Too bad Steve Wozniak is not in the running. Anyone who prints and spends his own $2 bills definitely knows how to make money.
You are very likely correct.
Much like how people reflexively think Scott Forstall would’ve been a good CEO because of his similar traits to Jobs, despite us knowing actually very little about him other than his presentations, and the fact that neither Steve himself, nor Tim, or Johnny, or anyone else in the company really thought he should have been the CEO.
I suspect you’ve missed the point of the piece. The author gave us a few quotes that describe how insiders view Termus’s strong points- and weak points. In other words, a nice guy who knows a lot but really hasn’t been tested with the tough stuff.That quote is so useless, it makes it sound like my Mom is qualified to run Apple. All things being equal, sure, 'niceness' or 'hang-out-ability' are valuable traits. But they aren't in the top 15 of the list of qualifications of the job.
What is happening to journalism? Is there anything left that's immune to this "******tification" trend?
They are talking about Apple’s succession plan before Jobs was gone. The Maps thing happened during Cook’s tenure as CEO. The Maps thing was an excuse for his ouster from Apple. Outside of his own team, Forestall was incredibly unpopular. Ive would not even attend meetings if Forestall was present.From what Ive read, I'm *guessing* that had to do with him alledgedly not taking responsibility and apologizing for the early Apple Maps app, that Cook wanted him to do.
Given the fact that Federighi nearly **** his pants during Joanna´s interview, Federighi is just weak.Ternus is great but this does give me pause. I'd also argue that the future of apple is in software and services. So I think Federighi is a better choice.
But Sundar Pichai is an engineer and made GOOGL more valuable than AAPL.CEO is not an engineering job.
but at least he has experience doing those kinds of interviews. Ternus only has experience doing puff pieces with approved YouTubers (MKBHD, iJustine, etc).Given the fact that Federighi nearly **** his pants during Joanna´s interview, Federighi is just weak.
I’m not hating at all, I’m honestly curious here…
What exactly makes Craig more qualified?
The man doesn’t seem interested in much outside of Apple‘s software development, he has worked at Apple a significantly shorter amount of time than John Ternus, he was absent for the majority of the development of both the iPod, iPhone and iPad, and he’s six years older.
The two things Craig really has going for him is his absolute dedication to privacy (sometimes literally going against Apple’s own like Phil and Eddie on privacy related matters) and his great stage presence.
Other than that, he seems like he’s right where he wants to be.
Obviously, we will always be on the outside looking in, but even from that, you could always tell that someone like Scott Forstall or Johnny Ive or many others wanted more power within the company, Craig, from what we know, never has.
but at least he has experience doing those kinds of interviews. Ternus only has experience doing puff pieces with approved YouTubers (MKBHD, iJustine, etc).
How old is Federighi?John Ternus is the only logical choice. The other candidates are too old, while others who bet on failures like Vision Pro and Apple Car have already left the company.
When crowdsourcing CEO options from online lurkers and outside enthusiasts, it'll always trend toward whoever has the best stage presence or whatever narrative (true or untrue) has been built up around them. None of this means they'll be able to run a business.You are very likely correct.
Much like how people reflexively think Scott Forstall would’ve been a good CEO because of his similar traits to Jobs, despite us knowing actually very little about him other than his presentations, and the fact that neither Steve himself, nor Tim, or Johnny, or anyone else in the company really thought he should have been the CEO.