maurvir wrote: I like Tim Cook, but he wasn't the right choice to replace Jobs. He lacks the creative vision that Jobs had naturally, and it is showing. He's not as bad as the jackals that took over in the 90's (Sculley / Spindler), but it's obvious that he lacks the design chops for a boutique fashion company.
Ive may not have wanted the job, but I can't help but think he would have held onto the Apple vision a bit better.
Looking back over his entire career, Jobs' "creative vision" was always more of a problem than an asset. Jobs' ideas were always in opposition to practicality starting way back with his battle to reduce functionality, expandability and his moronic attempts for force fanless designs in the early 80's when the HW was no where near ready for that.
The whole NeXT disaster is the story of Jobs' incapacity to design a practical computer.
In my estimation Jobs made two, very important right moves at Apple when he came back: He brutally stopped the bleeding and then, latter on accurately predicted how important mobile phones would be. Those two right moves were hugely important but had nothing to do really with a "creative vision".
The biggest falsehood that people believe is that Jobs saved apple with the introduction of the iMac. This is completely false. Mac sales remained flat after the iMac came on the market and Mac sales did not start to grow until 2006, long after the iMac came along.
Jobs made some good moves but they were business moves, not creative moves. Where ever his influence was strongest in the design of a product the more it was likely to be a failure. Cube anyone?
I am always a bit mystified at the hate thrown at Scully, his reign very successful, it is he who over saw Apple growing into a powerful and popular company. If Jobs had not been ousted from Apple they would likely be an historic foot note like Amiga.
Not even duct tape will fix stupid, but it can muffle the sound.
