“They say that politics is made up of strange bedfellows. So is the technology industry where Apple plays a leading role,” Ron McElfresh writes for Mac360. “Apple competes against Samsung which sells chips and screens to Apple. The company’s newfound friend is Yahoo!, whose high powered search engine is run by Microsoft. If that’s not strange, then digest this. Apple’s next CEO is running a company that competes with Google and Microsoft.”
“Indulge me while I climb out on a limb and state the obvious. CEO’s don’t last forever. If they did, Steve Jobs would have led U.S. forces into Korea and held a military tribunal against Samsung’s CEO,” McElfresh writes. “CEO’s of the non-Jobs ilk have a tenure, a limited lifespan, if you will. Based on both fact and frivolous conjecture, I can tell you who Apple’s next CEO will be.”
McElfresh writes, “For the moment, Marissa Mayer is busy running one of Apple’s new friends, Yahoo! It seems like an odd relationship, but when you think about it, all about Yahoo! and Apple dovetail nicely into a powerhouse company that could thwart the ambitions of both Google and Microsoft.”
This is about as likely as the prediction from “experts” that Eric Schmidt would be one replacing Steve Jobs.
After Tim Cook, it will be Jonathan Ive. He is being “groomed” for the eventual CEO position, to gain the necessary management experience, with his recent promotion to a role that involves overseeing BOTH hardware and software design.
When Steve Jobs was CEO, it was the “team” of Jobs and Cook that made Apple ultra-successful. Jobs was the creative genius and Cook turned that genius into actual products.
Now, that team is Cook and Ive. Ive is the creative genius and Cook turns that genius into actual products. The only difference is that Cook has the CEO title, and Ive is subordinate.
In the future, the team will be Ive and a person who will be hand-picked Cook to be the Apple’s next operational genius. That person is probably already be at Apple. When Cook decides to retire (or do something else), Ive becomes CEO. And he continues to be the creative genius and his operational genius “lieutenant” turns that genius into actual products.
Six months ago I would have thought this hypothesis as sheer nonsense. But now, I’m not sure…if true, he would be the most behind the scenes CEO Apple ever had.
Handling Apple’s now massive infrastructure is NOT “behind the scenes.” 🙂 Not by a long shot…
The mistake some of these “pundits” make is in believing that Apple has a singular leader. Yes, there is one person who is CEO and makes the final decisions, but Apple’s leadership has TWO heads. One leads the creative part of Apple that designs the amazing products. The other leads the operational part of Apple, that oversees manufacturing, runs the server farms, manages the stores, hires employees, handles customer relations and tech support, etc.
This is the ideal arrangement for Apple, because I think it is difficult to find ONE person who has a soaring imagination AND the pragmatism needed to run Apple’s actual “business.”
The creative genius needs to be unlimited. The operational genius needs understand the limits of what can be done and what cannot be done (at this time). Those two ways of thinking are basically opposite. Apple is creative genius tempered by operational genius. That’s how Apple introduces a product like iPad that only costs $499 retail.
So all the Tim Cook detractors out there need to shut up. Yes, he’s the one in charge, but Jony Ive is just getting warmed up.
I was tempted to call you, “You fool!”. But then you are not, the only flaw with your statement is that of the role of Jonathan Ive. He was co-creator/designer with Steve Jobs behind the multi coloured iMacs, was the sole brains behind the angle poised iMac and was instrumental in the development of the iPod and various other products with Steve Jobs.
Tim Cooks genius was to develop and create the supply chain for hardware manufacture. That makes Tim Cook the right candidate for his current post. Jonathan Ive on the other hand was bequeathed Designer in chief by Steve Jobs no questions or challenges to him to be entertained. He is the continuity of Steve Jobs design ethos which makes him suitable for the role of CEO after Tim Cook, more so now than ever as he is now in charge of both software and hardware development. The very kernel that is Apple inc.
Of course Jonathan Ive and MANY others can take credit for the creative output of Apple, during the time Steve Jobs was CEO. But one person sets the tone and standards, communicates “vision,” and has final approval; that person was Steve Jobs, no matter how much Jonathan Ive contributed individually. And during that time, Ive was only in charge of hardware design, while others led software design and engineering. Steve Jobs was the “integrator” for Apple’s creativity.
Now, that person at Apple IS Jonathan Ive. He oversees BOTH hardware and software. He has final approval (and disapproval) for Apple’s design work. And while there are still MANY who contribute significantly to the overall effort, Apple is now following his creative vision.
“no way she is qualified to run a manufacturing company”
Apple contracts out manufacturing.
Not Jonathan; he is artist and never managed anything bigger than bunch of designers. Besides, he did not even express will to take general management roles, ever.
Phillip is actually a variant because he is much more in material. He is biologist and software architect. I am not saying that he is best variant, though.
And, anyway, none of us here are capable of making proper judgements as we are not in position to have detailed information besides general thoughts like those.
… and most of the others who have managed such large groups are really in it for the money. That leaves a bunch of people who could grow into it but don’t yet have the experience. Like Phil.
Ms Mayer seems fine at running a me-too operation, would she recognize a game-changer if it were handed to her?
I think Tony Fadell fills the entire checklist for the next Apple CEO; he is a proven taskmaster, technical visionary, artist, and entrepreneur, as well as an alumni in the true Apple mold… Nonetheless, Tim is doing just fine.
Jony?, let him keep doing what he is good at, for what ability to run a company has he shown exactly? A massive difference between being an artist and an entrepreneur.
You never want Schiller as CEO. Remember Jobs’ saying? Schiller’s the “sales guy”, just like Ballmer, etc. Once the sales guy gets in charge, the company is doomed.
Jony Ive doesn’t strike me as someone who has the ambition/desire to be CEO. That would take him away from what he loves, which is designing. All the CEO crap would just depress him.
Mayer is doing well for Yahoo!. She needs more time on the job to see if her efforts will pay off, though. But thus far she seems to be reviving a dying company. However, that doesn’t mean she’s a good fit for Apple. I would rather see her remain at Yahoo! and have Apple and Yahoo! forge a very strong strategic alliance.
She would need indoctrination working directly at Apple for a while. But I feel she definitely has what it takes to run Apple, not today, but down the line. She has absolutely been doing good things at Yahoo, at least to this point.
Seriously, Apple’s next CEO after Tim (whenever that happens) will also be internally bred; I agree that Phil and Jony are the leading candidates.
Nothing against Marissa, who has lit a fire in Yahoo and, I’m sorry, she IS seriously cute; I don’t imply to detract from her professional competency, it’s just an observation.
Honestly, the only way that Yahoo is going to avoid a trouncing by Google is if it gets bought out by Apple and is given the Apple makeover, the same that they did to Logic Pro when they bought eMusic.
While silly comments by the writer, it’s hard to deny there is synergy there, and had Yahoo kept up it’s search engine technology, would be a very serious candidate for merger.
And yes, I could definitely see Marissa running Apple, though senior Apple guys might have some problems with that scenario.
So far I haven’t seen her do anything remarkable except sit on a red ball and have her picture taken. I understand that MDN is quite taken with her appearance, which is not bad but certainly not the stuff worship that it seems to be for some people here. In the 21st century she ended telecommuting for the entire company. It’s kinda like getting rid of email or texting. Now all the people who were working from home can drive, wasting lots of time and gas, just to sit in a cubicle and send the same email they could have sent from home. Obviously she had some reason for this. Perhaps the practice was being taken advantage of by non-productive people, but why not just fire those people? Put them on notice or something.
Nope. I ain’t seen nuthin from this “woman CEO” though if you listen to some of the propaganda, just having a vagina should increase corporate profits by a significant percentage alone. WE NEED MORE WOMEN IN TECH! WE NEED MORE WOMEN IN TECH!!
Ok. That’s fine. But no one ever says why we need more women in tech. Aren’t women allowed to choose what they want to do?
The COO of Yahoo, Sheryl Sandberg (who is much more to my personal taste.. she’s hot) is always going on about women in tech. She says bizarre things like “A perfect world would be one in which 50% of the men stayed home with the children.” Wouldn’t a perfect world be one where 100% of the people choose to do what they like?
Ron McElfresh is into pretty gals in short dresses.
Tim Cook was into manufacturing management for 20 years or so before he took the CEO job at Apple after tutoring under Steve Jobs for 10 years or so. Big dif.
C. Or maybe D, be more inclined to hire her because she can actually communicate and work in a cooperative team environment rather than have to compete all the time to assuage her ego like a man would.
The guys I hire are typically the no nonsense, no drama workers who communicate pretty darn well. The females in my area are typically the ones who, even though they might communicate a smidge better, there is a lot more drama and emotional stuff that takes a toll….not always true but more often than not.
The last time I checked, all she did was create some new policies to make the employees happier. Nothing to make Yahoo a better or more competitive search engine.
She hasn’t even proven herself as CEO of one company and now she should be the next CEO of Apple? What the hell?
Eric, the elimination of telecommuting had a good business foundation. It appears to be a good business decision for the mid to long term. She knows what she’s doing. Study the full thinking around it and you may come to the same decision.
What good business sense? What full thinking? Honestly, all I see is that it probably eliminated some very good talent that probably had some good reasons to be telecommuting in the first place, and now that that option was removed, those people couldn’t work there anymore. Not everyone can just build their own personal nursery on site like she can.
Hey, Really, you’ve clearly not been following things there. She appears to be exactly on the right track. Turning around Yahoo! is a multi-year effort. Those expecting immediate gratification are fools (though stockholders have already been well rewarded). We’ll see how thing go going forward, but she has great support from almost all sides. Learn what you’re talking about before letting your lack of info show.
I don’t expect her to turn Yahoo around tomorrow, but so far she’s literally done nothing for it. The support she gets is baffling.
Is it just because she’s the only female CEO running a big tech company, so people are afraid they’ll seem sexist if they don’t shower her with praise? Good god that’s immature. And sadly probably the truth.
What’s to prove? What proof was there that our current president was presidential material? What proof is there that the go along media is touting the democratic playbook that it’s time for a woman president, and of course that woman is Hillary, she’s owed! What are her successful qualifications? Go against her and it’s war on women, just like going against Obama and your racist!
I say Marissa needs no proof and furthermore, I say all executive meetings are to be held at pool parties! Wear a nice two piece Marissa, will ya?!
All Obama needed was to ride public rage against the Bush administration (and make both McCain and Palin look stupid) and put forth policies in stark contrast to the Republicans. Unfortunately, when he got into office, he failed to live up to those promises. But even then, Romney was so anti-middle class that Obama was able to position himself as the better alternative.
I, for one, am ready for a woman to be president – provided that woman is Elizabeth Warren. I wasn’t going to vote for Hillary in 2008, and I will not vote for her in 2016.
Now, to be CEO of Apple (or any other major company) you do have to prove that you can run a company and make it successful. Marissa Mayer has not done so, regardless of her gender.
This is the dumbest story I have ever read, which is saying a lot. Why not an article saying Steve Ballmer will be the next Apple CEO because he has a relationship with Yahoo. And. In the privacy of his home, he wears Marissa’s dresses.
I think the point is that she has done a pretty good job at Yahoo which was fading fast when she took over, Ballmer has never done anything but decline his company despite years of experience and opportunity. She has shown vision and flexibility so may be worth a look, if you know what I mean.
no way she is qualified to run a manufacturing company
This is about as likely as the prediction from “experts” that Eric Schmidt would be one replacing Steve Jobs.
After Tim Cook, it will be Jonathan Ive. He is being “groomed” for the eventual CEO position, to gain the necessary management experience, with his recent promotion to a role that involves overseeing BOTH hardware and software design.
When Steve Jobs was CEO, it was the “team” of Jobs and Cook that made Apple ultra-successful. Jobs was the creative genius and Cook turned that genius into actual products.
Now, that team is Cook and Ive. Ive is the creative genius and Cook turns that genius into actual products. The only difference is that Cook has the CEO title, and Ive is subordinate.
In the future, the team will be Ive and a person who will be hand-picked Cook to be the Apple’s next operational genius. That person is probably already be at Apple. When Cook decides to retire (or do something else), Ive becomes CEO. And he continues to be the creative genius and his operational genius “lieutenant” turns that genius into actual products.
And so on….
Six months ago I would have thought this hypothesis as sheer nonsense. But now, I’m not sure…if true, he would be the most behind the scenes CEO Apple ever had.
Handling Apple’s now massive infrastructure is NOT “behind the scenes.” 🙂 Not by a long shot…
The mistake some of these “pundits” make is in believing that Apple has a singular leader. Yes, there is one person who is CEO and makes the final decisions, but Apple’s leadership has TWO heads. One leads the creative part of Apple that designs the amazing products. The other leads the operational part of Apple, that oversees manufacturing, runs the server farms, manages the stores, hires employees, handles customer relations and tech support, etc.
This is the ideal arrangement for Apple, because I think it is difficult to find ONE person who has a soaring imagination AND the pragmatism needed to run Apple’s actual “business.”
The creative genius needs to be unlimited. The operational genius needs understand the limits of what can be done and what cannot be done (at this time). Those two ways of thinking are basically opposite. Apple is creative genius tempered by operational genius. That’s how Apple introduces a product like iPad that only costs $499 retail.
So all the Tim Cook detractors out there need to shut up. Yes, he’s the one in charge, but Jony Ive is just getting warmed up.
I was tempted to call you, “You fool!”. But then you are not, the only flaw with your statement is that of the role of Jonathan Ive. He was co-creator/designer with Steve Jobs behind the multi coloured iMacs, was the sole brains behind the angle poised iMac and was instrumental in the development of the iPod and various other products with Steve Jobs.
Tim Cooks genius was to develop and create the supply chain for hardware manufacture. That makes Tim Cook the right candidate for his current post. Jonathan Ive on the other hand was bequeathed Designer in chief by Steve Jobs no questions or challenges to him to be entertained. He is the continuity of Steve Jobs design ethos which makes him suitable for the role of CEO after Tim Cook, more so now than ever as he is now in charge of both software and hardware development. The very kernel that is Apple inc.
Of course Jonathan Ive and MANY others can take credit for the creative output of Apple, during the time Steve Jobs was CEO. But one person sets the tone and standards, communicates “vision,” and has final approval; that person was Steve Jobs, no matter how much Jonathan Ive contributed individually. And during that time, Ive was only in charge of hardware design, while others led software design and engineering. Steve Jobs was the “integrator” for Apple’s creativity.
Now, that person at Apple IS Jonathan Ive. He oversees BOTH hardware and software. He has final approval (and disapproval) for Apple’s design work. And while there are still MANY who contribute significantly to the overall effort, Apple is now following his creative vision.
“no way she is qualified to run a manufacturing company”
Apple contracts out manufacturing.
Marissa Mayer isn’t qualified to run that either.
Um, seriously? No. She hasn’t done right by Yahoo, and she won’t do right by Apple. There are better choices (like, say, Phil Schiller or Jony Ive).
Not Jonathan; he is artist and never managed anything bigger than bunch of designers. Besides, he did not even express will to take general management roles, ever.
Phillip is actually a variant because he is much more in material. He is biologist and software architect. I am not saying that he is best variant, though.
And, anyway, none of us here are capable of making proper judgements as we are not in position to have detailed information besides general thoughts like those.
… and most of the others who have managed such large groups are really in it for the money. That leaves a bunch of people who could grow into it but don’t yet have the experience. Like Phil.
Ms Mayer seems fine at running a me-too operation, would she recognize a game-changer if it were handed to her?
I think Tony Fadell fills the entire checklist for the next Apple CEO; he is a proven taskmaster, technical visionary, artist, and entrepreneur, as well as an alumni in the true Apple mold… Nonetheless, Tim is doing just fine.
Jony?, let him keep doing what he is good at, for what ability to run a company has he shown exactly? A massive difference between being an artist and an entrepreneur.
Could we not say that Steve Jobs was an artist? And look what amazing things he did for Apple with the right team. Sir Jony could do the same. 🙂
@spyintheskyuk, You bloody fool!!!!
Jonathan Ive co-owned a successful business he created from scratch before being head hunted to work for Apple inc.
http://uk.askmen.com/celebs/men/business/jonathan-ive/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Ive
Considering that you are from the UK, your level of ignorance is breathtaking! Please crawl back under those cobblestones you came from!
You never want Schiller as CEO. Remember Jobs’ saying? Schiller’s the “sales guy”, just like Ballmer, etc. Once the sales guy gets in charge, the company is doomed.
Jony Ive doesn’t strike me as someone who has the ambition/desire to be CEO. That would take him away from what he loves, which is designing. All the CEO crap would just depress him.
Mayer is doing well for Yahoo!. She needs more time on the job to see if her efforts will pay off, though. But thus far she seems to be reviving a dying company. However, that doesn’t mean she’s a good fit for Apple. I would rather see her remain at Yahoo! and have Apple and Yahoo! forge a very strong strategic alliance.
She would need indoctrination working directly at Apple for a while. But I feel she definitely has what it takes to run Apple, not today, but down the line. She has absolutely been doing good things at Yahoo, at least to this point.
Based on the laugh… NO!
MDN only runs these stories to show the red dress on the red ball. Well done MDN!
“Are you listening, Neo? Or were you looking at the woman in the red dress?” 😀
“Why oh why didn’t I take the BLUE pill? :-}
Could she be any more cute? She’s got my vote, right after Sir Johnny. He’s magic.
I only clicked on this story because I knew it would have The Picture.
What does she sell? 😎
MDN – I can’t read the article when you put that picture up on the same page. But don’t stop or anything… 😉
Seriously, Apple’s next CEO after Tim (whenever that happens) will also be internally bred; I agree that Phil and Jony are the leading candidates.
Nothing against Marissa, who has lit a fire in Yahoo and, I’m sorry, she IS seriously cute; I don’t imply to detract from her professional competency, it’s just an observation.
I’d love to see an Apple/Yahoo merger. Mayer and Jony Ive are good friends so who knows it could work out well.
Honestly, the only way that Yahoo is going to avoid a trouncing by Google is if it gets bought out by Apple and is given the Apple makeover, the same that they did to Logic Pro when they bought eMusic.
Gives me a hard on
Well as long as she’s easy on the eyes I see how that’s totally relevant.
Without Photoshop and makeup, she’s not event hat easy on the eyes. You blow her away C1. Yes, I’ve seen your website.
While silly comments by the writer, it’s hard to deny there is synergy there, and had Yahoo kept up it’s search engine technology, would be a very serious candidate for merger.
And yes, I could definitely see Marissa running Apple, though senior Apple guys might have some problems with that scenario.
So far I haven’t seen her do anything remarkable except sit on a red ball and have her picture taken. I understand that MDN is quite taken with her appearance, which is not bad but certainly not the stuff worship that it seems to be for some people here. In the 21st century she ended telecommuting for the entire company. It’s kinda like getting rid of email or texting. Now all the people who were working from home can drive, wasting lots of time and gas, just to sit in a cubicle and send the same email they could have sent from home. Obviously she had some reason for this. Perhaps the practice was being taken advantage of by non-productive people, but why not just fire those people? Put them on notice or something.
Nope. I ain’t seen nuthin from this “woman CEO” though if you listen to some of the propaganda, just having a vagina should increase corporate profits by a significant percentage alone. WE NEED MORE WOMEN IN TECH! WE NEED MORE WOMEN IN TECH!!
Ok. That’s fine. But no one ever says why we need more women in tech. Aren’t women allowed to choose what they want to do?
The COO of Yahoo, Sheryl Sandberg (who is much more to my personal taste.. she’s hot) is always going on about women in tech. She says bizarre things like “A perfect world would be one in which 50% of the men stayed home with the children.” Wouldn’t a perfect world be one where 100% of the people choose to do what they like?
Tasty, but total BS.
Ron McElfresh is into pretty gals in short dresses.
Tim Cook was into manufacturing management for 20 years or so before he took the CEO job at Apple after tutoring under Steve Jobs for 10 years or so. Big dif.
(To all men here) Just out of curiosity, if you were responsible for hiring a software engineer, and a woman came to you fully qualified, would you:
A) Think to yourself “Gee, I don’t have to pay her as much as a man!”
B) Not hire her because the male conspiracy demands that you find a male engineer
C) Hire her and pay her the stated salary be damned happy you found exactly the person you were looking for?
C. Or maybe D, be more inclined to hire her because she can actually communicate and work in a cooperative team environment rather than have to compete all the time to assuage her ego like a man would.
The guys I hire are typically the no nonsense, no drama workers who communicate pretty darn well. The females in my area are typically the ones who, even though they might communicate a smidge better, there is a lot more drama and emotional stuff that takes a toll….not always true but more often than not.
The article is a joke! LOL
Who at MDN decides to pass this garbage on?
Uh… So what exactly has she done for Yahoo?
The last time I checked, all she did was create some new policies to make the employees happier. Nothing to make Yahoo a better or more competitive search engine.
She hasn’t even proven herself as CEO of one company and now she should be the next CEO of Apple? What the hell?
And not even to make her employees happier – anyone remember eliminating telecommuting?
Eric, the elimination of telecommuting had a good business foundation. It appears to be a good business decision for the mid to long term. She knows what she’s doing. Study the full thinking around it and you may come to the same decision.
What good business sense? What full thinking? Honestly, all I see is that it probably eliminated some very good talent that probably had some good reasons to be telecommuting in the first place, and now that that option was removed, those people couldn’t work there anymore. Not everyone can just build their own personal nursery on site like she can.
Hey, Really, you’ve clearly not been following things there. She appears to be exactly on the right track. Turning around Yahoo! is a multi-year effort. Those expecting immediate gratification are fools (though stockholders have already been well rewarded). We’ll see how thing go going forward, but she has great support from almost all sides. Learn what you’re talking about before letting your lack of info show.
I don’t expect her to turn Yahoo around tomorrow, but so far she’s literally done nothing for it. The support she gets is baffling.
Is it just because she’s the only female CEO running a big tech company, so people are afraid they’ll seem sexist if they don’t shower her with praise? Good god that’s immature. And sadly probably the truth.
Oh, come on. Ridiculous. Has she proven herself yet? I think not.
What’s to prove? What proof was there that our current president was presidential material? What proof is there that the go along media is touting the democratic playbook that it’s time for a woman president, and of course that woman is Hillary, she’s owed! What are her successful qualifications? Go against her and it’s war on women, just like going against Obama and your racist!
I say Marissa needs no proof and furthermore, I say all executive meetings are to be held at pool parties! Wear a nice two piece Marissa, will ya?!
All Obama needed was to ride public rage against the Bush administration (and make both McCain and Palin look stupid) and put forth policies in stark contrast to the Republicans. Unfortunately, when he got into office, he failed to live up to those promises. But even then, Romney was so anti-middle class that Obama was able to position himself as the better alternative.
I, for one, am ready for a woman to be president – provided that woman is Elizabeth Warren. I wasn’t going to vote for Hillary in 2008, and I will not vote for her in 2016.
Now, to be CEO of Apple (or any other major company) you do have to prove that you can run a company and make it successful. Marissa Mayer has not done so, regardless of her gender.
This is the dumbest story I have ever read, which is saying a lot. Why not an article saying Steve Ballmer will be the next Apple CEO because he has a relationship with Yahoo. And. In the privacy of his home, he wears Marissa’s dresses.
Thank you SO much for putting an image in my head that a team of Viennese psychiatrists will never be able to remove.
That would explain a lot about Mr. Ballmer. 😉
I think the point is that she has done a pretty good job at Yahoo which was fading fast when she took over, Ballmer has never done anything but decline his company despite years of experience and opportunity. She has shown vision and flexibility so may be worth a look, if you know what I mean.
Hey MDN is that you or your “little brother” that is voting for Marissa as CEO? 😉
MDN’s sexist comments are pathetic. Does you Mom not allow porn in her basement?
That lucky red ball!
She is Aries like Ballmer!!! Stubborn and just always wants to be right!!! God forbid! Noooooooooooooo! )
MArissa Mayer does not have anything to do with the Apple. so STFU. She is not in any position to even clean the floors in the Apple.