| ▲ | epolanski 10 hours ago |
| Changing chip is way too little of an accomplishment in 10+ years of leadership of what was once the biggest tech company on the planet. The company isn't growing from years, and it's only saved by the positive offset coming from advertisement and app store growth. |
|
| ▲ | wk_end 10 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Listen, I don't really like the direction Apple has taken either, but since Tim Cook became CEO of Apple in August 2011 the company's stock went from like $15 to like $275; it had a value of $400 billion and now it's worth $4 trillion, ten times as much. Any characterization of him as some kind of failure who killed Apple ("once the biggest tech company on the planet", "isn't growing", "only saved"...) is completely out-of-touch. |
| |
| ▲ | epolanski 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | As a customer and tech enthusiasts I couldn't care less about the stock performance of Apple, truly. It's a tech company, I'm interested in the tech they produce. On that front, the company hasn't been innovative for ages. | | |
| ▲ | blackqueeriroh 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | This is one of the least reality-based statements ever. Just take AirPods Pro at a minimum. Apple is doing thing with AirPods that other brands can’t even dream of, and it’s all technical engineering. | |
| ▲ | crooked-v 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Apple Silicon and everything related to it is deeply innovative, it's just not at all flashy. | |
| ▲ | knollimar 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | in house chips are pretty cool. Shared memory is a really nice architectural advancement. | | |
| ▲ | makeitdouble 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | What is your specific definition of "in house" chips ? Usually we'd apply that to Samsung's exynos or Sony's image sensors for their DSLRs. Would Google's Tensor for instance fit in that definition ? |
|
| |
| ▲ | manmal 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It sailed on Jobs‘ monumental accomplishments, and still does. Including AirPods and Vision Pro, much of what fell into Cook‘s era was already well underway when Jobs died. Cook is a fantastic executor, fulfilling Jobs‘ legacy. But the tank is empty now, has been for a while. | | |
| ▲ | KerrAvon 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | Every bit of your second sentence is wrong. None of that was even on the drawing boards when Steve passed away. | | |
| ▲ | manmal 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Look it up. Both have been prototyped for more than a decade before being released. Like most recent Apple products. |
|
| |
| ▲ | sharts 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | How can we be sure this is specifically due to Cook and not the ecosystem overall? A lot has changed since 2011. Some was likely Cook continuing execution of things lined up by Jobs. Some could just be tech sector in general, etc. | | |
| ▲ | JKCalhoun 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | In some ways it doesn't matter. A bad CEO would have fucked up the ecosystem. |
| |
| ▲ | fnord77 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | 10x over 15 years is not really impressive for a tech company | | |
|
|
| ▲ | pshc 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| MacBooks outclass any other laptop in the market thanks to those chips. |
|
| ▲ | JKCalhoun 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| "…and it's only saved by the positive offset coming from advertisement and app store growth" That has been part of the plan for a decade now since Eddy Cue was tasked with boosting Apple's income from "services". (It's worked pretty well for Microsoft.) |
|
| ▲ | victorbjorklund 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| It’s not the only thing. The scale up of Apple is massive and so is the supply chain. Those are not really things consumers don’t see directly (just indirectly) |
