Except, these aren't simple retail or lower and middle management employees, these are S.V.P.'s, executives, heads of major departments. Upper management at Apple has been rocky at best for the past 2-3 years. That is making a few nervous, especially stock holders/investors.
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 Director of Graphics Architecture Is Second Chip Executive Hired Away by AMD
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Except, these aren't simple retail or lower and middle management employees, these are S.V.P.'s, executives, heads of major departments. Upper management at Apple has been rocky at best for the past 2-3 years. That is making a few nervous, especially stock holders/investors.
Getting out. It's funny. I'm labeled "Paranoid", and "Stupid" by Elitist Mods in other threads. It's too late. Peter O. will be gone by Nov.
2013. The year of the Low End Plastic iPhone. Still wondering?
Maybe Apple employees are upset that their stock options are worthless since the current stock price is well below their exercise price, perhaps employees have lost confidence in their management, who knows if there's any truth to any of this.
Tim Cook, during his 60 Minutes interview, said something along the lines of "don't bet against us." Well, the market and your competitors have dragged your name, Apple Inc., as well as your valuation through the mud and straight into the crapper. Your move, Cook.
If AMD upgrades their leadership with former Apple execs, doesn't that potentially benefit Apple in the long run if AMD becomes a bigger player in the GPU market? The more competent component vendors Apple has, the better off they are if they can play one against the other, right?
If these people have insider knowledge of Apple's future product design and engineering plans, doesn't that potentially help them taylor GPUs suited to future Apple products?
The list of exiting SVPs is a bit intimidating, but any position's responsibilities that just get shifted to Jonathan Ive is fine by me. One of Apple's strengths has been the seamless interaction of hardware and software/OS. Having one man essentially in charge of both is not a bad thing if the guy is a creative design genius, which Ive appears to be.
Even though Cook might be more of a manager than an inspiration visionary, so long as Ive is on board Apple's mojo probably remains intact. If Ive ever leaves, though, it's probably over. I hope that every time he pines for jolly old England Apple backs up the Brinks armored truck and empties another load on him to stay.
If these people have insider knowledge of Apple's future product design and engineering plans, doesn't that potentially help them taylor GPUs suited to future Apple products?
The list of exiting SVPs is a bit intimidating, but any position's responsibilities that just get shifted to Jonathan Ive is fine by me. One of Apple's strengths has been the seamless interaction of hardware and software/OS. Having one man essentially in charge of both is not a bad thing if the guy is a creative design genius, which Ive appears to be.
Even though Cook might be more of a manager than an inspiration visionary, so long as Ive is on board Apple's mojo probably remains intact. If Ive ever leaves, though, it's probably over. I hope that every time he pines for jolly old England Apple backs up the Brinks armored truck and empties another load on him to stay.
Now that's funny, poor Gil was out of his league. He should have never left National Semi.
Perhaps Apple's BoD should hire Amelio and Sculley to serve as co-CEOs.
come on guys, this is another "Ron Johnson" do-over.
This gentleman move to AMD, then that's last we hear of him. Maybe 2 years later, we hear he gets moved again.
This gentleman move to AMD, then that's last we hear of him. Maybe 2 years later, we hear he gets moved again.
Ive can't stay at Apple for ever. He has to retire or die at some point. What then? You need someone to replace him. And as good as Jobs was I think Ive's replacement will be so so so so much harder to find then a Jobs replacement. I just hope this need for an Ive replacement happens a long long time into the future.
EBC firmware based cards
This is great news as we will continue to see video card upgrades with EBC firmware to work on all generations of the Mac Pro. EBC for those who don't know is both EFI32/64, where as Nvidia only supports EFI64.
This is great news as we will continue to see video card upgrades with EBC firmware to work on all generations of the Mac Pro. EBC for those who don't know is both EFI32/64, where as Nvidia only supports EFI64.
Adding to this. Bertrand left because the desktop OS as we know it has matured to the point where there's very few left to be done with it. Mobile and Cloud/Virtual computing is where its at now and will be for the foreseeable future.
People making a mountain out of a molehill.
Ive has a team under him. Surely they've learnt a whole lot about his taste and design principles over the past decades and have picked up a thing or two in the process. Plus even if he leaves he'll still have a consulting/advisory role i would imagine.
English language fail. In this context, anecdotal does not imply fabrication.
The problem here is that conclusions drawn from anecdotal evidence may have limited validity due to selection bias, small sample size or any other numbers of reasons.
Last edited:
It's not "lots" of people and nobody knows if it's more or less than othe tech companies.
Because Apple is under a magnifying glass it just seems that way when somebody leaves
Apple and it gets blown all out of proportion.
Many people don't realize that there are great opportunities for
daring individuals to take on the challenge of fixing a struggling company.
Good points, all. Yes, CTO (surprisingly) was/is a job title. In fact, I got carried away as I simply wanted to list a few recent top level guys who have left. In the process I learned quite a bit more (as you can tell).
I believe the issue most are concerned about is the fact that most of these changes have been occurring recently. There was less under Jobs' direction (although certainly it happened). I don't know the reasons (cause and effect), but it seems close to and after Jobs' tragic passing a lot of upper management shifted, left, etc. We can only guess.
Given a choice, a stock holder/investor should choose these S.V.P's leaving. I do not think any of these management types did the work that resulted in the iPhone and the iPad ( Excluding Ive )
Do you know how many senior people have left BMW, Sony, Glaxo, Shell, Audi ??? No!
But I bet that they have people at all levels leaving just as much as apple. However Apple news has become "entertainment" and now every hire/fire or leaving is like an episode in a soap opera. It's getting ridiculous now.
This is just normal for a company of that size. This is not a start up, it's a 30 yr old multi billion dollar international company. Does any one really think that companies of that size DO NOT have frequent staff changes? Even at high levels?
I think the secretive siege mentality that apple has is going to need a rethink going foreword. They are going to have to talk a little bit more and forget about surprising the market all the time. I understand why they do it but if you pay people in stock and expect people to buy your stock as a sound investment your going to have to look at managing your share price properly. It's not a game any more. This lack of a road map has cut nearly 50% off the share price.
Apple need to play the "press" game now.
But I bet that they have people at all levels leaving just as much as apple. However Apple news has become "entertainment" and now every hire/fire or leaving is like an episode in a soap opera. It's getting ridiculous now.
This is just normal for a company of that size. This is not a start up, it's a 30 yr old multi billion dollar international company. Does any one really think that companies of that size DO NOT have frequent staff changes? Even at high levels?
I think the secretive siege mentality that apple has is going to need a rethink going foreword. They are going to have to talk a little bit more and forget about surprising the market all the time. I understand why they do it but if you pay people in stock and expect people to buy your stock as a sound investment your going to have to look at managing your share price properly. It's not a game any more. This lack of a road map has cut nearly 50% off the share price.
Apple need to play the "press" game now.
While the stock may be ~40% less than the peak, there are many "real" (meaning long term investors) who have benefited from their foresight.
Lets take the average 1999 price of the Dow Jones, Nasdaq, and AAPL stock and compare to today's Friday closing price.
According to wolfram alpha
The Dow Jones is up 58% since 1999, the Nasdaq is up 45%, and Apple is up 3716%.
One is not like the other two.
Smart people invested when they saw the Bondi Blue iMac. Even with a 40% loss off the the peak 6 months ago, they are still up 3716% which is incredible.
I'd like to know what other companies have a 3716% increase in stock value in the last 13 years.
Put in simplest form if you invested $1000 @$40 for 25 shares in 1999. The stock split twice.
That $1000 would have been worth $70,000 if you sold at @$700
Or over $39,000 today, which is still amazing compared to the general market.
Which would be Nasdaq $1450 or Dow Jones $1580. Which WallStreet usually considers good.
Why does today's stock price matter? If you're a long term investor and have faith (which you should) in the companies you invest?