Sales and marketing aren’t the equivalent to operations.
Maybe Steve knew Better, certainly worked for apple.
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.
Bloomberg: Jeff Williams is Second-Most Important Person at Apple, Operates Similar to Tim Cook
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Sales and marketing aren’t the equivalent to operations.
Maybe Steve knew Better, certainly worked for apple.
So long as they continue to make great products running great software, they can put the janitor in charge for all the difference it would make to me. Just for giggles though, I guess it would be pretty fun to see Craig Federighi as the face of Apple 
I think that Apple may turn into an Apple of the 90’s and today hybrid. I don’t think we will see a return of beige boxes of course, but I think we will see designs that use easier to produce with cheaper, more standard components.
He is basically describing todays Apple. Guy was a genius.
The suggestion that Apple will continue to work with Ive’s independent firm (designs R us) is a bit jumping the gun. You’re either with Apple or you’re not. Of all things mentioned that is probably the scariest scenario if you’re a fan of Apple. This has nothing to do with Ives ability but the notion that Apple is outsourcing hardware design.
If I was an editor at Bloomberg I would’ve said you don’t have a story here there’s nothing to publish. The only thing we learned in this piece is that Jeff Williams is married. Everything else is stuff we already knew with quotes from anonymous sources sprinkled in. Also if these people are willing to go on the record then I question whether they have an agenda that they’re trying to push.
As the saying goes, the A(a)pple doesn’t fall far from the tree.
If Tim Cook could instruct a committee to design an executive, moulded in his own grey-haired monotonous image, that could oversee design at Apple in Ive’s absence, an uber functionary that Cook could understand, be comfortable with, and never threatened by, the resultant stock price-friendly process would unceremoniously vomit up Jeff Williams.
Another “toner head” indeed.
If Tim Cook could instruct a committee to design an executive, moulded in his own grey-haired monotonous image, that could oversee design at Apple in Ive’s absence, an uber functionary that Cook could understand, be comfortable with, and never threatened by, the resultant stock price-friendly process would unceremoniously vomit up Jeff Williams.
Another “toner head” indeed.
Assuming they are different people, I would like to see either Rogifan (of this parish) or Ben Lovejoy (of 9to5Mac) made head of product development at Apple. Proper knowledge and passion and vision.
It was three years of the same style iPod under Steve before we got the Mini - which was just the same iPod shrunk. We had to wait four years for the Nano, which was an innovation on the design. It was three years of the same iPad before Steve innovated with the iPad Air. It was three years of the same iPhone before Steve innovated with the iPhone 4. And let's not get started on how the Mac design didn't innovate for long stretches under his watch.
Given the Steve Jobs interview (in the first reply on this thread) it’s sort of ironic that Apple is Xeroxing their executives.
Apple is now a Fortune 5 company - "going rogue" with your C Suite replacement plans is a good way to become a (low end) Fortune 1000 company.
I'd prefer an Apple with a stable and level-headed leadership team that results in an employee base who enjoys their jobs and is motivated to one that has a C Suite that is causing constant churn in the lower ranks due to people hating their bosses and/or jobs and just phoning in their work until they can move out to another place.
We had the latter under Sculley, Spindler and especially Amelio. And it almost killed the company.
Maybe the best thing to happen during the Jobs era was that he didn't get his wish of absolutely stomping Android. In that case, we would have the monopoly situation with the toner heads rising to the top. As it stands, there is still very strong competition in personal, professional, and mobile computing. (Stuff like the success of AMD's Ryzen is a very good thing.) Apple is still forced to focus on their products, even if perhaps to a lesser degree than they did while heavy underdogs in these industries.
If Jeff was the one responsible for the Apple Watch, we shouldn't be complaining. It has been a resounding success, even while only scratching the surface of wearable tech. Not only that, but it has probably been the most exciting Apple product feature-wise over the last few years, especially considering the near-negative expectations that were placed on it by many. The Watch is an excellent, Jobs-esque combination of tech innovation and attention to detail. I welcome the idea of the person responsible for this kind of success being the CEO of Apple.
If Jeff was the one responsible for the Apple Watch, we shouldn't be complaining. It has been a resounding success, even while only scratching the surface of wearable tech. Not only that, but it has probably been the most exciting Apple product feature-wise over the last few years, especially considering the near-negative expectations that were placed on it by many. The Watch is an excellent, Jobs-esque combination of tech innovation and attention to detail. I welcome the idea of the person responsible for this kind of success being the CEO of Apple.
LMAO ... Tim did NOT 'have' Ive ... as shown from the sudden leave announcement Ive mentioned NOTHING about Tim which is VERY glaring!
He did mention Apple as a whole and design team members and friends therein of the design team. Tim mentioned Ive, Ive did NOT speak of Tim.
So you think apple will be close to bankruptcy
I don’t see that happening, Standard components.
Cheaper to produce. Which apple have you been following.
Have you seen the new Mac Pro and apple reference display?
Yeah Face ID was totally a standard component and easy to produce.
Just read the entire article on Bloomberg.
It's an interesting read & I highly recommend everyone read it.
My take: There is NO WAY Jeff Williams is the next CEO of Apple !
He simply isn't technical enough.
It's the exact same problem Apple's Upper Mgmt has right now.
More of the same won't help !
BTW, Industrial Design, what Ive was responsible for, is NOT the same as Hardware Design (chips, boards, etc., what EEs work on) OR Software Development.
It's surprising how many simply don't know that !
ALSO, the Bloomberg article doesn't paint a very rosy picture of Apple IF Williams is 2nd in command ... is he really the best they have ??? a guy who started in Procurement & then became 2nd in command of Operations !
It's an interesting read & I highly recommend everyone read it.
My take: There is NO WAY Jeff Williams is the next CEO of Apple !
He simply isn't technical enough.
It's the exact same problem Apple's Upper Mgmt has right now.
More of the same won't help !
BTW, Industrial Design, what Ive was responsible for, is NOT the same as Hardware Design (chips, boards, etc., what EEs work on) OR Software Development.
It's surprising how many simply don't know that !
ALSO, the Bloomberg article doesn't paint a very rosy picture of Apple IF Williams is 2nd in command ... is he really the best they have ??? a guy who started in Procurement & then became 2nd in command of Operations !
Agree a visionary wouldn't necessary have to be CEO, but Apple's decisions since Jobs clearly illustrates there is no one with such capacity and/or if there is, he/she's making little impact.
Ive was a "product" person, as much as many hate on him, it was the very few left this company had towards giving the consumer a "better" experience (also "thinner" sure).
Ive was a "product" person, as much as many hate on him, it was the very few left this company had towards giving the consumer a "better" experience (also "thinner" sure).
That would be a great idea, apple can innovate but won’t be able to bring their innovations to market at scale. /s
Which would result in much higher prices all around.
I think that is a win win situation, you definitely have got something there./s
Last edited:
In Cook's mind, Williams is the perfect suitor, just as calculated and reserved. Jobs was terribly successful because he took risks, and it wasn't just his innovation. The current regime is hitting grounders with basic, already-been-done tech on phones, but they're looking for a home run with self driving cars and Apple video content. With self-driving cars and augmented reality now dumped, what do they have remaining?
IMO they could exploit the Apple watch and own the wearables market. Make it a bigger, wider display, enough so that older people with vision issues can use it. I'm younger, but I've heard that complaint 100 times.
IMO they could exploit the Apple watch and own the wearables market. Make it a bigger, wider display, enough so that older people with vision issues can use it. I'm younger, but I've heard that complaint 100 times.
I’m basing it on the fact that Apple just had numbers guys in the 90’s before Steve Jobs came back. They were not interested in innovation, they just wanted to make money.
So you think apple will be close to bankruptcy
I don’t see that happening, Standard components.
Cheaper to produce. Which apple have you been following.
Have you seen the new Mac Pro and apple reference display?
Yeah Face ID was totally a standard component and easy to produce.
I’m talking about the future of Apple not the present. And I wasn’t talking about Apple lowering costs to the consumer, I was talking about Apple lowering costs to bring up the bottom line to keep the numbers up where Mr Cook likes.
iPad Air came out after Steve died.
[doublepost=1563806356][/doublepost]
How do you know Jeff aWilliams is just a numbers guy?
Why? No one else got along with him, and Steve chose Tim instead of Scott.
[doublepost=1563806540][/doublepost]
It shouldn't. It's better to have both sides of the coin.