Will Tim Cook Be the Next Steve Ballmer?

CommanderFrank

CommanderFrank

Cat Can't Scratch It
Joined
May 9, 2000
Messages
75,399
Microsoft and Apple operate in almost parallel universes, being more alike than they are different. The structure at the top of both companies is pretty much the same. Could history be getting ready to repeat itself in the case of Tim Cook as CEO?

Like Ballmer, Cook’s legacy will be defined by whether he successfully launches new post-Jobs killer apps. Yes, Cook will be branded a failure if he does not to defend Apple’s franchises in smartphones and tablets.
Click to expand...
 
I doubt it. Cook hasn't demonstrated any of the failures in execution that seem to be the hallmark of Microsoft under Ballmer.
 
deathBOB said:
I doubt it. Cook hasn't demonstrated any of the failures in execution that seem to be the hallmark of Microsoft under Ballmer.
Click to expand...

But it hasn't been that long either. Gates hasn't been the CEO for a VERY long time.
 
I wouldn't want to be the guy trying to fill the shoes of Gates or Jobs, to be honest.
 
Why is everyone so sure that Apple would have continued success with Jobs? Apple has a history of being the first successful company at new products (PC, mp3 player, touch screen Smartphone, tablet computing), but aside from the iPod, they never held the market. They lost the PC market, there's little doubt that they'll become a niche player in smartphones (albeit a profitable niche) and the jury is out on tablet computing, but my gut says someone else is going to win the battle.

The fact is that much of Apple's profits under jobs were due to Cook's supply chain management.

MS was(is?) under a lot of restrictions throughout the world that Apple is not. Nobody tells Apple they can't make Safari the default browser on a Mac. And everything I read indicated the last version of the Zune was quite good. It iddn't matter, because the iPod touch was what everyone wanted. Really the same is true of the iPod vs Rio's Karma. The latter was by far the better player and the interface was generally considered very good. It didn't matter that it could play more formats, that it could play music just like a CD player (i.e. it passed the Pink Floyd test) and the iPod couldn't, and it wouldn't gain the capability for at least 3 years.

To this day, I don't think there's a proper EQ for iPhones/Pads/Pods, which is a needed feature on all players, because different headphones sound different. My EQ settings for OTE head phones are different from Buds, which are different from IEMs. I have an iPhone, and I don't play music on it (though I admit part of that is also the requirement to install iTunes, which I don't want on my computer).
 
Even if Jobs was alive, he'd have a hard time sustaining their previous marketshare. Cook is doomed no matter how good he is.
 
Apples strategy relies heavily on how many options they give the consumer. Once their single amazing product starts to dip in sales they have released other options along with future releases (ipod classi -> mini -> nano etc.) Eventually every cool product looses their luster, usually when competition shows up with a just as compelling product or undercuts you enough to make you change strategies.

One thing that has always perplexed me is Apple usually doesn't look at other competitors products and states "I want to take that product down!" So them releasing an iPad mini to compete with the Kindle was really a shocker, especially since it cannibalized their iPad sales considerably.
 
Parmenides said:
Even if Jobs was alive, he'd have a hard time sustaining their previous marketshare. Cook is doomed no matter how good he is.
Click to expand...

Uh What?

Also, the Mac market is still expanding considerably. They are actually doing very well compare to others. Also the profits.

Trimlock said:
One thing that has always perplexed me is Apple usually doesn't look at other competitors products and states "I want to take that product down!" So them releasing an iPad mini to compete with the Kindle was really a shocker, especially since it cannibalized their iPad sales considerably.
Click to expand...

iPad mini was indeed a shock to many, but it does not cannibalized the iPad sales. There are many reasons why iPad 4 wasn't doing as well as before. For one that is due to no changes except the lightening cable and spec bumps that normal consumer would not care.

This is also a good read.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/benzingainsights/2013/01/18/did-the-ipad-mini-just-kill-off-the-ipad-4/

iPad Air on the other hands are doing surprisingly well.
 
shansoft said:
iPad mini was indeed a shock to many, but it does not cannibalized the iPad sales.
Click to expand...

Why was the mini a shock? I know that Jobs kind of poopooed the notion of 7" to 8" devices but I think it was kind of obvious that Apple couldn't just concede that tablet size to Android devices. Heck, even 8" Windows 8 devices seem to be something of a hit, it really is a great size for a tablet.
 
I'm not really a fan of Cook. He hasn't really screwed up, but he doesn't seem to have the "vision" or "reality distortion field" that Jobs did.

For better or worse, he will be judged not by what he actually did, but how much he wasn't Jobs.
 
shansoft said:
iPad mini was indeed a shock to many, but it does not cannibalized the iPad sales. There are many reasons why iPad 4 wasn't doing as well as before. For one that is due to no changes except the lightening cable and spec bumps that normal consumer would not care.

This is also a good read.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/benzingainsights/2013/01/18/did-the-ipad-mini-just-kill-off-the-ipad-4/

iPad Air on the other hands are doing surprisingly well.
Click to expand...

Or maybe the iPad Air is stealing the thunder back from the Mini? Thinking about it hurts my head but you make valid points in regards to the iPad 4.
 
deathBOB said:
I doubt it. Cook hasn't demonstrated any of the failures in execution that seem to be the hallmark of Microsoft under Ballmer.
Click to expand...

Neither seem to be able to get a very large percent of their users to move to their new OS. (last I looked both were at about 10% of users).

looking at phones and not how much is made off that platform, android based phones have started to take over the market.

So I mean he isn't considered GOD to people in the same way that Jobs was.


Twisted Kidney said:
I wouldn't want to be the guy trying to fill the shoes of Gates or Jobs, to be honest.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that is going to be hard to follow up no matter who you are.
 
Scythe said:
I'm not really a fan of Cook. He hasn't really screwed up, but he doesn't seem to have the "vision" or "reality distortion field" that Jobs did.

For better or worse, he will be judged not by what he actually did, but how much he wasn't Jobs.
Click to expand...

Only to the uninformed. Cook is not Jobs and never will be, nor should he be expected to be. Hes a great logistics guy, and he'll be remembered for that.
 
heatlesssun said:
Not to slam Cook or any other great logistics guy, but who the hell is remembered for being a great logistics guy?
Click to expand...

kind of like the non-lead guitarist from bands, not many people remember the rhythmic guitarist, even the best ones.
 
nilepez said:
Why is everyone so sure that Apple would have continued success with Jobs? Apple has a history of being the first successful company at new products (PC, mp3 player, touch screen Smartphone, tablet computing), but aside from the iPod, they never held the market. They lost the PC market, there's little doubt that they'll become a niche player in smartphones (albeit a profitable niche) and the jury is out on tablet computing, but my gut says someone else is going to win the battle.

The fact is that much of Apple's profits under jobs were due to Cook's supply chain management.

MS was(is?) under a lot of restrictions throughout the world that Apple is not. Nobody tells Apple they can't make Safari the default browser on a Mac. And everything I read indicated the last version of the Zune was quite good. It iddn't matter, because the iPod touch was what everyone wanted. Really the same is true of the iPod vs Rio's Karma. The latter was by far the better player and the interface was generally considered very good. It didn't matter that it could play more formats, that it could play music just like a CD player (i.e. it passed the Pink Floyd test) and the iPod couldn't, and it wouldn't gain the capability for at least 3 years.

To this day, I don't think there's a proper EQ for iPhones/Pads/Pods, which is a needed feature on all players, because different headphones sound different. My EQ settings for OTE head phones are different from Buds, which are different from IEMs. I have an iPhone, and I don't play music on it (though I admit part of that is also the requirement to install iTunes, which I don't want on my computer).
Click to expand...

This^

Steve Jobs was lucky he died if he had lived to be 70 his legacy would have been one of a person who made apple twice and lost it twice. But now everyone will just blame all apples short comings on people who just are not steve jobs.
Apple like RIM and other companies that make the device and software always have an advantage in the start of a new product cycle. Because they make the software and hardware they can order and complete tasks faster if they are motivated and since most consumers are ignorant when a new product cycle erupts they go with that company. Where as more open companies like MS and Google cannot move as fast. But in the end the limits of hardware always cause the downfall of the vertically integrated company. Its just simply the way it works. Multiple times apple moved faster in a product segments that they stole the idea of from someone else. Because they did not need to invent the product idea they could just focus on stealing and tweaking it. And because they don't have to think and code an open system that has to work for hundreds of vendors they can get it all done faster. The problem is when people start needing more out of the devices and becoming aware of other options the closed company cannot make all the options. Because that is not how they originally succeeded. They originally succeeded by getting to market fast with no options.
 
heatlesssun said:
Not to slam Cook or any other great logistics guy, but who the hell is remembered for being a great logistics guy?
Click to expand...

Cook. Before Jobs left, he was constantly cited as the reason Apple had such high margins. Jobs had vision..or at least the smarts to keep Ive's who's certainly the man when it comes to the look of Apple's products over the last 17 years or so...really more than that, since he was behind the Newton (a bomb, but it was ahead of it's time).

But Cook has managed to have the parts and devices they need when they need them. How often does Apple have to sell off old stock at a loss like MS with the Surface?

Just because most have know idea who Geoff Emerick is doesn't mean he and even less known engineers weren't extremely important to the success of JPG&R (that'd be the Beatles). Same thing with other bands like Pink Floyd.

Ive's is still there and Cook is still there. I suspect we're going to see something new this fall. I'm less certain they can be the overall market leader. But we'll see. Right now, I see a lot of iPhone users going to Android (and in this case the phones are free, so price is not a factor).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top