That is what Apple was supposed to have. It was Steve’s vision. Tim Cook was supposed to take control through a period of stability. This would allow time for Forstall to finish training, as he was personally groomed by Steve to eventually take over operations. Tim Cook, in my beliefs, saw Forstall as a threat to Tim’s ability to take a ton of profits and stock out as CEO. He never championed any vision of the future. He only kept Apple on a straight line path trying to keep up what I believe were Steve’s final design and tech wishes.
So, Tim hasn’t done what’s best for the company. He has done what’s best for Tim. He has led the company to all time stock highs by buying back way too much stock instead of using profits to build out new technologies. Apple will never be a great visionary company as long as Tim Cook is the CEO. But the Board allows him to push his gay pride, eco conscious and talk via a list of main talking points.
I am not saying there’s anything wrong with gay pride, although I do think Tim should use his own money to spread that cause and it’s a good cause but not the responsibility of Apple. Now, the environmental stances Cook has taken that jobs would have never cared about like using renewable energy seem to be in the best interest not of Apple Shareholders and Stakeholders but of the core ethos of believers of longtime Apple purchasers. However, most people who buy iPhone probably couldn’t care less about that. But, I believe it’s necessary for good leaders to take a stance they believe in that’s good for the world.
In the long run, Tim Cook will be remembered as a great man who was able to grow Apple or AAPL into the valuable company it is - but I believe his key decision to fire chief threat Forstall was the biggest mistake he could make. Ive is important in the industrial design, but Forstall gets the big picture and has revolutionary software ideas. Before you go throwing out words like skeuomorphism and etc. Think about a new iPhone user picking up an iPhone XS/XR for the first time. It’s not intuitive. There’s a learning curve that came from the iPhones before it. This will cause a failure to adopt iPhone from people who may otherwise.
As a strategist, consultant, leader, and lifetime learner, I think Cook has had his time and the Board should do the proper thing and move on to not what will bring instant stability - the markets, economy and Fed will do that now - bring in a visionary, someone who understands users, consumers, and real world leadership. Tim Cook was a good successor to Jobs, but Tim should have never been allowed to fire Forstall. It’s almost like Forstall should have had a seat at the Board and guaranteed right of passage and time after Cook to champion a rebirth of visionary products. I cannot in good hope or faith think that Apple will ever present a revolutionary world changing product again. And if that’s true, it’s just a matter of time before it’s increasingly irrelevant how Apple lost its way, but allowing the executive team to grow older and not bringing in youthful visionaries who may not have had the best business sense but understood customers needs for the future and how AAPL could be a $10T company.