MacRumors Readers React to Tim Cook Stepping Down as CEO

[surferfb]

I think people here are giving the CEO too much credit for Apple's R&D process. I know Steve was heavily involved in products, but it's not like he was coming up with the ideas all by himself, he had a great team around him to bounce ideas off of, suggest things to him, disagree with him, etc. Clearly Jobs is sorely missed, but the idea that "Apple stopped innovating" just because Cook became CEO is nonsense. Yes, the CEO sets budgets and strategies and culture, but it's not like he's sitting in the R&D lab coming up with great ideas all day long. And, outside of AI, I personally don't see anyone in the industry making huge innovative products.

I'd add that people significantly underestimate the size difference in Apple now vs. when Steve ran it. It's one thing to come up with an innovation, it's a completely different one to put it into production at Apple's scale today. Apple is shipping more iPhones every two months than it did during the iPhone 4 era.

I also think a lot of innovations Apple does introduce get brushed aside by people on here because they aren't "products that make everything that came before them obsolete overnight" like the Mac and iPhone did. Even Jobs himself said you were lucky if you got to work on one of those products in your career, but people here expect one of those every year from Apple.

Under Cook we got things like FaceID, M Series/Apple Silicon, AirPods, the Apple Watch, a ton of Apple Watch health features, etc. that I would argue are massive innovations. But they all get waved aside as "not real innovation" because a large contingent of people on MacRumors are, in my opinion, upset with decisions Cook made that any CEO, including Steve, would have also made. Rather that grapple with the idea that Apple is a much larger and different company now and therefore needs to act differently, it's easier blame everything they don't like on Cook because he's a MBA, not a product guy, and (most importantly) not Steve.

 

[turbineseaplane]

I think people here are giving the CEO too much credit for Apple's R&D process. I know Steve was heavily involved in products, but it's not like he was coming up with the ideas all by himself, he had a great team around him to bounce ideas off of, suggest things to him, disagree with him, etc. Clearly Jobs is sorely missed, but the idea that "Apple stopped innovating" just because Cook became CEO is nonsense. Yes, the CEO sets budgets and strategies and culture, but it's not like he's sitting in the R&D lab coming up with great ideas all day long. And, outside of AI, I personally don't see anyone in the industry making huge innovative products.

I'd add that people significantly underestimate the size difference in Apple now vs. when Steve ran it. It's one thing to come up with an innovation, it's a completely different one to put it into production at Apple's scale today. Apple is shipping more iPhones every two months than it did during the iPhone 4 era.

I also think a lot of innovations Apple does introduce get brushed aside by people on here because they aren't "products that make everything that came before them obsolete overnight" like the Mac and iPhone did. Even Jobs himself said you were lucky if you got to work on one of those products in your career, but people here expect one of those every year from Apple.

Under Cook we got things like FaceID, M Series/Apple Silicon, AirPods, the Apple Watch, a ton of Apple Watch health features, etc. that I would argue are massive innovations. But they all get waved aside as "not real innovation" because a large contingent of people on MacRumors are, in my opinion, upset with decisions Cook made that any CEO, including Steve, would have also made. Rather that grapple with the idea that Apple is a much larger and different company now and therefore needs to act differently, it's easier blame everything they don't like on Cook because he's a MBA, not a product guy, and (most importantly) not Steve.

The thing that is missing without Steve is his good product sense and taste.

Dismissing all the bad ideas (for direction and products) that we don't even know about, were a core skill of his.

I'm hopeful Ternus will bring some of this back, as it's critical to have in the hands of someone with the ultimate power to decide.

 

[Haiku_Oezu]

I think people here are giving the CEO too much credit for Apple's R&D process. I know Steve was heavily involved in products, but it's not like he was coming up with the ideas all by himself, he had a great team around him to bounce ideas off of, suggest things to him, disagree with him, etc. Clearly Jobs is sorely missed, but the idea that "Apple stopped innovating" just because Cook became CEO is nonsense. Yes, the CEO sets budgets and strategies and culture, but it's not like he's sitting in the R&D lab coming up with great ideas all day long. And, outside of AI, I personally don't see anyone in the industry making huge innovative products.

I'd add that people significantly underestimate the size difference in Apple now vs. when Steve ran it. It's one thing to come up with an innovation, it's a completely different one to put it into production at Apple's scale today. Apple is shipping more iPhones every two months than it did during the iPhone 4 era.

I also think a lot of innovations Apple does introduce get brushed aside by people on here because they aren't "products that make everything that came before them obsolete overnight" like the Mac and iPhone did. Even Jobs himself said you were lucky if you got to work on one of those products in your career, but people here expect one of those every year from Apple.

Under Cook we got things like FaceID, M Series/Apple Silicon, AirPods, the Apple Watch, a ton of Apple Watch health features, etc. that I would argue are massive innovations. But they all get waved aside as "not real innovation" because a large contingent of people on MacRumors are, in my opinion, upset with decisions Cook made that any CEO, including Steve, would have also made. Rather that grapple with the idea that Apple is a much larger and different company now and therefore needs to act differently, it's easier blame everything they don't like on Cook because he's a MBA, not a product guy, and (most importantly) not Steve.

The animosity towards Cook is overblown but I’m still eager to see what someone with more vision is bringing to the table

For me it’s not a “glad he’s gone” but more of a “glad this other guy is in”

 

[turbineseaplane]

The animosity towards Cook is overblown but I’m still eager to see what someone with more vision is bringing to the table

For me it’s not a “glad he’s gone” but more of a “glad this other guy is in”

For me it's just "time for a generational change".

The Tim Cook playbook, love it or hate it, has somewhat played itself out at this point.

 

[Fallforward]

Tim Cook as executive chairman is a problem. It has nothing to do with him, personally, and everything to do with separation of management from an independent board providing oversight. An Executive Chairman, by definition, is not independent and a former CEO in that role even less do.

Many organizations have stated that the role of an "executive chairman" is problematic, such as CPA/Chartered Accountants, the NYSE, US regulators like the FRB and OCC (for banks), European Securities and Markets Authority, UK Financial Reporting Council, etc.

Non-executive roles could have accomplished what they imply will be his future role, such as Senior Advisor to the Board (Gates), or Advisor to the CEO (Schmidt).

 

[Kriss_De_Valnor]

Now let's have Steve Wozniak back if nobody else can fit the way Apple should be better.

The true legend! Can he do it in 2026?

 

[ipedro]

To set the historical record straight, I both praised and criticized Tim Cook and my comment in the article was cut to include only the criticism.

My full comment:

It's important to remember that Steve Jobs picked Tim Cook as his successor. Cook managed to execute on Steve Jobs' decade long roadmap and grow the company to unimaginable heights.

But Tim Cook was anything but a visionary and he completely missed what Steve Jobs intended for Siri, which debuted in the iPhone the day before his death. New blood is needed and an engineer who's a stickler for detail is a great place to start.

Bring on the next Era.

 

[bushman4]

Why wouldn’t Tim Cook want to be there for the iPhones 20th anniversary???? Somethings strange. Two weeks ago he gave an interview stating he has no plans on leaving….Things certainly changed fast
John Ternus is stepping into a position way over his head but Cook is still there to help him
Keep in mind Apple lost alot of talented soles recently to Facebook not going to help
Let’s hope John’s innovation is notable

 

[Sophisticatednut]

I think it’s good that we’re going to have some young blood take the reins, but I don’t like how this forum has turned into a Tim Cook bashing fest. Was he a visionary? Far from it. But people don’t give him enough credit for his role in Apple’s turnaround when they were 90 days from bankruptcy. Steve introduced the products to the world, but Tim’s contributions to the supply chain really turned Apple into a powerhouse worldwide brand.

Yea but he did the most terrible thing and made apple turn in to a much more heavily service oriented revenue stream and that has just slowly grown to a marginal tumor that the next CEO hopefully can fix and return to hardware focus instead of nickel and diming everything

 

[I7guy]

Yea but he did the most terrible thing and made apple turn in to a much more heavily service oriented revenue stream and that has just slowly grown to a marginal tumor that the next CEO hopefully can fix and return to hardware focus instead of nickel and diming everything

It’s my prediction nothing much will change. Services revenue is where Apple is headed. Ads is here to stay. And nickel and dining is part of the landscape.

 

[I7guy]

Tim Cook as executive chairman is a problem. It has nothing to do with him, personally, and everything to do with separation of management from an independent board providing oversight. An Executive Chairman, by definition, is not independent and a former CEO in that role even less do.

Many organizations have stated that the role of an "executive chairman" is problematic, such as CPA/Chartered Accountants, the NYSE, US regulators like the FRB and OCC (for banks), European Securities and Markets Authority, UK Financial Reporting Council, etc.

Non-executive roles could have accomplished what they imply will be his future role, such as Senior Advisor to the Board (Gates), or Advisor to the CEO (Schmidt).

The horse has left the barn on this one. I think it’s one thing for financial services another for non-financial services.

 

[ignatius345]

I think people are really underestimating the extent to which Apple could easily have become ensh*ttified by now. There’s stuff that sucks and there’s stuff that feels nickle-and-dimey, yes, but the company has also grown by orders of magnitude fairly recently and could a a LOT worse.

Take a look at the once-mighty Sony and how they just sold off their TV business to Walmart/TCL to turn into basically surveillance boxes. Take a look at how aggressively hard HP sucks ass when they used to have a rep for being a great, engineer-led company who treated their workers very well. Take a look at the sh*tshow of Windows and the crapboxes Intel is powering. Take a look at Samsung and how they've mostly just been aping the iPhone this whole time.

Yeesh.

 

[ignatius345]

Yea but he did the most terrible thing and made apple turn in to a much more heavily service oriented revenue stream

You just described the direction literally all of capitalism is going.

 

[Black Belt]

Maybe now we’ll finally get the stuff Jobs started like Siri and a complete smart home. We have enough rainbow watch bands for a lifetime.

 

[teh_hunterer]

The whole purpose of the articles is to get you to click on them and engage with them

Looks like a success

Then what was the purpose of my post?

 

[Charlie Bonesx]

Then what was the purpose of my post?View attachment 2624201

to create ad revenue for macrumors 😉

 

[dannyyankou]

Yea but he did the most terrible thing and made apple turn in to a much more heavily service oriented revenue stream and that has just slowly grown to a marginal tumor that the next CEO hopefully can fix and return to hardware focus instead of nickel and diming everything

Apple was already headed down that path when Steve was CEO. iCloud had paid storage tiers over 5gb, and iTunes Match was a subscription service.

Who knows how far he would’ve gone with it, but he was at least starting to look into additional revenue streams.

 

[Mrkevinfinnerty]

Kind of a sad day. Tim was the last direct connection to Steve Jobs—handpicked by him as his successor. It feels like the true-end of Job’s era. Enjoy your semi-retirement, Mr. Tim Cook.

Johnny Srouji and Greg Joswiak, both still in senior leadership positions, worked at Apple under SJ.

 

[FootballIsLife]

turbinseaplane ❤️

I think maybe this member is suspended?!?
I for one cannot wait for Ternus. Can he not start sooner. Why wait?

 

[Sophisticatednut]

It’s my prediction nothing much will change. Services revenue is where Apple is headed. Ads is here to stay. And nickel and dining is part of the landscape.

Well hopefully not, Apple was heading to the Microsoft difrecrion before Steve came back, and now we are going the Google direction. I expect Nickel and dimming but not Google/ Facebook levels.

When will you move your feet when Apple adopts all of googles add revenue but still keeping all the Apple premium price tags?😉

You just described the direction literally all of capitalism is going.

The ever expanding worseficarion

Apple was already headed down that path when Steve was CEO. iCloud had paid storage tiers over 5gb, and iTunes Match was a subscription service.

Who knows how far he would’ve gone with it, but he was at least starting to look into additional revenue streams.

I wouldn’t say these services are the same thing as when Apple moves further and further into adrevenue and expanding their implementation of existing as the middle man for any and all possible transactions.

Having adds in the settings, wallet, maps, notifications etc isn’t really the same level as appleTV, iCloud, satellite internet etc

 

[Apple_Robert]

I can't imagine anything less newsworthy.

Apparently, you enjoy reading supermarket tabloids.

 

[dannyyankou]

I wouldn’t say these services are the same thing as when Apple moves further and further into adrevenue and expanding their implementation of existing as the middle man for any and all possible transactions.

Having adds in the settings, wallet, maps, notifications etc isn’t really the same level as appleTV, iCloud, satellite internet etc

Steve Jobs introduced iAd, which any developer can integrate into all of their apps. And no matter what spin Steve tried to put on it, it was just a way for them to make more revenue because they kept a 30% cut.

 

[Sophisticatednut]

Steve Jobs introduced iAd, which any developer can integrate into all of their apps. And no matter what spin Steve tried to put on it, it was just a way for them to make more revenue because they kept a 30% cut.

And it was luckily unalived, but I do hope a more technical hardware engineer can do some more hardware and other service innovations instead of continuing down the Google pathway.

Perhaps make AVP actually meaningful instead of a än expensive glorified heavy Amalgamation of metal and glass. More utility functions in their hardware instead of being unnecessary simplified.


I hope Apple try to make great products instead of just focusing on the profit maximization aspect and forgetting the product and user experience along the wayside.

 

[teh_hunterer]

Apparently, you enjoy reading supermarket tabloids.

... huh?

Are you ok?

 

[ignatius345]

The ever expanding worseficarion

No argument there! But the idea that Apple is some kind of outlier seems a bit far fetched.