Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
As a veteran fanboy, I hate to admit it, but Steve had it relatively easy during his tenor. The company was much smaller and more flexible. It didn’t have to please a wide demographic or impatient Wall Street. What distinguished Apple’s earlier products from the rest wasn’t their “innovation” or perceived perfection… it’s that the competition’s products were so bad.

Nowadays, Apple is almost indistinguishable from their competitors. Others have improved their game, which is making Apple’s offerings appear less unique. Some are even obsessing over the details as Apple was famous for.

Still, I miss Steve’s reflectance on technology’s potentials and pitfalls—and how his products encouraged meaningful uses.

Steve had it easy simply because he was dictatorial in his style and had the clout to keep Apple on the straight-and-narrow in following his vision. He didn't care about people's feelings nor Wall Street's expectations. Fortunately for him his remarkable understanding about human behavior and product design resulted in very successful, innovative products.

Regarding the competitors catching up. That's the problem with the lack of innovation since Steve died. Tim Cook has been polishing the existing lineup to perfection, but being even two years ahead of the competition in a mature market yields nowhere near the advantage as being at the forefront of a new product lifecycle. Apple never was on the cutting edge of technology, but Steve could recognize an emerging market with mainstream potential and exploit it to its fullest better than anyone else. He knew what people would want two years into the future and targeted his development energies at having the perfect product ready as soon as it was technologically feasible. It makes me wonder what niche products are out there now with clunky designs that Steve could have worked his magic on and made into Apple's next explosively successful line.
 
I'm not stating it's about me. Respect was given if you properly read what I typed about letting Steve rest in peace - the BIGGEST form of respect for someone that has passed away. Like you I own the products and hold true to choosing them based on Jobs' vision and Apple's values.

I'm just seeing a repeated theme from Cook regarding Steve ... and today made it prevailent in thought. You're talking about it as well. You cannot fully speak for Cook's purpose(s) of his message as you're not him and most likely don't know him personally either. Phil Schiller is probably closer to Jobs and known him on a personal and professional level longer than anyone working at Apple (Cook, Cue, Ive, Federighi) save for employee #8! You don't see Schiller making such a tweet, where is Ive's who apparantly was VERY close to Jobs probably as much as his wife and kids yet on a different level. So I ask you to reflect and stop name calling and pointing a finger thinking I'm disrespectful or have ulterior motives to the conversation here.

I'm sure Tim means well and truely misses Jobs ... honestly I do, I just don't think he needed to mention the anniversary of his passing to the world vs doing so internally to those that are closely and directly affected by that - internal staff, and a direct message to family and friends. He may have done so already, and prior to the tweet. I just think the tweet was a bit much.

BTW: Happy World Teachers Day educators.

Tim Cook speaks as Apple's leader, was one of Steve Jobs' closest and one his most trusted friends and advisors.

If you hate the fact that Cook honored Jobs' passing today, reminding millions of others who probably had no idea, just let it slide rather than disrespecting this day by being petty. Please, save it for tomorrow.

No disrespect, but I have a feeling you might be young. I hope someday you will understand what I'm trying to convey to you.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: WatchFromAfar
I just don't get that feeling anymore. OS X and iOS are more confusing than ever -- not sure which features work in which products, different places for settings not just in the OSes but even between iPads and iPhones.

Innovation at Apple died along with Steve and Tim is just coasting along on what Steve built and trying to see how high he can price the hardware. That can't last forever.

But sometimes I feel like the unspoken feeling is that the largest offence that Tim has committed in the eyes of his critics is simply not being Steve... which is not really something anyone can do anything about.

Nobody really knows whether Jobs would have allowed iOS7's UI to see the light of day or the removal of the "lickable buttons" I so miss, but yet I fully 100% know he would never have allowed the mess of an iOS UI we're stuck with currently, nor the Fisher Price-looking OS.

But for me the biggest criticism I have of Tim is his inability to recognize (and put a stop to) so much prioritization on "less is more." Today's Apple w/o Jobs is too much about offering more (and charging more by) providing less:

  • More sleekness via fewer USB ports, no headphone jack, no magsafe, no function keys...flexibility and convenience be damned (and more work & dongles to do what used to be easy)
  • More thinness, battery life improvements be damned.
  • More emphasis on delicateness of design, durability be damned.
  • More removal of tactile buttons on the iPhone, convenience of unlocking w/o having to look at the device be damned. (more work to do what used to be easier)
  • More sleekness of the trackpad via ForceTouch, "feel" be damned.
  • More unnecessary minimalism and vagueness in the iOS/OSX, intuitiveness & prettiness of "Apple design" & "it just works" & joy-of-use be damned.

Interesting to see whether Tim lets Jony & Craig & the boys keep painting Apple into a corner of offering more by providing less. There's only so much more left to remove. Wonder if Apple will have the ability (and who) to recognize this unsustainable strategy & pivot in time.
 
Last edited:
He is better off respecting Steve by letting such poor design trough like the notch ! Seems Steves influence at Apple is just makerting now . Greed has over taken design
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michaelgtrusa
And to this day Apple is still milking Jobs for all he was worth. What would Steve think, if he came back from the dead and saw that there were like 20 different sizes of iPhones and iPads instead of you know an actually innovative device?
 
People will really use any excuse to try and trash Tim. It’s disgusting.

He’s remembering a good friend of his on the day of his death. Let him.

The irony - Tim uses Steve's name to this day.....and hides behind his legacy and products..... Less playing victim bud!
 
Herald T
CuDlNCVVMAAOaTM.jpg
ribune.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Applebot1
But sometimes I feel like the unspoken feeling is that the largest offence that Tim has committed in the eyes of his critics is simply not being Steve... which is not really something anyone can do anything about.

It's okay to "not be Steve", but the problem is that he and the others try so hard to BE like Steve on stage. It's actually painful to watch sometimes!

Steve could get away with saying products were "magic" and other such nonsense, because he was after all a surrogate and advocate for the common user and that's how many users think.

But when Cook repeats over and over again that everything is "incredible" and "we couldn't be happier", you know he's just pandering to Wall Street.

In short, these guys need to realize that they do NOT have the protection of Steve's RDF any more :D
 
As a veteran fanboy, I hate to admit it, but Steve had it relatively easy during his tenor. The company was much smaller and more flexible. It didn’t have to please a wide demographic or impatient Wall Street. What distinguished Apple’s earlier products from the rest wasn’t their “innovation” or perceived perfection… it’s that the competition’s products were so bad.

Nowadays, Apple is almost indistinguishable from their competitors. Others have improved their game, which is making Apple’s offerings appear less unique. Some are even obsessing over the details as Apple was famous for.

Still, I miss Steve’s reflectance on technology’s potentials and pitfalls—and how his products encouraged meaningful uses.

Nope. The competitions products weren't bad; Apple's products were just better. Now its the opposite. Apple just got their asses handed to them by Google's presentation yesterday.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Huck and drzen
And why not instead celebrate his birthday rather than his death?
I've been asking that since the beginning... Usually if you want to remember a loved one, you remember their birthday.

Remembering someone on the day they died is a bit dark, usually reserved for people you didn't care for. Example: Hitler.

When Apple does this, whatever their intentions, it sounds to me like they're remembering the day they peaked and it's all been downhill from there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tozovac
I've been asking that since the beginning... Usually if you want to remember a loved one, you remember their birthday.

Remembering someone on the day they died is a bit dark, usually reserved for people you didn't care for. Example: Hitler.

When Apple does this, whatever their intentions, it sounds to me like they're remembering the day they peaked and it's all been downhill from there.

Probably because everyone remembers the day that Steve died, not the day he was born. Same thing happened with Michael Jackson or with other celebrities. I remember that day pretty clearly. People all around the world had tributes to Jobs. Steve was a celebrity like no other tech executive was.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bunnicula
Putting "still inspiring us..." makes the message look like marketing.

Though, to be fair, he's a CEO and it's likely that the work Jobs did DOES still inspire the employees of Apple... especially those who knew Steve Jobs as a friend and colleague.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mdriftmeyer
Tim Cook is milking the Steve Jobs thing as much as possible to cover what a failure of a CEO he is. Using the same 4 year old design on a new phone, wow, that's ancient for tech gadgets, real progress there.

Get a life. Factually, Apple doesn't become Apple w/o Tim Cook as COO. It keeps expanding and improving.
 
Tim Cook speaks as Apple's leader, was one of Steve Jobs' closest and one his most trusted friends and advisors.

If you hate the fact that Cook honored Jobs' passing today, reminding millions of others who probably had no idea, just let it slide rather than disrespecting this day by being petty. Please, save it for tomorrow.

No disrespect, but I have a feeling you might be young. I hope someday you will understand what I'm trying to convey to you.

I understand and I’m not young although I look like it - a curse of great genes and fitness. I’m old enough to have a 19yr old, seen a half sibling die, a close friend at 13 when I was the same age die in front of my eyes, and a few other family members as well. That is the reason I have my views. Saving it until tomorrow.
 
I've been asking that since the beginning... Usually if you want to remember a loved one, you remember their birthday.

Remembering someone on the day they died is a bit dark, usually reserved for people you didn't care for. Example: Hitler.

When Apple does this, whatever their intentions, it sounds to me like they're remembering the day they peaked and it's all been downhill from there.

You must not know any Jewish people. One's yahrzeit is often recalled in a respectful way by one's friends and loved ones.
 
Though, to be fair, he's a CEO and it's likely that the work Jobs did DOES still inspire the employees of Apple... especially those who knew Steve Jobs as a friend and colleague.

I'll add at NeXT by 1996 Steve visited us probably twice a quarter. PIXAR consumed him. He had no expectations of reinventing anything in the IT world. A colleague started the negotiation with CTO of Apple and only after they got serious did Steve get called in and seal the deal. Only then did we see Steve on a daily basis, but the first few months he was nothing but frustrated with Amelio and ready to walk out as special advisor. Then the board stepped in and offered him iCEO for interim.

Then the next few months of downsizing and restructuring at Infinite Loop [getting rid of the coffee vendor (surprising everyone with free beverages as the replacement: most Apple staff wanted him exiled until they realized he was improving their work lives. Then came the Cafe redux and people then saw Think Different and the iMac. Not until that demonstration did old Apple staff **** and got on-board].

Steve was successful for many reasons, but he mainly learned from his failures/successes at NeXT and PIXAR on how to reinvent Apple. Tim Cook was huge in that future. He managed all Operations globally and procurement contracts. He's the only person for the CEO position, and I know no one else was even in the running.
 
What I liked about Steve was how he took a deep personal interest in the products Apple produced. He was noted to call out stupid designs and stand up for what made sense. At least that's what I've read. He was also a complete *******. Tim seems like the type of guy that is better to work for and who trusts his employees more than Steve did.

This comes at the expense though of having products that lack the polish and attention to detail that came out under Steve, and Tim strikes me as the type to be more of a "big pictures" type of guy, not getting drug into minor details of products like Steve did. I think in the end Apple will be fine with Tim. He is more flexible than Steve, giving the customers what they want, rather than what he thinks they want (aka Steve). I think Tim will help Apple stay more competitive.

I will say that under Tim, I feel Apple is more greedy, forcing consumers into non-upgradable products, which was something I think Steve would have fought against for the principle. However, as far as reliability, and as an Apple owner of various products for the last 11 years, I feel the products are designed better than they were under Steve. My iPhones have fewer issues as do my Macs.
I have to disagree with one part Steve didn't want upgradeability he wanted fewer slots in the Apple 2 and he didn't even want you to be able to open the Mac without a special tool
 
  • Like
Reactions: DeepIn2U
Wow Apple invented the iPhone?? I would have never known that by the daily reminders from Apple for the past 10 years. .. Maybe they should release more advertising letting us know.. cause we all have to know.. we have to be reminded.. every minute of every day forever and ever... Here Apple take $999.00 of my dollars, if you promise to stop reminding me..
 
  • Like
Reactions: MartyvH
I have to disagree with one part Steve didn't want upgradeability he wanted fewer slots in the Apple 2 and he didn't even want you to be able to open the Mac without a special tool

The walled garden approach Apple takes has benefits and drawbacks. Steve wanted total control over what Apple made. Having modifications would open the way for potentially undesirable costumer experience. Steve's mantra was that Apple knew better than the consumers what they wanted. Some companies have followed Apple's approach like Nintendo for example who is notorious for suing anyone that is using any of their assets and being quite reluctant to license them. Other companies like Google and Microsoft opt for the open approach. Neither approach is wrong just different.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DeepIn2U
Tim Cook is milking the Steve Jobs thing as much as possible to cover what a failure of a CEO he is. Using the same 4 year old design on a new phone, wow, that's ancient for tech gadgets, real progress there.

Why does everyone insist that everything at Apple was PERFECT under Steve? There were issues back then and there are issues now.

I guarantee Steve would approve of a lot of what is going on currently at Apple. Apple is also wayyyy different and has way more products now.
 
From an insanely great company (1998-2012), to the greedy fashionable brand.

Rest in peace, Steve.

Translating your biased opinion into reality, requires these two minor changes to your statement:

"greedy" = "successful"
"fashionable" = "innovative"
;)
 
Why does everyone insist that everything at Apple was PERFECT under Steve? There were issues back then and there are issues now.

I guarantee Steve would approve of a lot of what is going on currently at Apple. Apple is also wayyyy different and has way more products now.


it was *better* back then. and i would agree times were better when Steve was there..... there has defiantly been a sea-change at since Tim took over and with more integration comes more problems as well.

Or it could just mean everyone at Apple is slacking off :D

Can't argue with the present day.... What's done is done.
 
Why does everyone insist that everything at Apple was PERFECT under Steve? There were issues back then and there are issues now.

I guarantee Steve would approve of a lot of what is going on currently at Apple. Apple is also wayyyy different and has way more products now.

I don't think you can guarantee this unless you have the power to raise the dead. Apple only has more products because they milked the iPhone and iPad for an additional 10 different sizes. Their only real new product is the Apple Watch. Everything else is an expansion or continuation of what Apple had under Jobs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MartyvH
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.