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
I always thought Steve Jobs had no control anymore of many things, but perhaps I was wrong. Since he's gone, lots of weird stuff was released if you ask me. It all started with the new Podcast app in iOS 5 (?) which was a complete mess and totally un-Apple like. They quickly removed it however, which is very un-Apple like as well.
Then came the iPhone 5 and iOS7. Until then, the iPhone size had always been the same and iOS had continuous changes too. But iOS7 was abruptly different I don't believe it's what Steve wanted, he seemed to aim for something more continuous. I also believe that this is what's more successful than suddenly having flashy teen virgin colours and a different iPhone size, it sort if "interrupted" the "Legend" (iPhone) if you ask me. Now when we look back, there's a whole somewhere, where the iPhone and iOS have completely changed.
Now the same on OSX. I am sorry but I'm pretty sure Steve wouldn't have wanted that, if you look at previous forms of Mac OS, it was always just small changes. After 10 years, you suddenly do notice a big difference then.
It's a bit like the Porsche 911. It has progressively changed over the years, but only a little, but after 40 years, it looks like a different car all by staying the same old car. And what is it? It's a legend, often described as the best sports car ever built.
Someone at Apple, I don't know if it was Tim Cook or someone else, ruined this. Now it's not possible to reverse it
And Steve's idea in OSX was to make things as simple as possible:
http://tabtimes.com/analysis/ittech...apple-has-tossed-30-years-progress-out-window
This paragraph couldn't be more true!
I'm still staying with Apple obviously because I've never had something else, but maybe it just needs time to change, perhaps Tim Cook must adapt yet. I'm sure this isn't an easy process.
So let's see what Apple has to offer in the next 5-10 years.
Then came the iPhone 5 and iOS7. Until then, the iPhone size had always been the same and iOS had continuous changes too. But iOS7 was abruptly different I don't believe it's what Steve wanted, he seemed to aim for something more continuous. I also believe that this is what's more successful than suddenly having flashy teen virgin colours and a different iPhone size, it sort if "interrupted" the "Legend" (iPhone) if you ask me. Now when we look back, there's a whole somewhere, where the iPhone and iOS have completely changed.
Now the same on OSX. I am sorry but I'm pretty sure Steve wouldn't have wanted that, if you look at previous forms of Mac OS, it was always just small changes. After 10 years, you suddenly do notice a big difference then.
It's a bit like the Porsche 911. It has progressively changed over the years, but only a little, but after 40 years, it looks like a different car all by staying the same old car. And what is it? It's a legend, often described as the best sports car ever built.
Someone at Apple, I don't know if it was Tim Cook or someone else, ruined this. Now it's not possible to reverse it
And Steve's idea in OSX was to make things as simple as possible:
http://tabtimes.com/analysis/ittech...apple-has-tossed-30-years-progress-out-window
This paragraph couldn't be more true!
I'm still staying with Apple obviously because I've never had something else, but maybe it just needs time to change, perhaps Tim Cook must adapt yet. I'm sure this isn't an easy process.
So let's see what Apple has to offer in the next 5-10 years.'Apple spreading itself too thin'? Are they kidding? They've expanded to two phones and two iPad models and what happened at WWDC?
Huge releases for BOTH iOS and OS X.
I know that's software, and not hardware, but Tim Cook seems to be running the company very efficiently, and has been quoted as saying he knows Apple can "only do a few things really well".
Edit: Also - Tim Cook might not be as hands on with product development, but isn't that what we were worrying about originally? That he was great at running things but not good at being a visionary? Tim Cook seems to know what his strengths are, and has given Jony Ive more power. Jony Ive being, of course, Steve Job's 'spiritual partner' at Apple.
They put all this in an article and manage to hint at doom for the company.
Huge releases for BOTH iOS and OS X.
I know that's software, and not hardware, but Tim Cook seems to be running the company very efficiently, and has been quoted as saying he knows Apple can "only do a few things really well".
Edit: Also - Tim Cook might not be as hands on with product development, but isn't that what we were worrying about originally? That he was great at running things but not good at being a visionary? Tim Cook seems to know what his strengths are, and has given Jony Ive more power. Jony Ive being, of course, Steve Job's 'spiritual partner' at Apple.
They put all this in an article and manage to hint at doom for the company.
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....
The WSJ has become just another Murdoch tabloid. It's basically worthless for anything factually accurate.
Every good release since September 2011: 'It's too soon since Steve Jobs was CEO to give Tim Cook credit for it.'
Last edited:
Fair enough, but look at the new Mac Pro. Announced in 2012, and a huge update, so clearly Steve Jobs had a lot of influence on it. Yet without Steve Jobs to sell it to us, people are still saying "Apple can't innovate!"
Yet another contradiction here...
Yet isn't everyone upset because Apple hasn't yet launched any new products since SJ died? How can Apple be spread too thin if it's essentially the same lineup as under SJ:
Macbook Pro (Now Retina)
Macbook Air
Mac Pro
iPad Air
iPad Mini (SJ agreed to this)
iPhone (new and repackaged last year's)
(No more plain Macbook)
(No more Apple Displays)
(Less commercial software than before)
So where's the big change in products under Tim Cook that's spreading Apple too thin?
Yet isn't everyone upset because Apple hasn't yet launched any new products since SJ died? How can Apple be spread too thin if it's essentially the same lineup as under SJ:
Macbook Pro (Now Retina)
Macbook Air
Mac Pro
iPad Air
iPad Mini (SJ agreed to this)
iPhone (new and repackaged last year's)
(No more plain Macbook)
(No more Apple Displays)
(Less commercial software than before)
So where's the big change in products under Tim Cook that's spreading Apple too thin?
No, but then, we haven't seen any new hardware. At least, nothing that Apple has deemed important enough to hold a media event for.
Gotta wait for 2016...
Products take a lot more than one year to make, and as Apple openly discussed after SJ's death, SJ had already worked on the product line up out to 2015, including products like AppleTV that still haven't made it yet...
That's not to say there haven't been diversions - I find it hard to believe SJ would have allowed Ive's assault on icons, given SJ's attention to every pixel. But then again, SJ was continually simplifying the OS-X icons and robbing them of color, so who knows?
But changing the OS-X font after 30 years... ?
Anyway, as much as I hate the new look, I've come to realize it doesn't have a huge effect on day to day use - I found lack of color far worse, because I can't easily tell the icons apart...
Products take a lot more than one year to make, and as Apple openly discussed after SJ's death, SJ had already worked on the product line up out to 2015, including products like AppleTV that still haven't made it yet...
That's not to say there haven't been diversions - I find it hard to believe SJ would have allowed Ive's assault on icons, given SJ's attention to every pixel. But then again, SJ was continually simplifying the OS-X icons and robbing them of color, so who knows?
But changing the OS-X font after 30 years... ?
Anyway, as much as I hate the new look, I've come to realize it doesn't have a huge effect on day to day use - I found lack of color far worse, because I can't easily tell the icons apart...
Since Tim took over after Steve's death Apple's revenue has increased $106B. That's more than the annual revenue of Microsoft or Google. At the same time in the most recent quarter Apple reported that on average they carry less than a week of inventory, far less than the nearly 8 weeks for Samsung. When the iPhone 4 was released Apple reported 1.7M sales in the first weekend on sale. Only three years later they reported 9M for the 5S (and 5C). IMO these are the things Cook doesn't get enough credit for.
Wall Street nervous nellies got all scared when Samsung flooded the market with devices and spent a crap load on marketing. But the one thing Samsung couldn't buy is brand loyalty. They have missed analyst expectations three quarters in a row now and yesterday they announced that this quarter earnings will be down 24% and sales down 8-11% compared to the year ago quarter due to pressure in the mobile phone space. And Apple hasn't even announced the larger screen iPhone yet!
Wall Street nervous nellies got all scared when Samsung flooded the market with devices and spent a crap load on marketing. But the one thing Samsung couldn't buy is brand loyalty. They have missed analyst expectations three quarters in a row now and yesterday they announced that this quarter earnings will be down 24% and sales down 8-11% compared to the year ago quarter due to pressure in the mobile phone space. And Apple hasn't even announced the larger screen iPhone yet!
Whoa, whoa, watch it there. :there is no smiley for this:
I realize that they're not really equivalent, but as a thought exercise, picture Steve Ballmer and everything that's gone on at MS since Bill left, then picture Tim Cook and everything that's gone on at Apple since Steve died.
Very different pictures. And I hate the ms vs apple thing, but they're two men in very similar positions. Remove any emotions that you may have about either company from the equation, and it's kinda eerie.
Next week some Fox pundit is probably going to accidentally out Ballmer.
Are we done comparing Tim to Steve yet? Tim is a different person than Setev, and a different management style. Steve believed in Tim enough to pick Tim as his successor. My point is this, Either Tim is Doing great or he is not, but a differnet way of doing things doesn't mean he is doing worse or less. We have seen some pretty great things coming out of Applse since Tim has been at the helm, I'm sure there is room for improvement but as a shareholder, and and Apple fan I don't feel dissapointed in his performance yet.
Yes, but you are making my EXACT point for me. This all demonstrates that Tim Cook is a competent enough manager not to bungle Apple goodwill. He hasn't alienated customers by putting out junk products the way Amelio and Spindler did. But to be sure all of the products released to-date are Jobs-era legacy updates. There is yet a single Tim Cook signature product; one which Jobs had no hand in. That is a fact, and my central point. I don't know why people get so upset with this truth.
The whole "Apple can't innovate" is a bit premature based on the time periods between the iPod and iPod video and iPhone and iPad. People have short memories. Cook certainly deserved and needed time to develop new products as those do not materialize in months or even a year. We now how long it took the iPhone to go from concept to product. But that time lapse is due and Tim Cook needs to show he has the chops with 100% fresh product to take Apple growth higher. And Cook has been so bold as to announce such product this fall. The world waits to see if he is for real or bluffing to keep the wolves at bay. But he will have hell to pay if he is just teasing.
Apple can survive for a very long time with just recycling iPhone sales but it can't grow much longer w/ mostly iPhone sales because soon there will be near complete saturation; i.e., everyone in the world will have taken a side on which smartphone OS they will adopt.
----------
Senior Lobbyist.
I agree with you: It's far to soon to tell if Tim Cook's Apple is doomed.
However, I'm very hopeful that it's not, as a lot of the same people are there, and given that Cook was acting CEO previously.
As 30+ year Apple fan and decade+ shareholder I'm optimistic too. Apple is certainly not "doomed" because as I said, it can survive on just the iPhone for a long time. But, I'm also realistic, and it can't sustain positive momentum w/o an all-new product. I'm taking Cook at his word regarding this fall, BUT if we just get more of the same w/o even a hint of new product then I think the Board will be considering its options.
That's a good point: Apple needs to stay relevant. I think it was risky for Tim Cook to say there was a new category coming, unless what they have is really, really exceptional.
For all we know, it might be. But I'm remembering the iPad naysayers and that was after a stunning presentation from Steve Jobs.
General rule of thumb: If the board or Wall St. don't like it, you must be doing something right.
Seriously, screw them. Wall St. contributes nothing good to society any way.
Sounds to me like Tim wants to root out the same old people that have been on the board for ages and bring some youth into the company. No complaints there.
As Queen Elsa would say, "Let 'em goooooooooooooo"
Seriously, screw them. Wall St. contributes nothing good to society any way.
Sounds to me like Tim wants to root out the same old people that have been on the board for ages and bring some youth into the company. No complaints there.
As Queen Elsa would say, "Let 'em goooooooooooooo"
Because people are stupid, irrational, immature, self-entitled, and self-centered. You are spot-on and the guy is doing a remarkable job following in the footsteps of a legend. Let's see some other schmuck even attempt to do that. Their own hubris would get the best of them and they'd be trying to make a name for them every chance they could get. Tim on the other hand has remained calm, collected, and very thoughtful. Steve Jobs obviously chose the guy for a reason.
its official. Tim Cook is not Steve Jobs. stop the presses. read all about it. repeat, Tim Cook is not Steve Jobs.