Cook DID rush Maps out and as I said before the buck stops with Cook. Regardless of who initially approved it (Jobs or Cook) doesn't matter. Tim Cook was the CEO when Apple Maps was announced and came out. Maps was an alpha-release in every way and the fact that he approved it to be released as a GM in an alpha-state speaks to his gross incompetence because he rushed it out or surrounded himself with yes-men who when asked said it was gtg. Google took YEARS to build up it's Maps service. The fact that Cook thought it was ready in a few short months is laughable.
Also, I never claimed that Forstall was fired solely because of Apple Maps. To the contrary I said he had a bulls-eye on him ever since Jobs died and Apple Maps was a convenient way for Cook to pass the buck for Cook's incompetence and when Forstall rightly refused to sign the weak apology he gave Cook all the excuses he needed to ****-can him.
Thank you! This is what a lot of people don't get. Everything stops at the CEO's feet and it's his job to greenlight or not. If the project doesn't look like it'll make the scheduled release, it's the CEO's job to either call it off or kill it. Not just Forstall's call alone.
[doublepost=1498571732][/doublepost]
That's all nice but you overlook one huge item.
Ive is the master of simple design and he has an undying love for simplicity. Read this excerpt from Jobs himself.
"He understands what we do at our core better than anyone," Jobs told Isaacson. "If I had a spiritual partner at Apple, it's Jony."
Oh yeah, Jobs wanted Ive to be untouchable at Apple and he left with Ive having more power than anyone at Apple save Tim Cook.
"Showing his trust in Ive, the company co-founder left him more freedom than anyone else in the company —a perk that remains even after Jobs's death."
"He told Isaacson that Ive had 'more operational power' at Apple than anyone else besides Jobs himself —that there's no one at the company who can tell Ive what to do," the report said. "That, says Jobs, is 'the way I set it up.'"
(From Issacson's book).
Further Ive is known as the consummate team player. (Not so with Forstall)
That's well documented, of course. I'm quite aware of Ive's proclivity for simple design. But Steve had that philosophy for years way before he brought Ive into the picture. However, when Ive and Jobs worked together, there was a sense of balance. Jobs was able to keep Jony in check by narrowing down to the actual design(s) he liked. After all, Jobs had a creative background so he understood that process, especially coming from Pixar.
When Steve left, Jony had no one to provide him insights or feedback in what's needed. If Jobs was alive and saw there was a camera bump, he'd demand it to 'disappear' into the design. Why didn't Cook restrain his creative output? Let me put it this way. If Cook had a creative background, he would have been able to provide feedback with high standards and know what to look for.
This tells me that he's afraid to confront Jony in fear of him walking out and in the same time, he was afraid of confronting Forstall, so he wanted to get rid of him rather than deal with the fact the guy has a different personality trait that needs to be put in check. You don't just fire someone just because they're extrovertedly outspoken or, vice versa, an introvert. Cook is definitely an introvert (nothing wrong with that because I'm one myself).
As far as having more operational power without being questioned, THIS is exactly the problem. He needs to be brought down back to Earth.
That would be like having a big name comic book artist be 'untouchable' at, say, Marvel Comics, and do whatever he wants without the editors getting in his way. This is why they have editors for in the first place. To keep things in line and within the creative parameters or 'corporate language'.
Recently, two directors got fired from the Star Wars Han Solo film because they went against the grain, supposedly turning it into a comedy film ( I'm not joking. It's all over the news ) ticking off Kathleen Kennedy due to 'creative differences'. Do you know what happened after they got fired? The production crew applauded when Ron Howard got the call to step in.
The smartest thing Jony should've done was leave Apple some time after Steve passed on so that he can do his work independently with new clientele and projects. He can't stay in Apple forever because he will burn out eventually. I know about creative burnout and I do illustration/design work. If I were Jony, I would've said " My spiritual creative partner is gone, what more can I prove at Apple? I've done all I can for them. Time for me to do different things and new challenges to face head on with independent projects ".
I can certainly say he got lazy because Cook didn't challenge him enough to push the envelope. For example, iMac Pro was teased and it had the exact same design as the regular iMacs. WTF? So it has a darker space gray tone to it. That's it? It needs a major redesign if it wants to exude the 'pro' moniker and handle high end graphic cards and processing capabilities. It needs to have some kind of grilled vents on the back or sides to show that it's a serious machine. Remember the G5 tower with 'cheese grater' grills? Put some of that element to the iMac Pro. Why didn't they? The iMac Pro could've had some modular slide outs for the RAM and graphic card ports for easy swapping.
I could go on and on. But it's one thing I have to question Cook's ability to let Jony 'do his thing'.
