“I’ve begun to think that even were Jobs still around, Cook might still be the better choice for CEO in this day and age,” Dan Moren writes for Macworld.
“Can you imagine Jobs being as receptive as Cook was to calls for improved diversity at Apple? Or embracing social media? Or posing for selfies?” Moren writes. “Yeah, me neither.”
“That Jobs was a genius at what he did is difficult to deny, and there’s no doubt that he could be charismatic when he felt like it, but in a time when concerns often revolve around issues like transparency and responsiveness, it’s hard not to think that his secretive and often waspish shtick might begin to wear thin,” Moren writes. “Meanwhile, Cook’s more relaxed grip and good-natured charm go a long way towards softening the company’s image — even as it continues to do business with ruthless efficiency.”
Read more in the full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Tim Cook is the right CEO at the right time for Apple, but, boy do we wish Steve were still Chairman today (no offense, Art).
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Lynn Weiler” for the heads up.]
That’s debatable. I hear an awful lot of hate being directed towards Tim Cook about how he’s causing Apple to be devalued by Wall Street. Plenty of people hate him for being gay along with his defense of gay rights and now they don’t like the idea he’s selectively banning the Confederate flag from the App Store. I haven’t heard anyone trash talk about Jeff Bezos, Reed Hastings, Elon Musk or even Satya Nadella the way they trash talk about Tim Cook. No one is saying any of those CEO’s are ruining their companies like they say Tim Cook is ruining Apple.
I’m not sure if Apple’s hate is being transferred to Tim Cook or the other way around. It’s really hard to tell. I think Tim Cook is doing a good job running Apple and I’d hardly think the company has collapsed but that’s just my opinion. Tim Cook doesn’t run the company by himself but I suppose he makes a lot of final decisions. Does Tim Cook showing his outspoken support for certain causes hurt Apple? I really don’t know. I only know he seems to draw more bad attention than those other CEO’s I mentioned. To me, he seems like a caring goodwill ambassador but it’s quite likely the big Wall Street investors see that as a huge weakness.
My opinion: It is mostly Apple hate being applied to Tim, who happens to be an easy target because of all of the things you mention.
But you convinced me that it is actually a good thing. Never cared what Wall Street thought anyway, but Tim truly is “a caring goodwill ambassador”, and that does still mean something. We need more of that in the world today. (And I’m one of those against his outspoken defense of gay rights, but it is part of a bigger, very easy to support package.)
38% of Americans identify their political views as conservative, 34% as moderate, and 24% as liberal. (
” rel=”nofollow”>Gallup, January 2015)
Of course Tim Cook is alienating huge swaths of customers and potential customers.
If you think that’s okay, you’re a liberal (and you can’t do basic math). Imagine how you’d feel if Tim Cook were more in tune with the majority of Americans (76% non-liberals) and was making speeches about how the decline in morals touted by secular forces have destroyed any rendering of Judeo-Christian philosophy in the public school system and decried how major corporations targeting our neglected youth with sex and violence are destroying the basic fabric of the country. Imagine Tim Cook calling for an increased focus on morality and Judeo-Christian values instead of marching in gay parades.
Tim Cook should be quiet and focus on running the company. How about making enough Watches to sell instead of hurting the product with extensive, protracted shortages?
We don’t care what a COO who only became CEO because the real CEO died from cancer thinks about anything outside of Apple. He has no moral authority and he turns off huge numbers of customers, potential customers, and shareholders.
So somehow in your brain you decided that the moderates were with the conservatives? You being a conservative and big on free speech … shocked that doesn’t apply to Tim because he’s gay … right. I’m Jewish so I’m going to tell you what Judeo-Christian philosophy really is … embrace diversity, repair the world and treat people how you wanted to be treated. Nothing in there about hate or alienation. BTW doesn’t appear Apple is turning off anyone but haters … largest value of any company in the world ever! The only ones destroying the moral fabric of this country is right wing extremists who hate blacks, jews, Gays, immigrants, women .. just about anyone but white males.
You have to remember that conservatives main aim is to spread fear and bigotry so that they can maintain control.
Apple has always been liberal in many ways and strived to be different (remember that one).
Let the conservatives continue to bash everyone who is not like them and call everyone else Libtards. They will drive away the moderates who do not want to be associated with that type of bigotry.
Doggonetoo—> first you say
“…conservatives main aim is to spread fear…”
Then you immediately set about spreading fear of how evil and bigoted conservatives are.
Try rewriting an intelligent, fact based statement, that doesn’t immediately make you the worlds biggest hypocrite.
It’ll be a fun and challenging exercise that will make you a better propagandist for your cause. :~)
doggonetoo: when I read a post like yours, I wonder if you’re stretching your wings a troll-rovocateur, or one that truely thinks in such unsubstantiated and naive sound-bites? How is it exactly manifested as you say in respect to conservatives: spreading fear/bigotry for control? Throwing name bombs is quite easy. You seem to advocate being different as a liberal, but it appears you don’t fancy (bash) when a conservative follows the action you idealize. You don’t like when someone labels a liberal a Libtard, but it’s much better to call (all) conservatives bigots. You seem a little tied up with your own logic.
Thank you hozo1.
No Hozo1, he said nothing of the sort, First/Then clearly said Tim is focusing on 1/3rd of the potential customer base, while neglecting 2/3rds.
Not that the entire 2/3rds were all conservatives.
Drop the labels, and preconceived notions of who is better/worse. That’ll help keep your panties from bunching up.
There are 3 about equal groups, Group A, Group B, Group C.
Tim Cook is heavily in favor of, and putting his full support behind Group A.
Meanwhile he is both passively and directly challenging/dismissing/alienating Group C and Group B.
The great thing about Steve Jobs is everyone, from all three groups, could see themselves in one or more aspects of his character.
Tim Cook, a brilliant man, and the best logistics guy in the business hands down, is only making himself attractive to one group.
Now go back and re-read what I(and by extension First/Then) said a couple times and pretend you were the CEO of a successful business.
Is there any profit from alienating 2/3rds of your potential customers?
Yes, it is brilliant to alienate and mock roughly half the world. The half with morals.
Yet another fallacy – that morals and virtue are somehow exclusive to your political group. You embody and incredible confluence of arrogance and idiocy.
hozo1: from where exactly do you find your definition of moral fabric? Is it possible you are being a little presumptuous here in thinking your definition is THE definition? “Embrace diversity”-you mean “anything goes” if it fits with your definition of THE fabric? “Repair the world?” Geez–that’s such a high level of pap–it makes me tired/weary–I can’t even respond. “Treat people how you want to be treated.” Though not exact, from where does that sentiment come? Do you use that Source for all of your moral structure? I’ll guess not. If you did, you’d find that embracing everything with diversity in mind isn’t advocated in that Source. Making distinctions, differentiations and discriminating (yes, I said it–but without a bone of bigotry) is a good thing in light of the moral fabric (and we do it everyday in all sectors of life). Somewhere, somehow, you are discriminating as you come to your conclusions. You may want to fine tune you conclusions a little bit and ease the accusation that a conservative discriminating, as you do, necessarily means hate for blacks, Jews, gays, immigrants, women….
How are you doing with what SCOTUS just decided on gay marriage?
Anyone celebrating SCOTUS’ latest debacle is simply celebrating a dying culture.
A dead culture. A dead Constitution. A dead respect for following the law. A dead respect for the truth. A new culture based on deceit, raw power and coercion, and hedonism. All paid for by someone else. Till the fake money runs out.
Kent. Just shut up. Nobody wants to hear your idiocy.
Spot On!
Kent, you are CORRECT.
Dan Kurt
Supporters of same-sex marriage have achieved considerable success persuading their fellow citizens — through the democratic process — to adopt their view. That ends today. Stealing this issue from the people will for many cast a cloud over same-sex marriage, making a dramatic social change that much more difficult to accept.
Stripped of its shiny rhetorical gloss, the majority’s argument is that the Due Process Clause gives same-sex couples a fundamental right to marry because it will be good for them and for society. If I were a legislator, I would certainly consider that view as a matter of social policy. But as a judge, I find the majority’s position indefensible as a matter of constitutional law.
If you are among the many Americans – of whatever sexual orientation – who favor expanding same-sex marriage, by all means celebrate today’s decision. Celebrate the achievement of a desired goal. Celebrate the opportunity for a new expression of commitment to a partner. Celebrate the availability of new benefits. But do not celebrate the Constitution. It had nothing to do with it. — Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts
What the decision is all about is the fact that Congress has failed the citizens of this country with their inability to pass Constitutionally correct legislation. Nothing more.
I identify myself as moderate with conservative tendencies; however, I could not care less how Tim Cook lives his life or whom he advocates for. I am a consumer of Apple products. As long as they continue to make great products, I will continue to but them.
I do find it amazing that the same people who criticize Chick-fil-A protestors now bemoan Tim Cook and that the same stance toward Apple. It’s a free country: every citizen is allowed an opinion and to pursue support for that opinion. Other than the current Confederate battle flag stupidity that everyone is being whipped into a frenzy over (by the media), and Apple’s potential censorship pertaining to that issue, I don’t see Cook’s opinion heavily influencing Apple to conclude “he has to go.”
By definition, conservatives want to conserve things or keep them the way they were when they were growing up. Conservatives are against change and are unlikely to embrace change. For society to progress, it is obvious that the ways we do things and think about things have at least a few flaw that need to be changed. Conservatives are extremely unlikely to explore new ways to approach these areas and usually revert back to the old maladaptive methods and policies. Liberals scare the hell out of conservatives because they are all about change and often change for change’s sake. The leaders of humanity that bring about change are always more liberal than conservative because of that desire for change and yet liberals alienate conservatives because of those very changes. Neither side is correct. The time has come for a new standard based on the morals, values and qualities that all the world’s religions embrace. True improvement based on justice, tolerance, industriousness, generosity, hard work, intelligence, unity, understanding, equality, etc.
You need to go back and study cons and libs.
Start with history, and work your way up to today.
Conservatives have never been against change, just against bad change.
Conservatives want to quantify the usefulness of change and not just change for the sake of change.
Take education for example, it is indisputable that children nowadays are receiving a substandard education compared to even 10 years ago, let alone 50 years ago.
A conservative looks at that and says “what changed, and can we improve this process by reverting to methods we know worked in the past?”.
Today’s liberal looks at the same problem and says “oh this isn’t working, throw more money at it! Change it! Oh that didn’t work either! More money! More change!”.
Obviously this is a very simplified example, with a narrow focus, on a terribly complex issue, but it points out that conservatives want something that is quantifiable, and holds people accountable.
In fact one of the main differences in the worlds religions is along the same lines, Christians and by extension their progenitors, the Jews main focus is holding ones self accountable before the Lord God Almighty.
While there is prayer with faith and hope for random mercies and miracles, those are side trips on the rocky path to attempting the sinless perfection of Christ and/or Yahweh.
It’s one of the reasons the world is so quick to attack Christians, cause for a Liberal, actually being accountable for their own ill conceived ideas of change, is a bridge to far.
But! The world needs both, one to temper the other. The chaos of always changing does, on occasion, produce a good idea. Which is why you need to be able to quantify it, so it can be adapted.
Which is why we need to work together.
At the time that Jesus of Nazareth was teaching humanity about the new approach to life of adding the virtues of love and forgiveness to the Ten Commandments, He was considered to be a radical liberal. Although He was a liberal rabbi who changed the archaic practices of Judaism, His message of peace took root and changed the world and allows humanity to progress beyond simple laws to encompass compassion and understanding. Many who profess to be His followers these days have embraced war, hate and intolerance. Instead of looking at His radical message, they prefer to look back on the Old Testament for guidance and see the lessons about the follies of mankind as if they were desired for this day and age. This is a typical conservative move; go back to the past rather than create a better future.
Just to be clear from the start, I avoid interacting with you as much as possible. To me you are worse than a troll, you are thread hijacker, turning any issue going on to your center of the universe, which is fine hey it’s free will.
I do however want to applaud you though for actually identifying the idea that there is something other than what you call a conservative and a liberal. “38% of Americans identify their political views as conservative, 34% as moderate, and 24% as liberal.”
Then right reporting those numbers, you add an insult about those who can’t do math and then use these statistics to make this ridiculous statement: “Imagine how you’d feel if Tim Cook were more in tune with the majority of Americans (76% non-liberals)” when one could easy say something like “Imagine how it feels that Tim Cook is in tun with the majority of Americans (58% non-conservative)”.
Of more mathematical note, 38% + 34% + 24% = 96%. That leaves 4% that are something else.
One more mathematical note 38% + 34% = 72% so I suspect that you added the 4% to get your 76% as non-liberals. Thus that 58% non-conservative could be equally bumped in the same way to 64% non-conservatives.
All in all it’s hilarious, thanks for the laugh.
Make that 62%. I can’t do math.
Polls…it all depends on how you ask the questions and how those labels are interpreted.
You may take comfort in those numbers, but I would hazard a guess that the subset of that 38% of “conservatives” that affiliates with your far right viewpoints is not nearly as large as you would like to think. I also believe that the moderates actually outnumber both the conservative and liberal groups, once you trim away the more radical subsets on the left and right.
In the end, the moderates are the most important group in terms of the future of this country. But people like you somehow believe that ours is a binary system of political extremes.
You amuse me sometimes, Fwhatever, But you are mostly just an irritant.
Hilarious. Your source is the Gallup poll which has always been a poll by and for Republicans? Get better sources.
Moral authority…really.
Remember that the new definition of the word “hate” is: “anything I disagree with or might possibly have the slightest negative feelings toward”
So overused it has no valid meaning. Won’t prevent people from worshipping the word though, sorry to say.
I would agree except for Cook is also making Apple much more political something I think is not good for the company, We don’t need an Obama crony at the highest levels of Apple running social policy, Apple should be focused on making great products not social justice and the gay agenda.
I sent my thoughts to Apple about Apple’s board not controling the CEO’s use of a publicaly traded company for his own personal tool. As Apple gets into supplying the news and the selection of what is to be in the news that Apple users will see. I see a growing problem.
I miss Steve Jobs and his focus on doing only what is best for Apple and many times not for the investors. Keeping his focus on where to go with Apple’s resources next. Tim and the board are not looking for where the puck will go next. Their heads are in someone else’s game.
J-Trader: Thx for the note to the Board about a CEO’s use of the co as a personal soapbox. Have an opinion, but speaking for yourself is more appropriate than the opining on social issues as an official AAPL position (stock symbol is intentional).
Steve was very private…personally, fore sure–but also corporately. This always gave Apple an aire of focused mystery that bloomed into surprise with a savvy product release. The process followed the structure of a good book/movie. I like less the mentality the Dan seems to support in Tim…”embracing social media and posing for selfies.” Those are hardly qualitative pursuits that distinguish. Can you say generia (made up word)?
Add to Tim Cook’s C.V., then, Thought Policeman.
Yanking Civil War games was the kind of thuggery which I never expected Apple to engage in. Essentially, Apple has demonstrated they crave public adulation for doing the “right thing.” Look out, everybody, Confederate flags are evil!
Censorship in a free society is dangerous. If Tim Cook wanted to take on racial hate, he would do something about the hateful racial words in music which iTunes sells.
But that would be censorship, too.
For me Cook is the best man for the job because Apple needs a logistic genius now more than ever given the volume of quality products they make.
It’s hard to imagine that there will ever be another genius like Jobs. He was one in a trillion.
Remember that Jobs made Cook the CEO. I feel we should trust that that was the right decision. And if you are really honest with yourself you have to admit that Apple has grown significantly since Jobs passed away. Of course there have been mistakes but the product lines have been very successful. The key metric for me is how Apple have successfully retaken the smart phone market after a serious attempt from companies like Samsung.
“That Jobs was a genius at what he did is difficult to deny, and there’s no doubt that he could be charismatic when he felt like it, but in a time when concerns often revolve around issues like transparency and responsiveness, it’s hard not to think that his secretive and often waspish shtick might begin to wear thin,”
Wow, where to begin. First, “That Jobs was a genius at what he did is difficult to deny”, well, it’s impossible to deny. He is already revered with the greatest inventors of all time and hundreds of CEO’s try to embody him.
Second; “he could be charismatic when he felt like it …. hard not to think that his secretive and often waspish shtick might begin to wear thin,”
Well here’s a guy who’s been suffering with cancer for years, knows he has limited time with his beloved family, Apple and management team, so much to do so little precious time. I can’t for a minute criticize someone who didn’t divert focus to issues outside of his core mission or spend time answering / considering larger social issues.
Oh don’t you love it when a journalist tries to do your thinking for you?
Can you imagine Jobs being as receptive as Cook was to calls for improved diversity at Apple? YES.
Or embracing social media? YES
Or posing for selfies? YES.
Funny for guys that constantly speculate spin and avoid facts jouranalists like Dan Moren don’t have much of an imagination?
Hey Dan, can you imagine modern day jouranalists using only facts in their articles? Hey Dan, can you imagine headlines with the life supporting words in them? Hey Dan, can you imagine jouranalists modern day jouranalists writing with integrity. Hey Dan, can you imagine how karma is going to be such a bitch to media reporting? I can, except for the last one, no need to imagine something unless it’s fantasy.
dumb article.
because Jobs has passed his image is FROZEN in time.
what makes the writer think that Jobs couldn’t CHANGE?
Jobs changed and adapted continuously : the brash brilliant youngster to the careful master manager etc.
btw: I like TC.