Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

WSJ: Jony Ive Became 'Dispirited' After Apple Watch and Sometimes Failed to Show Up to Meetings

I think Apple expected the Watch to be another iPad smash-hit. But unlike the iPad, the Watch had competitors almost from the start. It also didn't properly account for the fact that people bang their wrists into things, and anything more than an entry-level version would be seen as a risky buy. Plus, since it needed to be tethered to an iPhone, Watch had a built-in limit to its uptake. The iPad had no such strings attached (hardware strings, anyway) and thus was the runaway hit it became.
 
  • Like
Reactions: iSilas and Mr Todhunter
I'm not surprised that Ive saw the Watch as a fashion accessory, nor that the $10,000 Watch Edition performed so poorly. A smart watch isn't like an expensive analog watch that is only designed to tell time and look nice as a fashion accessory. The analog watch doesn't need software updates, can't be remotely exploited if left unpatched, can be repaired easily if it breaks many years later, and therefore maintains its value, stays relevant for multiple generations.

Instead, anyone who bought the Watch Edition has discovered it's already obsolete because it can't run WatchOS 5.
 
  • Like
Reactions: curtvaughan, arkitect and Martyimac
Rogifan said:
It’s hard to tell though if his issue is the piece overall or something specific. I’m sure Gurman is working overtime on his gossip piece; probably The Information too.
Click to expand...
Between this article and the one on TheVerge, it seems like a lot of work is being put into trying to fluff up what essentially boils down to "Ive is burnt out and needs a break", and make it sound like management at Apple is dysfunctional.

If anything, the Apple Watch example shows Tim Cook reigning in some of Ive's more impractical ideas. The $17000 gold watch seems like a concession; Apple basically felt it was easier to just burn a little cash and show Jony Ive that his idea would never work, than try and fight him on this issue.

I can’t help but feel that this is most likely a good thing for both Jony Ive and Apple in the end.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Silencio, Canyonero and iMerik
ChrisNH said:
I think Apple expected the Watch to be another iPad smash-hit. But unlike the iPad, the Watch had competitors almost from the start. It also didn't properly account for the fact that people bang their wrists into things, and anything more than an entry-level version would be seen as a risky buy. Plus, since it needed to be tethered to an iPhone, Watch had a built-in limit to its uptake. The iPad had no such strings attached (hardware strings, anyway) and thus was the runaway hit it became.
Click to expand...

The Apple Watch is the number one selling smart watch. It is a success a very good one as well. Within a company as big as Apple people will disagree, but it hasn't turned out bad for the Apple Watch, a great product that’s a big success.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Canyonero and Jmausmuc
pika2000 said:
Err, the mistake was Forstall's, and the rest of the executives (including Ive) agreed with Cook. Stop spinning stuff just because you're Forstall's fanboy. Mistakes happened (Apple maps), but when one went rogue and denied any accountability (Forstall was taking teams out to run his own side projects outside the knowledge of other Apple executives and Cook), a company as big as Apple cannot afford to have that.
Click to expand...
That is the story you know and accept because it made headlines. You should also listen to his colleagues and ex Apple employees that tell a radically different story. And you'll probably agree that the quality of Apple's software was on different level than it is today. Yes, Scott ran side projects, but you should ask why. He ran them even when Steve was CEO and was probably encouraged in it. One product that is known to come from these projects is Apple TV. So, Scott is brilliant no matter how much you hate him. He's not only a brilliant engineer but also a great manager.
 
  • Like
Reactions: iSilas and Mr Todhunter
gnipgnop said:
The relevance is that most Rolex customers aren't going to view a $1,000 Apple Watch as being too pricey. Besides, everyone knows the tech world isn't centered around selling people a product that is expected to last 100 years.
Click to expand...
Why would you think that? People.buy rolexes knowing they're going to stand the test of time. The watch didn't do that. Further, people weren't buying those ultra expensive models as is evidence of their quick discontinuation.

I think we like to claim the ultra wealthy don't care about a $1000 because to them $1000 isn't the same as it to us. Maybe young rich folks that fall into money quick. Most of them obviously saw through the "luxury" apple watch though.

The problem with citing tech as something that doesn't last is that Apple marketed these things as jewelery. As a status symbol. It wasn't "just tech". And they also didn't really give a valid upgrade path. Who buys gold to throw it away?

Fwiw I think the person you originally quoted said "$1000+" a he was referring to the luxury line of watches as the comparison was to a rolex. They went for many thousands of dollars, too. We weren't ever really referring to "just $1000" here....
 
Last edited:
Sounds like he's depressed, burnt out, crispy. He needs to get laid, get a life, see the spark in the world, and be reinvigorated. Or he needs a muse... Hmm. But Apple is definitely turning from the 'Jobs days', and becoming more like HP. It's sad, but handling corporations and their direction after major changes is tough. I worked with a small company that was bought out, and the new owners didn't have a clue what drove the company. They hamhandedly over managed it, and killed its core, its soul. It was sad to see. To watch that center rot and fall apart. The company ended up being sold yet again after not 'proving their worth'. I think it eventually went bankrupt. Sad...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Canyonero
Relentless Power said:
Probably by not many on here, but he truly does have a unique mind in terms of how he was able to develop these products over the years, where they still hold a modernized-sophisticated look. I think Ive just became fatigued with the core changes with Apple, and wanted to continue to expand and grow on his own.
Click to expand...

Differences in personalities, opinions and visions. It is completely understandable as I faced similar challenges at one of my employers. Sometimes departing is the best course, because in the end it is about ones fulfillment and it seems Ive’s outgrew Apple. We have to remember when Jobs was around he was younger and both seemed to have great chemistry. It’s like loosing a long time best friend. I wish him all the best and hope his health improves, he won’t be far from Apple just has more design creativity.
 
Ive also grew frustrated as Apple's board became increasingly populated by directors with backgrounds in finance and operations rather than technology or other areas of the company's core business.
Click to expand...

and the root of that problem remains.
Likely the only reason the other designers are sticking it out is cuz they need to pay bills
 
Mic'sBook said:
It turns out the same thing can happen in technology companies that get monopolies, like IBM or Xerox. If you were a product person at IBM or Xerox, so you make a better copier or computer. So what? When you have monopoly market share, the company's not any more successful.

So the people that can make the company more successful are sales and marketing people, and they end up running the companies. And the product people get driven out of the decision making forums, and the companies forget what it means to make great products. The product sensibility and the product genius that brought them to that monopolistic position gets rotted out by people running these companies that have no conception of a good product versus a bad product.

They have no conception of the craftsmanship that's required to take a good idea and turn it into a good product. And they really have no feeling in their hearts, usually, about wanting to really help the customers.

Steve Jobs - The Lost Interview
Click to expand...

Yep... Apple is now officially in the "product people get driven out of the decision making forums" phase. It's really sad, because the future of tech looks really bleak this way, in an era where it should be most important than ever.
 
maflynn said:
I'm no Cook fan, but its hard to deny that he's taken Apple to new heights that Jobs never did, where as Ballmer did the opposite.
Click to expand...

Ballmer under microsoft was one of Microsoft's most profitable as well. (until he was replaced).

But nobody would accuse ballmer of being great for the company, or understanding products.

Profits isn't everything.
 
  • Like
Reactions: iSilas, BigDO and Mr Todhunter
If that means death to the thin mantra I can only see this as a positive evolution.

Yes - some iconic products were made by Ive - yet (as other people) I still don't see the elegance in an elevated camera sensor region. I still find that notch Awful and would prefer a small bezel. Just my 0.02$
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mr Todhunter
I knew it, I knew it, I knew it!!!!

The sudden over increase in prices, minor iterations on the same products year after year, the decline in quality. This company is on a slow long road to decline. I left a comment about the excessive price of the new Mac Pro and was attacked by a forum member because I pointed out how it was priced by some little hotshot out Wharton Business school MBA.

That is exactly what has happened, MBA’s have taken over the company which is a shame.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ramchi, BigDO, Mr Todhunter and 1 other person
apolloa said:
There’s just one thing wrong with your post I’m afraid, it was Steve Jibs who put Tim Cook in charge of Apple.... making him quite the hypocrite...
Click to expand...

Alex Ferguson picked David Moyes. Like Job and Cook, could have been mess up, could have been banter, could have been to enshrine their own legacy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mr Todhunter
Abazigal said:
Between this article and the one on TheVerge, it seems like a lot of work is being put into trying to fluff up what essentially boils down to "Ive is burnt out and needs a break", and make it sound like management at Apple is dysfunctional.

If anything, the Apple Watch example shows Tim Cook reigning in some of Ive's more impractical ideas. The $17000 gold watch seems like a concession; Apple basically felt it was easier to just burn a little cash and show Jony Ive that his idea would never work, than try and fight him on this issue.

I can’t help but feel that this is most likely a good thing for both Jony Ive and Apple in the end.
Click to expand...

My favorite part about the Watch is how easy it is to swap out bands. I’m wearing different bands all the time. For me fashion is more than just making an expensive gold watch. And I would be very surprised if Ive expected the gold watch to sell in mass quantities.

Honestly I wish Apple board would change the org structure. Make Tim Cook chairman and Jeff Williams CEO. Lisa Jackson could report directly to Cook but everyone else would report to Jeff. Then Tim can focus on those things he really cares about like privacy, the environment, human rights and there will be someone at the top to focus on real product development, not just how can we squeeze more money out of existing customers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Canyonero, Bin Cook and Mr Todhunter
So, it took about 8 years from the time Steve died to the time Jony left. Give it another 8 before Apple is just another big company without any real personality, driven entirely by sales and business dudes.

Sigh. I wonder if I’ll be using Linux in a few years. Doesn’t seem impossible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hawkeye_a
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back