No scandals, no twitter addiction, no sexual assault cases. No bullshit. All this guy does is wake up at 4, work till 10, and sleep. Cuts his own pay voluntarily. Didn’t double his headcount while revenues fell like so many. Tim Cook is such a beast. Jobs left one last blessing for Apple shareholders in his decision to elevate Cook.
> No scandals, no twitter addiction, no sexual assault cases. No bullshit.
It’s unfortunate (and it says a lot about our current situation) that that behaviour is worthy of note.
> Jobs left one last blessing for Apple shareholders in his decision to elevate Cook.
I don’t understand the obsession with shareholders. It’s all about money money money, good products and respect for the customer be dammed. Cook was a fantastic choice to fill Apple’s coffers, but an awful one for those who identify with Apple’s (old) values of making something good.
Yes, I agree that hardware-wise they’re on top of their game¹. I was specifically thinking of software and services, like the trend of trying to upsell you to their services when using their apps or releasing half-baked apps which go against their own Human Interface Guidelines and are never fixed.
¹ Let’s see if that continues with Evans Hankey leaving.
Apple is a public company, and public companies are accountable to shareholders, not customers. Shareholders want it to be worth their while, so yes it's about the money. It is possible to do what's best for both, and Apple still does that plenty, but the customer of today isn't the customer of the Apple you're describing. I wish they focused more on the Mac line, and the M1 and M2 are returns to that, but Apple's making money off iPhones, not Macs.
> Apple is a public company, and public companies are accountable to shareholders, not customers.
Tim Cook himself, a decade ago, might have had something to say about that¹.
> It is possible to do what's best for both, and Apple still does that plenty
My objection is the trend more than the current state. A decade ago it would have been unthinkable to me that Apple would ever have ads in any OS. Today, I’m dreading the moment they go “full Windows” and start shoving third-party ads in Spotlight, then Safari, then the Dock².
Sure I think there are senses in which Tim Cook is accountable to customers, or maybe his own moral compass (as might be the case here), but in a specific and direct sense the board that controls whether he keeps his job or not is legally bound to act for the shareholders.
However I don't think Tim Cook in that moment was necessarily saying that accessibility was non-negotiable, shareholders be damned, it's also possible he was taking a broad view of shareholder interest that is about more than immediate ROI.
> the board that controls whether he keeps his job or not
A job he doesn’t need¹ and which he’s aware he’ll leave in the not-too-distant future.² The only thing stopping Cook from making different decisions is himself.
> Apple isn’t an advertising company. It’s a hardware company that also does software.
They could be a noodle shop. The distinction isn’t relevant to the point: they are shoving ads in our faces, from their own apps from their own OSs. Always pushing you to the subscriptions. Everything Cook does indicates it will only get worse.
They're expanding into advertising as a revenue source. This undercuts google on their platform, but it does mean that advertising revenue will become something they want to protect. Google makes lots of money advertising and it's possible this could become a major (thinking around 30-40%) portion of Apple's revenue.
Link is interesting and a good response from Cook. I was hoping it would be more of a complete rejection of the terribly destructive Friedman doctrine of shareholder supremacy.
Because the shareholders are the owners. And I don't think it's all about money (in the short term). I believe a significant part of Apple shareholders understand the importance of brand reputation and are willing to sacrifice short term gains for sustainable long term gains.
Customers have a dozen companies to chose from that would respect them. Or are you saying Apple customers are specifically those who do not like respect nowadays.
> Or are you saying Apple customers are specifically those who do not like respect nowadays.
That’s such a leading question, I’m genuinely wondering if you’re arguing in good faith.
I’m saying neither of those. I’m talking about how Apple’s leadership transition from Jobs to Cook changed focus from what the company used to do best.
If you look at what Apple has done since, diversifying production out of China, this may have been a trigger. It could also be purely supply chain stability, but Cook appears to be a more noble figure than his peers IMO.
The collision of politics and business is never good though, but in most cases the company has to bow politely, at least in the near term.
I don't completely understand your comment. Do you imply there's something wrong with being autistic? Or that overworking is an exclusively autistic trait? Both interpretations seems off, so I believe I missed your point.
Though I suspect it's a joke that went well over my head.
