To your last point, I think it's less of a factor of the person in the lead or his ideas, and more about what was expected of that person. Sculley was more of

To your last point, I think it's less of a factor of the person in the lead or his ideas, and more about what was expected of that person. Sculley was more of a manager, Jobs was a dictator. Once Jobs was back, he was somehow able to lead the company in a near-authoritarian way, and despite many flukes, it allowed the company to try many things that would not be readily accepted by an all-powerful committee. One authoritarian that is wrong half the time is better than a committee that is not-wrong 100% of the time. The former tries a bunch of stuff, the latter doesn't really try anything. (And to me that's what got RIM and Nokia killed).