If the question is that is Tim Cook a dynamic CEO or not and the comparison is being made to Steve Jobs then what they are insinuating is that Tim Cook is not Steve Jobs.
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's Impact on Apple Detailed in New Profile Along With Plans for New Board Members
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If the question is that is Tim Cook a dynamic CEO or not and the comparison is being made to Steve Jobs then what they are insinuating is that Tim Cook is not Steve Jobs.
These articles are good for a chuckle and click bait, but the underlying reason behind them is Tim/Apple is giving the media absolutely no details into their future product cycle, and in this day and age of instant information all the time it is pissing everyone from the media (cough tabloids) and Wall Street off. Companies simply can't be secretive any more (especially a company of Apple's size). Too much money is involved. Yet here is Mr. Cook, giving absolutely nothing on what the details of these future products might be. This is the reason for all these click bait stories with constantly conflicting themes behind them. Tim hasn't released a new product yet, and until he gets a successful one under his belt the chorus will only grow louder.
Is Apple under Tim Cook trying to tackle too many good ideas, or are they floundering because they haven't come up with anything new? People really need to decided which it is because from where I'm sitting you can argue that Apple is trying to tackle too many items, or you can argue that they have no ideas, but you cannot argue that they are doing both...
If Steve Job's greatest creation was Apple itself, then Tim Cook's greatest is the new Apple 2.0 that we're seeing emerging. I for one see it as a positive thing.
-the old Apple was divided into fiefdoms and so focused it couldn't do two things at once; it constantly ripped engineers off one team and onto another. There was an OS X team and an iOS team. Now there's a "software" team that was absolutely prolific this year- with Homekit, Healthkit, iOS 8 extensions, an OS X redesign, Metal, and Swift
-the old Apple insisted on siloing apps and processes; the new Apple gives us features we've been clamoring for for years - Extensions, custom keyboards, etc.
-the old Apple was a workplace dependent on Apple zealousness and fear of Steve Jobs, with frequent burnout. The new one is kinder to its own kin, in an industry where it traditionally ranks quite low on perks.
-the old iOS seemed under lock and key from Jobs' fave, Scott Forstall. iOS 7 and 8 are huge leaps over the old stuff, despite complaints over subjective aesthetic choices.
-the old Apple was so secretive that it was like talking to a brick wall. Now, a few execs chat it up on twitter, publicly release environmental/labor reports, etc.
-the old Apple was divided into fiefdoms and so focused it couldn't do two things at once; it constantly ripped engineers off one team and onto another. There was an OS X team and an iOS team. Now there's a "software" team that was absolutely prolific this year- with Homekit, Healthkit, iOS 8 extensions, an OS X redesign, Metal, and Swift
-the old Apple insisted on siloing apps and processes; the new Apple gives us features we've been clamoring for for years - Extensions, custom keyboards, etc.
-the old Apple was a workplace dependent on Apple zealousness and fear of Steve Jobs, with frequent burnout. The new one is kinder to its own kin, in an industry where it traditionally ranks quite low on perks.
-the old iOS seemed under lock and key from Jobs' fave, Scott Forstall. iOS 7 and 8 are huge leaps over the old stuff, despite complaints over subjective aesthetic choices.
-the old Apple was so secretive that it was like talking to a brick wall. Now, a few execs chat it up on twitter, publicly release environmental/labor reports, etc.
Tim Cook has a leadership team that is more than capable. Several SVPs have been at Apple for over 20 years. They don't need a dictator or micro manager. And note: no SVP (other than Scott Forstall, who was fired) has left since Jobs died. Ron Johnson had announced he was leaving before Steve died. But those closest to Steve like Jony Ive and Eddy Cue are still there. IMO that's the biggest endorsement of Tim Cook.
I'd be curious to know what people think Cook is delegating that he shouldn't be.
As a leader of Apple, I'm not too optimist he can cut it. As a person, I like him much better than Jobs, but one of the iWatch's biggest functions is going to be voice messages? Why don't you just call the person? I'm also not sold on the whole iWatch idea anyhow, which is not necessarily Apple's fault. Are we going to have to pay extra to tether it to our iPhone's? Or, a separate bill like the iPad? Either way, new unnecessary device or not, I don't want a new bill.
This is a very insightful quote.
----------
True. And if Jobs said yes to more things when he was alive, Cook wouldn't have to be saying yes all the time now.
This is a very insightful quote.
----------
True. And if Jobs said yes to more things when he was alive, Cook wouldn't have to be saying yes all the time now.
The WS sharks want Cook out. They want a more pliable CEO that is more "WS friendly" (think cash hoard sucked away via dividends). Usually they attack more directly. In this case, they just insinuate (using convenient unnamed sources) that he is not the right man for the job (while giving him his due on issues that are considered chump change). SJ handpicked Cook for the job. I would rather go with that than some WS brown-noser.
Apple will be fine under Cook.
WS is a joke anyway...glorified (and rigged) casino.
TJReilly (WS defender) response in 3,2.1....
Lol the board has to sign off on stock buy backs and dividend increases. Including Cook.
Im actually shocked by the level of this so-called "journalism"
Who are these "worried employees"? Apple has thousands of employees... youll always find ones who are worried or wont agree with the last decisions of the company.
Second, how is Apple really losing its focus? Their product palette has not really changed that much if at all.
Who are these "worried employees"? Apple has thousands of employees... youll always find ones who are worried or wont agree with the last decisions of the company.
Second, how is Apple really losing its focus? Their product palette has not really changed that much if at all.
Hire a good man
I would vote for Brendan Eich on the board, he would bring experience and integrity to the role....if he wanted the job.
I would vote for Brendan Eich on the board, he would bring experience and integrity to the role....if he wanted the job.
I'm still waiting for the promised Exciting things coming this year.
We are over half way thru and nothing yet.
Lower powered iMac?
New mobile (well that's a given, nothing surprising there)
Put a new Intel chip in a few current products?
New screen size for a laptop?
iPad a bit faster with last years iphone touch sensor?
Not seeing this wave of new exciting products yet. Are you?
Now THATS funny! That's like saying Hannity only spews Roger Ailes venom and not every news broadcast that Fox sends out. The WSJ has always been conservative and now, even more so, if you read it on a daily basis. New Corp's effect is very evident, ever since they took over the WSJ.
Yes I do. Pulling engineers off a project and piling them on another running behind is exhausting when done time, and time again. Replace them with new engineers who are either NCG's or veterans training the NCG's. You almost end up with a "Start Up" scenario.
Innovation slows down, dates get pushed out, focus is lost, people leave.
You see it at all levels at Apple. Too Big Too Fast. With Software and Hardware Engineers having many other options these days.
If you think Apple has nearly the R&D Focus of the SJ era you would be considered in my line of work as a "High Risk Proposal."
Me and many others said that Apple would not be the same company without Steve and we've been proven correct time and time again. Tim Cook is not a useless hack, but he's simply not Steve Jobs. He doesn't know what Apple should or shouldn't be doing, he leaves those decisions to other people, and those people don't have the guidance of Steve anymore. The end result is a bunch of B+ products and another successful company. Not the insanely great company Apple use to be under Steve Jobs.
That's your personal experience. Most people are plenty happy with the way their Apple products function. If they weren't, Apple would be declining- and fast.
If you've been paying attention the past couple years, you'll know that the software side of things (which you neglected to mention) gets covered in June, and the hardware side of things gets the attention in September and October.
No they are questioning his leadership ability. Some CEOs are leaders, others managers just like there are "A" students that devise new theories or methods and their are "A" students who have photographic memory but don't have an original idea.
Steve Jobs was a dynamic CEO but he wasn't the the only one ever or could ever be. Cook is entitled to be his own person, & not live in Jobs shadows, but he has to prove he worthy of membership in the dynamic CEO club, & not just an average one.
----------
He has a team, yes. But every team still needs a head coach to take it to the Championships. What Cook needs is his own trophy product to prove he is elite.
BTW hilarious of you defending Cook after railing against the Beats buy.
As an Apple consumer Tim's Apple is not looking so good to me this year.
No updated mini, would have paid up for top specs (especially a dGPU) but bought a 2012 model on sale.
At one point I considered a 21.5" iMac instead of another mini. The lack of a 1TB SSD option, limitations on RAM and the glued-together constructions says "no" to me. Computers constructed like iPads are not to my liking.
Would like to get a TB display to solve a couple of problems, last update 2011. $1000.00 for the super-shiny screen, USB2 and TB1? No thanks.
I like iPhones but really want high-quality music output more than any other feature, even at the expense of battery life. The 5c is just as good at music as a 5s is so I bought one.
No updated mini, would have paid up for top specs (especially a dGPU) but bought a 2012 model on sale.
At one point I considered a 21.5" iMac instead of another mini. The lack of a 1TB SSD option, limitations on RAM and the glued-together constructions says "no" to me. Computers constructed like iPads are not to my liking.
Would like to get a TB display to solve a couple of problems, last update 2011. $1000.00 for the super-shiny screen, USB2 and TB1? No thanks.
I like iPhones but really want high-quality music output more than any other feature, even at the expense of battery life. The 5c is just as good at music as a 5s is so I bought one.
Hey I said Beats is still a head scratcher for me. I can defend Cook without being rah rah about Beats.
Anyway my belief is that Steve knew how big Apple would become and felt the right man to run Big Apple was Tim Cook. Obviously the executives that work for Cook (many of whom also worked for Jobs) feel the same way as none of them have left.