A MBA accountant type would support that move simply on the basis of replacing an expensive external vendor with a more affordable internally sourced chip and increasing profit margin.
The A4 was shipped in 2010. The playbook to use them in laptops might have been discussed before Tim Cook took over. He executed very well nevertheless, though that's what he is known to excel at anyway.
I worked with someone a little over a decade ago who worked directly with Jobs when they were building the NeXT computer.
He had two interesting things to say about it. It was one of the hardest jobs he's ever had because the standards were so high, and that he would do it again in a heartbeat.
> There’s a tech industry habit of second-guessing “what would Steve Jobs have done" ever since he passed away, and most of the things people attribute to him seem like guesses about a guy who was very hard to predict and often inconsistent.
Ahh good this isn't going to be one of those pieces were someone who scanned through the foreword to a book about Steve and once had the privilege of walking past the parking spot where Steve parked briefly one day wax on about what he would or wouldn't do, think or say.
> But recently, we have one of those very rare cases where we know exactly what Steve Jobs would not have done.
> > But recently, we have one of those very rare cases where we know exactly what Steve Jobs would not have done.
>Oh well.
There is a slight difference. It’s a case were we can’t necessarily see how to do something well, but we can see when someone else has done the wrong thing.
Think about design. A lot more people can look at something and say “this is a crappy design” but at the same time if you hand them the task they won’t know exactly how to design it better.
It's always a little bit invigorating to read an article like this.
It's also a touch sad. People appreciate companies who take a stand for their claimed ideals. Apple has made much of its dedication to protecting their customers, even when it might not be the easiest move. I guess here they've decided it's not worth the risk.
Still, combined with their other moves towards monetizing their customers it kind of shows that they're out of ideas to make more money, and the first things to fall in the face of that are their supposed ideals. They're sacrificing something that isn't easily regained.
The thing with this administration is that they can play it very dirty behind the curtains (life-threatening dirty, to oneself, family, and friends), which is why I think the "leaders" of various orgs and countries are bending the knee.
> the most grim and embarrassing thing that's ever been done in Apple's name
I think firing Steve Jobs or the famous Bill Gates appearance at the 1997 MacWorld are probably above that. I doubt this situation is even the worst they've bowed to a world leader.
The Bill Gates appearance was grim in the optics of the time but in retrospect, burying the hatchet with Microsoft, ending the lawsuits, and getting firm committments and investments in the Mac software Microsoft was gonna make saved their ass.
When you've been beaten, there is no shame in shaking your opponents hand.
Tim Cook is a Manager, and perhaps the best manager there is. But he is not an entrepreneur. Which means he is extremely risk averse.
Not sure; Apple's foray into producing their own chips was a big risk, one that has paid off so far
Apple was selling more SoC for iPhone than Intel is selling CPU per year. I am not entirely sure where that risk are.
Apple's foray into producing their own chips started under Steve Jobs. They bought PA Semi in like 2008. Devices with the A4 launched in 2010.
A MBA accountant type would support that move simply on the basis of replacing an expensive external vendor with a more affordable internally sourced chip and increasing profit margin.
The A4 was shipped in 2010. The playbook to use them in laptops might have been discussed before Tim Cook took over. He executed very well nevertheless, though that's what he is known to excel at anyway.
I worked with someone a little over a decade ago who worked directly with Jobs when they were building the NeXT computer.
He had two interesting things to say about it. It was one of the hardest jobs he's ever had because the standards were so high, and that he would do it again in a heartbeat.
> There’s a tech industry habit of second-guessing “what would Steve Jobs have done" ever since he passed away, and most of the things people attribute to him seem like guesses about a guy who was very hard to predict and often inconsistent.
Ahh good this isn't going to be one of those pieces were someone who scanned through the foreword to a book about Steve and once had the privilege of walking past the parking spot where Steve parked briefly one day wax on about what he would or wouldn't do, think or say.
> But recently, we have one of those very rare cases where we know exactly what Steve Jobs would not have done.
Oh well.
> > But recently, we have one of those very rare cases where we know exactly what Steve Jobs would not have done.
>Oh well.
There is a slight difference. It’s a case were we can’t necessarily see how to do something well, but we can see when someone else has done the wrong thing.
Think about design. A lot more people can look at something and say “this is a crappy design” but at the same time if you hand them the task they won’t know exactly how to design it better.
It's always a little bit invigorating to read an article like this.
It's also a touch sad. People appreciate companies who take a stand for their claimed ideals. Apple has made much of its dedication to protecting their customers, even when it might not be the easiest move. I guess here they've decided it's not worth the risk.
Still, combined with their other moves towards monetizing their customers it kind of shows that they're out of ideas to make more money, and the first things to fall in the face of that are their supposed ideals. They're sacrificing something that isn't easily regained.
The thing with this administration is that they can play it very dirty behind the curtains (life-threatening dirty, to oneself, family, and friends), which is why I think the "leaders" of various orgs and countries are bending the knee.
Apple's problems existed way before this administration.
> the most grim and embarrassing thing that's ever been done in Apple's name
I think firing Steve Jobs or the famous Bill Gates appearance at the 1997 MacWorld are probably above that. I doubt this situation is even the worst they've bowed to a world leader.
The Bill Gates appearance was grim in the optics of the time but in retrospect, burying the hatchet with Microsoft, ending the lawsuits, and getting firm committments and investments in the Mac software Microsoft was gonna make saved their ass.
When you've been beaten, there is no shame in shaking your opponents hand.
Corporate shenanigans is worse than blatant televised bribery of the US president...?
Tim Cook sitll the best.
We need to stop putting Steve Jobs on a pedestal.
You cant deny his success rate though? Especially given the success of Pixar too.
The dude was a special fella with a rare mix of skills.
Why, can he not get down?
It’s hard to move around in his current state.
> just one generation after IBM had sold its mainframe computers to the Nazis
tabulating machines, perhaps?
This guy seems so deranged he's not even using the word sold out in its original meaning