Tim Cook and a more likeable Apple: Why Tim Cook is right person at right time for Apple

“Apple CEO Tim Cook talked Chinese working conditions, potential for a dividend, Apple TV and product cannibalization at a Goldman Sachs investment conference, but the biggest news may have been about the speaker himself,” Larry Dignan reports for ZDNet.

“Simply put, Cook is the right person at the right time for Apple,” Dignan reports. “Apple and Cook are simply more likeable to me.”

Dignan reports, “Why does this matter? Cook’s approach, tone and personality will be better for Apple at this point in its history. The company is going to be a target on multiple fronts… Cook can manage through those wild cards better than Jobs would have. It’s hard to imagine Jobs walking through the supply chain flap and coming off well. Congressional hearings? Forget about it. Jobs would have been a mess. Cook can juggle those hand grenades. Apple under Jobs had this religious aura and army of fanboys was created. Under Cook, the vibe is different.”

Read more in the full article here.

33 Comments

  1. “It’s hard to imagine Jobs walking through the supply chain flap and coming off well”
    That’s because Jobs believe in FACTS and in IMPROVEMENT. not in “feelings” Jobs Believed in You have to do what you have to do, not what any one else wanted you to do. Investors have prove that they are idiots since it took them too much time to see the real value of apple, and now they want apple to do things their way? Tim is the right person, but that doesn’t mean Job wasn’t.

    1. Agreed. Steve Jobs was a super genius, super man at running Apple. I miss him and would bump Tim Cook back to where he was in a nano-second.

      Tim Cook is doing a good job. Let’s hope he continues to and does not eff up Apple.

    1. Freak I hate “Bozo’s” like this that make shit up. He wrote, “potiential for a dividend”?
      Bullshit, Tim never even used that word and didn’t even come close to saying it would go to the investors. This is why the stock was so hyped this morning it it because of Bozo’s like this.

  2. The ankle-biters see Jobs’s death as an opportunity to take his reputation down a few notches, since he can no longer defend himself. As to why, well it makes them feel better about their own mediocrity to kick the great man when he’s down.
    Real nice./

  3. Before we get into the ‘adulation’ for Tim Cook let’s first look at his own personal achievements as CEO at Apple Inc. going forward. Steve Jobs had Apple Inc. at the pinnacle of its success by having been a ‘Master Entrepreneur’ and not because he was a ‘nice guy’. We all wish T. Cook all the very best but I’ll save the adulation until I witness the long term results.

        1. The book had the personal accounts of many people who knew Jobs. Not one of those people has publicly bashed the book or said that it painted steve jobs in a negative light.

          Grubers rants about the book are from a fanboy who did not know steve, probably knows none of the people in the book and simply wishes the book lived up to his own mythical view of Apple and Steve.

          1. Gruber criticized Isaacson’s poor reporting on the technology.

            Gruber: “The personal stuff — documentation of Jobs’s cruelty (and his talent for cruelty), his tantrums, his tendency to claim for himself the ideas of others — that’s not problematic. Isaacson handles that well, and what he reports in that regard jibes with everything we know about the man. My complaints are about outright technical inaccuracies, and getting the man’s work wrong. The design process, the resulting products, the centrality of software — Isaacson simply misses the boat.”

          2. if you read the link posted it says nothing criticizing how the book talked about Jobs’s behavior, attitude, or anything about the man personally.

            The criticism is entirely about how profoundly wrong the book is regarding the technology behind why Apple is successful today.

            Read it before you criticize me or Gruber.

  4. I think Larry Dignan is totally unlikeable. I think the Microsofties and Fandroids that he draws to ZDNet turns off normal people.

    One can only hope ZDNet will get rid of Larry Dignan and make ZDNet a more likeable blog.

  5. If current Apple history were divided into four phases, phase one: Apple founded, phase two: co-founder Jobs exiled, phase three: Jobs returns, and phase four: Post Jobs, then I believe that Tim Cook is best suited for Apple, Inc. at this stage of its meteoric history.

    Apple internally may truly be a consortium of start-up like teams, creating in isolated silos of innovation, but, Apple, Inc. is also a very large corporate organization. It is this truth that must be managed from the top down going forward.

    Steve indeed saw that Apple was “growing like a weed”, and entrusted the next evolution of the company to two very competent individuals: Tim Cook and Jony Ives. Between these two, and the deep bench of talent at Apple, this next phase should be in good hands for the foreseeable future.

  6. Of course Steve Jobs had “this religious aura”: he was a Buddhist, and his beliefs translated directly into his life’s work.

    Moreover, returning to Apple in 1997, he rescued a floundering company on the back of the remaining Apple faithful, with all the hype, charisma, and showmanship of an itinerant preacher.

    His story is all about mastering the “business as religion” principle. Analysts and investors hated it, but in time they began to notice that it was working—exceptionally well.

    As Apple’s business continued to build, non-believers began to be attracted to the crowds around the revival tent, swelling their ranks to apocalyptic proportions.

    Tim Cook doesn’t need Steve’s flair to manage this situation. He understands the mystical appeal of the products, and his shop will only continue to extend its undeniably successful “experience for sale” business model, tapping into people’s instincts—religious or not—as opposed to the cynical hucksterism of other businessmen.

    1. Steve Jobs’ “religious aura” had nothing to do with being a Buddhist. People adored him because he cared about only one thing: Making amazing products, then making them better. This is not the way most of the world looks at things, in case you haven’t noticed.

      1. Very good comment Jane, but I have to side with Omalansky on the Buddhism part. Jobs wanted to “change the world” not simply shift a bunch of shiny metal widgets for a profit.

        I believe he saw much of his success long before anyone else did. I’m glad he lived long enough to see it playing out in the world and glad we have Tim in absence of Jobs, but only an Apple hating bozo would prefer Tim over Jobs.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.