Despite what some youngsters here think, being successful doesn't require being a jerk, nor does it confer special do-anything-you-want rights.
Steve Jobs' personality and attitude and entire management philosophy was also a winning formula. No matter how distasteful (unwarrantedly) you think it is, it needs to continue. This industry is ridiculously cutthroat - now more than ever. Apple needs a firm hand, and an
uncompromising hand.
Any change in management style is cause for a little worry.
Thank goodness for Tim Cook, who seems the opposite of Jobs, more thoughtful and respectful of people.
Let's hope not too much. Apple has always needed (and continues to need) a firm visionary - one that inspires more respect than love, and one that is feared by Apple's competitors. Apple is unique, at least in part, because its leader was also unique, and those "undesirable" characteristics were
exactly what was necessary to compete with the also-rans that have flooded the market with cheap derivative junk.
Steve Jobs' style obviously paid off - to the tune of about $80 billion, with MS firmly in rearview. Steve Jobs' style revived Apple in record time, changed and created entire markets, and was an example of how to not only run a business, but make rivals look like flat-footed idiots. Any change to that style carries some major risks.
Apple needs a combination of a**shole + visionary + obsessive (with perfection), and nothing less. Nothing less at all. It is precisely these traits that have kept Apple not only above water, but way above the also-rans.
This is not to say that another style wouldn't work, but that any deviation from the "Apple status quo" needs to be justified fully and completely. And at this point, I really don't see any justification for a change in management style.
Hopefully Tim Cook + Jon Ive + Scott Forstall can = 1 Steve Jobs. Cook ran Apple very well in Jobs' absence, but operations-savvy is only half of what Apple needs. We'll see in due course what Tim Cook's Apple is made of.