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.
Former Apple CEO John Sculley: Forcing Steve Jobs Out Was a 'Mistake'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I think you meant "ousted," but otherwise, yes.
----------
I don't know that he doesn't "see" that. I'm sure he's as aware of what went down as anyone.
re: Wozniak, Scully, etc.
Umm.... maybe because these folks were ALL key players in Apple at some point in time, and while they're still alive and available to interview -- people are still interested in their opinions?
Imo, Wozniak has plenty of good things to say about the computer industry, and sometimes specifically about Apple. I'd FAR rather hear more interviews with Woz than the likes of John C. Dvorak or some of the ZD-Net/PC Magazine bloggers advocating Windows OS all day long.
Umm.... maybe because these folks were ALL key players in Apple at some point in time, and while they're still alive and available to interview -- people are still interested in their opinions?
Imo, Wozniak has plenty of good things to say about the computer industry, and sometimes specifically about Apple. I'd FAR rather hear more interviews with Woz than the likes of John C. Dvorak or some of the ZD-Net/PC Magazine bloggers advocating Windows OS all day long.
Maybe BOTH should've been welcomed to the exit. Ive has done fantastic industrial design, but he sucks at GUI design. If Forstall was a game playing little jerk, management is supposed to MANAGE that or show him the door.
Really, these companies are like daycare centers sometimes. The richer and wealthier these people get, the more their complexes stick out. Actually, it happens at all levels, and management sucks in most places because they're busy managing upward (the opposite of the job function). A little bit of power and it seems many people turn into nuts.
Steve might have gotten into that stuff no matter what. But it was certainly useful that he had the time.
I don't think kicking him out was the big issue as much as how long he was out.
I disagree with that latter statement. We have no direct insight into what was going in with Apple and Forstall to say if it was a mistake. Folks are bashing his exit because of the perceived issues with iOS 7 but forgetting that similar issues happened under his and Steve Jobs watch and Forstall was 'on the throne' when Maps hit. Ultimately he was responsible for the oversight of that project and apparently didn't want to take responsibility for any issues with it. Had he agreed to stand up and say that yes there were issues, he was sorry about that and he was overseeing a resolution as quickly as possible he might not have been fired. Or he might have been anyway since there could have been other issues. There were rumors he was a jerk to a number of folks, refused to take thoughts from others etc. Making a place hostile is not a good move and employers generally have to do something about it. So Tim did. He might have warned Scott several times to get off his high horse and remember he's part of a time. He might have warned Scott that he wasn't going to tolerate the nastiness that apparently Steve did. This could have been the end of a long time of trying to deal with it without having to fire him but Scott wouldn't play ball.
If even half the rumors about what a jerk Scott was are true then it wasn't a mistake firing him. iOS etc will sort themselves out in time just like they did before when Scott was in charge
What does't kill you makes you stronger.
What does't kill you makes you stronger.
Would the kid (literally kid) who started apple have had as many tool & experiance to succeed later if apple had always been home. I can't imagine that he would have.
I'm shocked to see those that adore Jobs don't recognize that.
What does't kill you makes you stronger.
Would the kid (literally kid) who started apple have had as many tool & experiance to succeed later if apple had always been home. I can't imagine that he would have.
I'm shocked to see those that adore Jobs don't recognize that.
What does the board have to do with this? Talk about passing the buck... "I was acting like a petulant child. The board should have given me a time out rather than let me throw the tantrum that I did."
Big difference: Woz has done great things and deserves the reverence he gets. Unlike Scully, Woz wasn't bred for public speaking-- he's an engineer with opinions.
Big difference: Woz has done great things and deserves the reverence he gets. Unlike Scully, Woz wasn't bred for public speaking-- he's an engineer with opinions.
Duh
Sculley is certainly slow on the uptake! I think he should just go back to Pepsi, they know all about how to be anything but #1
Sculley is certainly slow on the uptake! I think he should just go back to Pepsi, they know all about how to be anything but #1
Surviving cancer doesn't mean smoking was a good idea.
No matter how things turned out, it doesn't mean that was the right decision at the time.
Question is, what if Steve had stayed at Apple at the time?
Apple bloomed mid to late eighties, thus the early years after Steve's departure.
Because of the fact that "classic" Mac OS (or System x) was showing its age, and Microsoft had come into the playing field with a huge bang with Windows 95 and NT 4, Apple had a problem.
But, could and would Steve had done something "brilliant" at that time?
Would he have had a NeXTSTEP like OS at Apple?
Was it possible that Apple with Steve could have done something good earlier to counter Microsoft?
IMHO, I don't think so. The freedom of Pixar an NeXT gave Steve a huge opportunity to focus on creativity and opportunity.
If he still were at Apple he might have caught himself in a battle with Microsoft (like he was with Samsung till his death) instead of being creative and persuasive (what he really is good at).
The next point is: are we entering Apple History part two:
After Steve is out of Apple, the company thrives some years, then falls in to the issues of being a clumsy corporate...
Apple bloomed mid to late eighties, thus the early years after Steve's departure.
Because of the fact that "classic" Mac OS (or System x) was showing its age, and Microsoft had come into the playing field with a huge bang with Windows 95 and NT 4, Apple had a problem.
But, could and would Steve had done something "brilliant" at that time?
Would he have had a NeXTSTEP like OS at Apple?
Was it possible that Apple with Steve could have done something good earlier to counter Microsoft?
IMHO, I don't think so. The freedom of Pixar an NeXT gave Steve a huge opportunity to focus on creativity and opportunity.
If he still were at Apple he might have caught himself in a battle with Microsoft (like he was with Samsung till his death) instead of being creative and persuasive (what he really is good at).
The next point is: are we entering Apple History part two:
After Steve is out of Apple, the company thrives some years, then falls in to the issues of being a clumsy corporate...
Difficult to say, as history can only be run once (as far as we know).
I spent some time talking to Guy Kawasaki about this years ago. His take was that in business you have to know who is your opponent, and Apple picked the wrong one when they went after IBM. They didn't know it then but their real enemy and competitor was Microsoft. Seems strange to consider today, but from the mid-'80s and well into the '90s Microsoft's relationship with Apple was more as an important developer than competitor. The question is whether Steve Jobs would have identified where Apple's real challenge was coming from faster than Scully did (or arguably, never did), and found a way to meet it. We can't know the answer to that question, and I have a hard time coming up with a basis to frame even an educated guess.
Hindsight is always so prophetic, but it's almost impossible to say with any degree of certainty, how things would have unfolded without Jobs' ouster. It was a humiliating time for him, followed by great personal growth, and that may have contributed significantly to subsequent events.
It is part of history and always will be. Who knows if Apple would be what it is today had this course of events not taken place. Hindsight is a funny thing after all is said and done.
Scully commented on lack of innovation? What a joke! For a few short years at Apple, not only he managed to isolate the brand to a niche market when the PC explosion worldwide was about to begin, he also then drove the company to the ground, resulting in the"brain drain" at Apple. In brief, no marketing talent in the world could run a tech company like Apple. On the other hand, Jobs tlearned a valuable lesson during his exile, too. He realized that no matter how great he could make a product, he an average person cannot afford to use it, it's value belongs in the museum. So when Jobs came back to Apple, he went with Intel, dropped the price of Mac products to an average of 30% premium pver comparable brand name PC; the rest is history.
John Scully now is now in no-man's land, pushing indian made phones, which in my opinion, will fall far behing those of China. Why? Let me remind readers that a few years back, a subsidiary of Coca-Cola India threatened the US parent co pany that they would reveal the secret formula if the company did not meet their demand. The same mentality of the Indian culture that now hosts thousands of pharmaceutical companies that manufacture knckoffs and pirated drugs. The morale of the story? This is the land where John Scully belongs.
John Scully now is now in no-man's land, pushing indian made phones, which in my opinion, will fall far behing those of China. Why? Let me remind readers that a few years back, a subsidiary of Coca-Cola India threatened the US parent co pany that they would reveal the secret formula if the company did not meet their demand. The same mentality of the Indian culture that now hosts thousands of pharmaceutical companies that manufacture knckoffs and pirated drugs. The morale of the story? This is the land where John Scully belongs.
A large part of this is not true. For whatever else you might say about Scully, Apple reached levels of profitability during his tenure that it had not before and would not for many years after. Jobs brought him in because he understood that the company needed "adult supervision." It was being run into the ground by undisciplined amateurs, of which Steve Jobs was the prime example. Scully ran it like a real company, and that is exactly why he was hired. When Jobs and Scully didn't agree, Jobs tried to undermine him. He made the board decide whether it would be him or me. It was a dumb ultimatum. Steve lost. Nobody to blame but himself.
The company Scully runs now is not building phones in India, they are selling them in India. They are making them in China.
I know Sculley says this a lot, but after reading Jobs' autobiography, I really think it was not only not a mistake, but the best thing that could have happened. It was clear that at the time, Sculley really respected Jobs and did not want to fire him if it could be avoided. Sculley isn't the baddie everyone (including the two Jobs movies) make him out to be. Had Steve actually stayed at Apple, he probably will have pushed the company under after the Apple II cash show ran out. Then we'd have had no NeXT, no Pixar, no Mac OS X, no iPhone, no iPad etc etc. So in a way we should really thank Sculley. I even say the same about Gil Amelio. He gets a bad name too, but he brought Steve back and bought NeXT.
Even Steve himself said getting fired was the best thing to happen to him. It's a shame he never forgave Sculley really.
Even Steve himself said getting fired was the best thing to happen to him. It's a shame he never forgave Sculley really.
I think what Sculley is saying in reality is that he should have found a way to make the R&D role Steve was offered more appealing. He wanted him to take it, but Steve refused to give up running the Macintosh division, even though it was in turmoil due to his erratic behavior, and everybody knew it. A lot of good things could have happened at Apple had it been run by a professional manager at the top, with Steve heading the skunkworks. They might have well been very different things than what did happen, but on the other side of the coin, Apple might never have gone thorough the death spiral either. Had Apple been more stable, it might been a stronger competitor during the key years in the '90s when Microsoft was scorching the earth.
I agree, it's sad that they didn't reconcile somehow. It was like a marriage gone bad. At least they didn't have to fight over custody of the kids.
hindsight is always 20/20
JS needs some media attention via mea culpa about SJ !
He's launching Obi mobiles, a low price smartphone competitor.
So he thinks he'll get some free press by referring to one of Apple's history most poignant "inflexion points".
Oops, isn't that the name of Sculley's company ?
btw. the decision helped shape SJ into the person he needed to become.
JS needs some media attention via mea culpa about SJ !
He's launching Obi mobiles, a low price smartphone competitor.
So he thinks he'll get some free press by referring to one of Apple's history most poignant "inflexion points".
Oops, isn't that the name of Sculley's company ?
btw. the decision helped shape SJ into the person he needed to become.