$155 is not a high stock price for Apple concerning amount of money so they make return on investment you get that but it’s very small Devon it’s OK should be a lot higher, compare that stock price to say alphabet on Google, $155 is not a high stock price for Apple considering earnings ratio, profits, valuation, so you make a return on investment but it’s very small. it’s OK should be a lot higher, yet let’s compare that stock price to say alphabet or Google, and you begin to wonder why the stock price is so low.Which part is getting old? The great products? The massive profits? The high stock price? The fantastic sdks? Introduction of new programming paradigms? Amazing M1 chip? AirPods? SwiftUI? AFS? Apple Watch?
Oh, please. The future of the company lay solely on the shoulders of Tim Cook?
Hyperbolize much, Sami?
What is with Cook's ridiculous photos?
What? I think you are missing some punctuation?$155 is not a high stock price for Apple concerning amount of money so they make return on investment you get that but it’s very small Devon it’s OK should be a lot higher, compare that stock price to say alphabet on Google, $155 is not a high stock price for Apple considering earnings ratio, profits, valuation, so you make a return on investment but it’s very small. it’s OK should be a lot higher, yet let’s compare that stock price to say alphabet or Google, and you begin to wonder why the stock price is so low.
$155 is not a high stock price for Apple concerning amount of money so they make return on investment you get that but it’s very small Devon it’s OK should be a lot higher, compare that stock price to say alphabet on Google, $155 is not a high stock price for Apple considering earnings ratio, profits, valuation, so you make a return on investment but it’s very small. it’s OK should be a lot higher, yet let’s compare that stock price to say alphabet or Google, and you begin to wonder why the stock price is so low.
He hasn’t done a great job? His job is to make value for the shareholders. In the time he’s been in charge, what CEO of what other company has produced more value for shareholders than Tim Cook?
Steve lived and breathed design and "it just works". I always wonder how much better the macOS would be if he was still here instead of the bean counters kicking all the QC problems down to the next release (over and over again).
He's been there for 10 years, and actually ran the operations of the company for years before that. The entire time I've read complaints here, and predictions of doom.From a consumer standpoint I don't care about the shareholders. If he makes them a ton of money, that falls in line with part of his job. Another part of his job is creating and distributing products to customers. In that sense he has left a lot to be desired. To date, it has not hurt the company but continuing down a path of monotony over time can greatly hurt the company if consumers take their money elsewhere. Again, that may not have happened to date but it can certainly be a reality in the future.
Lordy all sorts of wrong here. TC has done a fine job with Apple bringing out new products. One being the Apple Watch. A product people laughed at Apple for since other smart watches were already on the market. Today the Apple Watch is the most successful and most popular Smart Watch.Scale (e.g. huge volumes) is one reason Apple doesn't innovate as much. I seem to remember Steve Jobs saying that if Apple could capture just one percent of the then cell phone market, they'd be selling something like 10 million phones a year (I might have my numbers wrong here), and that would be good enough. Now, they are selling 15 million phones per month. So, to make it worth it to Apple to release a product, and to avoid the appearance of failure, they need to think big, very big, as in what can we make that will scale well with the enormous size of our company. Sure, they could go the way of Sony, or Samsung, and try to sell every product under the sun, and hope that every once in a while they get it right, but that was the Apple when Steve Jobs came back in 1997, and that was never anything he wanted.
I am guessing Tim Cook will stick around until Apple has made a (hopefully) successful and sustained launch of the Apple Car. Otherwise, he knows he will be known for not adding much at all to the Apple product line, although being known for making Apple the biggest company in the world would surely be enough for anyone to say, "look what I did!"
From a consumer standpoint I don't care about the shareholders. If he makes them a ton of money, that falls in line with part of his job. Another part of his job is creating and distributing products to customers. In that sense he has left a lot to be desired. To date, it has not hurt the company but continuing down a path of monotony over time can greatly hurt the company if consumers take their money elsewhere. Again, that may not have happened to date but it can certainly be a reality in the future.
I'm not saying that Steve would have had it remain the same but he would have ridden roughshod over any managers that didn't fix some of the glaring problems that we see today that seem to always slip to the next release and then never get fixed.It would be about the same. You might not realize current macOS is far more flexible, has more useful features, and is more capable than OS-X when Steve was around.
Lordy all sorts of wrong here. TC has done a fine job with Apple bringing out new products. One being the Apple Watch. A product people laughed at Apple for since other smart watches were already on the market. Today the Apple Watch is the most successful and most popular Smart Watch.
You're saying Apple doesn't innovate much? Nice way to ignore the Apple Silicon chips which have proven to be phenomenal and are outperforming every PC laptop on the market in the same class of computer. Intel is so threatened and salty that they had to put out ads and twitter posts to throw shade on Apple. That takes an enormous amount of innovation. MacOS is so great now that Microsoft had to copy the look and "Mac experience" in Windows 11.
I don't see innovations from other companies. Just the same crap of shoving in an Intel processor, and SSD and a screen. You're purposely downgrading Tim Cook when he's done amazing job. He's done more than just be a numbers guy.
But if you have a list of tech companies competing with Apple that have done a lot of innovation recently I'm willing to hear from you.
Also in 10 years the 5GB free iCloud storage has not been changed.
I'm not saying that Steve would have had it remain the same but he would have ridden roughshod over any managers that didn't fix some of the glaring problems that we see today that seem to always slip to the next release and then never get fixed.