Apple Trails Google, Amazon, and Microsoft Among Ideal Employers in Recent Survey

[drewyboy]

@deanthedev correct me if I'm wrong, but drewboy seemed to have missed the obvious sarcasm in your quote.

Drewboy, what makes you feel a CEO needs to move a needle with consumers? Good to employees - yup that's CEO responsibility. Good to stock holders - also CEO responsibility. Move a needle with consumers - uh, not so much. Here's the thing. Generally speaking, consumers don't care about or even know about Tim Cook. We know and some of care about the CEO of Apple, but we aren't average consumers.

A CEO's job is to provide direction to the company while maximizing shareholder value. The the latter is self explanatory. The direction encompasses employees and consumers. Direction includes innovation for consumers and security (or feeling of) for employees. If a company stagnates, people don't buy their stuff. What causes stagnation? Poor or no direction, or at worst, wrong direction. As for the employee, they pick up on all this stuff. Revenues/sales decreasing, isolated and/or out of touch management team.

A good CEO recognizes those three responsibilities. Shareholders, employees, and customers. Jobs did a great job with shareholders and customers. His philosophy being if I take care of my customers, in return they'll reward my shareholders. Customers first. I'd say his weakness was his borderline abusiveness towards his employees. Tim is shareholders first but to the point that he is neglecting his customers. Trying to wow us with animated emoji is pathetic and stop sacrificing functionality for fashion. There is absolutely no reason for the MBP to be as thin as it is.

At the end of the day, the CEO is the face of the company. The direction they set, impacts all aspects of the company which includes the products that are designed and produced for their customers. Jobs never took his hands off the products.

 

[69Mustang]

A CEO's job is to provide direction to the company while maximizing shareholder value. The the latter is self explanatory. The direction encompasses employees and consumers. Direction includes innovation for consumers and security (or feeling of) for employees. If a company stagnates, people don't buy their stuff. What causes stagnation? Poor or no direction, or at worst, wrong direction. As for the employee, they pick up on all this stuff. Revenues/sales decreasing, isolated and/or out of touch management team.

A good CEO recognizes those three responsibilities. Shareholders, employees, and customers. Jobs did a great job with shareholders and customers. His philosophy being if I take care of my customers, in return they'll reward my shareholders. Customers first. I'd say his weakness was his borderline abusiveness towards his employees. Tim is shareholders first but to the point that he is neglecting his customers. Trying to wow us with animated emoji is pathetic and stop sacrificing functionality for fashion. There is absolutely no reason for the MBP to be as thin as it is.

At the end of the day, the CEO is the face of the company. The direction they set, impacts all aspects of the company which includes the products that are designed and produced for their customers. Jobs never took his hands off the products.

Math doesn't support your vision of who Cook is. Neither do any other arguments for that matter. You mentioned shareholders, employees, and customers. Shareholders are definitely happier since Apple now pays quarterly dividends. Employees, if Glassdoor rating is to be believed, are happy with Tim at the helm. Customers consistently rate Apple's products and customer service either the best or one of the best in pretty much every measurable survey category. They also consistently buy Apple's products and services thus increasing Apple's revenue and consequently making Apple's stockholder happy. All the while Cook has increased the social and environmental stature of Apple.

So like I said, the arguments you're putting forth aren't arguments about a good CEO. If you're going to make a subjective argument that you don't like some of the things he's done. Okay, fine. That should not be confused with an objective evaluation of the job he's done.

 

[a.gomez]

I would rather work on the Surface over the Mac right now. They stuck in 2010

 

[PJivan]

Yes, I did work for Apple Corp and left because, shocker, there are better places to work. Did you work for Apple? Sounds to me like you're an armchair employee.
[doublepost=1507742857][/doublepost]
I did work for Apple Corporate. My point stands - there is no typical $500 off on top of the regular discount. A promo is different. You made it seem like it is normal (i.e. at any time one chooses) to get $500 off a mac on top of the regular discount. So, calm down.

You just didn’t. Stop pretending, maybe you worked for a vendor...if you did you would know how it works and you are miles off

 

[alexgowers]

I wouldn't want to work for any of them! Apple internally sounds like a cult, google has diversity issues that result in them correcting misogynistic behaviour but not also a program to reign in being offended by it! Google have taken equality and screwed it up so badly, it's a toxic environment to work in! Amazon, might be good to work for, I don't know but the company is systematically destroying and undercutting all areas of commerce using devious techniques that they are borderline evil IMO.

 

[JohnnyCanadian]

I wonder what's the benefit for working for Apple. Free mac computers? Iphones?

If it's anything like when I worked for Apple (1991-1993) you were able to purchase one Mac per year at actual cost. My final year I purchased a Quadra 660AV, which listed at around $2800 CDN. I think I paid around $700 or $800? It was an amazing discount. Yeah, I know, I should have either gone for the 840AV or stuck it out for a few more months and picked up a Power Macintosh 8100/80AV.

Previous to that I had a part-time gig doing work for ARPP (Apple Research Partnership Program) while I was finishing my first degree. We would spend a minimum of eight hours per week developing custom applications for faculties looking for vertical solutions that simply didn't exist on any platform. For that, although we weren't directly paid, we received one Mac of our choice at no cost, per year. My final one in 1991 was a Mac IIci ... hell of a bargain, given what they were selling for back then!

 

[theheadguy]

You just didn’t. Stop pretending, maybe you worked for a vendor...if you did you would know how it works and you are miles off

LOL! There are better places to pretend to work at. You must know of them since Apple is apparently on your list.

 

[PJivan]

LOL! There are better places to pretend to work at. You must know of them since Apple is apparently on your list.

Then just don’t! Or you want me to believe your were not able to understand your own benefits? Not sure what's worse.

 

[iName]

The benefit is you get $500 off an iPhone or Mac once every 3 years. That can be paired with 25% off once a year, 15% off 3x a year or 10% off anytime.

The discount is actually pretty abysmal if you’re a retail employee.

 

[niun]

It's been a few years since I was a full Apple bod rather than a contracter but the stock options and epp store discounts were pretty incredible. Not sure if that changed at all but I did notice a massive culture shift and a general drop in motivation over the past 6 years.

 

[PizzaBoxStyle]

In today’s workplace Psychopaths are no joke. I’ve had dealings with more than a few over the years. IMO, “Snakes in Suits” should be mandatory reading for anyone entering the workforce today.

Awesome! I'm going to check that book out!

 

[Leguna24]

I love it when my boss is never there too.

But seriously I bet Tim is a lot nicer than Steve was to Apple employees. However I think Steve “ got the job done” more so than Tim.

Apple has been doing pretty well after Steve's departure, what do you think?

 

[0098386]

in addition to its progressive stance on diversity and social issues

To many of us who understand these issues, we read "progressive" as "destructive". Moreover, Apple was soliciting donations on the iTunes Store for the Southern Poverty Law Center, a group that has personally slandered people I know - and that I _know_ to be free of hate - as being a "hate group".

Besides, most people I know working at Apple are miserable, both with the hours and their overwhelming aspects of control.

I'm glad to not be working there, and am easing my way out of the entire Apple ecosystem... and I know I'm not the only one in the Silicon Valley. (Indeed, it is a popular subject these days around here.)

What a bizarre post.

“To many of us that understand these issues”. The right choice of word here, because if you said “most” you’d be wrong. As most people are progressive (if we’re using ‘left wing’ as vernacular for progressive) these days. The US voting system is such that traditionally left wing areas are giving less voting power, as (IIRC) no Republican president has won the popular vote for decades now - feel free to correct that. I’m not American so I don’t keep an eye on the details there.

And well, most of us do consider the SPLC to be “a good egg”. They were the ones that labelled online hate groups as such, taking the wind out of their sail. I’m interested in who these people are that SPLC said were bad. Because as I say they’re usually on the ball.

(Suddenly I’m reminded of people that claim to be friends of Nigel Farage claim “oooh he isn’t racist or a mean person”. Sometimes those too close to people are a little too biased or confused)

And interesting ending point there. As someone that works in tech in Europe, (I’m off to Kyiv later today) there seems to be an ever increasing numeber of people using Apple. Certainly up from when I first started out in the early 2000’s. I wonder which one of us Apples sales data matches? Surely you understand what anecdotal evidence is?
[doublepost=1507794755][/doublepost]

Apple has been doing pretty well after Steve's departure, what do you think?

Exactly. I do wish people would stop making such daft claims. Apple are doing great after Steve. Everyone would say “oh just give it till 201X when Steve’s ideas run out”. Thing is they just keep adding to that year.

Just anecdotal but I’m seeing a pattern amongst claimed right wing voters and “Apple is doomed!” types. A single circle Venn diagram.

 

[wigby]

OK, there is NOTHING special about Tim Cook. NOTHING.

Apple had one of the greatest CEOs ever, because he was good at the money side AND the vision and taste sides. Apple was an extension of his will.

Tim is merely riding on the foundation Steve laid down, a foundation that ANY CEO that wasn't completely incompetent could have sustained indefinitely. Those CEOs are always good with the money-side.

What Apple needs now is a visionary, and neither Tim Cook, nor Jony Ive, nor Craig Federighi are it.

/rant

On topic: I would've KILLED to work at Apple 6 years ago, because I considered the products they were making to be the absolute, unquestionable best.

I still would work at Apple today, but only if the pay was way, way above average.

You sound like someone talking about Steve Jobs in 1984. Most people thought he was arrogant, got too much attention and was riding on the success of the Apple 2 for years with only the failed Macintosh to show for it. And after all that, no one really knew what Steve Jobs stood for besides great products. That is enough to make a company great but it's not really enough to make a great change in the world. Cook's ambitions are set a little higher so there is every chance that he fails but at least it's more exciting than another new iPod release.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

Yes, you asked a question. The you proceeded to provide an argument against what you'd already assumed was my opinion. The answer to your question was no btw, that's not what I think. So your argument was moot. Also, I don't think you were being demeaning or sarcastic. I do think you employed a cheap debate tactic that I wasn't going to engage so I shut it down tout de suite. You've already framed the evaluation of what a good CEO is to suit your feelings about Jobs and Cook. At the same time dismissing things that go contrary to your opinion. Judge the CEO based on A, B, and C, but ignore/dismiss what they did regarding D, E, and F. If I can only judge the CEO based on the criteria you narrowly define, then I can only come to a conclusion (you hope) similar to yours. See, you're really not looking for an answer. You're looking for agreement. Obviously I don't agree.

I personally think Cook is a better CEO than Jobs, not on par him. He's done things I agree with. He's done things I don't agree with. Evaluating him using the criteria I use to judge a CEO... yeah Cook wins.

We'll just have to disagree then. I think the above is BS because we've had "arguments" before, you've caught my mistakes before. And when you were correct I always responded with a hat tip, correction or apology, as appropriate. At least when it comes to our back and forth I don't think I've ever shown myself to be an ideologue that keeps arguing my side in the face of refutable facts or demonstrated weak logic.

You accuse me of looking or agreement but seems you are looking for agreement yourself or you would have answered my question properly about why you believe Cook is a better than Jobs and why my take is misguided rather than abruptly moved to shut it down. Instead you give me the gobbledygook of your first response and now this. If you make a blanket statement like you did you should back it up with reasoned thought or facts.

 

[69Mustang]

We'll just have to disagree then. I think the above is BS because we've had "arguments" before, you've caught my mistakes before. And when you were correct I always responded with a hat tip, correction or apology, as appropriate. At least when it comes to our back and forth I don't think I've ever shown myself to be an ideologue that keeps arguing my side in the face of refutable facts or demonstrated weak logic.

You accuse me of looking or agreement but seems you are looking for agreement yourself or you would have answered my question properly about why you believe Cook is a better than Jobs and why my take is misguided rather than abruptly moved to shut it down. Instead you give me the gobbledygook of your first response and now this. If you make a blanket statement like you did you should back it up with reasoned thought or facts.

Well since I didn't make a blanket statement, not sure what there is to back up. I asked a question. groove-agent stated he thought Jobs got the job done more so than Cook. I asked, "Based on what, revisionist history?"

There's no blanket statement there. It's a question. Could have been answered with a yes, no, maybe, here's my reasoning, etc. What I didn't do is ask the question, and then proceed to tell him/her why their thoughts on Jobs/Cook based on presumed revised history is incorrect. The only blanket statements and presumptions have been yours. Not sure what we're disagreeing about here. It's pretty clear that you 1. Asked if I thought Jobs and Cook were on par as CEO's. 2. Proceeded to answer that question yourself as if I stated they were. 3. Provided reasons why you thought they weren't equal even though I never said they were. 4. Tried to narrow the parameters of a good CEO to suit your narrative.

Whether you agree with the above or not is immaterial to the discussion and not a concern to me. Now, if you'd like to discuss my answer to your original question, by all means, let's do so. I definitely think Cook's a better CEO than Jobs. Jobs was the right CEO for the time. Cooks was a better CEO to take Apple forward... and better overall.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

Well since I didn't make a blanket statement, not sure what there is to back up. I asked a question. groove-agent stated he thought Jobs got the job done more so than Cook. I asked, "Based on what, revisionist history?"

There's no blanket statement there. It's a question.

Yes, it's a question. It's phrased in such a way a reasonable person could read it as a rhetorical question, which I did. Maybe you did not intend that to be the case. I did calculate that in my response. It's why I did not make a declarative conclusion in my original response to you -- wrote in first sentence: "...are you suggesting that TC is on par with SJ as Apple CEO?" Only after that I wrote "if so..." of course that also is conditional also not declarative. Even still that set you off. And even now you still won't explain in your own words why Cook is a better CEO than Jobs only that you believe Cook is better than Job. OK then. You made your point.

 

[69Mustang]

Yes, it's a question. It's phrased in such a way a reasonable person could read it as a rhetorical question, which I did. Maybe you did not intend that to be the case. I did calculate that in my response. It's why I did not make a declarative conclusion in my original response to you -- wrote in first sentence: "...are you suggesting that TC is on par with SJ as Apple CEO?" Only after that I wrote "if so..." of course that also is conditional also not declarative. Even still that set you off. And even now you still won't explain in your own words why Cook is a better CEO than Jobs only that you believe Cook is better than Job. OK then. You made your point.

Depending on how many people you ignore, I answered that at #77, near the top of this page. Not exactly sure why you think I was set off by anything in our discussion. I have an abrupt writing style. If I engage in ad hominem, then I'm probably set off. Til then, just me.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

Depending on how many people you ignore, I answered that at #77, near the top of this page. Not exactly sure why you think I was set off by anything in our discussion. I have an abrupt writing style. If I engage in ad hominem, then I'm probably set off. Til then, just me.

You not sure why I inferred you were set off but then you admit you have an abrupt writing style. Interesting disconnect.

And no, I don't read every single post on threads. Who has that kind of time? But my question was to you so there is that. Anyway I think we've both beaten a dead horse here.

 

[melendezest]

You sound like someone talking about Steve Jobs in 1984. Most people thought he was arrogant, got too much attention and was riding on the success of the Apple 2 for years with only the failed Macintosh to show for it. And after all that, no one really knew what Steve Jobs stood for besides great products. That is enough to make a company great but it's not really enough to make a great change in the world. Cook's ambitions are set a little higher so there is every chance that he fails but at least it's more exciting than another new iPod release.

Riiiight. Tim Cook is doing nothing but steering the ship Steve built.

Steve changed the way we use computers, smartphones, and tablets, completely disrupted the music industry, and was successful in retail when EVERYONE said he would fail.

So he was arrogant. Boo-hoo.

I'd rather have that than a slow-as-molasses-spoken individual that is more interested in personal politics and company profits than actually driving technology forward.

 

[wigby]

Riiiight. Tim Cook is doing nothing but steering the ship Steve built.

Steve changed the way we use computers, smartphones, and tablets, completely disrupted the music industry, and was successful in retail when EVERYONE said he would fail.

So he was arrogant. Boo-hoo.

I'd rather have that than a slow-as-molasses-spoken individual that is more interested in personal politics and company profits than actually driving technology forward.

I can't argue against Jobs as a great visionary but you've just rattled off his CEO accomplishments over 30+ years of career. The tech industry was a completely different beast when Jobs came up. Maybe give Cook more than 5 or 6 years to prove himself before judgement?

 

[melendezest]

I can't argue against Jobs as a great visionary but you've just rattled off his CEO accomplishments over 30+ years of career. The tech industry was a completely different beast when Jobs came up. Maybe give Cook more than 5 or 6 years to prove himself before judgement?

Nope, NO.

He's had 6 long years and under his tenure the Mac has stagnated, iOS is still pretty much the same at its core, and the Watch, well the watch is arguably more fashion than anything else.

The competition is driving innovation these days.

The iPod, iPhone, iPad, Apple Stores, App Store, all happened in a relatively short amount of time. It was one after the other: bang, Bang BANG. He didn't rest until he was dead.

Timmy sounds like he's dead, and the company Steve built is dead as well. I do not recognize today's Apple, but I concede that that may be just me.

 

[wigby]

Nope, NO.

He's had 6 long years and under his tenure the Mac has stagnated, iOS is still pretty much the same at its core, and the Watch, well the watch is arguably more fashion than anything else.

The competition is driving innovation these days.

The iPod, iPhone, iPad, Apple Stores, App Store, all happened in a relatively short amount of time. It was one after the other: bang, Bang BANG. He didn't rest until he was dead.

Timmy sounds like he's dead, and the company Steve built is dead as well. I do not recognize today's Apple, but I concede that that may be just me.

I'ver been following Apple since the 70's and owned every single Apple product less a few Quadros and Centris models from the 80's and 90's. I've seen Apple consumers, fans and even haters change so much more than the company itself has changed over the past 40, 20 or 5 years. Apple is doing exactly what they were doing on day 1. They are taking existing technologies and refining them for the masses. Since Cook, they've done that at an even greater level. Have they strayed a little? Of course. Just like they strayed and failed when Jobs was at the helm and wasn't too. There is no reason to believe Apple won't be doing the exact same thing 10 years from now.

Therefore, without even knowing you, I will presume that you have changed much more than Apple has changed. My view on Apple hasn't changed much in 35 years but I concede that maybe it should. I'm just not sure why. What companies are driving innovation? Amazon is just selling dumb speakers pretending to be AI assistants. Google is just now starting to develop a hardware program to copy what Apple has been doing for a decade. Samsung just makes sexy phones with no ecosystem or software to support them. Microsoft is trying to reboot and go the hardware route too. Facebook is racing Google to collect the most data. Meanwhile, I've yet to see any AI value or feature to justify the amount of data collection going on. Maybe Chinese companies are doing something different but all I see is them mimicking Apple but for less money. Does that count as driving innovation these days?

 

[melendezest]

I'ver been following Apple since the 70's and owned every single Apple product less a few Quadros and Centris models from the 80's and 90's. I've seen Apple consumers, fans and even haters change so much more than the company itself has changed over the past 40, 20 or 5 years. Apple is doing exactly what they were doing on day 1. They are taking existing technologies and refining them for the masses. Since Cook, they've done that at an even greater level. Have they strayed a little? Of course. Just like they strayed and failed when Jobs was at the helm and wasn't too. There is no reason to believe Apple won't be doing the exact same thing 10 years from now.

Therefore, without even knowing you, I will presume that you have changed much more than Apple has changed. My view on Apple hasn't changed much in 35 years but I concede that maybe it should. I'm just not sure why. What companies are driving innovation? Amazon is just selling dumb speakers pretending to be AI assistants. Google is just now starting to develop a hardware program to copy what Apple has been doing for a decade. Samsung just makes sexy phones with no ecosystem or software to support them. Microsoft is trying to reboot and go the hardware route too. Facebook is racing Google to collect the most data. Meanwhile, I've yet to see any AI value or feature to justify the amount of data collection going on. Maybe Chinese companies are doing something different but all I see is them mimicking Apple but for less money. Does that count as driving innovation these days?

Nope, I disagree vehemently.

The ENTIRE Mac Pro, MacBook Pros with soldered RAM and SSDs and USB-C only, single port MacBook, their awful keyboards, the inability to revert software in iOS, the necessity for dongles for every.damn.thing, and the overall stagnation in iOS software means Apple has changed from an innovator to a profiteer.

The don't care about building the best products for us through simplicity of design and ease of use.

They care about building the best products for them, through removal of features resulting in higher profit margins and accessory sales for once-built-in functionality.

You saying they strayed "a little" means I can't take anything you say seriously. I'm sorry but the rose-colored glasses are not my style.

 

[wigby]

The only reason the Apple 2 had slots and was accessible to users was because Woz won that fight against Jobs. Jobs' stance has been well documented since the beginning - he wants products sealed up and simple like appliances. Sometimes making a product user friendly means sealing it up and sometimes it means making it modular - usually depends on who you talk to at the time. When they removed all optical/floppy drives from their computers, they were simply creating giant dongles in the form of a superdrive. Wasn't that a money grab under Jobs?

Every time there is a transitional stage in tech, we get dongles, upset customers and incompatibilities. The only reason you can say that we have some dongles under Cook is because we are going through a tech standards cycle transition right now (we had 2 or 3 cycles under Jobs) from things like computer to mobile and from old USB to USB C for instance. There are no easy solutions for Apple or anyone to make everyone happy. Their job is to make the most people happy while still progressing the technology. They are currently #1 in the world at that job even if you don't like them.