have been done. But the point is under Tim, Apple developed into a one trick pony. When Tim enters the stage, everyone know what he is going to say. "The best iPhone ever". Same story as last year? Same story as every year, Tim.

And yes, $4 trillion - but I'm with Jobs when I say Apple became to greedy and focussed on making money. Nice for the stakeholders, but bad in the long run.

Under Jobs the only thing propping up the company was the phone. Now they have revitalized MacBook Pros that Jony Ive never would have put out, a bigger watch variety, solid entertainment, and at long last a truly low cost Mac for students. They also finally took the formerly sacrosanct Mac Pro out to the shed and ended it. Hardly the one trick pony you claim.

You just seem to dislike that they don’t throw a variety of sizzle words into the keynote.

 

[The Game 161]

the future will certainly be interesting

 

[The Game 161]

Pointless discussion. Many here say that Tim Cook did nothing innovative, played it safe, counted the pennies, while the Vision Pro is a completely new product. He also gave us the Watch and Apple Silicon.

The fact that Vision Pro was a dud is largely irrelevant. I'll give it to Steve Jobs that he struck gold with the iPhone, the right product at the right time for a very large market. But let's not forget that most of Jobs' products were duds as well, to the point of Apple going bankrupt.

If anyone here thinks that John Ternus is going to come out with a product that's as gold as the iPhone, just because he's a "product" guy, think again. It's not going to happen.

also vision pro is amazing tech and i'm glad it exists. just most people can't afford it and doesn't fit in most use cases.

 

[Dirk Pieters]

Jobs wasn’t flawless.
Cook was a decent pick to drive revenue but awful at driving innovation, products, and customer satisfaction.

Judging from Apple's growth during Tim Cook's era as CEO, I'd say he did a great job. That growth just does not happen when customers are not satisfied.

Sounds like you're projecting your own feelings onto everyone else. And guess what ... Apple's numbers completely wipe your arguments off the table.

I'm pretty neutral towards Cook. I thought many of his keynotes were cringe worthy <cough>Mother Nature™️</cough> and he lacked excitement and charisma.

But numbers are number and facts are facts ... he did a great job while he was CEO.

 

[AndiG]

Under Jobs the only thing propping up the company was the phone. Now they have revitalized MacBook Pros that Jony Ive never would have put out, a bigger watch variety, solid entertainment, and at long last a truly low cost Mac for students. They also finally took the formerly sacrosanct Mac Pro out to the shed and ended it. Hardly the one trick pony you claim.

You just seem to dislike that they don’t throw a variety of sizzle words into the keynote.

You might be a bit young, my friend. Let's skip the deep history - the Apple I, the Macintosh, NeXT becoming macOS X, the colorful iMacs when Ive entered the stage - and jump straight in.

2001: iPod. Then 2003: iTunes Store, 99 cents a song. Not just a product - a disruption. Jobs looked at Napster, Kazaa, LimeWire, and the labels suing their own customers, and built the one thing none of them could: a store that made buying easier than stealing. That combo (hardware + service + price point) saved an entire industry and invented the template for everything Apple Services is today.

2005–2006: Intel transition. A genius move that broadened Mac acceptance massively. "Get a Mac" - suddenly everyone wanted one.

2007: iPhone + iOS. This one turned the entire IT industry upside down. Killed Adobe Flash along the way. Made Safari/WebKit the dominant mobile engine - and still dominant today, since Chrome's Blink and Edge's engine were both forked from WebKit (which itself came from KHTML). Every major browser on Earth except Firefox traces its DNA back to a decision Jobs made. No one in the tech engine believed that it was possible to run Darwin on an ARM SoC.

2008: P.A. Semi. 2010: Intrinsity. Quietly, Jobs bought the chip design teams that became Apple Silicon. The A4 in the original iPad was the first shot. Every M-series MacBook you're celebrating today? That's Jobs' long game paying off 15 years later. Cook is harvesting what Jobs planted.

Not everything Jobs did was brilliant, and not everything succeeded. But those two figures simply cannot be compared. Cook is an excellent operator. Jobs bent the industry.

As for "sizzle words in the keynote" - no, what I miss is substance. One more thing used to mean something genuinely new. Now it means a thinner bezel.

 

[Dirk Pieters]

also vision pro is amazing tech and i'm glad it exists. just most people can't afford it and doesn't fit in most use cases.

From what I see (we can't buy it here), I agree. I think there is tremendous value in visionOS and the Vision Pro is just the first device to run it.

It's a bit over-engineered for me, with that I-see-your-eyes-blinking front but there you go. Could have been lighter and cheaper without all that but in the end it will never be a device that pretty much everyone has in their pocket like a mobile phone.

 

[opeter]

Will John bring back the Mac Pro and the big(ger) iMac? That is the main question for the Mac guys out there...

 

[Dirk Pieters]

You might be a bit young, my friend. Let's skip the deep history - the Apple I, the Macintosh, NeXT becoming macOS X, the colorful iMacs when Ive entered the stage - and jump straight in.

I like how you skipped the part of history where Apple nearly went bankrupt under Jobs.

2001: iPod. Then 2003: iTunes Store, 99 cents a song. Not just a product - a disruption. Jobs looked at Napster, Kazaa, LimeWire, and the labels suing their own customers, and built the one thing none of them could: a store that made buying easier than stealing. That combo (hardware + service + price point) saved an entire industry and invented the template for everything Apple Services is today.

Agreed.

2005–2006: Intel transition. A genius move that broadened Mac acceptance massively. "Get a Mac" - suddenly everyone wanted one.

He sort of "had" to because the chip before that had nothing left in it. The Mac/macOS are still a small percentages, so your idea that everyone went Apple after the Intel switch just isn't true. Even today with M chips Macs are still a minority.

2007: iPhone + iOS. This one turned the entire IT industry upside down. Killed Adobe Flash along the way. Made Safari/WebKit the dominant mobile engine - and still dominant today, since Chrome's Blink and Edge's engine were both forked from WebKit (which itself came from KHTML). Every major browser on Earth except Firefox traces its DNA back to a decision Jobs made. No one in the tech engine believed that it was possible to run Darwin on an ARM SoC.

Agreed.

2008: P.A. Semi. 2010: Intrinsity. Quietly, Jobs bought the chip design teams that became Apple Silicon. The A4 in the original iPad was the first shot. Every M-series MacBook you're celebrating today? That's Jobs' long game paying off 15 years later. Cook is harvesting what Jobs planted.

Not everything Jobs did was brilliant, and not everything succeeded. But those two figures simply cannot be compared. Cook is an excellent operator. Jobs bent the industry.

As for "sizzle words in the keynote" - no, what I miss is substance. One more thing used to mean something genuinely new. Now it means a thinner bezel.

The industry today isn't what it was around the time that Jobs died. Technology has matured and has become largely boring. Smartphones and the internet are the culmination of tech. You can reach anyone from anywhere and request all the data from everywhere from a device that fits in your pocket.

That's all there is, that's all you need. There might be new devices like Apple glasses but in the end that will just be a different way to do the same thing. From a communications/access point of view, I'd say that problem is fully solved.

 

[meepdarby]

John Ternus becoming CEO of Apple

 

[AndiG]

I like how you skipped the part of history where Apple nearly went bankrupt under Jobs.

...

The industry today isn't what it was around the time that Jobs died. Technology has matured and has become largely boring. Smartphones and the internet are the culmination of tech. You can reach anyone from anywhere and request all the data from everywhere from a device that fits in your pocket.

That's all there is, that's all you need. There might be new devices like Apple glasses but in the end that will just be a different way to do the same thing. From a communications/access point of view, I'd say that problem is fully solved.

Did I? Apple nearly went bankrupt in 1996 - under Sculley, Spindler, and Amelio. Jobs had been kicked out in 1985 and was running NeXT and Pixar at the time.
Michael Dell famously said Apple should shut down and return the money to shareholders. Market share was under 4%.

Jobs came back via the NeXT acquisition in late 1996, became interim CEO in 1997, and personally pulled off the rescue: the Microsoft $150M deal, killing dozens of confusing product lines (like he would do today), the Consumer/Pro × Desktop/Portable matrix, "Think Different," then the iMac in 1998. That's the turnaround.

So yes - Apple nearly went bankrupt. Specifically when Jobs wasn't there. The part I "skipped" is the part that proves my point.

Regarding your industry thesis. Apple was always a follower that's correct. But the folding phone - in the meantime Honor(? or a competitor) already presented a crease free foldable phone.

Meta glasses - absolutely awesome. With Jobs leading the pack, this is what he would have done and shipped it - not Apple Vision Pro that was DoA.

 

[Dirk Pieters]

Regarding your industry thesis. Apple was always a follower that's correct. But the folding phone - in the meantime Honor(? or a competitor) already presented a crease free foldable phone.

In the case of foldable phones there are only so many foldable screens and they all crease. What Apple does best is to wait and jump on the bandwagon when the tech is available so they can make a quality product. I don't know what that folding iPhone will bring in screen/crease tech but I don't think Steve Jobs would have been able to accelerate folding screen tech. In fact, no one knows if Steve Jobs would agree with the amount of iPhone that we have now.

I do understand that Apple is waiting to release folding devices every time I play with a Fold 7, because that screen tech is close ... but not quite there.

Meta glasses - absolutely awesome. With Jobs leading the pack, this is what he has done and shipped it - not Apple Vision Pro that was DoA.

I don't think the technology is there right now to bring glasses to the market with full day battery life, so again I don't think Jobs would have made a difference in that regard.

I don't hate Jobs and I'm not a Cook fan. In the end all that matters is that Apple is where it is today, in fantastic health. And both had a roll to play in that. And we have to look past things like Liquid Glass and Vision Pro when Tim Cook is judged.

 

[jlc1978]

New blood is needed and an engineer who's a stickler for detail is a great place to start.

I suspect the first time he makes a decision on product design the detractors will make the same complaints as they did with Cook. Over under on that is six months, IMHO.

I suspect he will continue much of Cook’s supply chain driven approach, which has driven Apple to what it is today, while adding his stamp on Apple.

 

[Velli]

You're wrong - you asking me which products Apple should have developed. But I'm not in charge. And when I give you examples, you don't like em.

Which is why I disagree with your position.

 

[AlumaMac]

Adios Tim, hopefully John can think outside the box.

 

[Dirk Pieters]

I suspect the first time he makes a decision on product design the detractors will make the same complaints as they did with Cook. Over under on that is six months, IMHO.

I suspect he will continue much of Cook’s supply chain driven approach, which has driven Apple to what it is today, while adding his stamp on Apple.

For the next 5 years John Ternus will be releasing hardware that is already on the roadmap today. He will inherit things like a folding iPhone, a redesigned MacBook Air, redesigned MacBook Pro, the rumoured MacBook Ultra with touch, etc.

Under Ternus products will ship that were put in motion before him, just like Cook shipped things that were put in motion before him.

No CEO or company goes from a lightbulb idea in January to a mass produced and sold product in December of that same year.

 

[AndiG]

In the case of foldable phones there are only so many foldable screens and they all crease. What Apple does best is to wait and jump on the bandwagon when the tech is available so they can make a quality product. I don't know what that folding iPhone will bring in screen/crease tech but I don't think Steve Jobs would have been able to accelerate folding screen tech. In fact, no one knows if Steve Jobs would agree with the amount of iPhone that we have now.

I do understand that Apple is waiting to release folding devices every time I play with a Fold 7, because that screen tech is close ... but not quite there.



I don't think the technology is there right now to bring glasses to the market with full day battery life, so again I don't think Jobs would have made a difference in that regard.

I don't hate Jobs and I'm not a Cook fan. In the end all that matters is that Apple is where it is today, in fantastic health. And both had a roll to play in that. And we have to look past things like Liquid Glass and Vision Pro when Tim Cook is judged.

So I proofed one thing wrong and you want to continue discussion? feel free ...but I'm not interested.

 

[Dirk Pieters]

So I proofed one thing wrong and you want to continue discussion? feel free ...but I'm not interested.

Word cannot express how little I care about what you're interested in.

But numbers can: 0/10.

 

[Spinarelo]

Ternus announced his new slogan:

MAKE APPLE GREAT AGAIN!

He went on to say “We’re going to fix everything that sleepy Tim broke”

 

[steven3130]

👏👏👏 about time. Get this guy outta here. Here’s to hoping Ternius takes Apple to the next level where we are excited about the products and not having “fake” keynotes where speakers hype up the most simplest of technological refreshes.

I won’t forget the one time Cook was on a morning show and turned full sleezy car salesman telling the world that they could buy a new iPhone for the cost of one coffee per month—promoting debt.

Unfortunately, he will be leaving right around the next iPhone and AppleTV release…if it were sooner, we’d probably get the Apple TV sooner and not have a chipset from 2023.

 

[b17777]

So now, instead of every article having someone call Tim, Timmy.
We are going to have people calling John,Johnny.

 

[Abazigal]

Interesting.

I'm surprised by how much Apple fans don't seem to like Tim Apple. I thought he was well liked?

Steve Jobs was a visionary, it's extremely hard to replicate someone like that. Steve was also lucky to be living in the era of two major technological revolutions — the PC revolution, and the PMC revolution.

Of course Steve Jobs played a major role in both.

Tim Cook brought Apple Watch, AirPods, HomePod, Apple Vision Pro in terms of hardware.

Nothing as revolutionary as Steve Jobs but still pretty good.

The problem for Tim is that he ran the company during the era of product maturity. Product categories and their form factors have been established, PCs and PMCs have matured.

I think the Vision Pro is a good example of consumers simply not wanting anything more.

The move towards the custom M1 silicone also happened during Tim. That move was monumental! It would kill most other companies.

It can also be argued that Steve Jobs directed the ship and Tim just held on to the wheel.

I'm curious as to what innovations would those want who proclaim that Apple does not innovate?

I will continue to argue that different people are needed at different points in a company's history. Steve was right for his era, just as I feel that Tim Cook took over Apple at exactly the right time to bring it to its current heights (you need a formidable supply chain to sell over 200 million iPhones a year, and the political savvy to manage an increasingly complex political landscape). My guess is that even if Steve Jobs were still alive today, he would eventually have handed control of the company over to Tim Cook anyways.

It's also probably more accurate to say that Apple is not innovating in a manner that appeals to the critics (but that doesn't mean they are not innovating). For me, I have purchased plenty of Apple products under Tim Cook's tenure, and they are working well for me. I don't hate Liquid Glass, and Apple does not grow to its current size by running on autopilot alone.

Just count the number of times the critics here have been wrong about Apple over the years. It's easy to talk crap from the comfort of your living room sofa, and that's also why people like Tim Cook are paid the big bucks, because he's the one actually delivering.