Tim Cook Receives Restricted Stock Units Worth Up to $114 Million, Ensuring He'll Remain Apple's CEO Through 2025

[laptech]

He said '

I think I’ve said this before. But Apple has never been the first to do things. And they don’t really care about being first

They didn’t make the first MP3 player, touchscreen smartphone, smart watch or wireless earphones. But they did it well that’s why we remember them.

Building something and then it being refined and made better by others is something that has been going on in the business world for decades but what annoys me the most is when Apple fans go on about Apple being 'inovative' when it comes to their lastest products but they fail to see that what they say is 'inovative' is predomiatly something that has already been made and produced for consumers already, Apple has come along, seen how that product is made and works and then 'refine's' on that products idea. That's not being 'inovative', that's copying somebody else's idea, refining it and making it your own. Apple is extremely good at that but it is very rarely mentioned by Apple fans because they like to think that Apple is an 'inovative' company rather than a 'copy and refine' company.

People need to give credit where credit is due and in a huge majority of cases it is not Apple but somebody else. Like I pointed out with the Apple watch and faceID, somebody else made them and produced them for the consumer market, Apple came along, copied the idea and refined it.

 

[cyb3rdud3]

He said '


Building something and then it being refined and made better by others is something that has been going on in the business world for decades but what annoys me the most is when Apple fans go on about Apple being 'inovative' when it comes to their lastest products but they fail to see that what they say is 'inovative' is predomiatly something that has already been made and produced for consumers already, Apple has come along, seen how that product is made and works and then 'refine's' on that products idea. That's not being 'inovative', that's copying somebody else's idea, refining it and making it your own. Apple is extremely good at that but it is very rarely mentioned by Apple fans because they like to think that Apple is an 'inovative' company rather than a 'copy and refine' company.

People need to give credit where credit is due and in a huge majority of cases it is not Apple but somebody else. Like I pointed out with the Apple watch and faceID, somebody else made them and produced them for the consumer market, Apple came along, copied the idea and refined it.

Innovation is closely related to, but does not mean invention. Just because you like to call it refinement doesn’t mean it’s not innovation.

It really seams like people like redefining meanings of words.

 

[laptech]

Innovation is closely related to, but does not mean invention. Just because you like to call it refinement doesn’t mean it’s not innovation.

It really seams like people like redefining meanings of words.

There is no 'redefining meaning of words' as you put it but there is your interpretion of it to support you defence narrative of Apple.

Two examples were put forward in an earlier post by another member, the Apple watch and FaceID who refered to them in their post as 'innovative' or words to that effect. By the dictonary definition of 'innovation' or 'innovative' I disproved that by saying both examples where proceduced and developed by others along time before Apple got involved into making their products. The Apple watch is a 'smartwatch' and smartwatches have been around long before Apple produced theirs. Apple 'refined' the smartwatch design to make it better. What can be called 'innovative' about the smart watch is the ECG feature.

Now take FaceID, a facial recognition concept that was used in 2011 on android phones, a concept that Apple 'refined' and made better for use in the iphone and named it FaceID instead of using the words facial recognition.

So no, there is no redefining meanings of words as it can be seen there is a very clear distinction between what is 'innovative' and what is 'refined'.

 

[Almovi]

I don't grudge him it, but I grudge paying for devices that have so many issues, so often.

I do grudge him because I do grudge to pay for devices that have so many issues, which he is responsible for. In 15 years before this person become CEO never had a problem with any device, stellar quality hardware and software wise. But now each time that I buy something from Apple has problems.

 

[cyb3rdud3]

There is no 'redefining meaning of words' as you put it but there is your interpretion of it to support you defence narrative of Apple.

Two examples were put forward in an earlier post by another member, the Apple watch and FaceID who refered to them in their post as 'innovative' or words to that effect. By the dictonary definition of 'innovation' or 'innovative' I disproved that by saying both examples where proceduced and developed by others along time before Apple got involved into making their products. The Apple watch is a 'smartwatch' and smartwatches have been around long before Apple produced theirs. Apple 'refined' the smartwatch design to make it better. What can be called 'innovative' about the smart watch is the ECG feature.

Now take FaceID, a facial recognition concept that was used in 2011 on android phones, a concept that Apple 'refined' and made better for use in the iphone and named it FaceID instead of using the words facial recognition.

So no, there is no redefining meanings of words as it can be seen there is a very clear distinction between what is 'innovative' and what is 'refined'.

Just repeating it doesn’t make it so. Apple Watch and FaceId are most definitely innovations. Both received significant improved ability to the original invention, so much so that they made a considerable and meaningful impact in the market and on society. And then, especially with regards to the already established Apple Watch, there has been further significant innovation, from how patient care is being handled to transforming research.

I really think you should educate yourself what innovation is actually about.

 

[Almovi]

We love you Tim! Good job!!!

We? who? Not me like many others. You? why? do you like the shift to a more colorful, with less taste, no innovative, faulty product producer brand style? Okeiii👍

 

[laptech]

Just repeating it doesn’t make it so. Apple Watch and FaceId are most definitely innovations. Both received significant improved ability to the original invention, so much so that they made a considerable and meaningful impact in the market and on society. And then, especially with regards to the already established Apple Watch, there has been further significant innovation, from how patient care is being handled to transforming research.

I really think you should educate yourself what innovation is actually about.

Your the one that needs to educate themselves. The Apple watch as a 'whole' is not innovative BUT it has innovative functions, like the ECG. If you think having innovative functions defines the whole watch as being innovative then you are very mistaken. Go to any engineering department at your local university and they will put you straight on the matter.

 

[LeeW]

I do grudge him because I do grudge to pay for devices that have so many issues, which he is responsible for. In 15 years before this person become CEO never had a problem with any device, stellar quality hardware and software wise. But now each time that I buy something from Apple has problems.

Fair, can't disagree as I can say the same thing, prior to a certain point under his watch, never had any issues, now just too many.

 

[Almovi]

Fair, can't disagree as I can say the same thing, prior to a certain point under his watch, never had any issues, now just too many.

If you want to share, which kind of major problems you had so far?

 

[C DM]

Now take FaceID, a facial recognition concept that was used in 2011 on android phones, a concept that Apple 'refined' and made better for use in the iphone and named it FaceID instead of using the words facial recognition.

Taking Touch ID as an example, and it likely applies similarly to Face ID, if a fairly sparsely offered and used functionally that wasn't really fully reliable and/or simple to use or benefit from is then adjusted and refined so that it's made and works in a way where it becomes almost second nature for the vast majority of regular consumers to consistently use and basically expect, that would be something that fits with the concept of innovation.

 

[LeeW]

If you want to share, which kind of major problems you had so far?

I have already covered that earlier in this thread.

 

[123]

So only founder CEOs are worthy? My gosh that seems a bit out of touch with the way it really works. Take a look at it from an investor perspective, he has achieved a lot.

Steve Jobs was not a founder CEO (the second time). Yet he drove innovation and brought back enterpreneurial spirit, both of which the current accountant has never heard of.

Investor's perspective? I own Apple stock. But much better performing titles too. Cook's incompetence as a tech leader bothers me.

From a short term investor's perspective it doesn't matter at all. Just short a stock if you're unhappy or buy other titles, who cares. What matters is that Tim is ruining the company we all love in the long run with no innovation and without vision.

 

[I7guy]

Steve Jobs was not a founder CEO (the second time). Yet he drove innovation and brought back enterpreneurial spirit, both of which the current accountant has never heard of.

Investor's perspective? I own Apple stock. But much better performing titles too. Cook's incompetence as a tech leader bothers me.

From a short term investor's perspective it doesn't matter at all. Just short a stock if you're unhappy or buy other titles, who cares. What matters is that Tim is ruining the company we all love in the long run with no innovation and without vision.

Horses for courses. Objectively Mr. Cook is doing the opposite of your subjective opinion. Unhappy? Buy other securities.

 

[I7guy]

Haven't bought an iPhone in five years, haven't bought a Mac in nearly ten. The only thing I've bought recently are a song or two from iTunes. Moved on to Android years ago. Love the freedom and openness of putting apps that I want on MY devices (what a concept I know) and not what Timmy TELLS me I can have on my devices.

Timmy just got a boatload of money TELLING people what apps they can have on their devices.

 

[I7guy]

Your the one that needs to educate themselves. The Apple watch as a 'whole' is not innovative BUT it has innovative functions, like the ECG. If you think having innovative functions defines the whole watch as being innovative then you are very mistaken. Go to any engineering department at your local university and they will put you straight on the matter.

The Apple watch as a whole was an innovative. Additionally over time innovative concepts have been added, such as EKG.

 

[I7guy]

In these types of threads, many issues get sideskirted by brown nosers who don’t care about the products. 😎
...

What do the brown nosers care about? The critics? What do “some of these issues” in these types of threads have to do with Tim Cooks’ compensation?

 

[TracesOfArsenic]

"Tim has brought unparalleled innovation.." HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAA!! That's rich!

Nope, it's Tim that's rich.