That's an interesting analogy you mention there. Sculley to Cook. Are they any different?
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 to Obsolete Select 2009 to 2011 Macs at End of Year
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That's an interesting analogy you mention there. Sculley to Cook. Are they any different?
One nearly killed Apple.
The other led Apple to becoming the largest, most profitable company in the world.
You tell me.
[doublepost=1488054872][/doublepost]
And then there are cases like the 2008 MacBook that lost OS update support after just 4 years. Last supported OS was 10.7.x Lion.
Exactly, the point being that OS support and VIN/OBS status have no correlation. VIN simply means discontinued 5 years, no hardware support except in California and Turkey. OBS means discontinued 7 years, no hardware support. Software updates might stop before a machine even makes the VIN list, or might continue even after it's OBS.
I'm not sure obsolete is the right word, he's just out of touch with Apple's mission. He's a great supply chain manager, and he's taken Apple to incredible efficiency at churning out and profiting greatly... on a deteriorating product line.
The problem, is that Apple is now focused on profits, rather than UX. Make a great UX, and profits will follow. Chase great profits, and the users will eventually go elsewhere... and the profits with them.
Unfortunately, Cook isn't that unusual in the tech industry. He's just not exceptional and properly focused like Jobs was.
And, no, Cook didn't lead Apple to much of anything. He simply didn't fail too terribly to screw up the momentum Jobs built... yet.
Hard to say. Apple seems to be right on track with where they were in the early to mid-90s. They are just starting with incredible brand image and a ton of cash in the bank. But, they are headed in a early-90s direction... it will just take quite a long time, this time.
You might not want to update beyond Sierra for some time anyway. Apple is switching file-systems for the next OS, which will likely turn out to be a royal mess. I'd wait at least a year before moving from Sierra.
The way things have been going, we might all end up moving to Windows 11.
I don't know how much cash Apple had in the mid-90s, but I do know it wasn't $246B.
No kidding. I've been a Mac evangelist for nearly 30 years, but I'm far more worried about their future now than I was in the mid-90s. Back then, I was telling people to buy stock... now I'm not even sure I'd recommend a Mac anymore to someone who isn't already invested in the platform.
That's somewhat irrelevant, aside from prolonging the agony. If Apple doesn't get back to caring about UX and making the best products... a company of their scale could erode that pretty quickly once the emoji fans pick the next flavor of the month.
It's not irrelevant at all. At the very least, the company is around to make products whether you like them or not. It beats extinction where nothing is being made.
I'm not sure if you're following. What I'm saying is that Apple's business and product design/innovation is much like it was back when they were 'doomed' in the early-to-mid 90's. If you're not running a company correctly, it doesn't matter much what your starting point is... it will just affect the amount of time it takes to fall.
BTW, They had about $1B cash on hand back then, which in scale, is quite a bit. The difference is that Steve Jobs was still alive to come to their rescue. They weren't really as doomed as the press thought back then (though certainly headed there eventually, if not corrected), and they aren't doing as well today as the press thinks either.
Their current success ≠ their future, if they don't correct.
In a way, Apple has become Gibson of the 21st Century. It's amazing what a CEO can do to a company.
There was a time in the history of the US that we (generally) made certain things better than almost every other country. Our premier brands were as follows:
Steinway.
Gibson.
Fender.
Apple.
New England Digital.
Boeing.
Lockheed.
General Dynamics.
General Electric.
Belden.
Northrop Grumman.
Westinghouse.
-And not a single one of these companies ever made a watchband.
Yes, I really don't follow what you're saying. They just had the most successful quarter in the history of the computer. You're telling me that if this current success continues it ≠ a future???
This is what Tim has done for Apple:
Again, I really don't follow how this is a picture of doom.
Steve Jobs himself stated at the All Things D Conference that they "were 90 days from going bankrupt." Apple is certainly nowhere near in such dire straits today.
As I've said before, you may not like what Apple is selling now but it doesn't mean they are doomed. Sales and profits seem to indicate lots of other people are happy with what Apple is selling. All those who call for the ouster of Tim has to careful of what they wish for. We could end up with someone like John Sculley who truly did nearly bring Apple down.
I don't think any of us are expecting Apple is just going to close the doors next week. My point is that record sales have little to do with where Apple will be in ~3-5 years, other than that they'll have a bunch of cash to burn through and weather tough times, giving some time for correction.
Here's Jobs on what Apple is doing wrong:
And, yes, I'm quite unhappy with Apple's direction, while others clearly aren't (right at the moment, anyway). I haven't stopped buying Apple *yet* either. I'm also a long-time tech industry person who has also worked in and with creatives for decades. The problem is that Apple's new excited consumers, are pop-culture enthusiasts who just want the latest emoji. How stable do you think that new audience will be for the future, once we've all left?
In the end (or in the big picture), I'm not sure I see that much difference between Tim and John... in fact, I might prefer John. Both are business 101 types who did much as would be expected in leading a tech company. The problem is, that kind of business wisdom ends up not actually being very wise. It makes the numbers, short-term, sacrificing the long-term. It's pretty much what's wrong with big business (not just Apple).
Yes, it's going to take a while for the impact to be felt. But, when it hits, it's also going to be hard to turn around. And Tim ain't Steve. (And, computing devices, operating systems, software eco-systems, etc. are more complex than a can of soda.)
They're not doomed, but their direction is a mistaken one. The company has so much money that any possible end to Apple would have a very, very long tail. It could take 10 years. Or they could simply turn the whole thing around and make professional products again. All they need to do is build machines that directly compete with an HP-Z840 or a Boxx. These are workstations, not lifestyle stations. And they're thick and heavy.
I wouldn't mind them only "innovating" when it comes to watches, watchbands, and thin, portless phones, and other lifestyle products, but they need to offer a diverse set of tools. Even a set for professionals. And I don't mean an iThrottle or a ThinBook-throttle.
I wouldn't mind them only "innovating" when it comes to watches, watchbands, and thin, portless phones, and other lifestyle products, but they need to offer a diverse set of tools. Even a set for professionals. And I don't mean an iThrottle or a ThinBook-throttle.
Yes, with that much cash, they'd have to mess up big. But, they are also a MUCH bigger scale operation. It would take time, no doubt.
But, IMO, the problem is far bigger than hardware. My main concern is on the software front. The quality just isn't there anymore, nor the focus on UX. Meanwhile, Windows has been improving. They are a way off from crossing paths.... but on the current trajectories...
I've worked with Macs for 30+ years now, and I've spent more time mucking with our family systems in the last couple years, than the previous years, combined. And, a bunch of what they've killed is core eco-system stuff the family depended on, and stuff that made the Mac more productive. As I find replacements, I need Mac less and less.
I used to enthusiastically tell anyone who asked my advice to go out and get a Mac. I've become much more hesitant. It isn't a good trend.
But, certainly... the hardware too. I'm hoping my iPhone SE lasts a good long time. I might buy a new iPad in the near future (to replace my iPad 2, which is mostly useless now). I was going to buy a MBP... we'll see in the fall or early next year, but I think I won't touch the current mess. They have no pro options, so I might consider a Hackintosh (one of my friends is pushing me that direction).
I probably wouldn't update it regardless. Simply because the machine is getting older and as you alluded to, there's not enough upside. Worst case scenario, you can always test it and roll it back if needed. Apple will list what machines are eligible for OS updates but always worth reviewing others experiences first.
Last edited:
The difference between John Sculley and Tim Cook is. With John, you didn't know if Apple (along with all their products, software and hardware) was going to be in existence any more next week. With Tim, I have no fears of them disappearing in "~3-5 years".
I believe that Tim is carrying Steve's plan as best he could. Let's not forget, it was Steve who made the PCs are trucks analogy.
I also really don't understand the animosity towards emojis that you have. If you don't like them, don't use them.
The problem I've found with that, is that there are more and more security threats to be concerned with, and more software that is requiring the latest (or fairly recent) OS. So, if you can just sit stagnant, and keep internet use to a minimum, I suppose that might work... but it's getting harder each year.
Two of the most troublesome Macs I've ever owned were a 2001 iBook and 2011 MacBook Pro. Both made during the Steve era.
Yes, I agree there... though Apple wasn't in nearly as bad of shape as you'd think from the press. A company of Apple's size (back then) with $1B in the bank? It was fairly unheard of. Yes, they absolutely had to change (like I think they do now). However, being only a computer maker, with the threat from M$ around core software and such, yes, it was a delicate situation. Apple has more options now, for sure, given their position.
What I'm saying... is that the type of product and business decisions are being made in a similar (mistaken) way. And, that if Apple doesn't get back to UX and quality as Job #1, they will eventually fall. (And, while I don't know how long... it seems to be accelerating.)
Maybe as best he can, I don't know. I just know he's failing. He doesn't seem to have a vision. He hasn't kept Apple's core values #1. He seems obsessed with profits and pie charts (instead of common sense). He isn't listening to the customer base (which Jobs didn't always do either... but again, he had actual vision). He seems to be, somewhat, listening to 'industry experts' given some of Apple's moves. He doesn't seem to have the same influence over the investors that Jobs did (which is crucial to make innovative moves w/o them freaking out), because such moves are often not in alignment with 'tech industry wisdom'. He's let many of the core talents on the Mac side (at least) slip away, or be pulled to iOS, and hasn't replaced them. He's made horrible decisions, like pulling out features to push services (ex: iTunes family sharing vs Apple Music).
re: trucks analogy - Notice that Jobs said trucks will remain. Cook seems to be looking at that pie chart changing, and forgetting about trucks. In the big eco-system, it isn't that simple. To carry the analogy forward, what if Ford said... hey, look, the truck category is getting smaller... lets dump trucks and just focus on sub-compact cars (oh, and people don't need cargo space or storage anymore, as they are just bopping around the city... so we'll get rid of trunks and cargo space).
Or, maybe even more accurate... if the car companies said, look, our racing programs and sports cars really don't sell all that many units, or bring a big profit return, I think we'll cancel them. If you know about cars, you'll know how devastating that would be. I see Apple doing this with their pro/creative user-base and the Mac line.
I'm fine with emojis (don't use them much), but when the are your big innovations....
And, was that because of software, or hardware? Yes, Apple has always had issues from time to time, especially in hardware. And, their cloud-services were horrible, even under Jobs. But, the focus was on UX (even when they failed). That just isn't the case anymore.
I don't have any issues with the UX. I've happily upgraded to each new release of OS X/macOS as they became available and I've found each to be better than the last. Of course, this is all a matter of personal taste. I basically keep all my Macs running 24/7 and only restart occasionally to clear up some memory paging/virtual memory or because of an OS update.
Here's that Steve said about Macs:
"If I were running Apple, I would milk the Macintosh for all it's worth -- and get busy on the next great thing. The PC wars are over. Done. Microsoft won a long time ago."
-- Fortune, Feb. 19, 1996
I believe that iOS was the "next big thing" to Steve and was what he was speaking about at the All Things D conference. It's also why I believe Tim is carrying out Steve's plan as best he could. The fact is, PC sales have been steadily declining.
Macs are still being produced and sold. macOS continues to be regularly updated. Apple is enjoying record profits on the back of record iPhone and Mac sales. I do not see any doomsday scenario for Apple any time in the foreseeable future.
Last edited:
The problem with Jobs' analogy of trucks and PCs, is that a truck continues to be the best selling vehicle in America, with SUVs close behind.
Many people love vehicles that combine multiple purposes.
Well, as I've stated earlier, PC sales have been on a steady trend downward for the last 5 years.
The problem is that Cook is just a brilliant numbers guy. No inspired spark, no burning motivation other than producing great numbers. Apple needs to find the next visionary and let them take the reins; of course that'll never happen in this numbers-only driven corporate world.
I don't know how anyone would know what motivates him...
Anyway, who would you replace him with? It's not as if firing him would bring Steve Jobs back.
How many companies that have ever existed repeatedly churns out "next great things" every few years?
Does Steinway, Gibson, or Fender introduce new, never seen before musical instruments every few years?
Does Boeing, Lockheed, or Northrop Grumman come up with new dilithium crystal driven intergalactic spacecrafts every few years?
A company doesn't have to repeatedly reinvent the wheel to be successful or great. Apple is already ahead of most by being successful in multiple business categories.
Sure, Tim Cook is not Steve Jobs. Who is? Anyone who is looking for another Steve Jobs will almost surely never be pleased with anyone else at the helm of Apple.
UX, as a whole, IS NOT a personal taste. I'm not talking so much about silly looks, like flat-design, though that can have an impact on UX. Apple spent much of their early years doing study after study on UX, and implementing that into the Mac OX (and producing guidelines for software devs). Now, Apple is one of the most prolific breakers of what they learned early on.
And, then careless, purposeful, buggy software and services don't make the above any better. I've got a whole folder full of poor UI choices and problems Apple has introduced over the last several years. If I ever get time, I'm going to start a series of blog posts on them.
For example, try changing the email address of an Apple ID sometime. Or, consider Spotlight from several years back to where it is now. Or, look at the UI and feature mis-match between the same app on iOS/macOS. Or, in going 'flat' the move from the use of color and meaningful icons/metaphors to nondescript icons and lack of color (which greatly slows recognition). Or, while I don't agree on everything, this article points out a number of good points and principals Apple is now breaking:
http://www.theverge.com/2015/11/16/9743996/apple-designer-interview-bruce-tog-tognazzini-don-norman
Quite possibly. And, for some fairly good percentage of people, it's quite possible they might switch to iPhone, iPad, etc. Still, I've met few of them who only use these devices, at least in North America. And, even those who personally do, often use a desktop/laptop at work (i.e.: they can get by in their personal lives watching Netflix, listening to some music, and maybe a bit of browsing, etc.).
Also, next big thing doesn't mean the end of the previous. The truck analogy is a good example there. And, there's the problem. Tim sees big pie slice, and determines to shift all effort to said big pie slice. That's dumb... it's an eco-system.
Yea, that thought was going through the back of my mind as I watched it. I'm guessing Job's 'off the top of head' stat there, was pretty far off... unless you live in SF & Bay area.
Well said, especially that last phrase. Wall Street is fundamentally at opposition with innovation and long-term well-being. One of the brilliant things about Jobs, was his ability to play them like a fiddle (and in so doing, be able to do things with Apple that a typical tech company can't get away with). Tim, on the other hand, seems to be doing just what they like... and that works great, until it doesn't.
[doublepost=1488173858][/doublepost]
I'm not looking for that. Apple didn't even do that. That's why when Steve died, and Tim took over, I figured enough of Steve's ideals were baked into Apple. I was writing against this idea that Apple would be in trouble w/o Steve. Then, Apple started shifting away from core principals. And, trying too hard to 'innovate' and screwing up. And, making fools of themselves trying to market it.
I don't need rapid innovation, so much as stability and lack of rapid deterioration.