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.
Tim Cook Putting His Stamp on Apple
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yup, but iOS 5 iPad Music app is one of the worst Apple software in recent times.
Hmm..
I thought about this and it's obvious we don't know sh|t because we don't know the man. But after seeing him a couple of times during some keynotes, I think he's a nice guy and might know a lot, but he's not a product guy. I would fall asleep if he would hold a keynote for longer than 30 minutes without a break from a colleague. He has this monotone soft voice and isn't really a salesperson nor a man who has the magic like Steve had.
But time will tell
I thought about this and it's obvious we don't know sh|t because we don't know the man. But after seeing him a couple of times during some keynotes, I think he's a nice guy and might know a lot, but he's not a product guy. I would fall asleep if he would hold a keynote for longer than 30 minutes without a break from a colleague. He has this monotone soft voice and isn't really a salesperson nor a man who has the magic like Steve had.
But time will tell
Good for Tim. It seems like he has much better people skills than Jobs did. He doesn't think the world revolves around him like the egomaniac did. Apple will be a better company all around now.
Anyone who thinks Cook is not fit for the job believes they know what is better for Apple than Steve did. After all it was Steve who recommended Cook as the next CEO. I'm sure it was Steve who recommended Cook takeover when he took his medical leaves.
There is a good reason why Apple does not issue dividends. Stockholders far prefer a rapidly increasing stock price associated with high growth and high margins associated with HUGE investments made possible ONLY because of a huge cash hoard.
As for stock buy-backs, if they didn't do it in March 2009, then why do it now or ever with large increases in values?
Now if they can "go private" . . . .
Rocketman
As for stock buy-backs, if they didn't do it in March 2009, then why do it now or ever with large increases in values?
Now if they can "go private" . . . .
Rocketman
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/9A334)
Here's what I think....Steve left Apple in good hands....since the Apple executive team knows how good Steve's product vision was, why would they stop following it, even after his death....I understand that within ten years the market will change and will have to rely on a new vision which I think is in good hands.
Here's what I think....Steve left Apple in good hands....since the Apple executive team knows how good Steve's product vision was, why would they stop following it, even after his death....I understand that within ten years the market will change and will have to rely on a new vision which I think is in good hands.
Don't forget that Jobs was also responsible for John Sculley becoming CEO, so that's not necessarily a convincing argument.
Keep in mind during the iPhone 4S launch all the Apple people there knew Steve was in a very bad way... just not that he was literaly on what would turn out to be his death bed. It's kinda hard to be up beat and "wowing" when something like is going on.
Sorry for being a bit morbid but I'll give Cook and crew a pass on being entertaining for that launch given the circumstances.
Only Steve and Tim worked together for over a decade before Steve recommended he take his position as CEO. Steve knew Tim much better than he ever knew Sculley.
Steve told them to Do what you think its right, don't do what you think Steve would do. looks like they are following his orders and what great advice to leave.
Tim is a quiet, thoughtful executive who has been running the company for several years now. He's no newcomer. He clearly has his own ideas and is already showing signs of running a better, "tighter ship" as CEO. Based on what I am seeing, I look for Apple to continue fast development but also to broaden its existing products and fine tune them even more to provide an even better customer experience. I have total confidence in Tim to lead the company and us as that company's market.
That Steve Jobs and the one who ran Apple for the last 10 years were very different people. I subscribe to the thought that if Jobs wasn't forced out, Apple would have died.
Yes, but Ive is only part of the equation. Who is going to make sure the software stays great? I'm not sure if Forstall is the one.
Could be. Kind of "falling upwards" for Steve at that time. I'm sure that time changed and grew his personality.
You make a good point here about focus - far too many CEOs allow themselves to be distracted 'in the weeds' with the wrong level of detail.
Sometimes the visible involvement of the CEO is the critical piece - it imparts a sense of importance, of highest priority, to what ever the CEO has got involved in.
Making changes of these structural kinds should have the visible involvement and support of the CEO - otherwise they'll likely fail to deliver what's expected.
Truly great CEOs (not the once in a generation geniuses...) are truly great NOT because of what they did per se, more about the fact they surrounded themselves with brighter, smarter people than themselves, and 'simply' provided direction and resolved some really critical decisions - and then got out of the way and let the smart people work their magic....
Easy to write, NOT easy to do - see how many truly great CEOs you can find that match this definition!
Just don't go changing too much.
And please give Scott Forstall whatever he needs. Forstall is brilliant and extremely driven, with just enough ****** in him. You need some of that. He's been called "mini-Steve", and that's a good thing.
The New Visionaries are Forstall and Ive. They really need to work well together. If they do, or if one naturally assumes a more dominant role with the assent (verbal or implied) of the other, than that's fine a well. The latter scenario tends to happen sometimes.
And please give Scott Forstall whatever he needs. Forstall is brilliant and extremely driven, with just enough ****** in him. You need some of that. He's been called "mini-Steve", and that's a good thing.
The New Visionaries are Forstall and Ive. They really need to work well together. If they do, or if one naturally assumes a more dominant role with the assent (verbal or implied) of the other, than that's fine a well. The latter scenario tends to happen sometimes.
Looks like Tim is off to a good start and making very positive moves. He seems to be well-liked. Of course no one will be able to be the visionary that Steve was, but as long as all the key people are still there (Jony Ive among them), I don't expect to notice any significant changes in Apple's direction over the next few years.