Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

dmccloud

macrumors 68030
Sep 7, 2009
2,862
1,582
Anchorage, AK
Firing Jobs was a mistake for Apple in the short term, because of how badly they struggled while he was away from the company. However, that firing is what led to Jobs getting involved with Pixar and founding NeXT, and paved the way for his return to the company. Apple as we know it today wouldn't exist if Jobs had been retained at Apple, because that experience (and his experiences away from Apple) are what paved the way for everything that came under his second watch and beyond.
 

SeattleMoose

macrumors 68000
Jul 17, 2009
1,960
1,670
Der Wald
John Sculley just played a role in the long term fate/resurrection of Apple into a more powerful company. As it turned out, when Steve returned he did so with much broader experience, wisdom, and people skills. So...thanx John!!
 

proline

macrumors 6502a
Nov 18, 2012
630
1
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.
Jobs' success in later years wasn't so much from going after the strongest competitor, though he did do that with Google, but from dodging the strong competitors entirely and finding new markets filled with only foolish naive incumbents. He avoided direct confrontation with Microsoft, HP, etc. and instead ransacked the likes of Creative in the MP3 market and Palm, RIM, and Nokia in the phone market. This is a skill that he learned only very slowly and painfully as a result of getting his ass kicked over and over at Apple and NeXT. Had he stayed at Apple in the 80s it is quite likely that he would have wasted Apple's resources on futile battles with MS and IBM.
 

IJ Reilly

macrumors P6
Jul 16, 2002
17,899
1,484
Palookaville
Jobs' success in later years wasn't so much from going after the strongest competitor, though he did do that with Google, but from dodging the strong competitors entirely and finding new markets filled with only foolish naive incumbents. He avoided direct confrontation with Microsoft, HP, etc. and instead ransacked the likes of Creative in the MP3 market and Palm, RIM, and Nokia in the phone market. This is a skill that he learned only very slowly and painfully as a result of getting his ass kicked over and over at Apple and NeXT. Had he stayed at Apple in the 80s it is quite likely that he would have wasted Apple's resources on futile battles with MS and IBM.

I'm not saying going after the strongest competitor, but knowing who is going to eat your lunch if you don't watch out. In the '80s Apple thought that was going to be IBM so they positioned themselves as the alternative to IBM. Ironically, IBM saw Apple in that same light at the time, which is why they created the PC in the first place. It wasn't to beat Apple so much as to block Apple. But due to a historical quirk of fate, it was Microsoft that ate Apple's lunch (and IBM's too).

It's kind of useless to speculate on specially what Jobs would have done had he remained at Apple in a creative role, but I doubt the board would have supported quixotic battles with IBM or Microsoft. Remembering also that by the early '90s IBM was trying to figure out how to wriggle out of Microsoft's grip, which led to OS/2 and ultimately to a partnership with Apple. At the point these events were occurring Steve Jobs was entering a more disciplined and creative period, but not at Apple, and in a way that would have come to naught had Apple not bought NeXT.
 

Lancer

macrumors 68020
Jul 22, 2002
2,214
146
Australia
But then we wouldn't have had NeXT and Mac OS X.

Things might've been different for the better had Jobs not been ousted, but things still turned out pretty well.

Good point, but I'd like to think Steven would have been developing these no mater where he was.
 

the8thark

macrumors 601
Apr 18, 2011
4,628
1,735
Being fired from Apple was one of the best things that could have happened to him. Forcing Scott Forstall out was a mistake.

Nah. I am glad Forstall is gone. Now iOS can move into the future and not be stuck in skumorphism hell. iOS7 is amazing and that in part is due to Forstall not ****ing it up. Forstall was good in the past but his ideas became outdated as did his *******ish attitude and refusal to work decently with anyone else.

Jobs left and we got Pixar and Next (which became OS X).
Forstall left and we got a much better iOS.
 

882188

macrumors regular
Mar 18, 2014
115
0
Its like Dragon Ball Z when Gohan left home to train with Piccolo for the battle against the saiyans.
obamanotbad.jpg
 

Atlantico

macrumors 6502
May 3, 2011
477
172
BCN
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.

Good points. I agree, Sculley was crucial to the success of Apple at that time - more so than Jobs.

People forget that the Macintosh became a success under Sculley and was incredibly innovative and important.

Many think the Apple of the 90s was Sculley, but it wasn't. It was Spindler and Amelio, two terrible CEOs.

Under Sculley, Apple introduced things such as:

PowerPC
PowerBooks (and Duos)
QuickTime
Upgradable Macs
System 6 and System 7
Macintosh II and the best keyboard ever (Apple ADB II)
LaserWriter printers
Macintosh Plus
Quadra Workstations
Apple II GS (probably the sweetest 8-bit machine made)
Newton (way ahead of its time)
Mac internet support
... etc. etc.

The list is immense and impressive. The focus on R&D, the relentless push for Apple to be the *best*, to constantly innovate - this came from John goddam Sculley.

:cool::apple:
 

Bubba Satori

Suspended
Feb 15, 2008
4,726
3,756
B'ham
Actually it was for the best. Jobs' experience at NeXT and Pixar were essential and without that Apple would not be where it is today. Obviously this is by accident and certainly no design of Sculley.

Very perceptive and quite true.
Things happen for a reason and Job's time away from APple
was crucial to the company's subsequent success.
 

kanselmo

macrumors member
Jul 21, 2010
64
48
Pretty ridiculous to make assumptions about what might have been if... But those are some wild jeans Steve has there. Most blue jeans at that point hadn't had suspender buttons for 40 years. Looks like a nice thrift store score.
 

macchiato2009

macrumors 65816
Aug 14, 2009
1,258
1
Sculley belongs to a small group of former Apple employees who tries to exist or survive in the media by reminding us of stories or comments about Steve Jobs...

:rolleyes:
 

Felasco

Guest
Oct 19, 2012
372
2
Sculley belongs to a small group of former Apple employees who tries to exist or survive in the media by reminding us of stories or comments about Steve Jobs...:

It's hard to think of another explanation. How odd to be bringing this up now, such very old news. Why Sculley would want to remind anybody of his time at Apple is beyond me....
 

roadbloc

macrumors G3
Aug 24, 2009
8,784
215
UK
At least he admits it. Not that he should dwell on it. If Steve's biography is accurate I probably would have fired him too. It was probably the right thing to do at the time.
 

Internaut

macrumors 65816
Actually it was for the best. Jobs' experience at NeXT and Pixar were essential and without that Apple would not be where it is today. Obviously this is by accident and certainly no design of Sculley.

----------


No, he has confessed several times in the past. It's how he gets his name out there these days.

The law of unintended consequences strikes again.
 

IJ Reilly

macrumors P6
Jul 16, 2002
17,899
1,484
Palookaville
Sculley belongs to a small group of former Apple employees who tries to exist or survive in the media by reminding us of stories or comments about Steve Jobs...

:rolleyes:

It's hard to think of another explanation. How odd to be bringing this up now, such very old news. Why Sculley would want to remind anybody of his time at Apple is beyond me....

That's just plain silly. He was asked about it in an interview that was mainly about his mobile phone venture in India. Makes a person wonder how many people bother reading the articles on which they seem to feel a need to comment.
 

proline

macrumors 6502a
Nov 18, 2012
630
1
That's just plain silly. He was asked about it in an interview that was mainly about his mobile phone venture in India. Makes a person wonder how many people bother reading the articles on which they seem to feel a need to comment.
You don't read much do you? Sculley drops Jobs name every chance he can get. He easily could have said "I'm not here to talk about that, I thought you wanted to hear about the cheap crap I'm selling in India..." but he didn't. He always answers the Jobs question because he is a marketing guy and he knows how to get his interview published. He does this 2-3 times a year. That perfectly matches the media's memory and attention span. Again I say, he's a marketing guy.
 

alysiaarmstrong

macrumors newbie
Apr 21, 2014
1
0
High Body Building Supplement

He really begin transfer Blue water a few decades back in nineteen ninety he's been running this nearing only a huge number of dollars on a yearly support he's got an all the Food Lion markets Harris Teeter he's got it in twelve universal com cut nation so he's Nitric Max Muscle carried out truly well and he knows how to take an organization from start-up to a the dollar's and he got some answers concerning local pearl on the grounds that he had experience with the item really the parts and afterward he said all your turn this in a private jug it and help quite a few people he didn't do this on the grounds that he required the cash now he went out and verified that this was a setup effectively he's got is authorize with the Better Business Bureau he's had that set up since the begin of the organization years prior.

----------

That much pack assault is the element for this item and in case you're in the Caroline you're likely acquainted with most gentlemen in case you're outside on you're presumably not Nitric Max Muscle yet these grapes become hot sticky atmospheres down the ailment inclined region the US and they've got an exceptionally kind of resistant framework stacked with cancer prevention agents what we call for Noah mixes on the off chance that I distinguish some of these and poisons here on the right affirmed gas said vitamin C inquiry res virtual there over a hundred against oxidants found in the muss set incredible they're ready to force the healthful quality included the ash put in a supplement your going to get or a ton more nourishing worth from the supplement than you.
 

IJ Reilly

macrumors P6
Jul 16, 2002
17,899
1,484
Palookaville
You don't read much do you? Sculley drops Jobs name every chance he can get. He easily could have said "I'm not here to talk about that, I thought you wanted to hear about the cheap crap I'm selling in India..." but he didn't. He always answers the Jobs question because he is a marketing guy and he knows how to get his interview published. He does this 2-3 times a year. That perfectly matches the media's memory and attention span. Again I say, he's a marketing guy.

I read plenty, and both you and I know he's going to be asked. For what possible reason would he "not want to talk about it?" That just makes no sense.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.