Steve Jobs Planned to Work on Apple TV Set After Stepping Down as Apple CEO

[maxsix]

The timing of this story is designed to draw attention to Apple due to the lack of buzz and excitement leading up to iPhone 7. Now just another consumer electronics gadget company, Apple's magic is gone.

Samsung dominates TV sales while Apple fails to deliver.

 

[pkginstall]

First, Just so we are on the same Page, the comment I made regarding Tim Cook was to be in respect and By no means was it to be demeaning to him in any way, being I appreciate him as a person and as Apple's CEO.

I don't want to stray to far off topic, but I'm not sure how the respect factor applies to Cook, being the same could be said about Jobs, "How do you know this?" It's more of a synopsis on how I view both of these CEO's over their years with Apple. I know as much as I have invested my time into discussion and studying the differences in Apple's work patterns over the years. If your seeking validation of indefinite answers to My quote, I don't believe anyone here can explain anything to you other than Cooks exposed interviews and or publicly made comments, being what I have listed below.

I look and measure Cooks over all demeanor on how he has spent his career with Apple during interviews with Earnings Calls, Charlie Rose, Jim Cramer, MSNBC, ABC and more. Cook, to me, is an astute businessman with the drive to understand Apple's current financial situation of how they invest and spend their money. There is no doubt Apple has struggled with various aspects in the Company and Cook has had to answer tough questions in the lime light. I think it's very evident Cook is self aware of where every Penney is being spent on Apple and managed for that matter, and blatantly admits on how Apple answers for it.

I don't have a citation to provide you, but another forum member made a great point a few months back. He/she said when Tim was appointed CEO back in 2011 prior to Jobs death, "Cook would be handed the keys to a Company where he knew how to ride the financial train for Apple, but leave the engineering to Ives."

Truthfully, that's how I view Cook. And the consideration it's been discussed on Macrumors thousands of posts worth. If your looking for actual hard evidence of "How do you know this?" That's what I can provide to you in my best way of my years being a customer, Past shareholder and Overall Apple enthusiast. It seems Cook has had to answer for Apple's 'Doom and Gloom' responsibilities, more so, now with the whole tax evasion concern.

No one here can truly state already what we know about Cook other than what is exposed of Apple and Cooks work history with Apple since 1998. Also on that Note, Wasn't Cook the lead financial fulfillment director for IBM? If I recall correctly, I believe he was. So Cook has the past experience in acting in a position where he can lead or fail (Take your pick) billion dollar Corporation.

Also the point of my reference to Jobs I stated above, one can say "In respect to Steve Jobs, how do you know this?" Which would open a whole another discussion.

Thanks for your question.

Not to mention his refinement and perfection of the coordination of supply chain channels and his design and refinement of an in-house supply chain software suite, the name of which escapes me.

People short-sightedly "dislike" Tim because "he's not Steve Jobs", instead of accepting that obvious fact and liking him for being Tim Cook, supply chain and coordination marvel, and rudder for a ship which is oft buffeted by huge waves of criticism and wilful ignorance.

You might like:
http://www.cips.org/supply-manageme...-customer-behind-apples-supply-chain-success/

 

[anomie]

I bet Jobs could've got it done through force of will and pure ambition.

Yeah sure... and he was a half-god, not a mere human being with a little megalomania.
Sorry folks, Jobs did not "crack it", he simply "failed it".
[doublepost=1472733138][/doublepost]

The timing of this story is designed to draw attention to Apple due to the lack of buzz and excitement leading up to iPhone 7. Now just another consumer electronics gadget company, Apple's magic is gone.

Samsung dominates TV sales while Apple fails to deliver.

Yeah but be fair: the time of "magical" devices is over. We saw everything already, only minor tweaks are possible now. Can´t blame Apple for that.

 

[cmichaelb]

I also have un upgradable Samsung TV and they already abandoned it. They will never release an update of said connect box. My fault in believing Samsung would be future oriented instead of being a low margin consumables company.

How do you know they abandoned it? Is your box black or silver?
[doublepost=1472738279][/doublepost]

Samsung seem to have something going with the external connect box except they have failed to upgrade it. The only advantage mine offers is that the TV is wall mounted and I need just one cable between the box and the TV with all the HDMI and network cables connecting to the box.

Well they aren't that old yet. Only the 9000 series are upgradable I believe and really, I haven't seen any reason to upgrade them yet.
[doublepost=1472738317][/doublepost]

Like the Xbox One - unfortunately that idea failed too.

LOL well that was doomed from the start. It's a game console. They didn't focus on the core business of a game console. PS3 tried to be a mutlimedia hub and got hammered by the 360. MS should have learned from that experience, Sony did.

Apple tv w/ pass through would be a dedicated tv appliance.

 

[usarioclave]

Well, didn't he tell anyone else about his ideas? That sounds unlikely.

 

[Vash108]

Would it just be an Apple TV built into a TV? Or I wonder if it would be more of something like MacBook specs inside a TV. Can be used for Light tasks and web browsing.

 

[sportsfan]

Live content (sports) is the only thing holding the networks cable packages together. Once ESPN decouples itself from the cable/satellite packages, the whole house of cards will fall.
[doublepost=1472742570][/doublepost]Netflix is creating some great, original content. The big network's shift to all reality tv all the time is hurting them. It may have goosed the bottom line, but long term it will be a brand killer for them.

 

[kemal]

Amazon FireTV and PlayStation Vue have re-invented the TV.

Point is, it doesn't need to change much. It needs to be a whole lot les expensive.

*The Fire TV and one one month of Vue cost less than cable.
**The remote needs work.

 

[citysnaps]

First, Just so we are on the same Page, the comment I made regarding Tim Cook was to be in respect and By no means was it to be demeaning to him in any way, being I appreciate him as a person and as Apple's CEO.

I don't want to stray to far off topic, but I'm not sure how the respect factor applies to Cook, being the same could be said about Jobs, "How do you know this?" It's more of a synopsis on how I view both of these CEO's over their years with Apple. I know as much as I have invested my time into discussion and studying the differences in Apple's work patterns over the years. If your seeking validation of indefinite answers to My quote, I don't believe anyone here can explain anything to you other than Cooks exposed interviews and or publicly made comments, being what I have listed below.

I look and measure Cooks over all demeanor on how he has spent his career with Apple during interviews with Earnings Calls, Charlie Rose, Jim Cramer, MSNBC, ABC and more. Cook, to me, is an astute businessman with the drive to understand Apple's current financial situation of how they invest and spend their money. There is no doubt Apple has struggled with various aspects in the Company and Cook has had to answer tough questions in the lime light. I think it's very evident Cook is self aware of where every Penney is being spent on Apple and managed for that matter, and blatantly admits on how Apple answers for it.

I don't have a citation to provide you, but another forum member made a great point a few months back. He/she said when Tim was appointed CEO back in 2011 prior to Jobs death, "Cook would be handed the keys to a Company where he knew how to ride the financial train for Apple, but leave the engineering to Ives."

Truthfully, that's how I view Cook. And the consideration it's been discussed on Macrumors thousands of posts worth. If your looking for actual hard evidence of "How do you know this?" That's what I can provide to you in my best way of my years being a customer, Past shareholder and Overall Apple enthusiast. It seems Cook has had to answer for Apple's 'Doom and Gloom' responsibilities, more so, now with the whole tax evasion concern.

No one here can truly state already what we know about Cook other than what is exposed of Apple and Cooks work history with Apple since 1998. Also on that Note, Wasn't Cook the lead financial fulfillment director for IBM? If I recall correctly, I believe he was. So Cook has the past experience in acting in a position where he can lead or fail (Take your pick) billion dollar Corporation.

Also the point of my reference to Jobs I stated above, one can say "In respect to Steve Jobs, how do you know this?" Which would open a whole another discussion.

Thanks for your question.

OK, thanks. From your reply to my question about your original assertion:
"And to add, Cook just doesn't acquire the tenacity and demand that Jobs had. Cook is more business orientated on the books and numbers, while Jobs was a relentless shark and a salesman in the same pitch."

I'm left convinced you know very little about Tim Cook and what his background and accomplishments were at Apple before Steve Jobs passed the baton to him. And instead rely on MacRumors' relentless Cook-bashing for your understanding.

Due to your lack of reference, you seem to either not know, or do not think it is particularly relevant what Cook's roll and achievements at Apple previously were.

Or if you did, you apparently felt that setting up and leading an incredibly efficient world-class supply chain and manufacturing operation, negotiating with myriad suppliers, all leading to a system that can turn on a dime at a moment's notice while dealing with huge volumes (>330M iPhones since 2015) at one of the most successful companies in the world did not require having tenacity or demand that was worthy of consideration or acknowledgement.

I suspect Jobs passed the leadership roll to Cook precisely for that incredible achievement, requiring the tenacity/demand that you believe he doesn't have.

 

[Statelymwhite]

I want my actual television set to do one thing, and that is display the best picture and sound possible. I don't want to touch it, and I don't want to have to sit back and watch both the display technology and "smart" feature both rocket towards obsolescence together.

The TV should be seen and heard, and nothing else. The brains I am perfectly happy plugging in from an external, modern, and always evolving source.

 

[IJ Reilly]

if anyone can do that, it would be Steve.

Just re-watch his speeches and presentations around 1997~2000 (and of course the iPhone intro) - pure Genius, passion about products, Eagle-like vision, impeccable salesmanship and irresistible charisma.

Now we have.... you know...

Sigh. I attended the majority of the Stevenotes late '90s through mid-2000s with a media badge (meaning, sitting up front). These were the prime years for Steve's sales pitch. They were memorable events and I am happy to have been witness to some of this history. They were akin to tent revival meetings. The likes of them were never seen before and will probably not be seen again (sorry Elon, you just don't have it).

And yet, walking out of the hall, regaining some objectivity, the mind turned to the substance. As often as not, once out of range of Steve's RDF, we were left grasping at straws. Steve was one helluva showman who could put on one helluva show, even if he had nothing much to show. Some might not know this or have forgotten it, but I do know it, and I can't forget. The rose-colored glasses thing just doesn't work on me.

On this subject, it's seems utterly preposterous to believe, let alone assume, that Steve and Steve alone knew exactly how to "crack" the TV problem, and that solution (or the ability to implement it) magically went with him to his grave. This concept does not pass the even the most modest sniff test. It is based entirely on the belief that Steve in life turned water into wine. Well he and his company accomplished a lot, but none of it involved actual miracles, even if Steve had the talent to convince a lot of people that they were somehow miraculous. And lest we forget the number of Steve's touted miracles that were booted pretty badly. So I no more believe that Steve was in possession of the secret key to TV then I believe in little Mars men or unicorns.

That's the real world. I invite anyone with an interest in stuff that actually exists to join those of us who prefer to live in it.

 

[Sakurambo-kun]

Too bad he didn't just say "lets just build a portable iTunes app and not waste time with the hardware".
[doublepost=1472681127][/doublepost]

Because people still watch live television and, well, for most of the apps you still need to have your TV service. Kind of defeated the concept of app based television. It does work nicely in the low use guest room. They can watch TV on apps and I don't have to have another DirecTV unit in there.

The UK is rather different to the US in that to my knowledge no streaming apps require a cable subscription. They're all stand alone, and many are free. They'd be a good fit for the Apple TV, so it's too bad they're nowhere to be seen. They're all over the Roku and Fire TV, needless to say.

 

[Appleaker]

Found it: http://www.businessinsider.com/steve-jobs-no-television-2014-3

"'TV is a terrible business. They don't turn over and the margins suck,' said Jobs."

Global compatibility could have been a factor as well.

Yeah I am sure that is true, he also mentioned compatibility in another interview with Walt Mossberg.

 

[SusanK]

We used to wait for wwdc to enjoy Steve's keynote and the unveiling of new gadgets now it's different

Different indeed. Watchbands don't excite me. Now we just hope Cook doesn't say something to tank the share price. If he would just stop talking.

 

[chiefsilverback]

Maybe the current Apple tv is a step in that direction, and they are still perfecting their model. It makes mention of iCloud, maybe they are still building out the behind the scenes infrastructure. Who knows?

I still miss TV episode rentals and I'd love to see them back. Just last night I had to go and buy an episode of show for $3 because the corresponding VOD service (NBC) doesn't have. I have no use for the episode once I've watched it, I'm never going to sit down and watch it again.

 

[ric275]

I really want to update my Apple TV but I'm hoping there will be a 5th Gen with 4K support arriving in the not-so distant future.

 

[weeniewawa?]

Apple will stagnate until Tim "Amelio" Cook is tossed out

There is no Steve Jobs to rescue the company this time

 

[Tech198]

ok.... I reckon these cool screenshots MR should also be posting the game names so i can get them.

 

[Pilgrim1099]

OK, thanks. From your reply to my question about your original assertion:
"And to add, Cook just doesn't acquire the tenacity and demand that Jobs had. Cook is more business orientated on the books and numbers, while Jobs was a relentless shark and a salesman in the same pitch."

I'm left convinced you know very little about Tim Cook and what his background and accomplishments were at Apple before Steve Jobs passed the baton to him. And instead rely on MacRumors' relentless Cook-bashing for your understanding.

Due to your lack of reference, you seem to either not know, or do not think it is particularly relevant what Cook's roll and achievements at Apple previously were.

Or if you did, you apparently felt that setting up and leading an incredibly efficient world-class supply chain and manufacturing operation, negotiating with myriad suppliers, all leading to a system that can turn on a dime at a moment's notice while dealing with huge volumes (>330M iPhones since 2015) at one of the most successful companies in the world did not require having tenacity or demand that was worthy of consideration or acknowledgement.

I suspect Jobs passed the leadership roll to Cook precisely for that incredible achievement, requiring the tenacity/demand that you believe he doesn't have.

From what I heard and read here, it was Steve who ORIGINALLY wanted to hire an outsider to run Apple. That idea got turned down by the BoD and he chose Cook, almost as if he had no choice in the matter.

It makes me wonder why he wanted an outsider in the first place. Did he know the execs would get lazy without an outsider that would lead to what's happening now? I wonder if Steve saw that coming and kept his mouth shut even though he told Tim not to be him and do what's right for the company.

He must've had had someone else in mind before picking Tim Cook.

 

[IJ Reilly]

From what I heard and read here, it was Steve who ORIGINALLY wanted to hire an outsider to run Apple. That idea got turned down by the BoD and he chose Cook, almost as if he had no choice in the matter.

It makes me wonder why he wanted an outsider in the first place. Did he know the execs would get lazy without an outsider that would lead to what's happening now? I wonder if Steve saw that coming and kept his mouth shut even though he told Tim not to be him and do what's right for the company.

He must've had had someone else in mind before picking Tim Cook.

Source?

 

[Pilgrim1099]

Source?

It's mentioned somewhere in MR at a recent thread. I forget the name of the OP but don't think it's Cfreymarc but it could've been. It was quite...interesting.

 

[44267547]

OK, thanks. From your reply to my question about your original assertion:

I'm left convinced you know very little about Tim Cook and what his background and accomplishments were at Apple before Steve Jobs passed the baton to him. And instead rely on MacRumors' relentless Cook-bashing for your understanding.

Due to your lack of reference, you seem to either not know, or do not think it is particularly relevant what Cook's roll and achievements at Apple previously were.

Or if you did, you apparently felt that setting up and leading an incredibly efficient world-class supply chain and manufacturing operation, negotiating with myriad suppliers, all leading to a system that can turn on a dime at a moment's notice while dealing with huge volumes (>330M iPhones since 2015) at one of the most successful companies in the world did not require having tenacity or demand that was worthy of consideration or acknowledgement.

I suspect Jobs passed the leadership roll to Cook precisely for that incredible achievement, requiring the tenacity/demand that you believe he doesn't have.

Without being petulant, You responded exactly how I thought you would by categorizing me into your quote "And instead rely on Macrumor's relentless cook-bashing for your understanding." You are highly inaccurate. Don't interject or place me into any submission into what I already provided you. I have a great deal of respect for Cook. Second, your reading my views entirely different based on my original quote to you, by providing my an iPhone volume number, when yes, Cook is a businessman, which I already stated, without breaking it into terms of numbers.

I see what everyone else does through the media, interviews and exposure from earnings calls/Key Notes. I dont need to provide you with concrete numbers or statistics to ultimately prove how Cook is. But make no mistake about it, Cook is not a salesman and does not have the tenacity that Jobs portrayed in obtaining results, which is not to say Jobs was not without flaws.

Cook also on stage is not what Jobs was, anyone will contest to this, which is why I stated Jobs was a salesman, and a very good one. Cook is the backbone of the financial means of Apple, which I agree with you on how he creates the rapport with suppliers oversea's and among many other things.

Cook is worthy of being acknowledged for many things, but again, not the tenacity and demand Jobs once had. So you suspect Jobs passed the leadership roll to Cook precisely for that achievement? How do you know this? Did Jobs for see Apple as it is now in their current state? Did Jobs envision Apple having one of the worst years in iPhone history with a reported net loss? Did Jobs fully understand how Apple has strayed away from providing new hardware, more specifically the lack of updated Macbooks? Which correct me if I am wrong, is the reason Apple is what is today? Did Jobs ever ponder how his shareholders would dump millions in shares? Clearly your precise analogy is no greater than anyone else's here on Macrumors for that matter.

Nobody can speak for Jobs and how he envisioned Apple's future. So your opinion is no different than mine, other than you providing me an iPhone number and manufacturer relations. I see Cook as leader in terms of Apple's well being, but not the drive Jobs had.

If your left convinced I don't have a full understanding on How Cook is or was in the past, its no secret, I openly admitted that in my previous post, being I see what everyone else does and I feel I follow Apple closely. The one thing that annoys me most is when forum members say "Jobs would have never done that or this never would have happened under Jobs reign." Its as if someone is pretending they were Jobs/Cooks lunch buddy, when in reality, they see exactly what is presented to them through the media, which is ALL you see. My post still stands, Cook does not have the tenacity and demand Jobs once possessed. Cook has different cues and strengths, but no one could surpass what Jobs did.

 

[fischersd]

Yeah but be fair: the time of "magical" devices is over. We saw everything already, only minor tweaks are possible now. Can´t blame Apple for that.

Heh, you're kidding, right? . Look at the changes we've seen over the last decade. Yep. You're right. There's nothing cool to see ever again...let's just form a line to the graveyard and pull the dirt over ourselves. Heh.

Innovation comes in waves. We just saw that the industry will be doubling battery capacity in a year or two due to innovation. Apple's going to be making micro-LED screens in the not-so-distant future. They're planning on having a car on the road in another 5 years (ok, it'll likely be 6 or 7).

Year over year with a single product, the incremental improvements add up to significant changes in a very short period of time.

If anything, technological change is accelerating. Give it time.

Oh...and on the Apple TV set? Smart money is to have a module that pulls out of the back/side - that's the bit that you can upgrade every few years. The set you only actually upgrade when you have huge jumps in screen tech (1080p/4k/8k, maybe glasses free 3D).

 

[citysnaps]

From what I heard and read here, it was Steve who ORIGINALLY wanted to hire an outsider to run Apple. That idea got turned down by the BoD and he chose Cook, almost as if he had no choice in the matter.

It makes me wonder why he wanted an outsider in the first place. Did he know the execs would get lazy without an outsider that would lead to what's happening now? I wonder if Steve saw that coming and kept his mouth shut even though he told Tim not to be him and do what's right for the company.

He must've had had someone else in mind before picking Tim Cook.

Can you supply a credible link saying the board of directors turned Jobs down on going outside for his successor?

Without that, you're just making stuff up and presenting it as fact when you say, "It makes me wonder why he wanted an outsider in the first place. ... He must've had had someone else in mind before picking Tim Cook."

 

[Pilgrim1099]

Can you supply a credible link that the board of directors turned Jobs down on picking Cook?

I'm trying to find it. I know it was brought up by someone on MR the other day. Trying to remember where it was. But I do recall clearly what the poster said.