ie8 fix

Between the Lines

Larry Dignan, Andrew Nusca and Rachel King

Pondering Apple in a post-Jobs world

By | June 18, 2008, 5:00am PDT

Before all of you start sending nastygrams my way about how tasteless and premature this blog post is, let me just say upfront I agonized about whether or not it should even be written in the first place, and my industry colleagues I consulted about it told me that the topic, while uncomfortable, is fair game.

Steve Jobs is still CEO of Apple, and he’s still alive, and unofficially Dictator for Life. But I am definitely not alone and hardly an original thinker among many who are pondering about how long he might be able to remain in an active role at the company.

steve_jobs-zd.jpg

I’m not going to theorize on whether or not Jobs’ pancreatic cancer has returned, is having a prolonged recovery from his Whipple procedure, or whether Apple is hiding the real truth of the situation, as many have suggested. Rather, I think some consideration should be taken as to whether or not Apple has formed an effective transition strategy, and has adequately prepared for the worst case scenario. What does Apple look like without Jobs?

Click on the “Read the rest of this entry” link below for more.

Companies that are centered around iconic founders and which cannot form effective long-term transition and mission strategies after they depart are doomed to suffer serious consequences. Case in point — from May of 1985 to late 1996, Jobs lived out his exile at NeXT and Pixar, only to return as Apple’s savior after over a decade of being completely rudderless and on the brink of oblivion.

The industry is littered with examples of poor transition management. Microsoft itself seemed to have hit a major bump in the road in vision and mission when Bill Gates decided to spend more time on his personal projects rather than be involved in day to day matters of the company — a road bump that it seems to still not have recovered from given the train wreck that is Windows Vista — although it could be said that Steve Ballmer had been groomed for the position since the day the company was founded. Michael Dell had to be brought back in to turn his company around after watching its market share deteriorate after three years of stewardship under Kevin Rollins. And who could forget how Palm Computing went completely, irretrievably south after Donna Dubinsky and Jeff Hawkins made the break. While Donna still serves on the board of directors, Palm hasn’t seen its glory days in a long time.

The tech industry isn’t the only one to be affected by founder exodus transition mismanagement syndrome.  Harley-Davidson went through years of deterioration and shipping poor products after being purchased by AMF in 1969 when the original founders left and only rebounded when 13 employees made a concerted effort to save the company and buy it back in 1981. It could also be said after Walt died in 1966, Disney went through an extremely difficult period in its core animated film business, for as much as two decades until Eisner revitalized the company.

If Jobs were to abdicate, would Apple indeed become rudderless again? Or has he installed a church of his own followers that would continue on in the same tradition and ideology? Is there a “Book of Jobs” somewhere in a pile of Word for Mac files or PDFs that contain the ideological canon of what comprises the essence of Apple? Is enough institutional knowledge and Jobs’s teachings documented and retained among the management staff? Only Steve Jobs can answer that question for sure.

Certainly, a number of the “inmates” that formed the NeXT “asylum” that reconstructed the company after the long decline during the Sculley, Spindler and Amelio years still remain, but some key folks are missing — notably Avie Tevanian, Job’s long time #2 and head of software engineering, who went off to join the board of Tellme Networks in 2006. Tim Cook, a former career IBMer, briefly filled the role of CEO when Jobs had his cancer treatment in 2004, but whether he has the institutional vision to run the company long term should Jobs have to leave Apple is a question only Jobs can answer. Only Bertrand Serlet, who succeeded Avie Tevanian as Chief of Software Engineering, and Sina Tamaddon are the two remaining legacy NeXTers serving as senior company officers. Whether either of these two they have the exact combination of talents to be CEO material of a multi-billion dollar corporation and the executors of Job’s legacy is uncertain.

Leadership isn’t the only thing that might have to change if Jobs leaves Apple — or God forbid, this world. Failure to adapt to market realities and holding Jobs’ principles up on a pedestal could cause the company serious problems as well. It’s no secret that what is holding Apple back from finally cutting the cord from its hardware and allowing mass-licensing of OS X on generic X86 hardware is Jobs himself. Getting iPhone out to other competing carriers besides AT&T may also be possible after Jobs and his tradition of proprietary exclusiveness becomes a thing of the past. And while it pains me to say it, despite all Jobs has meant for the company in terms of its establishing market vision and external sex appeal — his unique brand of slick hucksterism that comprises its current success formula, leaving these traditions behind may be the only way Apple will ever realize the maximum of its true potential.

Who do you feel and what principles should guide a post-Jobs Apple? Talk Back and let me know.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Disclosure

Jason Perlow

http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?page_id=8181

Biography

Jason Perlow

Jason Perlow is a technologist with over two decades of experience with integrating large heterogeneous multi-vendor computing environments in Fortune 500 companies. A long-time computer enthusiast starting the age of 13 with his first Apple ][ personal computer, he began his freelance writing career starting at ZD Sm@rt Reseller in 1996 and has since authored numerous guest columns for ZDNet Enterprise and Ziff-Davis Internet. Jason is currently Senior Technology Editor for Linux Magazine, where he has been writing about Open Source issues since 1999.

In his spare time, Jason is an avid amateur chef and food writer, where his work reviewing New Jersey restaurants has appeared in The New York Times. He is also the founder of the popular food web site eGullet and blogs about restaurants and cooking at OffTheBroiler.com.

137
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Pondering Apple in a post-Jobs world
tomlin21-24319035676893835085146735905770 11th Oct
I extremely like your method. I went for the online log for that earliest time on top notch of that as just your fanatic. Retain publish as I'm gonna arrive to find nfl jerseys out this just about every day.
0 Votes
+ -
Post Jobs Apple..
vinodis@... Updated - 18th Jun 2008
'Apple' the brand should survive Jobs or any other visionary - as long as they Innovate and think ahead of their times. That's what you expect out of the brand Apple.
0 Votes
+ -
Expectations don't always lead to results
Michael Kelly 18th Jun 2008
Remember that the last time they got rid of Jobs they quit innovating and MS merely improved (not necessarily "innovated") their product and Apple almost faded out of mainstream consciousness. So yes you'd like to think they would keep innovating, but then again it's just as possible that they get greedy bastard to head up the company who worries more about the locking in customers side of Apple than the innovative side of Apple.
0 Votes
+ -
I also would hope that Jobs wasn't replaced by someone who would only think of lining their own pocket which seems to be the trend amongst CEO's. The only way any company can survive is to care about its product, care about its employees, and put money into new product development. One would also hope that the "build it better, faster, and cheaper" mentatlity wouldn't be in his replacements thoughts either. So far, it hasn't worked out well for a LOT of companies. Hopefully Steve Jobs will alive and kicking for quiet a while and this will all be a moot point.
0 Votes
+ -
The Real Problem with Jobs' strategy
jattas@... 19th Jun 2008
In answer to Mike Kelly's commments, Apple has the biggest dilemma that I can remember in this industry: How does a company with so charismatic a leader continue with or without him and his policies when his ideas for creating product were indeed prophetic, but his policies for his company limiting their use were indeed self destructive, and the reason why Apple goes from peak to the next valley in business success.
Apple I will admit has some of the most extraordinary ideas of most companies in the field! Then eventually kills them by limiting the success of the product, and limiting it by not allowing its licensing.
I coming from the Graphic Arts field, have seen
this over and over again since 1984, a dilemma indeed.
0 Votes
+ -
It takes more than that ...
mwagner@... 18th Jun 2008
Technologically, Apple is not ahead of the curve. They are in the thick of it though. Their success comes from marketing, not innovation. They sell products that look 'sexy' and in doing so they command premium prices for them!
0 Votes
+ -
That's propaganda
roger that 18th Jun 2008
Apple's success is often attributed to good
marketing and good looks.

That's propaganda. Repeat a falsehood often
enough and it becomes accepted as the truth.

Apple is so bad at m arketing that it failed for
many years to sell superior operating systems and
computers.

mwagner is correct in saying that Apple does not
create advanced technology. What Apple does
create is a superior, powerful, simple interfaces
that use the best available technology most of the
time. Sophisticated solutions give users
exceptional power to do complex things with ease.

Using Apple products becomes a joy of soaring
personal power. This is where Apple excels. Not in
technology. Not in marketing. And only marginally
in good looks.
0 Votes
+ -
Possibly somewhere in between
klumper 18th Jun 2008
The true quotient probably lies about halfway between your take and Marc's.

Apple is so bad at marketing that it failed for many years to sell superior operating systems and computers.

"Superior" in how many ways? In it's ultimate reach? Interoperability? Price? Don't dismiss the power of Apple's marketing, or their branding appeal to many folks in computerland. It's always been part of their unique, higher road approach.

Keep in mind, you can dress up a Mercedes ten ways to Sunday, and in fact make it a superior all-around transportation package. But in the end, most still can't afford one so they'll invariably turn to other, less expensive alternatives - which ironically, generally serve their purposes better, in addition to residing within their budgets. Sometimes what that non-descript Minivan lacks in sexiness it just flat out bests the Porsche or Beamer in all-purpose utility.

So you gotta ask yourself, which one do I really need? [YMMV]

Using Apple products becomes a joy of soaring personal power. This is where Apple excels.

"Personal power" in how many ways? Read previous comments above; lather, rinse and repeat.
0 Votes
+ -
What people like you fail to realize...
Macs4EaseOfUse Updated - 18th Jun 2008
...is that Macs are superior in terms of ease of use to the
average user. Linux is just as stable if not more so but
why didn't it take the market by storm? Because it takes a
geek to get it tweaked the way Macintoshes now run with
no necessity to download much in the way of drivers, etc.
You wouldn't be seeing grandma and grandpa using a
Linux box unless they were the geeky sort. Apple's
superiority comes from turning a computer into an
appliance rather than a gadget that only geeks can enjoy:
Just as you don't care how your toaster makes toast so
long as toast is the end result when you press the button;
or how your TV works so long as you can watch those nice
movies when you press the power and channel buttons.
This is how Apple provides the "soaring power" mentioned
in the post you are replying to.

If all the user cares about is cost and is willing to sacrifice
the ease of use and become a geek, then they shouldn't
complain about how difficult it is to get anything done in
Linux and Windows. The truth of the matter is that the
majority of the world aren't geeks and these are the people
a company needs to sell to so as to gain market share.

After all, I can either buy a car prebuilt at the factory to my
specifications or I can save a couple of thousand bucks
and buy a kit car and spend the next three (or more)
summers building it myself in my spare time, hoping that I
didn't make a mistake and turn it into a deathtrap when all
I need it for is to go work, the grocery store and visit
friends and family. Not being a car enthusiast or a
mechanical engineer by training, I'd rather take the former
option. And that's the opinion of most of the average
people out there.
0 Votes
+ -
Re-read what I wrote
klumper Updated - 19th Jun 2008
To wit: "Superior" in how many ways? In it's ultimate reach? Interoperability? Price?

As for "soaring power", there's more than one way to define that nebulous concept. When I think of "soaring power" in matters computing, I first think of redline cycles + stability. And trust me when I say, what I could turn out with very little effort would best the baddest Mac on the block. That's the other side of soaring power, and another feather in the cap of the simple, nondescript and inexpensive x86 white box that can be turbocharged. wink

If you were to follow any of my comments in Talkbacks, you'll notice I'm not anti-Apple. The fact is, I have quite a bit of respect for Jobs & Co. But I'm also well aware of the unique limitations and "lock-in" factor that plagues the Mac world (though this now appears to be lessening somewhat, but only time will tell how far it shall go). The Mac is still out of its league in the DIY arena, as we both know. That happens to be a realm in which I excel, and target. So put 1 + 1 together to see where "superior" is there for rigmeisters like me.

The truth of the matter is that the majority of the world aren't geeks and these are the people a company needs to sell to so as to gain market share.

Fair enough, but come on, what's taking them then? How long will it be before the Mac OS X "revolution" breaks out and sweeps the masses off their feet, and into Apple's waiting arms? And again, a "superior" alternative to WinTel domination in how many ways? In it's ultimate reach? Interoperability? Price?

[-start back at the top to repeat-]
0 Votes
+ -
Lock-in???
Mikael_z 19th Jun 2008
Apple is a very good computer citizen in that they exclusively
use de jure standards, i.e. *real* standards, where it matters,
i.e. they don't constantly embrace and extend and invent new
protocols and dataformats as a certain infamous company
from Redmond do.

If you prefer Linux then kudos to you, it's a good citizen too,
but requires a geek to operate and maintain like the poster
above tried to say.
0 Votes
+ -
What really Apple Shine!
jattas@... 19th Jun 2008
You all are losing the point. Apple's latest success the Ipod, Iphone, etc. are great innovations, not really computers, but devices that tantalize the public. Then they limit their sales to ATT and there you have it. The marketing I agree is not so innovative to overcome the limitations infused by Apple (Jobs?) And you may be right that the Apple religious may be responsible for the products and Jobs is merely the "Guru".
0 Votes
+ -
They're the best there is
Mikael_z 19th Jun 2008
That's why they sell so well on merit.
Once you've got a taste of it then you'll see the light you too.
wink
0 Votes
+ -
Not really computers?
rynning 1st Jul 2008
I imagine in 10 years or so we'll all have some small device we carry around with us, and it will wirelessly connect to a larger display and keyboard. No more "traditional" PC.

The iPhone is a good start for exactly that, since it is a "real" computer after all.
0 Votes
+ -
Propaganda vs Marketing
interested bystander 18th Jun 2008
What exactly is the difference between propaganda and marketing?
0 Votes
+ -
Oh Please
tech_walker 17th Dec 2008
Using Apple products becomes a joy of soaring
personal power.
12 steps for you dude.
0 Votes
+ -
Things change
frabjous 18th Jun 2008
The recent shocking death of Tim Russert reminds us all
that nothing human is permanent. Should Jobs leave or
die, I suggest that Apple is far more ready to absorb the
loss and continue than it was even a couple of years ago.

Jobs' replacement need not come from his current team,
although it certainly could. Hey, maybe "Avie Tevanian,
Job?s long time #2 and head of software engineering"
would see enough opportunity to leave his current Board
position and return to Apple as top dog.
0 Votes
+ -
Its a question i ponder often, as Jobs' of the world are like
Picasso's, who can replace Picasso?
0 Votes
+ -
But is he really?
AllKnowingAllSeeing 18th Jun 2008
as Jobs' of the world are like Picasso's

Apple is a very secretive company, who can really say who is actually comming up with the ideas and visions?

It could be a really great team effort from a group of people, we don't know, but that would make his leaving a non-issue today.
0 Votes
+ -
Perhaps..
cashaww 18th Jun 2008
But the issue is one of not just innovating, but the face of
Apple. Jobs is the salesmen/face of Apple. Even if Jobs is
not the innovator, I doubt he does it by himself, you still
need a person to fill the "Jobs" shoes.
I'm sure most of Apple's innovation comes from teams of
creative people. The problem is that Steve Jobs and Apple's
success are infinitely intertwined, even if it is mostly public
perception. Public perception is very important for Apple.
Apple was almost destroyed by FUD in the 90s. Apple was
producing good products and innovating in the 90s, but
many of their innovations didn't pan out and bad publicity
almost killed them. Steve Jobs brought focus and
credibility back to Apple. Besides, Steve Jobs is one heck of
a salesperson and is a huge part of Apple's image.
I cant's STAND Picasso.
0 Votes
+ -
It is such a tough question, cause it's true that Apple is Steve Jobs or is it Steve Jobs is Apple. I honestly don't know what would happen when he left. I do believe they would still have great design as long as Jonathan Ives stuck around. But then it is Jobs that rubber stamps whats good and bad. I personally don't like to think about it. I still believe he has a number of years ahead of him and probably more if he ate some meat. Man, the iPhone gets so much main stream news reporting, could you imagine what would happen if we lost Steve. I think the world would stand still. I pray i'm dead before that happens. A world without a Mac and only windows. Might as well be living in hell.
0 Votes
+ -
Staff
succession is always an issue
Larry Dignan 18th Jun 2008
when there's a CEO that's so connected to a company. Just to expand the question I can't imagine

Berkshire Hathaway without Buffett (although he said there's a plan in place)

Oracle without Ellison

And I'm sure there are others. I'd be pondering this a lot harder if I were a shareholder--especially at Berkshire.
0 Votes
+ -
there should be a succession plan in place. Is there anyone who is as visionary and charismatic as Steve? Maybe, a rotational system is already in the pipeline.
0 Votes
+ -
But Steve has pancreatic cancer ...
mwagner@... 18th Jun 2008
There are lots of smart, innovative people in IT -- but few who can market 'sexy' products.

There is nothing really special about MacOSX - except that it is SEXY. It is built upon UNIX (invented at AT&T) and its uses a GUI invented by Xerox PARC.

Is it innovative? YES. Can just anyone do what Jobs has done. NO!
0 Votes
+ -
I've had the product argument...
nextbend 18th Jun 2008
...many times. Trying to get the CE folks that understand products together with the IT folks that understand digital isn't easy. Steve is the only one, save maybe the other Steve (Perlman), that gets both products and digital.
0 Votes
+ -
agreed...
devin6687 22nd Jun 2008
Jobs monitors the software and the hardware so they work
together in the most beautiful way imaginable. Nobody else does
that. It's really difficult to compare Apple's products to their
"competitors" because nobody else really offers the innovation
that they do.
There's the hardware:
iPod's click-wheel, multi-touch (in iPod Touch, iPhone, and the
MacBook Pro/Air trackpads), full 6-pin FireWire in notebooks...
And the software:
iLife (iPhoto, iMovie, iDVD, iWeb), Aperture, Final Cut
Studio/Express, Expos? window functions (in Mac OS X)...

Apple's products have a level of sophistication, taste, and
practicality that sets them apart from the rest. I believe much of
that is due to Steve Jobs. The man obviously has vision and the
entire industry watches in awe to see what he'll do next.

When he has to leave, cuz we all know he won't live forever, there
will be some mighty big shoes to fill. But I don't know, maybe
he's training someone to take his place. If he was, would we have
any way of knowing it?

And no, not everybody can grasp the appeal of Apple's products.
I think a lot of people are too distracted by the shiny exteriors,
they don't take the time to notice that what's inside is beautiful,
too.
0 Votes
+ -
Last time I checked . . .
TCollinsG3 18th Jun 2008
. . . the Xerox Palo Alto lab helped establish GUI components
(mouse, menus) used primarily in the *Apple I* platform, *not* the
Macintosh GUI; and even while they did so, Apple was there co-
developing with them. I'm sick and tired of correcting the propagation of the hackneyed misconception that says Xerox did all
the inventing for Apple! In case you PC users (who still to this day
use DOS-based apps on your me-too operating system) missed it,
the real genius of the Macintosh GUI was creating a *square-
pixeled* WYSIWYG display system that would roughly approximate
on the screen what would appear on the newly devised laser printer.
(The first lasers *weren't* HPs, they were Apple LaserWriters --
remember? Anybody remember the DOS-based *Xerox* Ventura
Publisher, circa 1987, which *did not* have a WYSIWYG display?) The
other geniuses at the time of the development of the Macintosh OS
were with Adobe, which in cooperation with Apple developed
PostScript with its Bezier curve capabilities, so that everyone could
print smooth fonts and plots at any scale. Any questions?
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
Historical Revisionism
jperlow Updated - 18th Jun 2008
The Apple Laserwriter engine was manufactured by Canon who also manufactured the engine for HP LaserJet I/II/III at around the same time. Who also manufactured the one for the for NeXT in the late 1980s.

The first Laser Printer was invented at Xerox at PARC in 1969 by researcher Gary Starkweath.

The Xerox system developed at PARC whose GUI design elements were copied by Steve Jobs and his engineering team for LISA and the original 128K Mac was the ALTO.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xerox_Alto

http://www.maniacworld.com/alto-computer-video.html
0 Votes
+ -
Most innovation = incrementalization
klumper 18th Jun 2008
TCollinsG3: I'm sick and tired of correcting the propagation of the hackneyed misconception that says Xerox did all the inventing for Apple!

JPerlow: The Xerox system developed at PARC whose GUI design elements were copied by Steve Jobs and his engineering team for LISA and the original 128K Mac was the ALTO.

And where did PARC get it? From a lateral c/o Englebart's SRI team earlier on, and the work they were doing in the name of AI and human productivity. And on and on it goes - one group borrowing, scrounging and lifting from the next, then ramping things up a bit. A lot like Led Zeppelin music. happy

Invention and innovation are overblown concepts anyway; very little in the earthly realm erupts from purely vacuum-like voids. Most innovating comes from building on what already has been (or is being) innovated elsewhere, mostly done in bursts and fits, incrementally and steadily. This applies as much to computing as it does to any other field, from communications to mass production to the expansion of language and idiom.

It's a lot like "original thought", which, though we all presume we possess it in spades, is probably nothing more than an illusion. We too are little more than rehashes of thoughts, ideas and concepts that have preceded us, and engulf us from birth on. In reality, we borrow, scrounge and lift almost everything we "think" from other external sources, from the days we learn to crawl 'till that fateful moment when we jump in the hole, though our minds try to convince us this it isn't so.

SRI > PARC > APPLE > MICROSOFT > ETC. > All we see is one expanding upon the other, while adding additional value and/or greater accessibility, belying the the formula that most "innovation" = incrementalization.
0 Votes
+ -
@klumper: Fear and the inevitable
Mikael_z 19th Jun 2008
Of course it is as you describe, the real problem here is that
ZDNet and its bloggers suffers from Apple paranoia. They
fear a company which is growing stronger each day.

That Microsoft will shrink and finally disappear like most
other companies is almost a certain fact, and a positive
promise in my book. The slightly confused ZDNet bloggers
will have to reeducate themselves or find new jobs I suppose.
=}
0 Votes
+ -
Re: Fear and the inevitable
klumper 19th Jun 2008
That Microsoft will shrink and finally disappear like most other companies is almost a certain fact, and a positive promise in my book.

That may take a while, so don't bet the bank on it without at least a protected reserve somewhere. In the meantime, I think it's equally interesting to try to envision a post-Jobs Apple Inc. The same could be said for Microsoft of course, once Gates steps down in a couple of weeks. Sure the companies will lumber on; they both have plenty of steam at this juncture. But without such iconic leaders at the ready helm, it will be interesting to see if either ship starts to list a bit as time moves on.

We really are about to embark on a new era, should either of those two leave the corporate stage for good. As for the ZDN bloggers, they're a fairly diverse crowd who cover a little of everything. I still miss George Ou, since he was everywhere at once subject-wise. If it overall seems mostly WinTel-centric, well that's just because the computing world is too by and large. No way to get around that, at least in the conceivable future.

In the meantime, a toast to Job's good health and Apple's continued success. love
0 Votes
+ -
You never DID check!
bob.kerns2 11th Jul 2008
Did you ever use an Alto? Obviously not. I did, circa 1978, near the end of its life and managed to escape from Xerox to MIT. Much more capable and much better UI than the first Macintosh many ways. (A lot more expensive, of course!)

Apple co-developing? No. Apple didn't even start on such stuff until later. Hell, Apple didn't even EXIST when the ALTO project began and much of the UI innovations were done.

Laser printers? Again, used Xerox's many many years before Apple came out with one. (And an XGP CRT-based contraption with similar, if much slower, results before that). The main innovation for the LaserWriter was that it was affordable.

Square pixels? Hardly a new idea. I can't recall what did NOT have square pixels, but things that did not did tend to annoy people -- even without considering printing. Hardly an innovation there.

Postscript was definitely an innovation. I don't know how much Apple contributed to its development, but it sure did to its successful marketing. (That's not a knock against Apple. In fact, you could take that as a knock against Xerox -- all that innovation, and none of it successfully marketed by them!).

Yes, I have questions:

So just why is it you're sick and tired of "correcting" facts you apparently have no grasp of? Maybe because nobody takes you seriously when you're so far off base?

So why do you WANT to push the idea that Xerox didn't do what Xerox clearly did? And give credit to Apple for what was done before Apple even existed?

Where did you GET these ideas? Why didn't you CHECK them before so enthusiastically pushing them on others?
Larry, history itself is littered with "hand-picked successors" who failed as spectacularly as Ballmer is busily failing over at MS - from The Heretic Pharaoh to Caligula Caesar to Edward II to Charles I to George W. Bush. And sometimes, the unexpected, unwanted red-headed stepchild who succeeds to the throne anyway like Edward III, Julius Caesar, Elizabeth I or Jimmy Carter, turns out to be the best choice overall.
0 Votes
+ -
I get your point, but...
John L. Ries Updated - 18th Jun 2008
...I have to question your list of "red-headed stepchildren".

Edward III was the firstborn son and recognized heir of Edward II and undoubtedly would have governed in his own name sooner or later. Possibly you meant that his mother and de facto stepfather were expecting him to be a compliant figurehead.

Julius Caesar was the most popular Roman politician of his day well before his coup. It's unlikely that he would have attempted to seize power were it otherwise.

I respect Jimmy Carter and voted for him in 1980, but he's hardly in the same league with the others. Most voters found him to be a disappointment, though you may possibly be referring to his career subsequent to his presidency.

Elizabeth I, however, fits the description perfectly.

On the other list, Charles I was not the one groomed for leadership; his older brother Henry was (Charles was the second son). James I even wrote a book for his heir's education and guidance. If Charles read it, he probably didn't understand it, as it appears that he adopted all of his father's ideas about the divine right of kings, but failed to learn the statecraft and moral leadership (discussed in said book) required to make those ideas work.
0 Votes
+ -
by allowing their Mac OSX to run on any Tom-Dick
and Harry, generic hardware from Dell, Hp, Sony,
Toshiba or anyone else would be an even hotter
hell for all users who simply want a working
computer they can just USE, rather than baby and
spend gobs of time on maintaining.

A friend of mine just bought used 4 year old
Toshiba laptop. It seemed quite nice and came
with XP professional that was locked down to
prevent Internet use on any network other than a
corporate network. He did not know the
administrator password and did not want to spend
more for a new copy of XP than what the whole
computer cost.

I wiped the thing and tried to install a copy of XP
hoping to use the Microsoft official code pasted on
the sticker on the bottom. XP would not accept
this code and MS would not either. Here was a
computer with a valid licensed OS, but MS in effect
says: No dice, that computer needs a new license,
even though one was paid for by someone, since it
had the official MS sticker.

That is what Apple may end up like if they too
become another MS. The world has one MS.It
certainly doesn't need another. Right now, anyone
can confidently install the same OS a Mac came
with, even if they themselves don't have a copy. I
have purchased every version of Mac OSX and still
have those disks. I would have had no trouble
legally re-installing the appropriate clean OS on
my friend's computer if that had been a Mac.
0 Votes
+ -
apple becoming microsoft
hoppity 19th Jun 2008
I am not sure that under the terms and conditions either company would like you to do that. Both will work and we all do it. All they are interested in is selling new versions and to be honest the whole industry wasts you to have the latest product with the newest gizmo's, its what keeps their profits up. In real terms the industry could produce computers that are perfectly serviceable and run them on older OS But we are all mugs and want the newest. My advice to you is keep trying and beat them at their own game
0 Votes
+ -
Maximum potential
frgough 18th Jun 2008
I love lines like this.

Apple is showing three times the growth of other PCs, it's market
share is steadily growing, it's starting to crack business, it has a
market cap greater than Dell, it's revenues are 30% of MicroSoft
even though it only has 1/10th the market share.

And yet, Jobs is holding Apple back from its own true potential.

There are those who do, and there are those who criticize.
0 Votes
+ -
In all fairness
AllKnowingAllSeeing 18th Jun 2008
Apple and Microsoft are 2 different companies
(software vs hardware) income/sales wise, so why they are allways compared is beyond me. (Apple is closer to a Sony in terms of businesses)

Dell is closer but still different as they don't do much beyond computers.

Now, back out everything but the Apple computer line, and see how much a purely computer based Apple would be making.

Getting into consumer electronics was the best thing they could have done as they will allways lag behing MS in terms of computer market percentages.
0 Votes
+ -
Not exactly a fair comparison
distantrhythm 18th Jun 2008
Sony brought us the Walkman; Apple brought us the Graphic User Interface and forced the Walkman into oblivion with the iPod. Sony's Computers are "boxes" that run MS's software, and as such they mainly specialize in passive hardware in the pro audio, home theater and gaming arenas. I don't believe the few similarities out weigh the many differences between these two companies and their respective legacies. Apple changed the way we do things in general all over the world, and continues to innovate with the iPhone; Sony brought us portable music for awhile but otherwise is not an innovator.
0 Votes
+ -
Erroneous comparisons
Mikael_z 18th Jun 2008
"Getting into consumer electronics was the best thing they
could have done as they will allways lag behing MS in terms
of computer market percentages."


First it's unfair to compare Apple with MS and then it is fair??
?
Your comparisons seems to be a bit biased I think.
0 Votes
+ -
I have to argue this...
vulpine@... 18th Jun 2008
Apple is hardware, true, but without the software,
Apple would be little better than HP or IBM. No, it's the
software that makes Apple what it is and the hardware
that 'catches the eye.' In all honesty neither will survive
without the other. Simply put, the hardware makes it
pretty, the software makes it work!

So why are the two compared? Because Apple is
directly competing with Microsoft's OS and ensuring
that it works better by running it on higher-quality
hardware. In many ways, Apple is to Microsoft what
Porsche is to Ford. They both do essentially the same
thing, but the way they do it is worlds apart.
0 Votes
+ -
Your argument doesn't hold water..
Wolfie2K3 18th Jun 2008
So why are the two compared? Because Apple is directly competing with Microsoft's OS and ensuring that it works better by running it on higher-quality hardware.

WRONG. That Intel CPU you have in your Mac is the EXACT SAME CPU you'll find in an Intel based box from ANY other vendor.

The difference between Mac and Windows is simple. Apple severely restricts the hardware you can run OSX on. There is NO support, for instance, for AMD CPUs. You buy whatever options are available for your Mac at the Mac store, onliine or wherever Macs are sold and that's it. Period.

Meanwhile, in the Windows universe, you can pick and choose your hardware from a nearly infinite combination of hardware, multiple CPU vendors (Intel, AMD, VIA), multiple GPU vendors (Nvidia, AMD/ATI, Intel) and the rest of the system can be put together from any number of motherboard, RAM and other peripheral vendors. The options are near infinite. And that IS where the perception of "quality" steps in.

With a short list of supported hardware, draconian rules for upgrading said hardware (you void your warranty if you try upgrading the RAM on certain Macs yourself, you MUST take it to an Apple authorized service center to have a "genius" tech do it for you) and so forth, there are fewer variables involved and compatibility between everything is maintained. Ergo, fewer choices, equals better control over drivers, fewer incompatibilities, fewer potential problems.

To say the Mac has "better" hardware is disingenious. The Intel CPU found in the Mac is identical in MOST cases to the Intel CPU found in a Dell, an HP, a Gateway, or any other Wintel branded computer. The only exception would be that oddball chip used in the Mac Air that Apple had custom made for them. The motherboards found in a Mac aren't fundamentally any different (or better) than those computers using an Intel board - with the exception of EFI and the TPM chip found on all Macs. The jury's still out on EFI - it still hasn't caught on much outside of Apple's circle of influence and TPM - that only serves to lock you into running OSX on an Apple motherboard. We've all seen exactly how effective that's been (Psystar, anyone?). Beyond that, the architecture behind a Mac mobo and any other Intel mobo is nearly identical. The chips controlling the peripherals, USB ports and so forth are identical regardless of the platform.
0 Votes
+ -
You are right--to a point...
vulpine@... 20th Jun 2008
However, that's a very shallow point. While you say that
Apple uses its "Draconian" control to maintain tight
standards, you miss the fact that those standards go
far beyond saying, "We'll use this hardware and not
that...," but rather, "This hardware must meet specific
standards before we will install it in our computers."
There's a difference.

Yes, Apple uses many of the same basic hardware
components all other computers use, but they also
require that the hardware they buy fit within very tight
specifications in order to maintain quality. In other
words, Macs have better hardware. I'm not talking
just the processor, I'm talking every component in
the machine.

I admit that hardware will break down, no matter what
brand it is; but Apple computers break down less often
than any other brand and their service is such that they
still maintain an 80% customer satisfaction rating even
after all these years; something no other computer
manufacturer even gets close to.

In summary, while the hardware is essentially the
same, it is not exactly the same. And that helps
Apple computers to remain viable longer than the
others.
0 Votes
+ -
There is NO comparison possible
j.m.galvin 18th Jun 2008
In the computer industry, Apple
is a hybrid - with the hardware,
OS and a number of apps.

As such, it's impossible to
compare them to MS or Dell. I
would agree that, since Apple
makes most of its money from
the hardware side, they are a bit
closer to a Dell or HP, but that is
still a bit of a stretch the the two
latter companies do not have a
software end.
0 Votes
+ -
Dell and HP both have a "software end", but it's by no means anything compared to Apple or even Microsoft. Both provide certain utilities such as Dell's PC Tune-up and Dell's Network assistant configuration utility. HP has an entire army of programmers who write drivers for their printers and other peripherals.
0 Votes
+ -
Hire WOZ when Jobs leaves
savagesteve13 18th Jun 2008
Yeah I know, Steve Wozniak is a tech lover but not very business savvy, but he is disarmingly charming in a nerdy sort of way and would make a great and honest talking head for Apple.
0 Votes
+ -
is an honest talking head.

The RDF would come crashing down fast enough to leave splinters.
0 Votes
+ -
he is a sweet man,
pikeman666@... 18th Jun 2008
but I think he has no practical use as a businessman.
Plus I doubt he wants anything to do with Apple.
0 Votes
+ -
Correct
John L. Ries 18th Jun 2008
Steve Wozniak is an engineer, likes being an engineer, is good at it, and appears to have little or no ability or interest in running a company. If he ever goes back to Apple, it will be in a technical capacity.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Pondering Apple in a post-Jobs world
tomlin21-24319035676893835085146735905770 11th Oct
I extremely like your method. I went for the online log for that earliest time on top notch of that as just your fanatic. Retain publish as I'm gonna arrive to find nfl jerseys out this just about every day.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix