Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
New Profile on Apple CEO Tim Cook Details Influence on Product Development, iWatch Plans
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Maybe it just doesn't matter that much anymore. If his orientation is a big "who cares?" I'd call that progress.
WTF. Is this the same NYT article that Apple Insider went on a sarcastic tirade about?
----------
Being discriminated against, and not being in the majority, can mean so many things. Weren't any of you geeks bullied as a kid??
And orientation... WTF CARES? It has no bearing on his work... and it's none of your business.
----------
Being discriminated against, and not being in the majority, can mean so many things. Weren't any of you geeks bullied as a kid??
And orientation... WTF CARES? It has no bearing on his work... and it's none of your business.
AI is the most ******* crazy tech forum I have ever visited. I actually have no idea if the posters are for real or they're just trolling as to who can seem like the most ******* crazy fanboi.
The main difference is hands-on manager vs facilitator. If you can't deliver it yourself, certainly the next best thing is to enable others to do it for you.
There are plenty of managers who try to be hands-on only to get in the way of people doing their jobs (pun intended).
There are plenty of managers who try to be hands-on only to get in the way of people doing their jobs (pun intended).
Thomas Edison is also dead. He was known as one of the greatest inventors that ever lived. However, progress has not stopped since his death. Humans can't rely on just one person forever because no one lives forever. You can't compare Steve Jobs to Thomas Edison because each was important in a different way. It's also hard to say which of them was more important but I'd have to give the nod to Edison.
I just think we have to give up worrying about Tim Cook not being Steve Jobs because Jobs was unique in his way of doing things, but thinking Apple can't flourish without Steve Jobs is simply being narrow-minded. We should give others the chance to prove themselves before completely giving up hope. Rome wasn't built in a day and maybe with patience Apple will continue to improve before collapsing. At least that's my hope.
Did we read the same article? All I read from this was “Tim Cook is no Steve Jobs” and how analysts, investors and apparently the general public feels that apple has “lost it’s mojo” and are impatient for the “next great thing”.
Seriously, the guy that compared him to Ringo? WTF was that?
Thankfully a real Apple - State of the Union article was written this week: http://daringfireball.net/2014/06/only_apple
I think both of you got it wrong. That's going to happen when you read with a bias.
Tim Cook is doing things much different than jobs. He's buying back billions in shares. He's matching employee donations to charities and then sometimes going above that. He bought Beats which Jobs probably wouldn't have done. He's very into gay/lesbian rights, the environment, and then some. Things Jobs ignored. While Tim may not be the creative genius, he sure is helping change the world. And that's what I always admired about Apple. It's a company that cares about the environment and society. Something I hope Samsung WOULD copy.
----------
IMHO iWatch ( alone with Apple TV ) are now waaaay to long in development
Not really. Have you ever developed a product before like this? It takes time to get it right. From design, function, user interface, etc. Nobody wants just another 'smart watch'. This has to be 'magical'. And magical doesn't happen overnight.
That's because Apple and the New York Times have been bed partners for decades. This is familiar territory to those who know Apple history and Steve Jobs accomplishments. Steve lured David Pogue, Walt Mossberg and the times into the inner circle of Apple decades ago. The confidential arrangement provided for advance previews of soon to be released products that assured David Pogue he'd be ready with one of the first full pro Apple reviews after WWDC or whenever Steve gave the signal. A cozy arrangement that paid both parties handsomely. Especially lending credit to the elder Mossberg, thereby insuring senior citizens would perceive Apple products as less scary.
Yeah I don't know what article others were reading but I'm not sure how this could be called a puff piece or favorable in any way. It's the same Apple is doomed pablum we've been hearing for years.
I am just as puzzled by this sort of remark. Sure, they found the obligatory "Apple will never be the same without Steve Jobs" comment. But we hear that opinion expressed here every single day, from people who profess to be Apple fans. The real takeaway is that Apple is fundamentally the same company under Tim Cook as it was under Steve Jobs. For reasons that elude me, a lot of people just don't want to hear that, and will avert their eyes from any evidence that anyone but Steve can run Apple.
Good post. Jobs hand picked Cook to become CEO. People don't seem to remember that. He could have promoted forestall if he wanted to. Cook made the most sense and he is doing a fantastic job. Anyone who thinks otherwise is delusional.
People with high public profiles as a result of their careers should be able to keep their private lives private.
On this site some people who have issues with Steve rant that as a young man he did not live up to the poster's standard for excellence in parenthood.
Nothing else to complain about so that's their best shot at Steve.
Job performance is the main thing. Off the clock is off the clock.
Just my two pennies.
Cook has done a good job in maintaining profit margin and maintains the aura of excellence surrounding Apple
Let's remember that Apple is the biggest company and growing it is no easy task.
New product categories are hard to achieve and rushing to put something out that's not Apple Quality would be a big mistake.
Cook has enhanced the company with new blood , continued acquisitions and hopefully this year new products
Let's remember that Apple is the biggest company and growing it is no easy task.
New product categories are hard to achieve and rushing to put something out that's not Apple Quality would be a big mistake.
Cook has enhanced the company with new blood , continued acquisitions and hopefully this year new products
I read the article several times now and all I took away from it really was "Where are the hits Apple?!? Where is the shiny new object to wow us all?!?" And then of course some cheap shots at Cook like calling him Ringo and Jobs Lennon. And then just outright falsehoods like Steve wouldn't have announced new software without new hardware, when that's exactly what Apple did at WWDC 2011.
I do agree with you that Apple is essentially the same company as it was under Steve, though I would argue it's a better company now. Mostly because of the organizational changes Cook made to get rid of silos and fiefdoms and having executives work together rather than competing against each other.
Yeah, and it means when he retires and someone else becomes CEO there won't be another panic. He gives other people credit (like at the end of WWDC 2014).
----------
I don't think it matters if Apple isn't going to 'grow' much anymore. It can't forever. Like people have said, if their profit is up $1 Billion in 2014 compared to 2013, it won't make much of a difference percentage wise.
If the profit dips even slightly people will jump on the 'Apple is doomed' bandwagon more than ever, despite the fact Apple are still making a ton of money and have plenty in the bank if ever there is a major problem.
Remember, Steve Jobs built up Apple's cash pile in case there ever was a crisis. Annalists are predicting doom just because the year over year growth is slowing down.
This is not true. It can't possibly be more harmful in terms of immersions to build a solar panel array that keeps a building going than it would be to just run the building on non-renewable energy.
Aside from the fact non-renewable energy will eventually run out, and build a ton of solar panels will help fund R&D.
Maybe we didn't read the same article because the central point of the one I read differentiated Jobs and Cook as if to say Cook is his own man; has his own way of doing things and Apple is doing just great. Just because one compares Jobs with Cook doesn't mean they are dissing Cook and more than comparing red with blue would by default denigrate blue.
I certainly didn't get the impression the NYTimes was trying to say Apple is doing "just great". If anything the impression they left is Apple is not doing great because they no longer have the magician Steve Jobs who was leader of the hit factory. Now Apple is lead by Mr. "quiet consideration" who is overseeing changes in terms of the environment, charitable giving and certain political issues, but Apple is no longer the hit factory it once was. That incremental updates to existing products have taken the place of game changing innovative products.
I didn't read a negative article. Quite the opposite. It was complementary to Cook IMHO, unjustifiably so, as I stated in my first post on this thread. The article contrasted the two CEO's styles, yes, but not to the effect "Cook doesn't have a clue," but more to the Jobs favorite tool was the hammer and cook prefers a mallet. As I read it it positioned Cook as having to work under the thumb of Job's legacy and winning at it. But maybe that's my own bias.
Also didn't really read anything as strong as "Apple has lost its hit factory status." Of course that would be something a non-thinking person might say on MR but lazy for actual NYT writers. It doesn't take much intellectual horsepower to calculate the time between the iPod:iPod w/ video:iPhone:iPad when Jobs was CEO. Each of those products were years apart and that is just the non-ATV iOS line. I'm no Cook cheerleader and he's made many goofs, but he's only been CEO 2.5 years so saying Apple's best years are behind is a bridge too far for anyone do suggest.