Scott Forstall Profiled as Apple's 'CEO-in-Waiting'

[AppleScruff1]

Is that a setup for a joke?

Not at all. He stated that their needs to be a succession plan in case of an accident and used a plane crash as an example. My scenario of Tim and Scott being on the same plane is a reasonable possibility. So what would they do in that case? Or would they do as the Royal Family and not travel together?

 

[Rogifan]

Scott was personally recruited by Steve prior to Scott graduating from Stanford. Scott went to NEXT with Steve, then to Apple.

He will be Tim's replacement. The 10 year plan applies to the other Senior VP's as well who received the stock vesting incentive.

Their replacements 10 years from now are currently being groomed. I don't see any current Senior VP's staying without Tim. Except for Scott.

He will be Tim's replacement? Do you work for Apple or something that you have this inside knowledge?

And interesting how someone supposedly being groomed to be Steve's replacement was barely mentioned at all in his official biography. If he's the future of Apple you'd think Isaacson would've had a chapter on him like he did Ive.

----------

I'm going say this here for record. I don't think Tim Cook fits the bill for Apple CEO. All he has done publicly after being reigned in for the chief position was to look into some charity program and also the suppliers auditing nonsense. Apple didn't become great company because you matched a donation or set up a free class for the assembly workers. Apple became a great company by changing industries with game changing products. Tim is an operation guy and he should stay as COO. He is leading Apple to nowhere IMHO.

Geez the guy just became CEO last August. Give him some time.

 

[marksman]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A334 Safari/7534.48.3)

(keeps a jeweler's loupe in his office to check every pixel on every icon)

This all sounds very amazing and romantic, except that's completely stupid. If he actually wanted to check every pixel, he would zoom in photoshop or another digital graphics editing software package that allows enlargement and observation of discrete pixels. If you're using a loupe with a real screen you're magnifying in the real analog world and that's ridiculous for a number of reasons. Do you know any graphic designer who would possibly do this? Of course not, and not because they aren't clever..

Sounds like yet another book full of hype and spin and nonsense

This silly book aside, this guy does seem sharp

Checking how something looks like on the actual display device is smarter than just zooming in on photoshop and assuming everything is okay.

You dont even understand what he was doing

 

[Bernard SG]

I always have a bad feeling when I see him. Yes, he looks FAKE in every aspect. Creepy, with a sinister aura. Probably butt-kissing his superiors and kicking down on his underlings. So far, he is the only Apple manager that I disliked right from the moment when I first saw him in a public appearance.

In short, a personality that's a lot similar to Steve Jobs'.

But more importantly, he's responsible for iOS and the entire Walled Garden concept around and behind it. I wouldn't trust this guy even if I found him as likeable and cool as Captain Jack Sparrow.

It's been reported that Steve Jobs was staunchly against native apps on the iPhone and that the team had to bug him endlessly until he gave in. I'm betting "the team" here means mostly Scott Forstall; so if anything he contributed to open it a little more, rather than the opposite.

It might be hard to swallow for most of you, but I think that even Steve Ballmer - as a person! - has more going for himself than Scott Forstall. At least Ballmer knows how to make a fool out of himself and he's always good for a laugh.

Making us laugh is not really the main quality required from a CEO...

 

[pacman7331]

I heard Steve Jobs was apprenticing a guy to take over after his death a good 10 years or so before he died?

Besides this guy looks a little effeminate in that picture.

I know Apple's logo used to be rainbow, but... eh heh, I understood it was a different rainbow, or so I hope.

 

[Nostromo]

We are talking about 2021.

A lot of bird droppings will stain Apple's headquarter until then.

Today iOS may be the profit machine.

In this volatile market that changes completely every ten years... ten years from now there could be another company out there who beats the bejesus out of Apple when it comes to entertainment gadgets.

There are other fields Apple will have to turn its attention to when looking for future revenue.

The ios arena's profit is great, but maxed out. The longer entertainment gadgets are around, the less profit one make.

So, it's all smoke and crystal ball.

The only place where you can really count on a successor is royalty. Which went out of sense and out of style in the late 19th centure.

Many things can happen, and will happen.

 

[Rocketman]

From 5 years ago:

https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/3205221/

OBTW

https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/3580830/

 

[Bernard SG]

The ios arena's profit is great, but maxed out. The longer entertainment gadgets are around, the less profit one make.

Smartphone penetration rate is still quite low at this point (in US which is one of the most advanced, it's about 50%). So still a lot of room for iPhone and Android growth.

iPad has even more potential for growth.

 

[Rogifan]

Forstall needs to stick to iOS. The UI is due for a refresh. And please can we got rid of the patronizing faux leather and torn pages? Pure kitsch. Perhaps the software guys need to borrow some of Jony Ive's designers to help them get the UI design right.

 

[MattInOz]

I always have a bad feeling when I see him. Yes, he looks FAKE in every aspect. Creepy, with a sinister aura. Probably butt-kissing his superiors and kicking down on his underlings. So far, he is the only Apple manager that I disliked right from the moment when I first saw him in a public appearance.

Your not judging him based on his twin brother are you?

edit: oops not to imply the "twin brother" is like that either but many of his characters where not the nicest of people.

 

[MacCurry]

He looks creepy like John Wayne Gacy. I like Tim Cook, he seems to be doing everything right and is positioning AAPL to go forward as great technology company.

 

[Can't Stop]

Scott is always smiling. It looks fake.

Not that that wouldn't make him a good CEO for Apple. But it seems to me he tries to hard to look enthusiastic.

Maybe he's just polite.

 

[techfreak85]

I've always felt Forstoll has the drive and charisma, in addition to the intelligence to one day be the head of Apple.

He is still young, and Tim is a good leader (probably the best choice to show that the company can operate without Steve), but one day Forstall will be in charge.

 

[GanleyBurger]

Ive is the man

Jonathan ive
needs to become the spokesperson for apple now!!!
Immediately!!!
He has the look, the accent, and looks like he can put up a good fight.
Apple... Are you listening????

 

[techfreak85]

Jonathan ive
needs to become the spokesperson for apple now!!!
Immediately!!!
He has the look, the accent, and looks like he can put up a good fight.
Apple... Are you listening????

Ive is much more reserved whose passion is design, not marketing or business.

 

[GanleyBurger]

Ive is much more reserved whose passion is design, not marketing or business.

Yes, but remember..
Marketing is not a battle of products, it is a battle of perceptions.
Ive doesn't need to become the CEO or the head of Apple...
He just needs to introduce products and make announcements...
keeping his current job...
He has the 'X-Factor' and looks and sounds like a global, intelligent, hip tech guy.

 

[Gomff]

Besides this guy looks a little effeminate in that picture.

I know Apple's logo used to be rainbow, but... eh heh, I understood it was a different rainbow, or so I hope.

The 90's called.....Said they wanted their outdated attitudes to sexual preference back.

 

[Bernard SG]

Besides this guy looks a little effeminate in that picture.

I know Apple's logo used to be rainbow, but... eh heh, I understood it was a different rainbow, or so I hope.

Tim Cook is *strongly* rumored to be gay.
Which is totally okay in my book btw.
But there you go... Are you switching to Samsung now?

 

[Damtoft]

Scott Forstall will be a better CEO than Steve Jobs

 

[CFreymarc]

Scott is always smiling. It looks fake.

Not that that wouldn't make him a good CEO for Apple. But it seems to me he tries to hard to look enthusiastic.

I ran into Scott back in his NeXT days. Very good engineer, very good planner. However, I didn't see the take-the-hard-right-making-it-great that Jobs had in him. Honestly, it may not be Scott nor Cook, but this company is so set up for complacency when Job's product plans run dry in a few years.

My take is that an outsider coming in to make the Next Great Thing when everyone goes back to playing tennis / volleyball / pool for a half day and then doing a handful of hours everyday ah la the Spindler years.

 

[Rogifan]

Yes, but remember..
Marketing is not a battle of products, it is a battle of perceptions.
Ive doesn't need to become the CEO or the head of Apple...
He just needs to introduce products and make announcements...
keeping his current job...
He has the 'X-Factor' and looks and sounds like a global, intelligent, hip tech guy.

i would argue of all the Apple executives Ive has the 'coolness' or 'it' factor more than anyone else. I don't think people look at Forstall and think 'cool'. He comes across as more of a geeky nerd. While I think Ive is great in product videos and gave a fantastic speech at Steve's memorial I don't think he's th best public speaker, and he's admitted as much. I think he'd prefer NOT to be on stage giving keynotes. Anyway if Forstall is ever Apple CEO I bet it will be after Ive has left the company. I can't see him ever reporting to Forstall.

 

[vrDrew]

What would happen if Scott and Tim were on the same plane?

Most large companies have fairly strict rules that would prevent several key executives from traveling on the same plane.

Succession Planning is indeed an important part of a company's corporate strategy. The Board, usually working with VP of Human resources and the General Counsel, are generally responsible for this part of corporate governance. And I would be very surprised indeed if they didn't have plans in place in case any one of a dozen or more key Apple executives were to suddenly not be able to work.

Succession Planning, however, is very different from having an assumed or named "CEO-in-waiting" hanging around for an extended period. This is generally thought to be a very bad idea. For one thing, it tends to diminish the authority of the actual, present, CEO. People may think "why should I do what this guy says - instead I'll suck up to the guy who's going to be boss in the future.." In some cases it may even result in people sabotaging the efforts of the current CEO, hoping to hasten the day that regime change takes place.

The other reason having a "CEO-in-waiting" is a very bad idea is that it acts as a disincentive to other top managers. They may think to themselves "why should I keep knocking myself out, if I know I'm never going to be the top boss." It also makes those executives much more receptive to offers from other firms, who may wish to poach away top talent.

Obviously there are exceptions to this, an example being Apple's recent history, where the CEO had serious health issues necessitating lengthy leaves-of-absence and for someone to step in and assume the day-to-day responsibility for running the company. But this isn't the case with Apple now. Tim Cook has only been CEO for a few months. In fairness to him, and to the other top managers at Apple, it would be a very bad idea for anyone to become an "heir apparent."

 

[AppleScruff1]

Most large companies have fairly strict rules that would prevent several key executives from traveling on the same plane.

Succession Planning is indeed an important part of a company's corporate strategy. The Board, usually working with VP of Human resources and the General Counsel, are generally responsible for this part of corporate governance. And I would be very surprised indeed if they didn't have plans in place in case any one of a dozen or more key Apple executives were to suddenly not be able to work.

Succession Planning, however, is very different from having an assumed or named "CEO-in-waiting" hanging around for an extended period. This is generally thought to be a very bad idea. For one thing, it tends to diminish the authority of the actual, present, CEO. People may think "why should I do what this guy says - instead I'll suck up to the guy who's going to be boss in the future.." In some cases it may even result in people sabotaging the efforts of the current CEO, hoping to hasten the day that regime change takes place.

The other reason having a "CEO-in-waiting" is a very bad idea is that it acts as a disincentive to other top managers. They may think to themselves "why should I keep knocking myself out, if I know I'm never going to be the top boss." It also makes those executives much more receptive to offers from other firms, who may wish to poach away top talent.

Obviously there are exceptions to this, an example being Apple's recent history, where the CEO had serious health issues necessitating lengthy leaves-of-absence and for someone to step in and assume the day-to-day responsibility for running the company. But this isn't the case with Apple now. Tim Cook has only been CEO for a few months. In fairness to him, and to the other top managers at Apple, it would be a very bad idea for anyone to become an "heir apparent."

Excellent post. Thumbs up.

 

[Imhotep397]

Where do people get this stuff?

What do you know about what Forstall has created at Apple or that he's chomping at the bit to take over.

Apple doesn't create that many products and it really doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out Steve Jobs and Johnny Ive designed the iPhone and the iPad (the main products Forstall maintains the back end of.) The thing is it's fine to have someone that's ambitious and it's fine to have someone that's a programmer, but if Apple is going to put a programmer in the CEO position that person ought to have a magnetic personality to go along with that and be a person that likes the idea of inventing things or at least has a lot of respect for a legacy of inventing things. Marissa Mayer seems to represent these values pretty well.

Every time I see Forstall make a presentation and introduce the things he's created, in my mind, I don't see anything that he's personally done without the team that knocks me out and the first thing I visualize is a "Snake Oil" salesman. It sounds like I'm not the only one either.

 

[rdowns]

Apple doesn't create that many products and it really doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out Steve Jobs and Johnny Ive designed the iPhone and the iPad (the main products Forstall maintains the back end of.) The thing is it's fine to have someone that's ambitious and it's fine to have someone that's a programmer, but if Apple is going to put a programmer in the CEO position that person ought to have a magnetic personality to go along with that and be a person that likes the idea of inventing things or at least has a lot of respect for a legacy of inventing things. Every time I see Forstall make a presentation and introduce the things he's created, in my mind, the first thing I visualize is a "Snake Oil" salesman. It sounds like I'm not the only one either.

Again, where do you get this stuff? You know nothing about him and you are simply posting your opinions, ignorant ones IMO. Do you really believe Jobs and Ive create products without input and ideas from others? I think you do.