How Tim Cook Is Filling Steve Jobs's Shoes 209
The New York Times, in an article about Apple CEO Tim Cook, focuses in large part on the ways in which Cook is not Jobs. He's less volatile, for one thing, whether you think that means he's less passionate or just more circumspect. A small slice: Lower-level employees praise Mr. Cook’s approachability and intellect. But some say he is less hands-on in developing products than his predecessor. They point to the development of the so-called iWatch — the “smartwatch” that Apple observers are eagerly awaiting as the next world-beating gadget. Mr. Cook is less involved in the minutiae of product engineering for the watch, and has instead delegated those duties to members of his executive cabinet, including Mr. Ive, according to people involved in the project, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to press. Apple declined to comment on the watch project. ... Mr. Cook has also looked outside of Apple for experienced talent. He has hired executives from multiple industries, including Angela Ahrendts, the former head of Burberry, to oversee the physical and online stores, and Paul Deneve, the former Yves Saint Laurent chief executive, to take on special projects. He also hired Kevin Lynch, the former chief technology officer of Adobe, and Michael O’Reilly, former medical officer of the Masimo Corporation, which makes health monitoring devices. Not to mention the music men of Beats.
He's not filling Steve Jobs' shoes ... (Score:5, Insightful)
How Tim Cook Is Filling Steve Jobs's Shoes
Cook is not filling Steve Jobs' shoes. Steve Jobs' shoes are in a display case at Apple's museum. Cook is wearing his own shoes.
Cook is not Jobs nor is he trying to be Jobs nor should he try to be Jobs. Jobs made lots of product design and development mistakes. His genius was in exploiting those projects where time and circumstances made them successful, in pretty much maximizing the potential of the products that turned out to be successful. In 2001 Jobs brought us both the iPod and the Flower Power iMac.
Cook has to use his own judgement, things Jobs said years ago don't necessarily apply any more. Time and circumstances have changed. The iPad mini is a good example. When Jobs frowned upon a smaller iPad a smaller device meant a lower resolution screen. Once pixel densities improved and a smaller device could have the same resolution as the original full sized device the circumstanced changed such that Jobs' original judgement no longer applied.
Jobs' good decisions have a time and a context. They are not necessarily universal truths. His shoes don't need to be worn.
But who will succeed Steve Jobs? (Score:5, Funny)
Maybe Apple could make a comeback under Scott McNealy, former head of SUN Microsystems.
Re: (Score:2)
Really? I remember Jobs saying nobody wants a small tablet, period. I'd used a large one at work and decided it was too heavy to use, so when Google released their 7" tablet in July 2012, I bought
Re:He's not filling Steve Jobs' shoes ... (Score:5, Insightful)
so when Google released their 7" tablet in July 2012, I bought one.
Then, in October 2012, Apple did a "me too!" and announced the iPad mini. I still think it was a reactionary move and I doubt the iPad mini would have surfaced at all if someone else hadn't released it first.
Wait, you think the iPad mini was approved, designed, engineered, mass manufactured and released in four months?
Re: (Score:2)
Then, in October 2012, Apple did a "me too!" and announced the iPad mini
Wait, you think the iPad mini was approved, designed, engineered, mass manufactured and released in four months?
Emphasis added. Regardless of that, Apple could have started work on the iPad mini after Google announced (rather than released) their tablet, and it would have still been reactionary.
Of course (Score:2)
so when Google released their 7" tablet in July 2012, I bought one.
Then, in October 2012, Apple did a "me too!" and announced the iPad mini. I still think it was a reactionary move and I doubt the iPad mini would have surfaced at all if someone else hadn't released it first.
Wait, you think the iPad mini was approved, designed, engineered, mass manufactured and released in four months?
Haven't you ever heard of rapid prototyping?
This it's the Apple development cycle here! It's not like anyone expects a finished product out of anything first generation.
Re: (Score:2)
Really? I remember Jobs saying nobody wants a small tablet, period.
Because of resolution, tap target size, etc ... all issues that were resolved by the time the mini came out. Again, circumstances changed.
Re: (Score:2)
Not really, the tap target size IS smaller.
It's just that Apple uses a LOT of touchscreen processing in order to get more accurate use of points.
It's why I've found that the iOS keyboard is far more accurate at typing than the Android one, even though my Android device has a much larger screen (3.5" vs. 4.5"). In Android, hardware is responsible for reporting the touch po
Re:He's not filling Steve Jobs' shoes ... (Score:4, Insightful)
If you noticed, Jobs was fond of saying that "nobody needs X" until Apple figured out how to do X right. He was not the most open and truthful of men.
Re: (Score:2)
Could it have been the state of capacitive touch-screens at the time, and the failure to recognize the leaps those devices made since the release of the iPad.
It's possible they tested bleeding edge tech, and at the time the displays really weren't up to snuff yet for a smaller form factor.
I'm just speculating. Maybe someone who knows will reply. Touch has gotten a lot better, very quickly in my opinion.
Re: (Score:3)
Time and circumstances have changed. The iPad mini is a good example. When Jobs frowned upon a smaller iPad a smaller device meant a lower resolution screen. Once pixel densities improved and a smaller device could have the same resolution as the original full sized device the circumstanced changed such that Jobs' original judgement no longer applied
Ignoring the fact that when the ipad mini came out it was the low resolution device (1024×768 px at 163 ppi). Steve jobs had already launched the iphone 4 with its *cough* retina display (960×640 at 326 ppi) two years earlier.
You seen to forget that Jobsy(I like to park in handicapped space) was not the density of pixles...bit the size of the display to quote the foul smelling genius "It's meaningless unless your table includes sandpaper," Jobs said, "so that the user can sand down their fingers to around one quarter of their present size." He said 7-inch screens were actually 45 per cent the size of an iPad, which wasn't sufficient.
"Apple has done extensive user testing and we really understand this stuff," he added. "There are clear limits on how close you can place things on a touchscreen, which is why we think 10 inches is the minimum screen size to create great tablet apps.
Lets not start using words like "universal truths"(sic) when you are at best misinformed
And the iPad mini was 8 inches not 7, and at 8 with 1024x768 the 40x40 recommended tap target was large enough. No sandpaper required. As I said, circumstances had changed since Jobs made those comments, pixel density, touch sensor accuracy, etc.
Brand identity (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: Brand identity (Score:4, Interesting)
Or they could have bought a company that sells high margin products and has a streaming music service because they wanted to sell high margin products and streaming music service....Nahh to simple of an explanation. I think I like your explanation better.....
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Brand identity (Score:3)
Subscription music services have tried and failed since 2000. For you to think that there are only 5 years old says something.
If only Apple had started selling music a decade ago. They might have a profitable digital music business by now.....
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like a perfect fit for Apple then...
And Beats streaming service is far older than Apple's non-existent streaming service. Apple acquiring them instantly gives them a functioning subscription service infrastructure, a paying subscriber base (albeit small), and existing streaming contracts that don't need to be negotiated with dozens of different labels before they can launch the service
Re: (Score:2)
Re-read what the GP wrote. Jobs would have created an Apple headphone brand and streaming music service from scratch. Apple already had iTunes to process payments and stream to, and sweet deals with the music industry that Jobs negotiated hard for.
Re: Brand identity (Score:2)
Right because under Jobs they didn't buy lala to start iTunes Radio.
Or for that matter over *20* other companies.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mergers_and_acquisitions_by_Apple
Re: (Score:2)
Apple is still the most valuable brand in the world. Beats doesn't even make an appearance.
http://www.forbes.com/powerful... [forbes.com]
Google replaced them (Score:2)
Your information is out of date.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/je... [forbes.com]
Google has overtaken Apple to become the world’s most valuable global brand in the 2014 BrandZ Top 100 Most Valuable Global Brand ranking, worth $159 billion, an increase of 40% year on year. After three years at the top, Apple slipped to No 2 on the back of a 20% decline in brand value, to $148 billion, according to annual research conducted by Millward Brown.
Re: (Score:3)
Although it's being reported on the Forbes site, that's not the Forbes list. That's the Brandz list. Apple is still number one on the Forbes list.
But OK, Apple is number 2 and Beats still isn't on the list. The point is the same.
Thank you finally (Score:2)
OK, Apple is number 2
Something we can finally agree on, the fact that Apples brand is shrinking and Beats is growing in an Apple area dominates does not really matter. the whole point is Apple is relying on past glories...and those under Jobs.
Re: (Score:2)
the whole point is Apple is relying on past glories...and those under Jobs.
If that's your point, you're misinformed. Apple just had it's most impressive WWDC since the launch of the iPhone. It's for developers, so it's understandable you don't know. But it presages some very exciting products when they do their hardware announcements in the fall.
Launch a new Product Line already (Score:2)
Apple just had it's most impressive WWDC since the launch of the iPhone.
Safari(With Bing?) Mail improvements, More Lock in/Cloud(At a price). Single platform...slight(after slight) at google, costly cloud applications, even with a few tweaks...like a clone of the awesomebar, and a nice payout from Microsoft.
Spin is just that spin. I bought the first iPhone
Re: (Score:2)
You've not even covered the tip of the iceberg of what was revealed at WWDC.
Re: (Score:2)
OK, Apple is number 2
Something we can finally agree on, the fact that Apples brand is shrinking and Beats is growing in an Apple area dominates does not really matter. the whole point is Apple is relying on past glories...and those under Jobs.
Because in one out a dozen brand charts, Google beats Apple.Coincidently "The credibility of the Interbrand and BrandZ league tables have been cast into doubt by an article written in Marketing Week by Mark Ritson.[4] The lack of clear definitions and valuation dates in the both companies methodology raise questions about the subjectivity involved in brand valuations. Being part of multinational advertising groups, Interbrand and Millward Brown also suffer from the risk of objectivity. Transparency and obje
Less hands-on (Score:5, Interesting)
But some say he is less hands-on in developing products than his predecessor.
The best leaders will see their own shortcomings and delegate to trusted experts to pick up their slack. Perhaps this is Cook's strategy.
Re: (Score:3)
If you just compare the nearly total standstill of iOS up until iOS 6 to what happened in iOS 7 and 8 he obviously made sure to get some people into the right places who were able to get something done. About time, I'd say.
Re: (Score:2)
But that doesn't mean that half of the people who got upgraded to 7 would downgrade to 6 in an instant. That assumption is totally unfounded.
Do you think that the customer satisfaction statistics that show 90%+ results of ipad/iphone would look as good if people hated iOS7 en masse?
Re: (Score:2)
As a long-time user, I didn't like my first impression of iOS 7 beta, got used to it after about a day, and would not now go back. I actively recommend that people I know upgrade, unless they have an older device (never install a new iOS on a 3+ year old device; it never ends well.)
So, you haven't met me "in real life", but there are plenty of people who like iOS 7.
If we went on "met in real life" figures, then I'd have to say that nearly everybody uses an iPhone and very few use Android. Because that's wha
Huge difference in people (Score:2)
Cook is a businessman.
Jobs was a evangelist.
One row of icons (Score:2)
So far, the extent of innovation under Tim Cook is one extra row of icons on the iPhone.
Not much compared to Steve Jobs.
Missing all the important stuff (Score:3, Interesting)
Firing employees on elevator rides, driving a plateless Benz and parking it in handicapped spots at every opportunity, organizing a massively anti-competitive no-poaching agreement across the entire tech industry, hypocritically accusing competitors of "theft" if they make a competing product, lulztastic attempts at fruit-based cancer treatment.
He's doing a downright shitty job, really. But I'm glad that the cult of personality around Jobs is fading, possibly leading to a long-awaited collapse in the Reality Distortion Field.
inadvertent mental image (Score:2)
"...like our old cat used to fill my grandfather's shoes each morning..."
Um, sorry...
By putting steve's shoes in a nice line (Score:2)
and pooing in each one.
Re: (Score:3)
The New York Times authors are would-be novelists. (Score:4, Interesting)
The authors are WRITERS (Heavenly horn sounds). The first 4 paragraphs are examples of their intent to tell stories like novelists, avoiding writing boring stuff like news. And, of course, WRITERS don't care about messy things like technology, even if they write about technology companies.
It's okay to put in some facts to give novels a feeling of realism: "And the [Apple] stock price fell nearly in half from its 2012 peak to the middle of 2013" Then: "To shore up shareholder faith, Mr. Cook split the stock, increased the dividend and engineered a $90 billion buyback -- steps that helped shares rebound almost entirely." The price of stock goes up when someone buys a lot of it.
But novelists have problems. Sometimes facts are more weird than any novelist would invent: "rap star Dr. Dre
Mr. Cook is not much like Steve Jobs. He supports brand confusion: "Mr. Cook is trying to broaden Apple's brand, too, taking to Twitter and other public venues to express support for environmentalism and gay rights (and for Auburn University football)."
There are big hopes for the Apple iWatch "... according to people involved in the project, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to press." Steve Jobs fired people who announced products early because announcing early creates brand confusion.
The whole point of being a novelist is to avoid unpleasant realities. It's like being a drugee, but without the drugs. Don't get involved with messy issues. Quoting: "Jonathan Ive, the head of design at Apple
Mr. Cook wrote an opinion piece [wsj.com] in The Wall Street Journal in support of proposed federal legislation protecting gay, lesbian and transgender workers.
Nothing has changed?
Another quote: "Last July, a federal judge ruled that Apple had illegally conspired with publishers to try to raise prices in the e-books market; Apple is appealing."
And this: "Apple has also started building apps for Android systems".
Novelists like to live in their fantasy worlds. They don't want to think about messy news like the beginning of a gay, rap-singing, law-breaking, watch-making Apple that makes software for Google.
The real story? Apple and the New York Times are both spiralling downwards, in my opinion.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
I'm old enough to remember when Apple stock went up because they made and sold revolutionary new products.
Pro-tip for entrepreneurs: If you spend $90 billion buying your own stock, the stock price will rise. Similarly, if you get very drunk an ugly girl doesn't look quite as bad.
The problem is you can only do that so many times before you can no longer pretend she's a s
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Jobs was a right-brain leader. Creativity and creative genius cannot be emulated or duplicated. People should stop thinking that someone can just come in and do the same things he did, think the way he thought. It's impossible. Find another, equally brilliant right-brain thinker and maybe you have a shot at a new era of Apple that is reminiscent of building things around sacred geometry, art and magic - but new and different on its own merits.
Lateralization of the brain is pseudoscience bullshit.
http://www.plosone.org/article... [plosone.org]
Steve Jobs was not creative. At all. Name one thing he ever invented.
Re:Left brain vs. right brain leadership (Score:5, Funny)
Steve Jobs was not creative. At all. Name one thing he ever invented.
"Holding it wrong"
Re:Left brain vs. right brain leadership (Score:5, Insightful)
Steve Jobs was not creative. At all. Name one thing he ever invented.
Typical engineering mindset - "inventions" are not the only yardstick of creativity. Pablo Picasso never invented anything either, but I hope you're not going to argue that he wasn't creative.
Jobs demonstrated a highly creative approach to business, acting intuitively and often flouting the rules of "what businesses should do." He transformed Pixar from a software company to an entertainment company. He change Apple from an also-ran PC manufacturer into a provider of an ecosystem of mobile and desktop devices with seamless software, entertainment and marketplace integration. He imagined what customers would want and took the gamble of building it, and had no fear of cannibalizing his existing products to do so. And, in the world of business, that is creativity.
Re:Left brain vs. right brain leadership (Score:5, Informative)
Picasso is created Cubism w/arguable amounts of co-credit to Braque, and Wikipedia says he invented constructed sculpture and co-invented collage. You might want to research someone before you use them as an example.
Re: (Score:2)
What the GP may have meant to say, or have said better, is that Jobs had an incredible form of intuition, seeming to know from a long distance what was going to work and what wasn't, even when that meant doing something totally different from what would have seemed normal or sensible. That can't be written off as coming just from experience. Who the hell knew 20 years ago that Apple could possibly end up where it's at today? Jobs had something inexplicable (call it 'genius' or 'vision' or whatever) that mos
Creativity (Score:5, Insightful)
Steve Jobs was not creative. At all. Name one thing he ever invented.
Apple. As in the company. It is very much the creative brainchild of Steve Jobs. He founded it, led it, it foundered without him and he rebuilt it. If you think that didn't require immense creativity and invention then I think you don't understand the meaning of the words. Furthermore many of the important details of Apple products have been shown to be directly attributable to Steve Jobs. No, he didn't do it all himself, but then nobody does in business.
Re:Creativity (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
And would not have happened without Jobs either. As the GP says, "He didn't do it all himself, but then nobody does in business." Thus neatly answering GGP's challenge question.
Re:Creativity (Score:4, Interesting)
Jobs was the one that turned what Woz made into a company. Woz wasn't interested in starting a company. Jobs had to struggle to convince Woz to leave HP and start Apple. If it wasn't for Jobs, Woz might have spent the rest of his life designing calculators at HP. (HP wasn't interested in the computer Woz created, nor does it seem to have recognized Woz's ability.)
Re: (Score:3)
But the founding and initial success of Apple would not have happened without Wozniak.
And you never, ever would have heard of Wozniak without Jobs.
Ever.
Wozniak needed what Jobs brought to the table as much as Jobs needed what Woz brought. Each, without the other, would have been nothing.
Engineering a company (Score:3)
But the founding and initial success of Apple would not have happened without Wozniak.
The founding and initial success of Apple wouldn't have happened without a lot of people, Woz not the least among them. Any claim however that Jobs was not critical to the success of Apple simply is not looking at the facts. As much as the initial Apple computer hardware was Woz's creation, the company of Apple was Job's creation. Building a company or an organization is every bit the creative engineering feat that building a computer is. It's no disrespect to Wozniak to say that without Jobs none of us
Re:Creativity vs innovation (Score:5, Insightful)
I think the problem is more that many (most?) people seem to think that being creative and being innovative is the same thing. It isn't.
Steve Jobs may not have been the most creative person on the planet - but he was possibly one of the most innovative.
It's all well and good if you think of an idea on how to beat cancer - but the idea is nothing if you can't realize it.
Maybe Xerox had the first graphical user interface - but they had fairly little idea on what to do with it - Jobs did - and while many people will happily point out that Xerox had a mouse and GUI before Apple got there (and they're right) - how many can honestly say they had heard of a mouse and graphical user interfaces BEFORE they had seen one on an Apple computer or one of the countless GUIs that followed?
How many phones today would have touch screens and controls that look eerily similar to the iPhone ones, if the iPhone wouldn't have shown it before? (it doesn't matter, if you know a single phone before that had a touch screen - physically having the touch screen is not the same as seeing how it was all put together first).
Tablets had been around before the iPad - but what kind of sales did they have before? And what kind of sales do they have now? And - those that are selling the best now, in terms of their usability, do they look a damn sight more like the iPad, or more like whatever tablets were there before?
All those are cases of INNOVATIONs brought by Apple and which ultimately massively changed the face of the markets that they went into.
Another pointer on how Apple did something great and something new?
Name the last Samsung product launched that had a significant number of other players in the industry immediately clamoring to make something similar or "better"? When was the last time LG did? Google? Google possibly did with gmail - but search engines were there before, even large and well known ones.
Jobs was great in seeing something and seeing how it could be made useful far beyond what their original creators might have done.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
you want more control over burning a cd? why? there are countless little micro-optimizations and hacks, do you want a few hundred pointless variables, or do you want to just click the "burn" button and be done with it? i know which one i wanted.
i take it you don't remember having to manually remount your cd burner on linux for each burn. christ, that was idiotic, and there were even GUIs that made you jump through these hoops. taking every bullshit step and turning it into a button is the worst way to desig
Re: (Score:3)
One thing (Score:3)
I thought that he came up himself with the idea of the nifty magnetic power cable connector. A very good innovation that must have saved many a Mac laptop when users would step on the cable.
In any case he could see potential and kept on pushing his people further and further until he would say himself "ok, now we have something really cool.". It is that attitude that caused Apple to come with great products. Regarding Cook, he seem
Re: (Score:3)
The iPod. iTunes. The iPhone. The iPad.
He didn't do the technical work, but they were all his vision. He knew how to create electronic products so much easier for the average person to use than their predecessors. He knew how to give them style.
That is creativity.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Name me one thing you ever invented.
The idea that you can make a company successful by not chasing short term monetary gain but by having long term (10+ years) goals and working continously towards achieving those goals.
Re: (Score:2)
Steve Jobs was not creative. At all. Name one thing he ever invented.
Name me one thing you ever invented.
A formula for calculating binder group colors in telecom plant records. It's only 1 line of code, but it's industry standard now. Probably the biggest effect I'll ever have on the world other than my son.
And you?
Re:Left brain vs. right brain leadership (Score:4, Insightful)
Hey AC, don't worry, I'm not an Apple fanboi to any extent. I think Jobs was an asshole in many respects, a profiteering, egotistical glutton that couldn't ever get enough power under his belt. I think that had a lot to do with why he got cancer (stress). I don't even own any iDevices. I think the app store is inherently evil in how they regulate apps (think VLC, anything with F/OSS code in it). I could go on.
But you can't deny that Jobs *was* a creative genius. I bet you could count the number of people that could run such a huge corporation *and* stay true to the right-brain roots that built it on one hand.
Creative With A Twist - (Score:4, Insightful)
We know that Jobs wasn't a technologist. Even in his later years you couldn't have possibly called him much of an inventor and certainly not one of the same caliber as Wozniak.
We also know that Jobs was a poor businessman until his later years, and even then, he only learned his lessons the hard way by nearly destroying the company after the early success of the Apple ][ series. He was no Markkula.
What Jobs was, other than an egomaniacal backstabber and chronic credit thief, was a nonpareil marketer. The only thing he promoted better than his products was himself, but that's besides the point - convincing his company and his customers that he was the second coming of digital Jesus (or an Silicon Valley version of the Old Testament God) was just part of doing business and a means of gaining control over his environment, necessary tasks for any executive despite his means of fulfilling them. He understood the concept and power of fashion and how easy it is to reach into that right-brain and some deeper, more reptilian components accompanying it, and cause people to want to buy things regardless of their technological merits. By transforming devices into accessories and attaching status to the Apple brand through trendy design and hip advertising, Jobs was able to create a commercial cult unmatched in recent history, and all of that has to do with a profound understanding of the irrational human mind. (The huge part that rests underneath the iceberg of consciousness, mostly unseen by ourselves.) That man could've sold dog droppings at $1,000 a pound and Apple would still be the richest company in the world. He was just that good, the king of postmodern consumerism.
I can't even be mad at him for how he ran Apple. I'm fascinated by it, actually. Not only is it instructional for future leaders, it's a validation of every critique of the common consumer and a gigantic rebuttal to the idea that agents in a market always behave rationally, when in fact they seldom do. (The greatest force in the marketplace is not reason but a combination of impulse and passion, which are perhaps one and the same.) I condemn how he treated his friends and his family and we all know now that he was a deeply unpleasant, Machiavellian asshole through and through, but if you ignore his character he did everything else right. He played his game astonishingly well and is one of the few people I would actually say 'won' at capitalism. It's a shame he didn't live longer. I would've liked to have seen where he would take the company next and what other schemes he would devise over time.
Speaking of which, he was no medical doctor, either. Too bad for him that he convinced himself he was one. Hubris kills in more ways than one.
Re: (Score:3)
You don't understand what Jobs was doing.
Jobs's idea was to make stuff that non-geeks could use easily. He had style and taste, so he made stuff that looked distinctive. Not counting what he did to the Mac lines when coming back, he revolutionized three markets by introducing products that were far better in many respects than their predecessors. They allowed ordinary people to use them easily.
He had several traits. He could come up with ideas for things that normal people would like, unlike a very
Re: Left brain vs. right brain leadership (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: Left brain vs. right brain leadership (Score:5, Interesting)
I used to think taste was kind of like fashion, but I've realized it's more.
Specifically, a few years ago I listened to Ira Glass's short talk on storytelling [youtube.com] and there's this short bit about taste that is just SO wise and SO insightful... (view all four parts)
“Nobody tells this to people who are beginners, I wish someone told me. All of us who do creative work, we get into it because we have good taste. But there is this gap. For the first couple years you make stuff, it’s just not that good. It’s trying to be good, it has potential, but it’s not. But your taste, the thing that got you into the game, is still killer. And your taste is why your work disappoints you. A lot of people never get past this phase, they quit. Most people I know who do interesting, creative work went through years of this. We know our work doesn’t have this special thing that we want it to have. We all go through this. And if you are just starting out or you are still in this phase, you gotta know its normal and the most important thing you can do is do a lot of work. Put yourself on a deadline so that every week you will finish one story. It is only by going through a volume of work that you will close that gap, and your work will be as good as your ambitions. And I took longer to figure out how to do this than anyone I’ve ever met. It’s gonna take awhile. It’s normal to take awhile. You’ve just gotta fight your way through.”
What I think Steve Jobs did was get an organization to do this, to make tasteful things. He was a great integrator. He pulled people together, he pushed through obstacles, he overcome a lot of mediocrity. Yeah, he was a jerk about a lot of things.
It's like a law of nature, a law of aerodynamics, that anything that's written or anything that's created wants to be mediocre. The natural state of all writing is mediocrity. It's all tending toward mediocrity in the same way that all atoms are sort of dissipating out toward the expanse of the universe. Everything wants to be mediocre, so what it takes to make anything more than mediocre is such a fucking act of will.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Did he actually create anything on his own, though? I don't think we can call him a "creative genius" just because he had the resources to hire people with actual talent and actual creativity. Maybe he could be given some credit for wrangling these people, but that's about it, I think.
He patented a lot of things, where he was personally named on the patent as one of the inventors. Most of these things were not technical from a software or electronic hardware perspective, but include things like the free standing glass stairs in the NY Apple Store. He also was an amazing arbiter of taste; Jony is a veritable fount of design, from which Steve would pick (usually) two to prototype, and later, one to go forward with to market. Getting from 10 things to two things to one thing is a creativ
Re: (Score:2)
What is responsible for the state of Apple today? It is the cult-like mindset that affects so many of Apple's customers.
Yes, and that cult was created and centered around Jobs. He created the market for Apple products and the aura around them.
Re: (Score:2)
Sacred geometry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Apples use of Golden Ratio: http://paulmmartinblog.wordpre... [wordpress.com]
I wasn't actually aware that it wasn't proven regarding brain hemisphere + function. Thanks for pointing that out, though I think you could have been less accusatory and generally like a fuckwit, as you so elequently dubbed me. Why not just denominate it to how one can refer to "creative-centric" vs. "logic-centric" thinking. Which I guess you couldn't handle on your own without being a literal-naz
Re: (Score:2)
They haven't ditched Chiat/Day yet. They're simply pitting them against their in-house team for now and choosing the best from each.
Re: (Score:2)
most people find those devices OK. your opinion is not meaningful when Apple shares and profits are climbing to the statosphere
Shares (Score:2)
most people find those devices OK. your opinion is not meaningful when Apple shares and profits are climbing to the statosphere
Except Apples shares plummeted under cooks leadership it has taken two years to recover some of it most based on market manipulation rather than actual success. Its profits continue to be based on the iphone in the American market...everything else is struggling including the ipad and that peaked two years ago. Apple is seeing shrinking margins and its first shrinking profits under Jobs.
The bottom line is that growth before came from successful launches of products...Cook has yet to show the world anything
Re: Shares (Score:2)
Uhh two years ago. Cook was in charge. Apple saw their highest share prices under Cook.
Someone hasn't looked at Apple's financial statements to see the breakdown of where revenues are generated by region.
Re: (Score:2)
IOE 6, 7, and 8 were universally hated disasters.
Bull. Fucking. Shit.
Re: (Score:3)
IE 6, 7, and 8 were universally hated disasters.
Fixed: typo
LMFAO (Score:2)
Re: poorly (Score:5, Interesting)
Let's see where to start?
1. If iOS 7 was so bad, why was the adoption rate so high so fast?
2. The iPad 3 did suck. All indications are that the A6 and the lightening connector just weren't ready in time. They bought out a new iPad six months later.
3. ITunes has been a disaster since it started trying to manage iOS devices.
4. Everyone is suing Apple because that's where the money is. Who isn't getting sued left and right these days?
5. IOS 8 is a "disaster"? You mean the OS that isn't even shipping yet?
6. The iPad Mini 3 a lie? Huh?
Re: (Score:2)
A few corrections...
4. Everyone is suing Apple because that's where the money is.
No, it's because Steve Jobs decided to go "thermonuclear" with patent litigation, and because Apple doesn't have enough valuable technology patents of its own to cross-license and refuses to pay cash.
1. If iOS 7 was so bad, why was the adoption rate so high so fast?
Apple hype around upgrades. If iOS 7 were so good why were so many people downgrading and them complaining when that option went away? Also: automatic updates and people not realizing the ramifications of a major OS upgrade that would make everything look different and slow their device down
Re: poorly (Score:2)
A lot of the lawsuits have been by patent trolls. But you do remember that Apple won cases against Samsung (twice), and HTC?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
There are no such forced updates.
Re: (Score:2)
My OSX desktop does the same thing as windows, and tries to download updates nightly, as does my Apple-TV. I guess they are not "forced" as i can turn those options off, but the default was to have them ON.
I notice you neglected to address the extent to which Apple makes it hard to "roll back" an update, instead focusing on the "forced update" angle?
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, it'll download updates. And it'll notify you about them. But it won't install them without your permission.
Neither with iOS do updates without your permission.
I notice you neglected to address the extent to which Apple makes it hard to "roll back" an update, instead focusing on the "forced update" angle?
That would be because you said one thing that was wrong, not two things that were wrong.
But more to the point than the one you got right, the reasons for the extremely high adoption rate are:
1) The updates are actually made available, and promptly, unlike Android.
2) The users are all informed that they are available, and the installation made si
Re: (Score:2)
What exactly does this mean? Android has updates as well. (FUD on your part)?
Android updates for phones come a long time after Google releases, if at all. Few Android phones get more than one update. Apple updates are available to all compatible devices on the day of release.
Perhaps true now, but in the past apple charged a fee for its updates.
Apple never charged for iPhone updates. OSX used to be charged, but now they are not. And that's on of the reasons adoption is so high. The past is irrelevant.
Apple TV doesn't just download them, it installs as well, unless Apple's website is incorrect in which case you can have them update it with the correct info.
Quite possibly. Neither of us have Apple TV, and it's not what we were talking about. It's OK to do auto updates on that because there is are no third par
Re: (Score:2)
Why doesn't IOS 7 work on an iPhone 3GS?
Your link explains. It's a very old phone that's not powerful enough to run iOS7. The same is NOT true of Androids. Androids typically get an update at maybe 6 months old, and then never get any more. The problem is that device manufacturers and networks don't feel any incentive to update them beyond that. It's not because they are no longer powerful enough.
You said "Apple OS updates are free of charge". OSX updates were not always free of charge.
Which would be why I didn't say "Apple OS updates were always free of charge."
Really, so because this device does 'auto updates' it is OK because here are no third party risks? isn't the same true for all IOS devices since they all use the app store?
1. Yes.
2. No.
Re: (Score:2)
Updating to iOS7 was the ONLY way to get the SSL/TLS bug fixed, so yeah, it was pretty much forced.
I know that's the only reason that *I* updated.
Re: (Score:2)
Updating to iOS7 was the ONLY way to get the SSL/TLS bug fixed, so yeah, it was pretty much forced.
Wrong. Apple released a patch for iOS 6 on the same day as the iOS7 fix for that bug.
Re: (Score:2)
Only for devices that could not upgrade to iOS 7 (e.g. iPhone 3 family and earlier). iPhone 4 would not let you get that upgrade.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
First; best or cheapest (Score:2)
What is a Motorola 360? I have never ever seen one in use, nor a Sammy gear or a google glass for that matter. I guarantee that when apple sells 10 million iwatchrd the first year, we will all see them everywhere. And yes, I know what a moto 360 is, I'm just proving a point. Also, nobody knows what the iwatch will look like.
I have no idea how successful the iwatch will be, what I do know, it is already a long way from being perceived as being first. It is not walking into a market which has years of necessary frand patents. It is walking into a market with large companies Sony; Samsung; Google already having products(some on their second generation) and patents. Whatever the iwatch looks like they changed the game...and it is costing them now. Oh and I like the look of the Motorola 360 too, so its looking pretty good for an un
Re: (Score:2)
I have no idea how successful the iwatch will be, what I do know, it is already a long way from being perceived as being first.
You don't even know whether there will be a watch.
All the smartwatches so far have been awful, and commercial failures. Apple will only make one if they have a different concept of it, such that they can make a device people want. Otherwise they won't bring out a smartwatch.
Given this years WWDC, a game console is far more likely than a watch. And they are unlikely to launch into 2 new categories in the same year.
A watch, console or personal massager? (Score:2)
You don't even know whether there will be a watch.
Except it is already a proven market, with large companies and some great products. I personally would love Apple the parasite and its abuse of patents to stay out of new markets.
It is unlikely to get involved in consoles...low turn over...no profit margins already a premium market. It could make money on *cough* apps, but android is there first and in droves cheaper with a larger ecosystem...and it does not make the same margins from software. The bottom line is Apple can't even right drivers as fast as Li
Re: (Score:2)
You don't even know whether there will be a watch.
Except it is already a proven market, with large companies and some great products.
to date the market has been proven to suck. even the most successful product, the nike fuel band, is shutting down. the only way apple gets involved is if they can flip the bitch and make something new.
It is unlikely to get involved in consoles...low turn over...no profit margins already a premium market. It could make money on *cough* apps, but android is there first and in droves cheaper with a larger ecosystem...and it does not make the same margins from software.
apple already makes consoles... TV consoles. it just needs to flip the switch and open up an app store and allow games. then roll it out to the millions of already existing apple TVs in the market.
The bottom line is Apple can't even right drivers as fast as Linux...they run 15 year old games as a tenth of the speed.
true for mac gaming, which is retarded. but false for iOS gaming, which leads the pack. didn't you see the suppo
Flip this and Flip this...Flipping eck? (Score:2)
I didn't really understand your point about watches, something about "bitches" and flipping. Your talk about the nike band...not really a smartwatch really, but http://edition.cnn.com/2014/04... [cnn.com] there is talk of collaboration between the two which makes more sense, as they are unlikely to compete in the smartphone market, which is already hitting strides. The moto360 is making waves.
As for switching on games on AppleTV...are those people games buyers or would they have like bought a game console instead of
Re: Flip this and Flip this...Flipping eck? (Score:2)
Right. A proprietary language used only by Apple. That will never work.
http://m.infoworld.com/t/application-development/objective-c-regains-its-mojo-in-tiobe-language-index-218317
Re: (Score:2)
You don't even know whether there will be a watch.
Except it is already a proven market, with large companies and some great products.
There were some exceptionally dumb statements in this discussion, but this takes the cake.
AppleTV a failure (Score:2)
Honestly I'd be happier to see an openly available AppleTV SDK
Apple have squandered a lead they had with AppleTV when for a few $ you can by a cromecast of android device(even dedicated gaming ones) who cares now. In context of this article I think its cooks biggest failure.
Re: AppleTV a failure (Score:2)
http://m.digitaltrends.com/home-theater/new-study-google-chromecast-usage-takes-dive/#!Zzvaa
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Re: (Score:2)
hahahaha. Wish I had funny mod points.
Especially for the unemployed part. Seems oxy-moronic that most folks insist Apples products are overpriced and yet the unemployed magically are the ones using those. Something has got to give eh?