As much as many of us use the internet, nature's information has superhighway, to our advantage, the internet a dark and seedy site filled with propaganda, misleading information, chaos and anarchy. Tread gently. There is a jungle out there.
So often we read an article that Apple CEO Tim Cook's days are numbered, which he needs or needs to be replaced for Apple to survive. English is the complex language it is, everyone can make an argument for something – no matter how ridiculous – and get it spread all over the world in minutes.
Say who? Exact!
Opinions are easier to produce and distribute than facts, unless you use alternative facts, so it's about the same. No one generally says " Tim Cook must be replaced ." Wait. What? Say who? Exact.
In an article written by no one in particular, authors should use a city line to increase credibility, rather than hide in the shadows. Apple's CEO is skewered and compared to Microsoft's former CEO Steve Ballmer. There is not much to compare. Cook speaks in complete sentences. Apple under Cook's government has flourished and grown. You can't say about Ballmers Microsoft.
Here are the basic arguments that, without analysis or comparison, or a look at a list of criteria for what makes a successful CEO, can be the progression of the last days of Tim Cook.
Under Tim Cook, Apple became the most valuable, most profitable and best-known company in the world.
Good enough. Begin with facts that are not available.
But Tim Cook only inherited the success, created by Steve Jobs, who left him with the iPhone, iPad, iMac and the entire Apple ecosystem.
Uh, huh. Sure. On his death bed, Apple found founder Steve Jobs found Cook's name during a Google search and anointed the homeless and unemployed engineer as CEO. No? Well, what about the truth. The cook was several occasions for the CEO. Cook was one of Jobs's early recruits. Cook was the engineer who made Apple's train ̵
Look at a chart with Apple's number of successes, and you'll see the big jumps occurred after Jobs died.
Assessing the new products and projects presented under Tim Cook reflects a lack of vision and innovation required by a successful tech company CEO.
A similar assessment of Apple's failed products and projects revealed under Steve Jobs will show the opposite of his carefully crafted history and innovation, none of which is a requirement for a successful tech company. Google is considered successful, but about 90 percent of the company's successes – in terms of revenue and profits – come from the same old same old one. Advertising. Just like another successful technology company. Facebook.
To be fair, iPod, iTunes, iPhone changed all their respective worlds. A while. iPod is on life support. iPhone won't be the world's best-selling consumer product forever (nothing is anything). But Watch has come strong in its second year, AirPods is still ordering, and if engineer Tim Cook can construct a glucose monitor in Watch, such stupid comparisons will end. For a while.
Tim Cook in many ways is identical to Steve Ballmer, and for the same reasons should be replaced.
This comparison lacks the reasons, but let's cover someone who doesn't compare well. Microsoft was willingly profitable under Ballmer, but failed to spread itself after spending nearly $ 100 billion and disasters that were Windows XP, Windows 7, and anything else. He wasn't fire because Microsoft wasn't profitable. He was fired because he could not see the future, ignored the iPhone and the mobile device revolution, and made it only to the CEO because co-founder Bill Gates wanted to spend some of his bad winnings to get paid for the trip to heaven.
On the other hand, Cook and remains the engineering architect of how Apple operates; a company whose investments have paid big dividends – literally – and not just increased revenue and profits, but continue to operate efficiently. No big and complex technology company is without problems, but before a vote to kick Tim Cook out the door, what about these get the mind first; 1) What are the criteria for success? and, 2) who will decide (Apple's board)? Or, a non-named author from a hedge company short on Apple and long on competitors?
Tim Cook's last days could be here, and we would never know, but with the stock moving into unknown territory, revenue and profits at record levels, and a few game exchange products being rumored and not denying, I think there are several days left in Cook's calendar on Apple.