Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
This would be a DISASTROUS loss that should not be downplayed (if it happens).

Cumulatively, this is all adding up to a five alarm fire in Cupertino.
I believe people are leaving the company for two reasons.

Apple is largely run by marketing and sales people. Their products have barely changed in recent years. Brand loyalty and good supply chain management have ensured their success. Therefore, there aren't many reasons for employees who want to make a difference to stay when the competition offers the same salary and more challenging projects.

And the VPs and C suits are leaving because the decision about the new CEO has likely already been made internally. So, those who had hoped to become the new CEO and didn’t got the position are leaving the company to climb the corporate ladder somewhere elsewhere.
 
This is what happens when companies only cares about pure profits than employees and consumers.
Like the good devices it has been making for years? Especially on the Mac side. Apple isn’t alone in pushing hard on AI stuff that many are ambivalent about. This is part of the trouble with consumer-level hardware having reached “adequate for most people” status years ago.
 
Aren’t Mac and iPad billion dollar businesses? Probably Apple Watch and AirPods too.
Airpods are an iPhone accessory and the watch maybe too (it needs the iPhone). iPad, Mac and everything else have decent sales but not to make the company trillion of dollas worth.
 
Last edited:
It’s always worth mentioning that a company is not one person and a department not one head. Steve Jobs was perhaps the exception but he assembled a crack team to surround himself with.

My point is that just because the guy at the top leaves does not mean all the talent is gone. It may be that much like Dye Apple’s current teams really dislike working for the current management and a younger set of people at the top is just what the company needs.
 
Intel - complacency. It was the bottom line and repeating that status quo. They became completely blindsided by the GPU race by blatantly ignoring anything around them. And in several turns and events, rather than reinvestment they CUT the innovation departments for the sake of holding onto the purse, IP and whatever else keeps their valuation.

IBM - again, dominance and market shift. Selling off of their consumer products and severing their connection to the end user. Guided by technology iterations vs problem solving and consumer sentiment. Hit several financial snags and at one point losing $8 a year - cut innovation departments and sold off hardware IP to lean toward AI and cloud computing like everyone else.

Forest for the trees.

If you chose to be in the hands of end user, you must solve the problems of the end user. It's not how much faster your copy and paste is - it's the context of what the user is attempting to do that drives the need of that copy and paste in the first place.

Go with bean counter and technology mind to lead the charge and you gut the culture that made Apple different than it's competitors. Go with marketing/product/design leadership and you at least have a chance to adhere to why people buy your products.
Hmm...you can be the next Apple CEO... :)
 
Act like a creep and expect consequences, yep!
You sound so certain that you are on the right side.
Can you be very specific what does it mean to act as a creep, while also staying relevant for the mentioned case? Because until now it sounded very much emotionally charged.
 
In my opinion, it is pointless to try to retain people with absurd figures. You risk overpaying people who then don't prove themselves to be that great outside of a certain environment or team (think about what soccer players are paid).

It is better to have motivated people, paid according to merit, who believe in the company's vision.

Perhaps the solution lies in reapplying the ‘Jobs cure’, rationalizing product lines, and focusing on quality and real innovations that can realistically be mass-produced at affordable prices for the average person.

While partially true - intrinsic motivation is by far the best kind of motivation - not being paid what you think you're worth is a massive negative hygiene factor. And if you see your colleagues leave in large numbers due to pay, it will definitely be on your mind as well.

It's also harder to sell the idea - "we have a mission, the money you earn isn't that important" - when the company earns massive amounts.
 
I have always wondered why Ternus was/is supposedly being groomed for the job. What exactly makes him CEO material over anyone else on the executive team? Usually the only thing mentioned is his age.
I assumed that Ternus is at least partially credited with Apple's hardware success over the last several years. You'd like to think he has a good working relationship with Srouji, which makes me wonder why he wouldn't want Ternus as CEO. You'd think that Ternus would want to give Srouji what ever he wanted to stay. Of course, if Srouji wanted the job for himself that would make sense, but he seems so happy in his underground lab, why would he want all the headaches of the CEO's job at his age? I don't get it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rogifan
I believe people are leaving the company for two reasons.

Apple is largely run by marketing and sales people. Their products have barely changed in recent years. Brand loyalty and good supply chain management have ensured their success. Therefore, there aren't many reasons for employees who want to make a difference to stay when the competition offers the same salary and more challenging projects.

And the VPs and C suits are leaving because the decision about the new CEO has likely already been made internally. So, those who had hoped to become the new CEO and didn’t got the position are leaving the company to climb the corporate ladder somewhere elsewhere.
The only person on Apple's executive team that can be considered a "sales and marketing" person is Greg Joswiak, who for his high profile hasn't been considered (to my knowledge) as a CEO candidate. Deirdre O'Brien is tasked with Retail and People, which goes to show how much of the company's payroll is tied to its stores.

I don't really get what the people on MacRumors want. A hardware-focused guy? That's Ternus, and maybe Srouji. A software guy? Federighi, who in the past has waved off the suggestion. People need to understand that not everyone wants to sit in the big chair because of the responsibilities it requires, like kowtowing to politicians. It's easier to cultivate a friendly image for the fanbois if you don't wade into deep waters. I am certain that if Tim Cook left years ago, Apple would already be well on its way to spinning off multiple units, which whether you appreciate the integration or not, would be deleterious to the general Apple user's experience.

The folks clamoring for Scott Forstall or Tony Fadell should be aware by now that both individuals are by now two or three steps removed from their Apple tenures. CEO is not a plug-and-play position.
 
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.
Apple, don’t hire this guy!!!! Hellllllll naw!!! You’d the be type I’d want to get rid of!
 
Undoubtly the key piece of technology in Apples armour has been there silicon. The potential loss of Johny Srouji would be deeply concerning since he has been building this silicon empire within Apple since the A4 chip.
 
The apple walled garden was only sustainable for so long. The fact that there has been no hardware evolution with just the same iphones, ipads and smaller device hardware changes over the years, the brain drain and fast shifting landscape of tech due to AI is going to shift talent elsewhere. It's happening across the board in other work sectors also.
 
While partially true - intrinsic motivation is by far the best kind of motivation - not being paid what you think you're worth is a massive negative hygiene factor. And if you see your colleagues leave in large numbers due to pay, it will definitely be on your mind as well.

It's also harder to sell the idea - "we have a mission, the money you earn isn't that important" - when the company earns massive amounts.
I understand the individual's point of view, but...

it is not sustainable for a company to pay hundreds of millions of dollars to everyone who feels indispensable... (and perhaps much of the work is done by anonymous engineers/designers... who, logically, will want recognition proportional to the figures of those who take the credit) even with large profit margins. Perhaps it is a mistake to put them in promotional videos.

In the short/medium term, my hypothesis is that the bubble will burst and that many will try to take advantage now while they still can before inevitably returning to sustainable salary levels... or until AI renders them obsolete.

Final thought: I suppose the true big failure is the internal academy that was supposed to convey Jobs' values.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Omega Mac
The apple walled garden was only sustainable for so long. The fact that there has been no hardware evolution with just the same iphones, ipads and smaller device hardware changes over the years, the brain drain and fast shifting landscape of tech due to AI is going to shift talent elsewhere. It's happening across the board in other work sectors also.
I’d argue competitors hardware has largely followed the same iterative path. Except the phones have more screens and are more fragile and expensive.
 
I wonder if apple under cook has resulted in a poor work culture.

It’s odd that so many people are leaving (or considering it) even to the point Tim himself looks to be going. Something doesn’t seem right with unhappy staff. Has he recognised to leave before a perceived internal meltdown and get out at “the top?”
 
  • Like
Reactions: nt5672
As opposed to…..Samsung? Google? Maybe Meta if you count smart glasses, but that category is still pretty nascent.

This has honestly been a pretty boring decade for consumer technology. I don’t think Apple should get singled out.
That's because every company is spending tens of billions searching for the next iPhone / smartphone level product. They're never going to find it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: alfonsog
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.