Save it. The face of the company is the person who sees the entire picture. Ivy's oversight of a variety of Design engineers [M.E., EE, ChemE,etc] gives him far more credit than a industrial design degree holder should ever have.
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 COO Tim Cook as Possible Steve Jobs Replacement?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Save it. The face of the company is the person who sees the entire picture. Ivy's oversight of a variety of Design engineers [M.E., EE, ChemE,etc] gives him far more credit than a industrial design degree holder should ever have.
Isn't this what Jobs has been doing more recently? I think the golden days have already passed and you're probably right, number crunching is now the priority goal.
The one common denominator in Apple's success has been Steve Jobs. Steve left in 1985 and then the company started in a downward spiral. In 1997 (when Apple was near death), Steve returned and all of a sudden, the company has been profitable.
I think when Steve steps down, things are definitely going to change. It is hard to say how they will change. I imagine that Apple products will begin to look a little different (then again you have Johnny Ive). Who knows if Apple will be successful. Lets just hope that things stay the same for the foreseeable future.
I think when Steve steps down, things are definitely going to change. It is hard to say how they will change. I imagine that Apple products will begin to look a little different (then again you have Johnny Ive). Who knows if Apple will be successful. Lets just hope that things stay the same for the foreseeable future.
No lets hope that apple pulls the wool off their eyes and releases what the people want.
Jobs needs to step down - to paranoid, to worried about the PRO using cheaper machines, so what Jobs, you will sell MORE not less, computers.
And Ive's should be the "main" man.
Time for JOBS to step down and let the real marketing people run the ship.
Disneyland, EPCOT, and Disney productions sans-Walt is a good example.
Wrong, Ive's is the face of Apple not Jobs - Jobs job is to be paranoid and not allow PRO users to have a cheap solution, Apple TV with NO DVR, iPods with no delete and DRM and one way street with music.
Ive's is the face - lets just hope he can remove these barriors.
But those are peanutes, ases under the sleve to have against competitors. What about the iMac, the iPod, the 12" Powerbook, the Pismo, the OSX itself, Logic, Final Cut Pro, iTunes Store... iPhone.
You need a creative mind behind all that. One thing is to have the product and features, another thing is to make it something.
I work with the Philips 3D WOWvx displays, the screens are great but everything depends on the content as well where I market them. Now, I have huge investors and if I am not here the business disapear. You need some one behind everything.
I just don't like being lied to, that's all. Quality rant on your part though!
Thanks a lot on the rant bit
None of us like being lied to, and it took an example of executive subterfuge to make me understand the world of business, and more importantly, never to fall in love with a company or indeed its technology.
Anybody remember Bob Palmer and his ousting of Ken Olson and subsequent sale of Digital to Compaq?? He told us all much the same things.....
Not quite. Not even close, really. When Steve left Apple in 1985 the company was a mess, organizationally and financially. The Mac looked like a failure. That's why he recruited John Scully -- to right the ship. Under Scully, Apple had its most profitable years to that time. The downward spiral didn't start until the mid-1990s, under Spindler and Amelio. The return to profitability didn't happen all of sudden when Steve returned -- it took several years.
It will be a sad sad day when Steve leaves....hes my hero....
I hope not. He's not a very good person.
But it hasn't quite been two decades. Steve Jobs returned to Apple in 1997, and the hardware since then has been what revitalized Apple. Steve's original run with Apple in the 80s was actually not particularly profitable, and the Apple of the late 80s/early 90s was a nightmare.Sure Tim Cook would be a great leader of Apple, but to call him a Steve Jobs replacement is impossible. Apple will continue to move forward after Steve as stepped down, but we all know that things will never be the same.
As a shareholder I am glad to see that Apple is moving on and looking down the road to replace the one thing that has made Apple, Apple for the last two decades. However, as a 'mac addict' I dread the day when Steve steps down.
Basicly this move is good for business but will deffinetly hurt Apple's popular image.
Long live Apple and Steve Jobs.
And let's not forget that 1997 was also the year Microsoft made a $150 million investment in Apple. I'm quite sure that helped to save Apple.
It didn't. The investment was a token, and in exchange for the settlement of a lawsuit. Apple had over a billion dollars cash on hand at the time. Microsoft's announcing that they were committing to at least five more years of Office for the Mac probably had a greater impact. But the biggest impact was the new products. Nothing beats having products to sell that people actually want to buy.
You are correct that there are many very brilliant people working for Apple. However to diminish the value of Steve Jobs is simply naive. The reason Apple exists then and now and the reason Apple is admired world-wide is fully the result of Steve Jobs doing his job better than anyone, twice.
I agree
Sadly, I have to agree.
A general strategy I would put forward is to have every product something like a measure of how fair it is. This can be achieved by having a company to declare, which goals have been maximised internally, effectively.
E.g. to build a product as cheap as possible and to sell it deliberately as high as possible, allied with very selective advertisement, close to deceiving a potential buyer, would carry a very low fairness rating.
Also, making a strategic decision like, our customers like our design, and there is no similar choice from another competitor, so lets determine that point of the customers utility function, such that he is still willing to buy our product instead of something different, even if does not match with our previous history and aims, and we know that very well, would be rated as highly unfair.
Apple has steadily been moving into the unfairness direction with respect, towards its customers.
So, it is not only about energy efficiency but also about fairness, which can be removed by getting rid of information deficits.
Sadly, I have to agree.
A general strategy I would put forward is to have every product something like a measure of how fair it is. This can be achieved by having a company to declare, which goals have been maximised internally, effectively.
E.g. to build a product as cheap as possible and to sell it deliberately as high as possible, allied with very selective advertisement, close to deceiving a potential buyer, would carry a very low fairness rating.
Also, making a strategic decision like, our customers like our design, and there is no similar choice from another competitor, so lets determine that point of the customers utility function, such that he is still willing to buy our product instead of something different, even if does not match with our previous history and aims, and we know that very well, would be rated as highly unfair.
Apple has steadily been moving into the unfairness direction with respect, towards its customers.
So, it is not only about energy efficiency but also about fairness, which can be removed by getting rid of information deficits.
I don't think STEVE JOBS (all caps shouting intentional.. steve made me do it that way) would allow a rising star in Apple to shine brighter than himself. If one did arise he or she would be forced out of the nest and probably go on to become the CEO of another company.
Release what people want, who are you, you think because you want something, you speak for everyone else, if people were to listen to people like you, they would be out of business.
Best of luck to both Tim and Steve! It's about time that Steve stepped down, for the good of the company and his own. Yes, AAPL will take a serious hit in the short term, but 10 years from now we will all be fretting about Tim Cook's emminent departure from Apple's helm, mark my word. Tim will do just fine.
I think the whole executive team at Apple is top rate.
What are the thoughts on someone from the outside coming in?
I'm not asking if this is a crazy question. But rather are there any likely candidates?
What are the thoughts on someone from the outside coming in?
I'm not asking if this is a crazy question. But rather are there any likely candidates?
Depends on who they interview and who'd be up for the job. I'm sure there's plenty of adequate outsiders who could take the job. And really, it's just a job. You don't have to be superhuman to be Apple's CEO.