Tim Cook’s tenure as Apple’s CEO ends on September 1 when he assumes the role of executive chairman. He will be replaced by John Ternus, a 25-year Apple veteran and head of its hardware engineering division. I get the sense that Cook’s obituaries will focus on his steady hand, executive success and lack of internal company drama. Those are all good qualities but I suspect the media, once fond of their own narratives, will use them as goblins. Consider this an attempt to set the record straight before Cook was dumped with less fame.
Cook is quiet and private, which makes it easy to paint him as a dreamy executive focused on the iPhone’s success. In Ternus, Apple once again has a “product guy” in charge, a name loaded with enough subtext to sink a battleship. You can hear the explanation that only “product guys” have the vision, taste and knowledge to innovate. By extension, Cook was never a “real legend,” but a man with no financial background who didn’t understand what made Apple tick.
If there’s one thing Silicon Valley loves more than money, it’s a smart artist to rest their dreams on. Values with a capital-V vision who invented new product categories with a touch, captains of industry who inspire fear and devotion. And making enough money that even Rockefeller would start thinking “gosh, that’s too small.”
The Jobsian mythmaker hides his talents and downplays the number of misses he’s had along the way. Jobs’ first term at Apple ended in failure and NeXT, for all its innovation, never survived as an independent hardware manufacturer. Many of his ideas were too big and ambitious and his refusal to compromise made them sink. His time in the wilderness made him a better manager, and a better storyteller. But to suggest that Jobs had the gift of the Midas touch is wrong, because for all his vision and taste, he needed a strong execution.
Kimberly White via Getty Images
It doesn’t help that Jobs is the epitome of a Silicon Valley tech founder, meaning many have never stopped looking for his successor. The title of “the next Steve Jobs” has been diluted to the point of meaninglessness at this point given the list of nominees. Those include Elizabeth Holmes, Elon Musk, Adam Neumann, Trevor Milton, Sam Altman and Travis Kalanick. Given that kind of company, I’m sure Cook is happy when people say he’s not Steve Jobs.
I suspect, in part, that Cook was viewed as just an employee (expletive) rather than a self-made startup founder. That overshadows his success, first at IBM and at Intelligent Electronics where he took the role of COO at the age of 34. Even in an industry that thrives on youth, I doubt these companies would promote someone as young as Cook unless he is a very good person. And when he came to Apple in 1998, his role was to get the company’s wheels turning. We may praise Jobs and Ive for dreaming up products but, to quote Jobs himself, “the ship is for real artists.” By that metric, Cook was a true artist.
When Cook took over as CEO of Apple, it was only a few weeks before Jobs passed away, which may have been a very difficult time. Holding the company together after such a shock while grieving your loss must have been quite a challenge. And while Cook had Jobs’s army of lieutenants around him, it was up to Cook to actually lead that team. That he then took Apple to the phenomenal success it is today is a testament to his ability to get things done. Consider how it was Cook who used Apple’s early success to strike deals with manufacturers that outboxed many of his competitors.
I am sure that Cook does not have the taste and vision of Jobs or Ive, and instead relies on the ability of his team. I’m not sure why that would be painted as something bad given the list of people Apple pays to have such taste. If Cook lacks taste, he doesn’t lack humility, and he knows well enough not to interfere. Friends, that is not a sign of a bad leader, it is a sign of a good person, who makes his team feel trusted, respected, and listened to. Consider how quickly Cook democratized Apple’s key words, making stars of many of its top executives, rather than trying to do Steve Jobs’ tax act.
His tenure as CEO was flawless: Hiring John Browett to replace Ron Johnson at Retail was an early mistake — but Cook was smart enough to correct it six months later. A power struggle with Scott Forstall might be a miss given Ive’s instincts for user interface design. On the product front, we were embarrassed by AirPower, the Mac Pro stand-alone function and the muted release of the Vision Pro. The App Store’s lack of effective governance and lack of transparency in its operations counts as a major strike, too. I’m sure we’ll get some discussion about the Apple Car project from people who thought that was a good idea.
As for the Trump Stuff(™), I feel for Cook, who probably didn’t expect to play diplomat when he took the job. His relationship with the current administration has tarnished his reputation, even if his involvement appears to be limited. As CEO of Apple, he is responsible for approximately 170,000 people and has legal obligations as the head of a public company. Just like him it is possible he wishes to wave the bird at a military commander, he must tread a straight line. And it will be up to him to wrestle with his conscience to decide if he did the right thing on the ground.
One of the pitfalls of the progressive era of success is that people lose sight of how things were in the old days. You can expect editorial sites to say that Cook “failed” at AI because he wisely avoided not starting the boondoggle first. It “failed” to launch a new product category in the post-Works world, even though the Apple Watch and AirPods are, in themselves, bigger businesses than other big companies. He “failed” by building a subscription and services business without every hardware company in the world doing the same thing.
I would say that Cook’s judgment was far better than anyone has given him credit for, and he made many world-shattering reforms. Think about Apple Silicon and how it has moved up the order of things in the chip world, almost inadvertently taking the wrecking ball to dominate Intel. A technological revolution that has been so seamless, unpopular, and yet so rewarding, that the idea of Apple using other people’s chips in its hardware sounds like ancient history.
To all those people, I would say look — look! – with your stupid eyes on the MacBook Neo. Look for a company that has found a way to manufacture hardware like thatby working like thatbecause that kind of price! The MacBook Neo is so good and cheap that it makes the entire consumer electronics industry look useless. It may not be a shiny new gadget to show off to the envy of your adopted friends, but it will make a meaningful difference to many people.
We can all agree that no kid is going to hang a poster of Tim Cook on their bedroom wall the same way they would of Jobs, or even Musk. I don’t think that’s a bad thing, because Cook’s legacy isn’t in headlines or cheesy biopics, it’s in making things happen.
