Slashdot Mirror


What is Apple Without Steve Jobs?

necro81 writes "David Pauly at Bloomberg has written a piece that asks 'Does Apple Inc. Have a Future Without Steve Jobs?' He writes in the context of Jobs' latest success in launching the iPhone, set against the backdrop of stock backdating troubles. In Pauly's worst-case-scenario, the SEC prosecutes Apple, and the board is forced to oust Jobs.Even without resorting to such scenarios, it's an interesting question to ask the fanboys and detractors out there: could Apple succeed and continue to innovative without Jobs at the helm?"

29 of 281 comments (clear)

  1. they'll find a way by User+956 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In Pauly's worst-case-scenario, the SEC prosecutes Apple, and the board is forced to oust Jobs.

    They'll just bring him back as an "independent consultant" and it'll be business as usual.

    --
    The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
  2. No Problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    No problem. They just need to replace him with someone else that's exactly the same.

    1. Re:No Problem by Fearless+Freep · · Score: 4, Funny

      Watch for the impending release of the iClone

  3. Apple needs a superstar CEO by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It doesn't necessarily have to be Jobs, but I have a hard time imagining who else could be as effective. The Reality Distortion Field is a very real thing and must be taken into account. Anything Jobs says is automatically newsworthy. The black turtleneck has become an icon of geek chic. Apple and Jobs are, in the minds of the believers, inseparable.

    Regardless of who sits in the big chair, that person must positively sweat charisma. People have to want to believe them. And whatever else is true, they must never ever have worked for HP :D

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    1. Re:Apple needs a superstar CEO by Skadet · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's not Jobs per se that they need. It isn't Jobs himself that's important, it's the role of his position. He's far more publically involved than a lot of CEOs are. Apple has successfully turned the CEO position, and consequently Jobs, into the mouthpiece for Apple -- into the spokesgeek people adore. Jobs' successor would have to fill that role well, but it's silly to think that Jobs alone is the only one who can do the ... uh, job.

    2. Re:Apple needs a superstar CEO by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Apple had another CEO like that once. His name was John Sculley. Visionary, charismatic superstar...Sculley was even seated between Hillary Clinton and Alan Greenspan at Clinton's first State of the Union, for God's sakes! Long story made short, he burned out and made some mistakes, and Apple fell into the disaster that was the mid-to-late 90's. Jobs has been CEO longer than Sculley was, and he never made that mistake. (One crucial difference: like Jobs, Sculley had visionary ideas. One of them was the Newton. Unlike Jobs, however, Sculley was no perfectionist, and the Newton shipped prematurely. Sculley was also nowhere near the control freak Jobs is, and engineering fell out of his influence and under Gassee's.)

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
    3. Re:Apple needs a superstar CEO by WilliamSChips · · Score: 4, Funny

      Why not get an actual rock star? That would be a hilarious sight in the board room.

      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
    4. Re:Apple needs a superstar CEO by MsGeek · · Score: 5, Insightful

      John Sculley was not the problem. Michael Spindler was. Spindler presided over the fiascos that marked the early PowerPC period, like the dreaded "Performa" machines. And contrary to popular belief, Apple was on its way to a turnaround before Apple bought NeXT. Gil Amelio was responsible for the revival of the PowerBook brand after the "PowerBook Flambe" fiasco, hired Jonathan Ive as industrial designer, and had greenlighted the iMac. Of course, when Amelio bought NeXT, he basically signed his own pink slip as the purchase meant Steve Jobs was back.

      I think after 10 years of The Steve back at the helm of Apple, the next CEO needn't be anywhere near as hands-on as The Steve is. They just need to avoid hiring someone as clueless as Spindler. The technological team Apple put together is good enough and strong enough to carry on unless a Spindler-level fuckup winds up at the reins. Amelio started the rebirth of Apple, The Steve kicked it into high gear. Apple will never be Dell. Perhaps that's for the best.

      --
      Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
    5. Re:Apple needs a superstar CEO by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 4, Funny
      Sculley was CEO from April 1983 until June 1993, which is ten years and two months. Jobs has been CEO since September 1997 (interim until January 2000), which is nine years and four months.

      I come from the future, bearing good news: Steve Jobs is still CEO!

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
  4. Re:Ummm, by Tackhead · · Score: 5, Insightful
    > ...perhaps a non-fascist technology company that embraces third party developers and applications, rather than a company that engages in propritary pogroms against any and all that think they can add to the glory that is Apple?

    No, that's what Apple would have been with Steve Wozniak.

  5. We already know the answer by venicebeach · · Score: 4, Insightful

    History says no. Apple without Steve was not the same...

    1. Re:We already know the answer by statusbar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      NeXT was very much a success! In fact NeXT purchased Apple, for something like Negative 300 Million Dollars! Now NeXT continues in Apple form.

      --jeffk++

      --
      ipv6 is my vpn
  6. What launch? by nelomolen · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Successful launch of the iPhone? What launch?

    They've only announced a future product, and the general sentiment seems to be that it won't be a hot seller. That's a far cry from being a success.

  7. More interesting question! by ceeam · · Score: 5, Funny

    What is Microsoft without Steve Ballmer?

    1. Re:More interesting question! by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 5, Funny

      What is Microsoft without Steve Ballmer?

      A corporation that employs fewer chair repairmen?

    2. Re:More interesting question! by Nemetroid · · Score: 5, Funny

      The same thing, but with 100% less squirting.

  8. Investor confidence by kongjie · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I guess there's a few questions in there. The article suggests that investors' confidence is based on Jobs. So if he goes, so will they.

    For me the more interesting question is how much of Apple's success can be ascribed to Jobs' leadership style. Perhaps that should be in quotes because he is rumored to be an asshole to work for. Did his uncompromising behavior and standards create the iPod? Would it have been less of a hit if his vision didn't push it in the right direction? Or did it require a perfectionist?

    Clearly he won't settle for less than best in him employees--but viewing from the outside, it's hard to say if that helped or hindered Apple's success.

    1. Re:Investor confidence by cowscows · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What I think is most important for a company like Apple is focus. And that focus needs to come from the top. Perfectionism is a double edged sword, and not really all that hard to find. It can enable you to make some really great things, but the nature of working that way means that you can only make so many great things, because perfectionism takes time.

      Before Jobs returned, Apple still made some cool stuff, and I'd imagine there were still plenty of smart, perfectionist engineers and such working there. But they were producing about 12 billion different projects, and there's just no way to get that many things right. The old Apple may have had all the technical and design oriented staff they needed to design the iPod, but it never would've happened, because an mp3 player project would've been competing with too many others for resources and talent.

      Steve Jobs' cult of personality and RDF are certainly a benefit. It gets them a good bit of free advertising and makes following Apple that much more fun. But his best contribution to Apple is his ability to focus the company's efforts in just a few directions, and usually in the right directions.

      If Jobs was out tomorrow, and they replaced him with a guy who was as boring as a stump in the ground, they'd still do alright as long as the replacement kept the company on task. There'd definitely be a short-term stock slump as investors got worried, and Macworld keynotes would probably be far less amusing, but Apple could survive, and continue to churn out cool stuff.

      --

      One time I threw a brick at a duck.

    2. Re:Investor confidence by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Clearly he won't settle for less than best in him employees--but viewing from the outside, it's hard to say if that helped or hindered Apple's success.

      It's a peculiar argument to make that a greater tolerance for mediocrity could have in some way helped Apple's success.

  9. Anecdotally... by Zaurus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    (Jobs) I loved Mac's in the 80's. High-res screens. Mice. Cool apps.

    (No Jobs) I hated Mac's in the 90's. Slow. Ugly (my opinion). No cool apps. Crashed as often as PC's (I worked at a graphic design firm, macs at work, pc's at home)

    (Jobs) I love Mac's in the...2000's(?). Beatiful. Fast. Tons of cool apps + lots of OSS stuff.

    So, anecdotally I'd say that Jobs makes a huge difference. That being said, I think Apple would still have a good chance if the Jobs appointees stayed in power after he left.

  10. Just like... by zerrubabul · · Score: 4, Funny

    Apple without Steve Jobs would be like what De Lorean was without John De Lorean. No one really wanted De Loreans after John De Lorean left either.

  11. As the number one fanboy... by Whiney+Mac+Fanboy · · Score: 4, Funny

    it's an interesting question to ask the fanboys and detractors out there: could Apple succeed and continue to innovative without Jobs at the helm?"

    As the first result for a google search on mac fanboy, I feel qualified to answer this.

    Answer yes. Last time Jobs left, Apple was left with mediocre CEOs (who seemed determined to run Apple to the ground). It entirely depends on who replaces Jobs.

    --
    There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
  12. Oh I don't know. by Spazntwich · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm sure Steve's influence on the company's success is overrated. They did just fine without him, launching many successful products under the wise leadership of their brilliant interim CEOs.

  13. High standards by moderators_are_w*nke · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Somebody within Apple (strongly rumored to be Jobs) who has a lot of power has exceptionally high standards for design an usability, and this is why we get iPod+iTunes from Apple (killer app - even my little sister can rip CDs onto it) and Media Player+Some strange OLED WMA player from others.

    Thats the key, somebody who will say no to an average product which would make a fair amount of money until its even better. If they lose that, they're the same as everyone else and they can't command premium prices anymore.

    --
    "XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve your problem, use more." - Anonymous Coward
  14. Steve Jobs == Lassie by dafragsta · · Score: 5, Funny

    When he dies, they'll just replace him with another guy in a turtleneck. No one will know the difference. Mac users are more emotional than logical anyway. ;)

  15. Re:Ummm, by Tackhead · · Score: 4, Informative
    > Considering that the couple of folks that tried to clone the AppleII way back when were mercilessly hunted down and killed, (legalistically speaking), by Apple, and the short time Apple tried to license out their OS to clone makers was such a miserable failure due to their overly restrictive terms and high fees, I think my opinion is an honest one, not a troll.
    >
    > Contrast to IBM and M$, who let the IBM PC clones freak flags fly, welcoming any and all third party developers and apps.

    It was a weird time in the industry. Everyone was trying to figure out whether or not to go with open or closed architectures, and changing their minds about it every couple of years.

    Compared to the Mac, the Apple ][ was an exceptionally open platform. It not only had slots, when you bought an Apple ][, you got the schematics for the hardware, and you got a commented disassembly of the ROM in your documentation. Whereas the Mac needed a special Programmer's Key just to reset the machine.

    And as for IBM, the same IBM that let the clones out of the closet... was the same IBM that came up with the PS/2 and MCA (Micro Channel Architecture). Sure the second generation of IBM machines had slots and ran DOS (whether it was PC-DOS or MS-DOS :-), but what good were the machine's slots if you had to sign a licensing agreement just to build hardware for 'em?

  16. Willy Wonka by Pengo · · Score: 5, Interesting


    It is actually exciting to live in a time where we have a CEO like Jobs. He's the only example of a true living Willy Wonka in my lifetime.

    I can't think of one more individual like Steve that inspires me to not only pull out my wallet and hand over thousands of dollars, but do it with a smile.

  17. Re:Jonathan Ive by mollymoo · · Score: 4, Insightful
    For example iPod has perhaps the best user interface of any mp3 player but the battery problem is a real problem [...]

    The thing is, it simply isn't a real problem for the majority of customers. Hard-to-replace batteries were all over the news for a while, but Apple still sells iPods by the bucketload. Apple realised that a sleek exterior and minimum size and weight sell much better than inconvenience a few years down the line. For most customers, a battery cover you can remove with your thumb or a coin is an unnecesarry cost (in terms of style and weight, not cash). I bet Apple have figures on how many replacement batteries are sold for consumer electronics (generally, not just iPods). I'd like to see those figures, but my guess is few are ever sold. You get them for mobile phones and laptops, though I suspect that market is more about increasing runtime than replacing ageing batteries. When I walk into an electronics store I do not generally see racks of replacement batteries for non-Apple MP3 players. Where I have seen replacement batteries they are right next to the kits to replace your iPod battery.

    Part of Apple's success comes from challenging the conventional wisdom. There's no point making the sleep light pulse, is there? There's no point adding a speaker so the click wheel actually clicks, is there? Nobody would want an all-in-one PC & monitor that they couldn't upgrade, would they? Well, it turns out that when you do lots of those 'silly' things and get rid of 'essential' features like no-tools battery replacement the result is devices that people want to buy.

    --
    Chernobyl 'not a wildlife haven' - BBC News
  18. Killing the Goose that Lays the golden Eggs by Alien54 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As Jerry Pournelle (long of Chaos Manor from Byte Magazine in ages past) has noted

    The LA Times has a We Hate Gates series. Most of the press seems to have a similar crusade against Apple. One wonders if some press consortium has sold Apple stock short and is working to make it come true?

    Because whatever irregularities in the stock option of many years ago, Jobs has taken Apple from a struggling company to a major player, and the stockholders were rewarded with a 1200% stock value increase.

    Why regulations designed to protect minority stockholders are now being used to smear Jobs is a story someone with more resources than I have should dig into. I doubt it's really coincidence.

    --
    "It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"