The question of succession at Apple

The "Australian" has an interesting article, "Without Jobs, Apple just wouldn't compute."  I tend to agree with the title of the article which isn't nearly as certain about Apple if you read the whole thing.

The recent departure of Avie Tevanian and Jon Rubenstein brought some questions from folks as to why anyone would leave Apple when Apple appears to be on a path to greatness. I discussed it briefly over at my often rambling View from the Mountain blog, and here's what I said.

In other news today, I got a note that Avie Tevanian is leaving Apple.  Most people will say Avie who?

Avie was one of the people who led the team who developed Mac OSX.  Lots of people think that Apple would be a dream job.  So the question is why is someone like Avie Tevanian leaving a company, Apple, that is supposedly at the top of its game?

My theory is that working for Steve Jobs even at Avie's level is probably not as much fun as one might think.  Then if you are as rich as Croeseus, maybe you just don't need the grief that comes with trying to please a tough task master like Steve Jobs.    The funny thing about Apple is that even the highest  and mightiest really have only as much power as Steve allows them, which really isn't very much.  It's not an environment where you develop a strong bench or where there is much reason to hang round a long time in hopes of being named CEO.  Apple is Steve and Steve is Apple and that will never change.

Now some will disagree with me but I've been on enough calls with Apple executives to know that Steve still makes them sweat bullets even if they are multi-millionaires.  I can't imagine it is good for your mental health wondering what Steve has up his sleeve next.  It's also not an environment where promotion or another title actually means much.  Everyone knows that Steve has all the power.

Some have postulated that Tim Cook, Apple's COO, who is most often in the news for his multi-million dollar stock transactions, might be groomed to replace Steve. After all he covered for Steve when Steve was sick.  That speculation probably comes from those who have never "enjoyed" one of Mr. Cook's presentations.  He's no Steve Jobs and seems to enjoy spreadsheets more than product plans.  He has done an excellent job with Apple's supply chain, but that doesn't mean that he can do anything with its product plans.

The reality, for anyone willing to admit it, is that there is only one Steve Jobs, it is probably not an open question as to whether or not Apple will survive after Steve.  However, survive and thrive are two different things.  Unless someone who is a certified star can be brought in to take over from Steve, I have serious doubts that the products after Steve will be much to excite us.  I just can't imagine someone being groomed in the shadow of Steve to take over from Steve.

_______________________________
There's a great article, "Mac OS X: Living Long and Prospering," in the Washington Post.  It was pointed out to me by a friend in State College, Pa.  It's the most positive OS X article that I've ever seen in the Post.

On another unrelated note, some of the many who are still reading and going back to the post "Lingering regrets from Apple days" might have noticed that the part of the article which referred back to my current company is gone. If you had carefully read the article you might have concluded that the section seemed inserted.  Actually it was, since I was using it to test some things with Google Analytics.  It actually added very little to the article.  Since I'm done my testing, it's gone.

I had no idea the post was going to get that kind of wide readership or was going to stir up such a nest hornets since I've said the same thing several times before.

Also one of my favorite April 1 Apple stories was "Apple announces purchase of GM's Delphi unit."  As always Andy came up with a good one.

I still welcome anyone to visit our site at Webmail.us .