Apple Chip Chief Johny Srouji Could Be Next to Go as Exodus Continues

[Runaway Train]

Huge companies have lots of shock absorbers to get through this kind of thing. Apple can, screw up (and they have - as mentioned Vision Pro, iPhone Air, trash can, Touch Bar, removing Mag safe, nonsensical promos like the Mother Nature skit, and the list goes on). That said - the user base is huge and most importantly switching costs are quite high if you have been in the ecosystem for a long time. Then there are services which are growing and those are subs - they keep on giving. Where they will likely get hurt is new adopters - an unknown at this point.

However …..so much chatter about AI. Does Apple really need to lean in so heavily on that as opposed to being a platform that leverages 3rd party AI? Cook - the shine has come off, he looked lackluster in the Oct event, his energy level was way down.

In sum, yes clean house, make big changes before it is too late. I expect my iPhone and Mac to still work for some years ahead, regardless. Not losing any sleep over this.

 

[nickf]

It’s simpler than this:

- Hire Musk as CEO;
- immediately discontinue Siri and use only uncensored Grok or Gab AI as AI technologies;

Hey Grok, how do you turn a trillion dollar company into a million dollar company?

 

[antonrg]

iPhones and Macs are causing them eyestrain and headaches due to temporal dithering. And the only way they can switch to alternative hardware that works for them is to quit their jobs at Apple.

Alternatively, no one wants to be around when Apples annouces that the foldable iPhone has gone the way of AirPower and Apple Car.

I use both iPhones and Macs and have no eyestrain whatsoever ...

 

[Fender2112]

It's about time some of the younger minds move up and breathe some new life into Apple.

 

[Mac Fly (film)]

…and more urgently, good software.

Obligatory: Bring back the mini!

Don’t bring back the “mini”. Drop that name it put people off.

iPhone 13 mini (5.4”, okay battery)

Instead completely clean up the iPhone lineup, less devices, more sizes, simplified product naming:

iPhone (5.7” 6.3” 6.9”)
iPhone Ultra (5.7” 6.3” 6.9”)

Smaller version of 5.7” is diminutive without sacrificing so much battery size—this size would be more of a sweet spot for a small iPhone in the modern era. Bezels are also as thin as possible—regular and Ultra could have same thin bezels, marking the key difference with Ultra being battery thickness, fortified build quality with grippy texture for improved case-less experience, cameras, “Ultra” branded chip.

 

[turbineseaplane]

The worst part is that privacy is a key advantage for Apple, and yet surveys suggest young people just don’t care about it anymore, which means Apple will be losing an entire demographic over time. And all young people clown on Apple Intelligence.

This is an under discussed point about the younger generations and their lack of enthusiasm on the privacy angle.

 

[Mac Fly (film)]

"good riddance! He sucked anyways!" - Many macrumors posters after someone leaves Apple

No one said this about him. Read the responses on this thread. People think he was great. They are saying this is Apple’s fault, not his. Whereas software design at Apple many think was no great, so they blame both Tim, and the software lead who moved on. Gruber didn’t just start criticising the software lead now, he had a whole podcast dedicated to it many months ago, the Louie Mantia episode—skip at least the first hour in the three hour episode to get to the crux of the episode—the rest of the episode. Louie worked at Apple for two years and was a well known designer in the Apple community for years before that—the two of them were upset with Apple in the episode, especially regarding macOS UX design re Tahoe. It’s telling that the software lead who left was Ive’s protégée as Ive’s full software redesign for iOS 7 was also not well received—because it was bad in many ways.

 

[Runningman262]

Poor overall corporate governance with a board of directors who have forgotten their role. Complacency at it's best. No reason they can't recover with the right team, but it will be slow and painful. Reminds me of the NCAA CFP playoff selection process...

 

[joloriquelme]

This is the result of having too much products (and variants) and services.

Nobody cares about Vision Pro. If they choose to axe it, nobody will even care.

Apple is known for good things that are the cash cows:

- iPhone
- iPad
- MacBook
- iMac
- iCloud
- Apple Watch
- AirPods
- Apple Music

And bad things that should be axed inmediately:

- Siri

Reduce the unnecesary variants of multiple devices (only 2 iPhones, only 2 iPads, only 3 o 4 Macs, etc.), get close all of that list to perfecton, and trash everything else that nobody cares (Apple TV, Apple Arcade, Vision Pro). With that funds, explore a new, useful, and really game-changer device (and AFFORDABLE, not like VP).

 

[rp2011]

One correction there: “Amazon is a shopping monopoly that runs the internet” - Amazon’s biggest profit center isnt retail/shopping or shipping these days, it’s AWS. They are a huge tech company

Lot'sof respect to Amazon from their inception of oolong forward and playing the long game where it comes to the internet.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Reduce the unnecesary variants of multiple devices (only 2 iPhones, only 2 iPads, only 3 o 4 Macs, etc.),

The problem with doing this is that it's the bedrock of Tim's entire strategy to get people paying more for everything.

It's become an art form of this version of Apple. They seemingly craft devices for price points and strategically gimp them in little ways to get folks thinking "maybe I should just bump up a tier and spend the extra XXX".

 

[Ctrlos]

This is the result of having too much products (and variants) and services.

Nobody cares about Vision Pro. If they choose to axe it, nobody will even care.

Apple is known for good things that are the cash cows:

- iPhone
- iPad
- MacBook
- iMac
- iCloud
- Apple Watch
- AirPods
- Apple Music

And bad things that should be axed inmediately:

- Siri

Reduce the unnecesary variants of multiple devices (only 2 iPhones, only 2 iPads, only 3 o 4 Macs, etc.), get close all of that list to perfecton, and trash everything else that nobody cares (Apple TV, Apple Arcade, Vision Pro). With that funds, explore a new, useful, and really game-changer device (and AFFORDABLE, not like VP).

I never quite understood the need for the market to have some sort of new, game-changing device. Laptop's haven't changed much in over 30 years beyond mass and chipsets and nobody is screaming at them to be reinvented. The same inevitably applies to phones.

The 'game changing device' the market is waiting for already exists. It is theft-proof, quietly away when you don't need it and right there when you do. The big 'AI device' people keep waiting for is the smartwatch. The only reason a company like Meta are selling the idea of glasses as the next big idea is because its still a visual place they can cram with ads. Zuckerberg doesn't seem to realise he is the Nolan Sorrento of his own story.

A watch is the perfect medium for a smartphone replacement. Its smaller screen encourages more passive use. It just cannot cope with video, social media or games meaning it avoids all the addictive negatives that plague current devices. It needs just 2 things to get there: an on-device AI capable of running tasks for you and silicon battery tech.

Heck, they could get rid of push and have it just check every 15 minutes for notifications to preserve background battery only stepping up to more frequent checks when you're chatting. People need to get out of the idea that just because we can communicate instantaneously doesn't mean we need to.

 

[Madhatter32]

This is the result of having too much products (and variants) and services.

Nobody cares about Vision Pro. If they choose to axe it, nobody will even care.

Apple is known for good things that are the cash cows:

- iPhone
- iPad
- MacBook
- iMac
- iCloud
- Apple Watch
- AirPods
- Apple Music

And bad things that should be axed inmediately:

- Siri

Reduce the unnecesary variants of multiple devices (only 2 iPhones, only 2 iPads, only 3 o 4 Macs, etc.), get close all of that list to perfecton, and trash everything else that nobody cares (Apple TV, Apple Arcade, Vision Pro). With that funds, explore a new, useful, and really game-changer device (and AFFORDABLE, not like VP).

As any investment professional will tell you, "past performance is no guarantee of future results."

 

[turbineseaplane]

A watch is the perfect medium for a smartphone replacement. Its smaller screen encourages more passive use. It just cannot cope with video, social media or games meaning it avoids all the addictive negatives that plague current devices. It needs just 2 things to get there: an on-device AI capable of running tasks for you and silicon battery tech.

The flaw here is the assumption that people want a smartphone replacement.

People LOVE their smartphones.

I, myself, would love to have smaller screens and/or go watch only, but I'm basically a Neo-luddite in many ways.

 

[jdawgnoonan]

My biggest fear regarding people leaving Apple is that they become just another tech company that views their end user data as a commodity to sell to third parties.

 

[vantelimus]

The problem with doing this is that it's the bedrock of Tim's entire strategy to get people paying more for everything.

It's become an art form of this version of Apple. They seemingly craft devices for price points and strategically gimp them in little ways to get folks thinking "maybe I should just bump up a tier and spend the extra XXX".

This is exactly what I was taught in behavioral marketing at Columbia Business School a couple of decades ago. Any competent company selling non-essential consumer products uses this structure. The standard three-product offering is engineered to trigger the compromise effect. Consumers disproportionately choose the middle option when presented with low, medium, and high alternatives because it feels reasonable/safe/balanced. By exploiting human cognitive biases with a menu-driven purchasing decision, companies can steer buyers toward the option that maximizes margin while appearing to offer choice. The techniques can be used ethically or unethically. It is defensible when the tiered structure provides genuine product differentiation. Apple's offerings generally do, though reasonable people can disagree on any specific instance.

 

[JMalone]

apple is sinking

we need a complete renovation, a new CEO. get rid of Apple Intelligence, Vision Pro, iPhone air, iPhone fold.

focus on making good devices.

Bizarre and ignorant. And you fell for Bloomberg’s stock manipulation.

Apple Silicon based Macs have been revolutionary, not just among faithful Mac users but also very favorable to machine learning and language model enthusiasts. As soon as $10K M3 Ultra’s appear on Apple’s refurb page they are sold out.

The iPhone business is as strong as ever and the iPad still makes all competing tablets look slow and lazy.

You walk down any busy street and you see AirPod buds everywhere just like we saw white iPod headphone cables everywhere.

Apple might have a couple of devices you don’t like but that is the way it has always been. Some devices are there just to show the world Apple can design better than the competition, not necessarily to sell those niche products to the masses.

 

[Sasha-1]

Why are you laughing? Can’t stand the truth? Elon is probably the only “outside the envelope” leader these days, whether your political views allow it or not - without his vision, Teslas wouldn’t be on the roads today (regardless of one’s opinion on EVs), nor would we be seeing the world’s largest rocket being recovered by giant clamps.

SJ had exactly the same kind of mindset when going beyond what ordinary customers even thought of wishing. And no other living exec can do that besides Musk.
He, and he alone, would be the one bringing back the simple product matrix to Apple, instead of the absolutely confusing aberration that we see nowadays with iPad and other device lines - for this you need someone to shake things up, not some DEI-complacent moron.

Musk has been claiming the FSD will be ready in a matter of a few months for the last ten years. He's been absolutely wrong about this over and over again. Not the brightest guy in the room. Musk claims we'll be going to Mars in 5 years for at least the last 5 to 7 years. He has no concept what-so-ever of the launch-window that exists for Mars or why you can never terraform Mars. A couple nukes over the poles will not warm the planet and even if it did, the planet has no magnetic sphere to protect it, meaning the solar windows will just blow it away, again. You will be bombarded by radiation on the trip, which will take 9 months. How will 1,000 people exercise on a starship for 9 months. It's simple math. Which means, exactly like FSD, he is either knowingly lying to you, or he's an idiot. Either way, he's wrong.

When you get around to opening your eyes, you will discover he is a snake-oil salesmen. That's all he is. And if you follow his posts, he's a nut. And I still have not even brought up his political views, but I don't have to.

Starlink? Do the math.. 59 satellites x one launch costing $60 million. That's $2.6 million per satellite. Say I am generous and say it lasts for 5 years in space, so divide $2.6 million by 60 months. You get $43,000 per satellite in perpetuity. He has $5,884 satellites in space, which means he has a cost of $255 million per month in perpetuity. If you have 2.2 million customers at $100 a month, then your income is $220 million. But again, JUST the launch costs exceed that. And that's just the launch costs. It doesn't include anything else. Starlink doesn't make money and it only requires extremely simple math to see it. So how is the space company worth $150 billion when all it does is burn $2 billion a year? Like Twitter, it makes NOTHING.

Musk does one thing. He hypes up everything. Robotaxi? Assume Robotaxi takes over all the business of Uber. Add the value of Uber to that of Tesla. How much is Uber worth? Trillions, like Musk says the taxi business is worth? Nope. Uber has an inflated valuation of $191 billion. Tesla is trading 300:1, and has an inflated valuation of $1.5 trillion. Adding $200 billion to it, will not make Tesla worth trillions more. It's snake-oil salesmanship.

Musk is giant fraud and always has been. You just don't want to see it.

 

[Sasha-1]

It’s simpler than this:

- Hire Musk as CEO;
- bring back Jobs’s 2x2 matrix as a MAX limit for all product lines;
- republish the classic Apple Human Interface Guidelines and require all to abide by them;
- release a Snow Leopard-like Mac OS and mandate the team to get rid of all years-long unfixed bugs;
- eliminate the IAP scourge from the App Store, or at least prioritize non-IAP apps in its search engine and storefront;
- immediately end all DEI policies and focus only on merit for all employees;
- immediately discontinue AVP;
- immediately discontinue Apple Arcade, ATV streaming, Apple Fitness and Apple News - license the little existing ATV content to other media companies;
- stop any and all Ellen Hancock-, Copland-like internal developments at Apple;
- immediately fire all execs who refuse to toe the above lines;
- immediately discontinue Siri and use only uncensored Grok or Gab AI as AI technologies;
- rehire Avie Tevanian and Scott Forstall.

Yeah, bring Musk into this. He's promise a product and fail to deliver it for ten years, and then hype up something else, and repeat often and never deliver. Great idea.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Bizarre and ignorant. And you fell for Bloomberg’s stock manipulation.

You think Bloomberg is manipulating stocks with their news stories?

🧐 😵‍💫

 

[treyjustice]

Musk has been claiming the FSD will be ready in a matter of a few months for the last ten years. He's been absolutely wrong about this over and over again. Not the brightest guy in the room. Musk claims we'll be going to Mars in 5 years for at least the last 5 to 7 years. He has no concept what-so-ever of the launch-window that exists for Mars or why you can never terraform Mars. A couple nukes over the poles will not warm the planet and even if it did, the planet has no magnetic sphere to protect it, meaning the solar windows will just blow it away, again. You will be bombarded by radiation on the trip, which will take 9 months. How will 1,000 people exercise on a starship for 9 months. It's simple math. Which means, exactly like FSD, he is either knowingly lying to you, or he's an idiot. Either way, he's wrong.

When you get around to opening your eyes, you will discover he is a snake-oil salesmen. That's all he is. And if you follow his posts, he's a nut. And I still have not even brought up his political views, but I don't have to.

Starlink? Do the math.. 59 satellites x one launch costing $60 million. That's $2.6 million per satellite. Say I am generous and say it lasts for 5 years in space, so divide $2.6 million by 60 months. You get $43,000 per satellite in perpetuity. He has $5,884 satellites in space, which means he has a cost of $255 million per month in perpetuity. If you have 2.2 million customers at $100 a month, then your income is $220 million. But again, JUST the launch costs exceed that. And that's just the launch costs. It doesn't include anything else. Starlink doesn't make money and it only requires extremely simple math to see it. So how is the space company worth $150 billion when all it does is burn $2 billion a year? Like Twitter, it makes NOTHING.

Musk does one thing. He hypes up everything. Robotaxi? Assume Robotaxi takes over all the business of Uber. Add the value of Uber to that of Tesla. How much is Uber worth? Trillions, like Musk says the taxi business is worth? Nope. Uber has an inflated valuation of $191 billion. Tesla is trading 300:1, and has an inflated valuation of $1.5 trillion. Adding $200 billion to it, will not make Tesla worth trillions more. It's snake-oil salesmanship.

Musk is giant fraud and always has been. You just don't want to see it.

Starlink has deployed over 9,000 satellites, serves 6 million users in 140 countries. It generates $15.5 billion in projected 2025 revenue. Starlink including direct to cellphone services (voice, internet and text) could see $40-100 billion in revenue in 2026 and $100-200 billion in 2027.

 

[jecowa]

The Neural Engine is walled off, anything past M2 won't even boot Linux (and M2/M1 don't very reliably run it as a daily driver)

Is there something about M3+ that makes running a 3rd-party OS harder on them? Or maybe Asahi is focusing on making it run well on the M1 and M2 before expanding support to the other chip.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Starlink has deployed over 9,000 satellites, serves 6 million users in 140 countries. It generates $15.5 billion in projected 2025 revenue. Starlink including direct to cellphone services (voice, internet and text) could see $40-100 billion in revenue in 2026 and $100-200 billion in 2027.

What are the profits like?

It's amazingly hard to find a real number on this, and as we all know revenue ≠ profits.

What have you seen on that front?

 

[FatLouie]

The Apple marketing strategy is successful; however, creative employees are perhaps not as successful in their personal pursuit of 'Apple Excellence'. Too many Apple loyalists are leaving; that says a lot. When they exit before retirement age, that says even more.

The bulk of the posters on this board lack the creative talents of those working for Apple; otherwise, they would be working for Apple. Speculating that Apple is successful, based on its enormous profits, is foolhardy. Arguing who failed and where is senseless, as we generally do not know the whole story about any aspect of Apple. But I do know this.

Creative people are loyal as long as their creativity is honored. When management fails to permit that creativity to flourish, to blossom, to take a chance on it...then creative people become disillusioned and look for somewhere else to express themselves. This is what we see happening.​

Creative people never retire...at any age. They stay involved in something creative to help others and improve some aspect of humanity. Leaving a company such as Apple at age 60 indicates a level of dissatisfaction, with the exception of health or family reasons.

Apple has taken a handful of full-on, broadside impacts. Someone on the board needs to seriously question what has happened under their guidance and Tim Cook's stewardship.

 

[The Game 161]

this would be a far bigger loss than any other guy who have gone thus far.