Larry Ellison predicts bleak future for Apple without Steve Jobs, ‘our Edison, our Picasso’

Business magnate Larry Ellison thinks that without Steve Jobs — “our Edison” and “our Picasso” — Apple Inc. is in trouble.

In a CBS News video interview with Charlie Rose, Ellison painted a bleak future for Apple.

Larry Ellison: He was brilliant. I mean, he was our Edison. He was our Picasso. He was an incredible inventor.

Charlie Rose: So what happens to Apple without Steve?

Ellison: Well, we already know. We saw, we conducted the experiment; it’s been done. We saw Apple with Steve Jobs (raises hand high). We saw Apple without Steve Jobs (lowers hand). We saw Apple with Steve Jobs (raises hand high). Now, we’re going to see Apple without Steve Jobs (lowers hand).

The video can be seen via CBS News here.

MacDailyNews Take:

Larry Ellison
Oracle CEO Larry Ellison
This is sad. Something seems to have slowed down Larry’s thought processes. Botox overdose?

Quick, somebody unstretch Larry’s face to the point where he can open his eyes enough to see that the variables in his infantile equation have changed dramatically:

Tim Cook ≠ John Fsckin’ Sculley, nor does Apple Computer, Inc. in 1985 = Apple Inc. 2013.

[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Fred Mertz” for the heads up.]


  1. Oh, fer cryin’ out loud.

    Apple kicked Jobs out the first time around, then tried to run their business without him. It was a disaster. This time around, he tragically left them, and the company is doing their level best to live by the lessons he taught them. Not the same thing. Not in the slightest.


  2. All MDN delusional fangirls will be speechless when the board finally removes this “babysitter” posing as the Apple CEO.

    Tim Cook had done nothing except make critical errors in judgment since he took over.

    He will be remembered for his only innovation, a completely unnecessary and outlandishly expensive device adapter… pathetic!

    1. Someone here will iCal your comment and play it back to us in 6 months.

      Creating the best new innovative products takes an incredible number of man hours and when you tie them all together in a software ecosystem that multiplies the work to be done.

      So, orandy, who else is doing better? HP, MS, Dell, Samsung?

  3. So how come nobody here has brought forth one iota of evidence to show that Larry’s opinion is inaccurate? He didn’t predict that Apple would tank, but that its fortunes would wane. Without Jobs, they have.

    Stock price is down, despite Apple bending over and giving Wall Street traders everything they wanted.

    Pace of product innovation is noticeably down.

    Retail executives are not even in place.

    Advertising is a bore.

    Cook is uninspiring. If he’s such a genius, then he should be COO. As CEO, he has essentially just sit on his hands and allowed the last of Steve’s pipeline roll out behind schedule. Let a real leader make some decisions, and maybe Apple would reverse its fortune — and Larry would be the first to praise the decisive leadership.

  4. I’ve worked with Oracle since 1995. I’ve been a fan and really liked their technology. When they introduced the Network Computing Architecture back in the late 90s, they were ahead of what today is called “cloud computing”.

    But, since then, all they have done is buy companies and buy companies and buy companies. The database itself has been stalled for years, and today’s Oracle looks like a 1000 head monster with no focus at all.

    While Steve Jobs worked on focus on few amazing products, Oracle has a catalog which not even they understand. A lot like the pre-Jobs comeback Apple. While I admire Larry Ellison, I think, at this point, he’s not the most authorized person to analyze Apple’s state.

    Now, he was a close and personal friend of Steve Jobs. There has to be anemotional factor on what he says.

    1. Oracle’s problem is that it ran out of room to grow. Once you’re the biggest and best at your core business, all you can do is get into other businesses to satisfy Wall Street’s insatiable greed and demand for infinite growth.

      Apple, on the other hand, thinks it owns the PC market when it has perhaps a 12% market share in the USA and even less elsewhere. It thinks its owns the mobile phone industry despite the continuous waves of competition that are slowly but surely beating down iOS market share — and, yes, profit share will follow, it always does. Apple thinks its app store is untouchable despite the android copycats offering:
      1) more hardware options at all price points
      2) more OS versatility (and with it, less security, which buyers seem not to care about as much as they say they do)
      3) just as many decent phone apps as iOS.
      4) more retailers, more advertising, and greater global support.

      Face it, Larry is correct. Steve has always got the ball rolling in the right direction. Nobody at Apple has ever been able to keep it moving for long. None of Apple’s other leaders, including Cook, has ever shown the same ability to conceive of a must-have breakthrough product, let alone have serial commercial successes. Cook hasn’t done anything new — he’s a perfect COO and a dismal CEO.

  5. This is the same guy who, though supposedly Steve’s “best friend,” predicted, after Steve came back, that Apple would leave the computing business and focus on “appliances.” This worried me at the time- would Steve actually do that? Not exactly…

  6. We’d all be missing the point if we didn’t see this as Larry sayin Oracale with me will crash and burn. Oracale has lots of lieutenants and one general. Jobs created an Apple with Generals of various ranks. Hence some of the friction.

    The example of 85-95 is bogus. Use Jobs’ medical leaves as the examples and we get a very differant view

  7. Larry Ellison admired Steve Jobs. To him, Apple and Steve Jobs were one and the same. My take is he is showing loyalty to his friend.

    Ellison gets a pass from me.

  8. Edison wasn’t exactly the inspired genius you might assume. As far as recorded sound is concerned – his main claim to fame – he stuck to producing cylinders years after it was obvious the disc was more practical. Then went on to produce his own type of thick discs you couldn’t play on standard gramophones. They flopped. Then he refused to record electrically until it was much too late to save Edison records, which ceased in 1929, a few months after his first electric “Needle Cut” lateral discs were issued. Another flop, nice though they are….

Reader Feedback

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