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

Starting off in a garage

aaaand…

Finishing in a garage sale!

/jk
Oh! I thought ti was all about the garage. Didn't matter if it started or ended there. I thought the magic was the garage and nothing else /s 😂. P.S Good response Arkitect :)
 
  • Love
Reactions: arkitect
Jumping in here...yes, I do. I do not think Jobs was thinking on the same level during the end of his life. Why on earth would he have a penny pinching Ops guy take over for him. It makes no sense. He should've chosen someone who was huge on making great products and also huge on design. He ended up choosing someone who was nothing like him. When you are on the trajectory that Jobs created, you do not change course mid-voyage. Sure, Apple is the world's top company, but their products are boring and innovation has all but ceased. I'm a shareholder but I'd still rather see someone running the company who was more like Jobs.

The decision was made before his sharp decline in health the last year or so. There was much consternation about succession at the time and he made a public statement well ahead of stepping down.

I don’t completely disagree with you, but who then? Considering what we’ve read of their private email from court cases over the last decade, I don’t think any of the executives are like him where it matters.

I agree Tim is no Steve but I think Steve also remembered the times when Apple wasn’t doing so hot financially, and chose someone who would not let that happen again.
 
Tim Cook wouldn't have been able to do this if he was CEO of Samsung.
Funny you should say that. In manner, Cook has often struck me as better suited to a company such as Dell or Microsoft rather than Apple. After Jobs, a CEO and how they come across is inevitably going to contribute to the wider brand. And no matter how many times I hear Cook's Alabama vowels strangulate the phrase "At Apple...", he just doesn't seem to convince.

Probably not his fault. Obviously I see what he's done to the company finances. But damn, the daring, rebellious and leading edge company of Jobs has grown into a somewhat small-c conservative, greedy behemoth with about as much personality as its robotic Apple Event presenters.
 
The decision was made before his sharp decline in health the last year or so. There was much consternation about succession at the time and he made a public statement well ahead of stepping down.

I don’t completely disagree with you, but who then? Considering what we’ve read of their private email from court cases over the last decade, I don’t think any of the executives are like him where it matters.

I agree Tim is no Steve but I think Steve also remembered the times when Apple wasn’t doing so hot financially, and chose someone who would not let that happen again.
Well, before he flipped his lid I think Musk could've been a great successor. Not so much anymore. In a world filled with billions of people, there were better options than Cook.
 
Let's kindly and smartly stop talking about rich lunatics

OpenAI's CEO Once Bragged About His Hoard of Guns and Gas Masks - Futurism

I truly believe we should send a bunch of these rich doomers, frauds and preppers to a remote island and let them Battle Royale themselves for our entertainment.

Then we won't have to deal with them wasting stupid amounts money and tons of electricity on their toys and eccentric lifestyles.

Sam Altman is a garbage human. That Jony Ive comes up in the same sentence as the WorldCoin founder is embarrassing and sad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NEPOBABY
Exactly! Jobs had a history of picking garbage successors.
Except that you're dismissing the idea that people can learn with age and experience. Scully was a mistake and Jobs knew it relatively quickly. Cook was a good choice by the older, wiser Jobs, and was a good successor for him. He remains that. Ives was useful for a good while, but his work diminished over time and he is no longer relevant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: arkitect
Except that you're dismissing the idea that people can learn with age and experience. Scully was a mistake and Jobs knew it relatively quickly. Cook was a good choice by the older, wiser Jobs, and was a good successor for him. He remains that. Ives was useful for a good while, but his work diminished over time and he is no longer relevant.
Cook can learn with age and experience but he hasn't become a product and design guy, and he never will. He only cares about the bottom line. He was a great Ops and supply chain guy though, probably the best ever.
 
Well, before he flipped his lid I think Musk could've been a great successor. Not so much anymore. In a world filled with billions of people, there were better options than Cook.

Absolutely not. Steve wanted someone in-house, and wouldn't have even considered an outsider, Musk or otherwise..

I agree 100% with him on that, regardless of who it is. I don't think replacement CEOs should come from outside companies.
 
Except that you're dismissing the idea that people can learn with age and experience. Scully was a mistake and Jobs knew it relatively quickly. Cook was a good choice by the older, wiser Jobs, and was a good successor for him. He remains that. Ives was useful for a good while, but his work diminished over time and he is no longer relevant.

I suspect much of what went wrong with Ive and others is that post-Jobs, no one pushed these guys to get over their differences and get along for the sake of the users and the products. Politics took over and many people started leading with their worst tendencies with no built-in check, and with an unwillingness to work with those who challenged their thinking. In the end, the work ultimately suffered.

Many people (namely Ive) were also handed responsibilities they weren’t suited to handle (software design). Had someone been there to keep everyone laser focused on end users and products, and had everyone been able to stay in their appropriate lanes, I don’t think we’d be having this conversation, and I think Apple hardware and particularly software at this point would have been much better off for it.
 
IMG_9238.JPG
 
So it’ll be a thin, light, power constrained, GPU, that thermally throttles. It’ll look good but will require an always on gigabit Ethernet connection to a cloud service where the ml is actually done.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: nvmls
Sure, noble and all that…

But often a lot of functionality was seriously compromised in that search for what you describe as simplicity.
1000%. He made way too many trade offs, especially in performance. That approach is why the Mac Pro is a big meh. A good Nvidia GPU run circles around it.

Given that the GPU is the core of any AI system, his insistence on thin light and thermally, constrained, and putting power efficiency over performance result in hardware, that looks great, but is grossly overpriced for what it can do
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.