Slashdot Mirror
Apple's Life After Steve Jobs
animusCollards writes "Slate ponders a post-Steve Jobs Apple, including possible successors, and the future is... boring. '..it's certainly true that Jobs' style is central to the company's brand and the fierce connection it forges with its customers. His product announcements prompt hundreds of millions of dollars worth of free press coverage and whip up greater and more loyal fans, generating ever-greater interest in the company. ... At some point, all that will end. Jobs will eventually leave the company. There are no obvious plans for succession; in addition to Schiller, observers finger Tim Cook, Apple's COO, and Scott Forstall, who helped develop Mac OS X and the iPhone's software, as contenders for the job. But Tuesday's keynote illustrated how difficult it will be for any of those guys to replace Jobs.'"
How did Tuesdays Keynote illustrate 'how difficult it will be for any of those guys to replace Jobs.'? Just a bloggers opinion, nothing to see here, please move along
Watch those corners
While stock owners of companies like Apple or Berkshire Hathaway may wish their CEO's could like forever. Jobs while "great" is still a double edged sword for Apple. Granted one side is sharper than the other at the moment.
But a less charismatic person could make different decisions that get Apple way more into the main stream. I could go on, but work is busy today.... :-(
Think Deeply.
Ok look. I love my Apple gear. My MacBookPro is by far the best laptop I have owned in a long series of laptops. I like hearing about interesting new tech stuff coming from Apple. New gadgets like the new MBP and its battery, the dropping of DRM, those are geek worthy stories. But seriously, how many damned times is slashdot going to rehash this "What will we ever do without our beloved Steve Jobs!?" story?
How about we just leave it at this. Regardless of who takes over the company next I am sure we can all agree, regardless if you love or hate Apple, that he will probably be more stable and qualifed that the Chair Tossing Google Killer that took over that other really big tech company...
The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
So a post-Jobs Apple will be 'boring'? Nowhere near as boring as the constant stream of articles about a post-Jobs Apple thinks this AC.
Say what you like about Apple (I usually do) but one thing that can't be denied is that Apple does what it does starkly in the face of existing trends and directions. They do it their own way regardless of whether or not the general consensus thinks it's a good idea.
This makes Apple a very popular trend setter and many people really like that about Apple.
This is made possible because Apple leadership is run by an asshole. And I don't mean that in a bad way either. Jobs does what he does from what appears to be pure inspiration. People just eat that up too. He is the Willy Wonka of the computer world.
There can't be another one... there will not be another one. Apple will become a blob of its former self and people will make decisions the way they feel most comfortable... incremental changes and improvements, following trends and very rarely will frighteningly new ideas get thrust into the limelight as they have been under Jobs.
But we will also see something that people have been begging for... something that competes HEAD to HEAD with Microsoft. And Apple will WIN.
There is a simple solution: just follow the mac rumour sites and skim the ideas which make sense (physical, technological, ergonomic, etc.) and turn them into products.
There is a problem with that.
People tend to not know what they want. Noone demanded something like the iPhone.
The secret is to understand their wishes and offer them far more than what they've asked for.
I am no fan of Apple as a company, but I do appreciate what they've done. The same thing holds true for Microsoft and Bill Gates. Apple was doing well because of Steve Jobs, then went into a decline when he left. Because of his return Apple enjoys the popularity and success it holds today.
Bill Gates has left Microsoft (sort of) and Microsoft is rapidly declining. Hewlett and Packard left HP and look where that company is now. These were all visionaries and good businessmen. You can't just replace someone like that. ESPECIALLY not with a financial person (CFO, etc.) Finance people know one thing, numbers.
In order for a company like that to continue it's momentum it needs an Engineer (software, hardware or otherwise) with charisma and good business sense. That is unlikely to happen as these people generally create their own companies and become the next Apple or Microsoft.
They already are!
Apple used to OWN the video editing market. Final cut WAS the defacto standard.
Well come 2009 and we have no update. we cant author BluRay DVD's because apple bet the farm on HD-DVD so now our DVD authoring app is useless. My only choice is some crappy 3rd party apps (Yes adobe's offering is crap)
Apple is dragging it's feet in it's professional lines and it's causing them issues. They have been focusing completely on the "oooh shiney" general public and ignoring their professionals on the backend.
I want my FCP Suite 3 that fixes the problems with the current one and give me native suite bluray menu authoring.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
First off, there is no such thing as "Replacing Steve Jobs", there is only following him.
ANYBODY who is trying to "duplicate" the Steve and his infamous RDF is going to fail, and miserably. In fact, if I was on the committee that was choosing the heir to the helm I'd ask how they plan to "replace" Jobs, and if anyone mentions anything other than .... "nobody can replace Steve" (or similar) is clearly not good enough to fill the vacancy.
People wanting to continue the mystique after Steve leaves is going to fail . There is only one Steve Jobs.
That doesn't mean that Apple will fail after Jobs, but rather, they need to find a new "leader", one that doesn't replace Steve, but rather one that mealy follows him.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
As stated elsewhere, it's supposedly because Apple is tired of being a slave to the MacWorld schedule whereby (1) they have to have all the new, cool stuff ready by January that (2) hurts their Christmas sales because lots of people wait until MacWorld to see what's new before buying. Apple is successful enough (and has been for a while) now that it doesn't need MacWorld they way it used to. This was Apple's last keynote address at MacWorld. Now Apple will get to release the cool, new stuff when it's ready. It'll still have "special press events" most likely and I'd bet that Jobs will still give those.
If you reply, do so only to what I explicitly wrote. If I didn't write it, don't assume or infer it.
Jobs is capitalism to a T. He is exploiting a market by any means acceptable and doing a damn good job at it. If anything Apple will fail when the person running the show starts to actually be concerned with what the public wants instead of telling the public what he wants.
Apple is marketed very well and a big part of marketing is convincing people they must have it even if it isn't what they want or need.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
I don't have anything against him or Apple itself, but people need to calm down the Steve Jobs worshipping. He is the founder, he have great ideias, but he's not alone in the world, I'm sure they can find a good substitute when the time comes.
Am I eval()? - http://www.monst3r.com.br
The Apple fanboys think Jobs is important for his design influence. But Apple's design work is actually outsourced. (Early on, Apple used frogdesign; they've since used others.)
What really turned around Apple were two deals. One was the deal with Microsoft that kept Office on the Mac, and the other was the deal with the recording industry that put music on the iPod.
Apple needs a dealmaker from the content industry. Probably a film executive; recording industry people are too dumb. (Really.) Successful film producers are good at getting multiple parties who don't like each other all pulling in the same direction.
I don't have anything against him or Apple itself, but people need to calm down the Steve Jobs worshipping.
If they do that, they'll lose their jobs (no pun intended)!
The man may ooze style (if that's what you call the shiny, "world of tommorow" look of the iWorld), but he's a helluva narcissist.
I can't believe that the removal from DRM from the iTunes music store isn't bigger news. I think it's huge news. This is the single biggest remaining reason why people are nervous about moving to downloaded music, and it's gone. I'm delighted.
I totally disagree.
The problem isn't that Apple has no corporate identity, but almost the opposite. They have a very strong identity, and it's intimately tied to Jobs, not just in terms of his brilliant marketing and product launches but more importantly in terms of the (high design, cutting edge, minimalist) more-than-skin-deep design aesthetic he imposes on everything that Apple does.
The trouble is that while a generic bunch of (post-Jobs) suits may be able to run certain types of companies successfully (generally the type that Warren Buffet invests in - stable markets where all you need to do is execute competently), they're very unlikely going to be able to continue that design aesthetic - they don't teach design/style in bean-counting school, nor for that matter can it really be taught. Jobs not only has style, and the asshole micromanaging, yet inspirational, personality to enforce it ubiquitously at every level of the products Apple designs, but also a style that has widespread appeal.
When Jobs eventually leaves Apple, the company will almost certainly flounder the way it did under (ex. Pepsi CEO) Sculley. IBM did much better when it brought in a high powered generic suit (ex. Nabisco biscuit boy Louis Gerstner), because IBM didn't need a high priest of style as well as a manager. Apple best bet (but still no sure thing) post-Jobs will be to lure away someone who is already running a high tech company where style is a/the key element - you either have it or you don't and there's no chance of a generic suit learning to fulfill that roll.
Agreed. RDF exaggerated.
Jobs is remarkable in that he Part product visionary, part perfectionist taskmaster, part marketing guru, and part charismatic showman.
But more is made of his lesser role as showman than is warranted. I seriously doubt anything more than 10% of Apple product owners have ever even watched a Keynote. Steve Jobs charisma is nice for the free press it gets them but little else. If they keep building good products and doing half decent marketing there will be no problem. I don't watch the keynotes, but read about them. I was disappointed because there was no Mac Mini, not because Jobs wasn't there.
But in my opinion the greater loss might be in the loss of Steve Jobs the product visionary with the right measure of taskmaster.
I don't think these roles can be filled at a post Jobs Apple by one person. The probably need at CTO visionary/taskmaster + CEO-Showman. The should be figuring Steves roles in the company and how they can interact if those roles are split among different people. At some point the should staff all the roles and let Jobs supervise them, but let them run with it, but only if he feels that he is planning to leave sooner rather than later.
I don't disagree with anything you say, but I think you're missing the point. Today's admirers of the cult of personality have also matured, and have recognized that having a bastard in charge is usually the only way out of the swamp of corporate mediocrity. Farhad Manjoo's recent article in Slate about Macworld hits it: The problem with Jobs's departure will be that Apple will become another HP or Dell, selling it's particular thing that's not really distinguishable from anything else.
Apple fanbois these days aren't the "Apple will change the world" fanbois of yesterday. They're yuppies with cash who appreciate a name brand worth displaying prominently, and they're worried about it losing its social cachet.
Anyone who loves or hates any language, platform, or manufacturer, doesn't know what they're talking about.
"with at least the potential for 8 hours of battery life"
Every laptop I ever owned clamied similar, and usually turned itself off after around the 2 hours 45 minutes mark.
But what amazes me, is that the battery is non-removable, so if it shorts or has some other problem, back to the approved iMac store for Joe Fanboi, and another whopping bill for service.
Doesn't the fact that Apple even lock you in on the battery tell you anything ?
Here, I believe you are wrong. Apple means easy to use electronics people want.
That's a powerful image. When I go to Walmart, I see an entire row of 25+ mp3 players. The only ones people are eyeing are the iPods. The closest, a Zune, I have never seen in the wild. It's also extensible: they just moved into phones 1.5 years ago. With iTunes they'll become the defacto music, movie/video, and, if they play their cards right, book store in the future. That is pretty good too. They're becoming a real media hub.
Right now, they can say to themselves: "What devices supplied by their current industry is deficient, ugly, and/or hard to use, which we, can make easy?" I have one: e-ink based book readers. I'm sure there are many others, but they want the profitable opportunities - thus the small line of computers unlike what confusing line of products in the 90s. Plus new devices not out yet but made possible soon through emerging technology.
The downside, which you touched upon, is that they can't rest on their laurels. That they need to churn out new things. BUT, stagnation like that isn't good for Apple anyway. The artistic types always want to tackle something new, not just rehash the same old thing.
But they do have an imag which means something. The fact that it's not something as definite as you say is a double-edged sword. Look at Polaroid? They, too, meant instant photos once. It only hindered them in a market that they should be more dominant in (as they couldn't let go of the exact method of "instant", being addicted to the old revenue stream). Microsoft may mean "Windows" but what happens why Adobe and Intuit start compiling against Wine 1.xx?
we cant author BluRay DVD's because apple bet the farm on HD-DVD so now our DVD authoring app is useless.
Huh? Apple is a member of the Blu-Ray camp. Microsoft is the one that backed HD-DVD.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blu-ray_Disc_Association
You're right about their pro tools, though. It is surprising that Apple hasn't either updated DVD Studio Pro to support Blu-Ray authoring or partnered with a third party to provide integration between Final Cut Studio and a Blu-Ray mastering application.
http://www.apple.com/finalcutstudio/dvdstudiopro/
I have a website. It's about Macs.