On Succeeding Steve Jobs • Hacker News Board

Re: On Succeeding Steve Jobs

#61

Post by matthew-wegner » Sat, Jul 23, 2011, 1:42 AM UTC

mrshoe wrote: post #57

Apple needs someone who has wired their mind to think just like Steve Jobs. Someone who is able to rationally explain all of the decisions made at Apple, even the ones that look downright crazy to most outsiders. Someone who has spent the last 10 years trying to make themselves one with the Apple brain trust so that they can accurately predict Apple's future game plan. Someone who has immense support from Apple emplo…

Gruber is a fervent follower, and good at reading between the lines, but he's demonstrated no ability to set his own rudder. His vision is simply Apple's vision.

Re: On Succeeding Steve Jobs

#62

Post by megablast » Sat, Jul 23, 2011, 1:50 AM UTC

joebadmo wrote: post #41

jonnathanson wrote: post #24

Cook was palatable to both Wall Street and Apple employees while SJ was on medical leave. IMO, he's passed the test already. Everyone was willing to accept him then, back when there was serious doubt about whether Jobs would return after his leave. So there's no reason why they wouldn't be willing to accept him in a genuine succession event.

Seems to me that the post doesn't fully address the most important fact: "He cannot be replaced..." Gruber takes the paragraph to points about what Jobs' absence will do to the stock, and then takes the rest of the post to talk about the sourcing of the story and who might eventually replace him, but those strike me as ancillary issues at best. Jobs can't really be replaced, can he? Certainly Apple will continue to m…

Jobs can't be replaced, what more needs to be said about it? Apple will continue, and we need to look at what happens when he does leave.

Re: On Succeeding Steve Jobs

#63

Post by mw63214 » Sat, Jul 23, 2011, 1:50 AM UTC

even though I'm anti-Apple, I've always thought James Dyson would be a perfect fit, along with his company. Apple -> Dyson -> Sensor Network -> Internet of Things(with some design love)

Re: On Succeeding Steve Jobs

#64

Post by tptacek » Sat, Jul 23, 2011, 1:59 AM UTC

kes wrote: post #59

dr_ wrote: post #21

This also goes back to how News Corp has changed the Wall Street Journal since it's acquisition. The quality has deteriorated. And it's shows what News Corp real focus is - it's not news, and it's not really conservative or liberal issues either - it's sensationalism, in any form. Because thats what gets peoples attention.

I think this is on the wrong thread.

Gruber is criticizing a WSJ story.

Re: On Succeeding Steve Jobs

#65

Post by emehrkay » Sat, Jul 23, 2011, 2:18 AM UTC

statictype wrote: post #60

Beloved within Apple, but he’s been out of the game for decades, and, let’s face it, is a bit of a flake. What makes him a flake?

I would assume that he called him a flake because Woz openly praises "the competition."

Re: On Succeeding Steve Jobs

#66

Post by megablast » Sat, Jul 23, 2011, 2:42 AM UTC

antics wrote: post #34

Ok, Gruber's answer is probable, maybe even correct. But what exactly is Jobs responding to[1] here? Not the ramblings of a tabloid magazine, but the reporting of a world-class newspaper. And before we band together behind a blogger it's worth at least considering exactly why (or if) his position is better. Where the WSJ seems to have black-box-trusted someone else's expertise, Gruber seems to depend only on facts th…

Why do you imagine that the WSJ writer or Gruber feel that they have a firm grasp on the matters? They are just speculating, nobody is calling it here. As much fun as it is to deride these articles, you seem to be missing the point.

Re: On Succeeding Steve Jobs

#67

Post by kenjackson » Sat, Jul 23, 2011, 3:04 AM UTC

Steko wrote: post #56

mortenjorck wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Jobs has really, truly done it right this time, he won't need to be replaced. Cook, Forstall, Ive, and Schiller are obviously people he trusts with his life's work. Time will tell how good his choice of stewards was, but given that he learned the hard way nearly three decades ago, I'd say the odds are in his favor.

Jobs can be replaced, he's not some magical being, he's a person making decisions and he isn't doing it all by himself. He probably won't be replaced (at least not completely by one person) but -- and this again ties back to the Apple University effort -- it will be even more impressive if the crux of what makes Jobs/Apple great is successfully imprinted on dozens or hundreds of Apple execs and engineers.

Jobs actually is sort of magical, at least at Apple. One thing Jobs has that will be hard to replicate is that fact that he's Steve Jobs. His decision is final and adored. Forstall or Cook won't try an end run to try to make something happen and hope that with enough corporate backing they can put Jobs's back against the wall. Won't happen. With any other CEO it could.

It's not just the decisions that Jobs makes that are important, but the fact that a decision coming from Jobs means something to every employee at Apple.

Ive+Forstall are within a couple of orders of magnitude from Jobs (the only people who are even in the neighborhood of reverence). But the fact that they're two people, with two egos will probably mean that the two together as the visionary aspects of the company won't be as unified as a single Jobs.

Re: On Succeeding Steve Jobs

#68

Post by shaggyfrog » Sat, Jul 23, 2011, 3:05 AM UTC

podperson wrote: post #47

Steko wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a solid post but this is batting practice by Gruber. Anyone following Apple would bet the farm on Gruber's shortlist and the only serious candidate I'd entertain besides Cook would be Ive. Notably, Gruber missed a chance to link back to the Apple University effort which is another huge giveaway that a successor will almost certainly come from within. Glancing over the archive, imho Gruber's best posts in the las…

Gruber's dismissal of Ive as a candidate is pretty solidly based. I don't think Ive has even appeared in a speaking role in a keynote. I just don't think it's his kind of gig (and why should it be?)

Ive has certainly made appearances during keynote speeches before. Example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7JLjldgjuKI&t=0m25s

This idea that Steve can't possibly share the spotlight with Ive is absurd.

Re: On Succeeding Steve Jobs

#69

Post by far33d » Sat, Jul 23, 2011, 3:15 AM UTC

Ed Catmull is the only plausible external possibility. He would be excellent at making sure what works at Apple stays that way.

Re: On Succeeding Steve Jobs

#70

Post by 6ren » Sat, Jul 23, 2011, 3:46 AM UTC

kenjackson wrote: post #19

igorgue wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMHO there is a big difference between Apple and Microsoft, Bill Gates was surrounded by suits, Steve Jobs is surrounded by Engineers and Designers... I like all the guys that surround Jobs, Philip Schiller, Scott Forstall, Jonathan Ivy even Bob Mansfield are a good candidates, there is no reason why Apple should look elsewhere for CEO candidates.

IMHO there is a big difference between Apple and Microsoft, Bill Gates was surrounded by suits, Steve Jobs is surrounded by Engineers and Designers... You know very little about Microsoft. You're right there was a difference. Jobs was surrounded by engineers and designers. Gates was surrounded by engineers. Gates top business guy was a math geek from Harvard with not much in the way of business experience (Ballmer).…

How was Ballmer a "math geek"? He strikes me as an extroverted business guy - but I love having my assumption subverted.

Wiki says he did maths and economics at Harvard - sounds business oriented. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Ballmer#Early_life and magna cum laude seems to mean 2A/2nd class/B/Distinction. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magna_cum_laude#Types