121–130 of 446 posts
I believe that Apple is planning for succession, which of course they should, as an obvious responsibility to shareholders, especially given the health issues of the previous CEO Steve Jobs. However, I don't believe that Tim Cook is on his way out. I certainly don't believe that Cook wants to retire. It's not like he has a family to spend time with. Apple is his family. The final but crucial paragraph in the Financia…
Satya Nadella is by most accounts the best person to lead Microsoft, currently the largest software company in the world.
"The only problem with Microsoft is they just have no taste," said Steve Jobs. That largely remains true.
Jobs called the computer "a bicycle for the mind." It immediately evokes a sense of freedom, magic, and fun.
Satya Nadella calls AI "a cognitive amplifier," which sounds like some kind of cool Excel formula.
Without taste being reinjected into Apple, it will remain uninspired and uninspiring, no matter who leads.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the real world I don't know anyone replacing their phone every 24 months. Usually people keep a phone for 3-4 years and then it gets given to kids/someone else for another few years usage. I doubt any significant number of people are chucking their 1 year old iphone in a draw to sit unused after they get the next one.
With easier to replace batteries and 3.5mm headphone jacks, I'd wager the secondary market service life would be 2-3 times longer. Not to mention the e-waste from non-repairable battery-based devices like air-pods. Corporation make planned obsolescence decisions that happen to benefit themselves, then can dress it up as "water resistance". Wouldn't be so bad but Apple's anti-consumer decisions are unfortunately imita…
Cook's been great for massively scaling Apple (and its stock price) up, but the art, vision, and soul of the company is gone. It's just a stock price maximizing lawnmower now, just like every other corporate stock price maximizing lawnmower. If that's what shareholders want, fine, I guess. But I'd be bored just manufacturing the same boring rectangles every year. I think Steve would have been, too.
Arguably he overshot innovation, tried to kill the pocket bricks and failed (with a v1 that wasn’t meant to replace the rectangles but was supposed to be a first step toward that). Sounds like you’re ignoring Vision Pro.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Changing chip is way too little of an accomplishment in 10+ years of leadership of what was once the biggest tech company on the planet. The company isn't growing from years, and it's only saved by the positive offset coming from advertisement and app store growth.
Listen, I don't really like the direction Apple has taken either, but since Tim Cook became CEO of Apple in August 2011 the company's stock went from like $15 to like $275; it had a value of $400 billion and now it's worth $4 trillion, ten times as much. Any characterization of him as some kind of failure who killed Apple ("once the biggest tech company on the planet", "isn't growing", "only saved"...) is completely…
Yes!!! Such great news. Apple has really gone to shit. I am confronted by Apple performance and bug pain every hour of my life. I always think: how can someone think this is acceptable? Steve Jobs wouldn’t. Everything is such trash I could go on for hours. I realized a long time ago that if the person at the top doesn’t care then no one will. It seems hard to believe but it makes sense when you consider individual in…
There is no light at the end of the tunnel, Apple's shareholders are using this process to manipulate the stock price. If the next quarter performs poorly then the move up the timeline, if they do well then Cook's leash gets longer. Tim needs to be gone yesterday , not in a few months.
There is a fine line that needs to be walked between innovation and appeasing share holders. Cook is mostly just doing the latter.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No company is immune to disruption, but plenty of them have innovation and adaptation in their DNA. IMO over the years Apple has lost that. Look at Google, or Meta, or even Microsoft. Diversified income streams. Clutch acquisitions. Massive capital investments. Data centers. Nuclear power plants. Moonshot factories. Self driving cars. AR glasses. Robots. Venture investing and dealmaking. Massive AI ambitions. Stuff t…
I don’t think Google is a great example to hold up here. They throw so much random crap at a wall hoping for another golden goose. Then kill anything that isn’t after a few years. If you can’t tell, I’m still salty about Google domains. Many of the things you listed need time to bake and Google never cooks anything more than a quick sear in the pan.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Vision Pro is a perfect example of a greed-driven failure. Apple pissed off both devs and megacorps by keeping the ecosystem closed, fighting tooth and nail in courts such that every app needed to pay them 30% and couldn't be installed without their blessing, and unsurprisingly very few massive companies (or hackers) wanted to support Apple's fledgling closed garden. Without software, it's just a gadget.
> Apple pissed off both devs and megacorps by keeping the ecosystem closed This was so incredible to see play out in real time. You know where else this is happening now? Car makers and CarPlay. CarPlay might be objectively better but car makers are giving them the boot, for very good reason. Apple overplayed their hand (or as you say, was incredibly greedy) and now they get to live with the consequences.