Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Must be weird to have a job where you basically win the lottery with Every. Single. Paycheck.
 
Because nobody here is a CEO of a successful company.
Or rather, that's why they are not the CEO of a successful company.
[doublepost=1481640285][/doublepost]
That's because most members are more interested in the products than the profits.
Or rather, they only think about themselves and would prefer that Apple cater to their wants and their wants alone at the expense of everything else.

Apple has achieved so many milestones and the only thing going through their minds is "where's 32 gb ram on my MBP?"
[doublepost=1481640375][/doublepost]
Ripping off customers must be a highly regarded skill for a CEO.
You give Apple customers too little credit.
[doublepost=1481640435][/doublepost]
Well this article will surely rankle The Tim haters.
And impeccably-timed too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: doelcm82 and CB1234
I feel like this economic path to success under Cook's rule isn't a sustainable one. Previously, it would seem that Apple's focus was to surprise consumers with amazing technology and impeccable innovation. But now it would seem that their focus is on squeezing costs and increasing margins in every facet of their business. They're taking advantage of what has made them successful but there's only so much mediocrity their loyal followers are willing to put up with before they become loyal no more.
In general, I think that Cook has done a good job at CEO, but he lacks the "cojones" to take risk on products and instead is happy with a more incremental and conservative approach. To be fair, most of those increments have been positive changes, it just not coming fast enough for some. With the phone as an example, people here complain about the form factor that has not changed in three years. I am actually okay with that. However, changing to OLED or mLED, getting rid of the bezels and home button are things that Apple could have done a while ago within the current form factor but has resisted IMO because of the conservative approach. The other issue is that Tim spends too much time in Politics and other efforts outside of Apple.

I would love for Tim to focus exclusively on Apple and take bolder decisions. Taking a few more risks (other than getting rid of the 3.5 jack) is what Apple has been based on and what has gotten them where they are. The conservative approach gives consistent returns, but a slower pace means the competition can and will catch up and eventually surpass them. This is what we do not want.
 
If he's undervalued and I hope he realized that soon. Can any other company offer him big money enough to entice him to leave Apple. That would be an awesome turn out and it's a win-win situation. :D
 
He's not a bad CEO but he's not a good one. He's definitely responsible for helping Apple to quickly scale over the years from an operations perspective. He has also done a lot to ensure customer privacy remains a focus, as well as a more sustainable supply chain and renewable energy for data sensors. He's also fairly charitable. But as for running Apple, he got kind of lucky taking over during a time of dramatic growth. As a CEO, I don't feel like he has done anything exceptional, but he has kept Apple going. IMO they're not headed in the right direction, but there's still time to fix things before it gets too bad. I'm just not sure if he can see the issues boiling beneath the surface with many of his customers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: George Dawes
Cook is a logistics genius. He really is. What he's achieved with manufacturing and markup is unparalleled in the industry.

What he suffers with is something that Jobs was so good at: looking at products from the view of the consumer. If Jobs sat down and used an entry-level Mac Mini in 2016, he'd question why it was so damned slow. The engineers would answer that it's due to the 5400RPM drive. So Jobs would simply make sure it's a Fusion drive at minimum to give the impression of quick real-world performance.

That's what's most frustrating. There's very little that needs to be improved to make every Mac across the board perform to an Apple-quality level. But sometimes I get the feeling he's looking to upsell more than the consumer getting a great product, regardless of what they buy.

There's one problem with that. He's NOT doing Logistics/Operations anymore. That was his old job. You know who's doing that now? Jeff Williams. Hand picked by Cook, who followed him from IBM back in 1998 and also graduated at the same university together in the days before IBM and Apple.

As far as improving on the products, the blame lies on him for approving such decisions. He allowed them to happen when he shouldn't have.
[doublepost=1481642558][/doublepost]
In general, I think that Cook has done a good job at CEO, but he lacks the "cojones" to take risk on products and instead is happy with a more incremental and conservative approach. To be fair, most of those increments have been positive changes, it just not coming fast enough for some. With the phone as an example, people here complain about the form factor that has not changed in three years. I am actually okay with that. However, changing to OLED or mLED, getting rid of the bezels and home button are things that Apple could have done a while ago within the current form factor but has resisted IMO because of the conservative approach. The other issue is that Tim spends too much time in Politics and other efforts outside of Apple.

I would love for Tim to focus exclusively on Apple and take bolder decisions. Taking a few more risks (other than getting rid of the 3.5 jack) is what Apple has been based on and what has gotten them where they are. The conservative approach gives consistent returns, but a slower pace means the competition can and will catch up and eventually surpass them. This is what we do not want.

He has no balls to get things done nor rein in Ive's crackpot design acumen. He needs to stop kissing Ive's ass. Seriously. And making Ive Chief Creative Officer is a huge mistake.

Second, as far as the competition catching up, they already have. And surpassed Apple. The only way to turn this company around is to get rid of him and a few others because their executive presence is what's hurting it. And some of them are out of touch with today's consumers. Way out of touch.

And when ( and if ) Trump officially gets sworn in, he's gonna give Cook an earful, breathing down his neck to the point where he'll want to get out. I may not agree with Trump, but he's going to give Tim nightmares. Anyway, that's not the point of this post but rather to point out that Cook's presence, if prolonged, will hurt Apple in the long run.

The company has lost direction under him because he LOST control over the executives. The late Jobs, however, was not afraid to bring the hammer down.

Apple needs a new hammer. Not an ass kisser.
 
The people that want him out should be careful for what they wish for. He is the only CEO that truly cares about privacy. Once he goes all data will go to the FBI. This is what separates Apple from the others. And is actually a reason why I think he will be ousted sooner rather than later because there are more powerful people in the game.
 
Or rather, that's why they are not the CEO of a successful company.
[doublepost=1481640285][/doublepost]
Or rather, they only think about themselves and would prefer that Apple cater to their wants and their wants alone at the expense of everything else.

Apple has achieved so many milestones and the only thing going through their minds is "where's 32 gb ram on my MBP?"
[doublepost=1481640375][/doublepost]
You give Apple customers too little credit.
[doublepost=1481640435][/doublepost]
And impeccably-timed too.

Or rather, would you like a crippled Macbook or a tricked out to the max device? These days, you do NEED lots of RAM on desktop OSes, especially on mobile products. Software is taking up more memory whenever they upgrade. The bigger the upgrade, the more RAM is required. You would be surprised at how much Mac OS X takes up RAM-wise.

You can accept blindly from what Apple Ingsoc has to give you or form your own critical thinking for yourself and demand better from them. Are you " Winston Smith " trying to revise facts to favor Apple?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Huck
Or rather, would you like a crippled Macbook or a tricked out to the max device? These days, you do NEED lots of RAM on desktop OSes, especially on mobile products. Software is taking up more memory whenever they upgrade. The bigger the upgrade, the more RAM is required. You would be surprised at how much Mac OS X takes up RAM-wise.

You can accept blindly from what Apple Ingsoc has to give you or form your own critical thinking for yourself and demand better from them. Are you " Winston Smith " trying to revise facts to favor Apple?

I am still chugging along on my MBA with 4gb of ram just fine. And my iMac with 8 gb ram rarely goes over that limit.

All other things equal, I won't deny that more ram is better than less, but I feel the importance of 32 gb of ram is being over-exaggerated here.
 
I am still chugging along on my MBA with 4gb of ram just fine. And my iMac with 8 gb ram rarely goes over that limit.

All other things equal, I won't deny that more ram is better than less, but I feel the importance of 32 gb of ram is being over-exaggerated here.

I run out of ram at 16gb. All because you manage on 4 doesn't make you everyone or even necessarily a typical user.
 
I run out of ram at 16gb. All because you manage on 4 doesn't make you everyone or even necessarily a typical user.

I would argue that it is you who aren't the typical user. Most people should do just fine with 16 gb of ram and that's who Apple is targeting. No point saddling them with more power-hungry ram, especially since most won't ever go with the 32gb option.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.