12 ms·

Tim Cook, the interview: Running Apple ‘is sort of a lonely job’

178 points by jerryhuang100 10y ago

icpmacdo 10y ago
PG talked about this in his talk 'before the startup' "Larry Page may seem to have an enviable life, but there are aspects of it that are unenviable. Basically at 25 he started running as fast as he could and it must seem to him that he hasn't stopped to catch his breath since. Every day new shit happens in the Google empire that only the CEO can deal with, and he, as CEO, has to deal with it. If he goes on vacation for even a week, a whole week's backlog of shit accumulates. And he has to bear this uncomplainingly, partly because as the company's daddy he can never show fear or weakness, and partly because billionaires get less than zero sympathy if they talk about having difficult lives. Which has the strange side effect that the difficulty of being a successful startup founder is concealed from almost everyone except those who've done it." http://paulgraham.com/before.html http://paulgraham.com/before.html
- TekMol 10y ago
  I wonder why he can't hire a "Sub CEO" whose job it is to handle 90% of the shit. Mission statement: "Act like the CEO. But you are allowed to pass the hardest 10% of your tasks to Larry. 10%. Not more.".
  - blasteye 10y ago
    It's called alphabet ;)
  - ghostly_s 10y ago
    Isn't this what a COO does?
    - unixhero 10y ago
      Yes.
    - aetherson 10y ago
      I think that every company handles its C-levels somewhat uniquely, for a variety of reasons. But if there's an archetypical COO job, I'd say it's the process-and-execution leadership job, but not the long-term strategy, big product vision job.
  - modeless 10y ago
    His name is Sundar.
  - samwillis 10y ago
    But that 10% hardest takes 90% of the time...
    - enraged_camel 10y ago
      Exactly. It's essentially the Pareto Principle at work. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle
  - erdevs 10y ago
    This misses the point in that it is a function of your ambition and vision for the company. Page, or any CEO with significant control of a large, highly profitable company, could delegate any aspect of operations which fall below the level of governance by the board of directors. Or all of that except the biggest strategic projects. But with time then freed up, the question becomes how you spend it. Do you vacation? Do you start a side project, or a bevy of them? Or, do you invest your time and energy into your highest point of leverage: your existing large, profitable company. In the latter case, you still want ultimately to be CEO. Your goal then is to structure the company, if possible, so that it continues to fulfill its mission and to grow while you focus on the things that you feel are most important and which are most well-suited to your interests and perceived talents. For some company+CEO pairs, that may in fact be the core operations themselves. For others, it may be building toward conglomeration or investing in strategic R&D. This helps explain the Alphabet restructuring. But it doesn't mean that suddenly Page has less to worry about. He could if he chose to step back, but as long as he feels drive to make an impact, to make the highest use of his talents, and that he can do that largely through Google/Alphabet, he'll want to remain CEO, he'll want to work hard at the company, and he'll still feel the (admittedly self-induced, chosen) pressure. Let's also quickly look at each of the aforementioned areas of focus for a CEO who continues to have drive and believes that drive is best leveraged at their existing large, profitable company. For some company+CEO pairs, that may in fact be the core operations themselves. Apple is a good example here. Tim Cook could delegate whatever aspects of Apple's operation that he likes. But if he continues to have drive and views Apple as a great way to realize that drive, then his best use today is in focusing on Apple's core operations. This is because Apple's continued growth and profitability is, today, almost entirely dependent on continuing to frequently ship cutting-edge devices worldwide. That requires a very heavyweight operation, and there isn't much "revenue momentum". Apple gains network effects in the power of its brand, its distribution, and its manufacturing chain. But its revenue growth and profitability are dependent, today, on each new generation of devices. Thus, Cook had best focus there, while trying simultaneously to build toward greater "revenue momentum" in the future. Compare this to Google, who just like Apple is also primarily dependent on one profit stream. But Google's profit stream in advertising has more self-sustaining revenue momentum. This allows Google to have focused on other areas outside the core profit operation earlier, and helps explains the Alphabet restructuring. Apple may get there one day (and it seems to me they are trying to... witness all of their recent attention on and talk about services/subscriptions), but they're not there yet. In addition, Cook is an admittedly operations focused executive, while Page is more inclined toward R&D and long-term strategy. In combination, these things help explain how both Cook and Page can delegate as much as possible, but still remain very busy (and in very different ways) at both of their companies. The push toward conglomeracy that Google is undergoing now is largely based on build-outs of internal brands ad operations through R&D. Others, like Disney and GE, went down the conglomeration path through combinations of internal buildouts and acquisitions. While building a conglomerate, the CEO is wisest to delegate on the core profitable operations and focus on the conglomeration process itself. This is what we're seeing with Google now, and something we may see in the future with Apple. After achieving a large and diversified conglomeration, the CEO is wisest to focus on governance/guidance/measurement and strategic guidance of the groups as a whole. This is what we've seen with GE, Disney, et al in the past.
  - dekhn 10y ago
    Technically, Larry is the CEO of Alphabet, while Sundar is CEO of Google. Larry doesn't deal with daily shitstorms- that's Sundar's job. By the way, Sundar is a genius- absurd level of memory recall, extremely logical (vulcan-class), and pretty personable.
- k__ 10y ago
  Well, no one force them to do it...
  - thomasahle 10y ago
    I think that's the reason. It may be hard, but apparently it's worth it. Just like we don't have pity with athletes, even though they are clearly in a lot of pain a lot the time.
- adamlett 10y ago
  Who is PG?
  - dgemm 10y ago
    The founder of Y Combinator
  - pygy_ 10y ago
    Paul Graham, YC co-founder and original dev/admin of this message board.
  - jganetsk 10y ago
    Paul Graham
  - lsh 10y ago
    Phallis Giganticous https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2K8_jgiNqUc&feature=youtu.be&t=94 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2K8_jgiNqUc&feature=youtu.be...
  - throwaway274739 10y ago
    Proctor & Gamble. Huge, diversified corporation. Google 'em.
- Animats 10y ago
  Google is in some ways easier, because there's no real threat to their cash cow, search ads. Apple has to stay ahead of competition in phones. That competition is now quite good, and usually cheaper. As CEO of Apple, Cook is expected to deliver the Next Big Thing. So far, he hasn't, and he's running out of time. (Cars? Tough, low-margin business. VR? Niche market. Watches? Tried that. Robots? Not ready yet. Voice AI? Already doing that, need to improve. Services? Crowded field, no edge.)
  - agumonkey 10y ago
    Honestly, what could be the NBT in consumer tech ? I feel we reached cultural and ontological plateau in most areas. If there's a next it probably won't be a big thing.
    - yomly 10y ago
      I feel wearables - IoT could be the next big thing (...who isn't saying this...). Putting privacy concerns aside, imagine having contact lenses + voice and/or gesture control augmenting your life. Combine that with real-time health monitoring, all powered by your blood glucose. That's hinging on still quite a lot of big technologies delivering and becoming mass-consumerable, but that is one way in which I can see technology and connectivity being taken to the next level in a similar sense that smartphones did. Note: I am not particularly pro IoT nor wearables, but can see this becoming a thing in the future.
    - detaro 10y ago
      Home automation/IoT is still a thing that could be it. And I'm honestly surprised Apple hasn't been more aggressive with HomeKit etc. With more and more crappy IoT devices, Apple coming out with a reliable and well-integrated platform could be great. I don't have Apple stuff, but the people I know that do often cite good integration between everything as a reason, so I think that angle might work. They have voice control tech, they have end devices in all important form factors (TV, tablets, phones, watch), they have customers that like everything being tied together. Only issue is that I'm not sure if they could do it with external partners making most of the devices (how do you guarantee quality to people? Premium home IoT is scarce for now), and making everything themselves would be a lot of different pieces to make.
- krisdol 10y ago
  > and partly because billionaires get less than zero sympathy if they talk about having difficult lives That quote from the essay reminds me of a Silicon Valley scene [1] where the CEO of the pseudo-Google company in the show gets vilified (rightfully so in the show) for complaining about how hard billionaires have it in this country. I bet the creator's read PG's essay and were inspired by it. [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5zQpN28xa4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5zQpN28xa4
  - justicezyx 10y ago
    I cannot believe that the privileged rich created such shows to disguise their unjustified fortune; and still intelligent people believe these superficial arguments. billionaires == jews? Can something be more wrong?
    - corysama 10y ago
      It's not clear to me if you are aware that the video you are commenting on is from a comedy show satirizing Silicon Valley and it's billionaires...
      - mulcahey 10y ago
        Gotta hand it to them for the realism though getting the actual code conference interviewers.
  - rfrank 10y ago
    That scene was inspired by Thomas Perkins' letter to WSJ. http://www.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304549504579316913982034286 http://www.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1000142405270230454950457...
  - tdaltonc 10y ago
    Or they read the news. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-01-26/kleiner-perkins-shocked-by-co-founder-comment-on-nazis https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-01-26/kleiner-p...
  - 10y ago
- coldtea 10y ago
  >Basically at 25 he started running as fast as he could and it must seem to him that he hasn't stopped to catch his breath since. Every day new shit happens in the Google empire that only the CEO can deal with, and he, as CEO, has to deal with it. If he goes on vacation for even a week, a whole week's backlog of shit accumulates. With the difference that unlike a poor single working mother, or some 40-something factory worker, etc., he can quit anytime, and has billions in the bank to show for it...
  - Olscore 10y ago
    > get less than zero sympathy if they talk about having difficult lives You just proved this part.
    - zyxley 10y ago
      coldtea's point is that "difficult" when you can walk away from it and never have to work another day in your life, and "difficult" when getting it wrong means that your life and your childrens' lives are ruined for years, live in two entirely different strata of meaning.
      - addicted 10y ago
        +++ Think about this way. Imagine if you could spend the next year absolutely any way you want to (within bounds of laws and human possibility and decency). Larry Page chooses to do his job instead of doing that. I can't imagine the unenviable parts of his job adds up to anything beyond a rounding error. The one part I can have some sympathy for is the lack of any sort of privacy (and the accompanying inability to go for a walk in the park by yourself), but those aren't the points mentioned here, and are worse for your regular TV/Hollywood types, who have less privacy as they are more recognizable, and much less money.
      - bane 10y ago
        Let's be honest, a billionaire could walk away and their next several hundred generations wouldn't ever have to work and they'd all live very comfortable lives.
justinv 10y ago
Full quote: "It’s sort of a lonely job. The adage that it’s lonely — the CEO job is lonely — is accurate in a lot of ways. I’m not looking for any sympathy. You have to recognize that you have blind spots. We all do. Blind spots move, and you want to not just have really bright people around you, but people who will push on you and people to bring out the best in you. People that amplify whatever you’re good at. And then also the people who plug the parts that you’re not and may never be."
helloworld 10y ago
In Tim Cook, it's interesting to see a leadership style that's so different from the Jobs/Ellison mold. Cook seems to have a very humble manner, and he emphasizes listening to and learning from people both inside and outside Apple. In the startup world, I wonder whether founders can find success in emulating Cook -- or whether a harder-edged, harder-driving style is required.
- apozem 10y ago
  Cook has his edges. He's supposed to be a demanding, logical boss. > One day back then, he convened a meeting with his team, and the discussion turned to a particular problem in Asia. “This is really bad,” Cook told the group. “Someone should be in China driving this.” Thirty minutes into that meeting Cook looked at Sabih Khan, a key operations executive, and abruptly asked, without a trace of emotion, “Why are you still here?” Khan, who remains one of Cook’s top lieutenants to this day, immediately stood up, drove to San Francisco International Airport, and, without a change of clothes, booked a flight to China with no return date, according to people familiar with the episode. The story is vintage Cook: demanding and unemotional. http://fortune.com/2008/11/24/apple-the-genius-behind-steve/ http://fortune.com/2008/11/24/apple-the-genius-behind-steve/
  - 1123581321 10y ago
    I think about that story a lot because I'd like to know what happened in those thirty minutes. Presumably they continued to discuss the situation, and Cook's opinion of it worsened to where he demanded immediate action. It wouldn't make sense for Khan to leave the meeting and have to be caught up later on the situation he'd flown to China to resolve. Less likely possibilities: was Cook talking to someone in the other direction and only noticed Khan? Was he thinking to himself Khan should leave immediately but wanted to give him some time to make the call himself?
    - ktRolster 10y ago
      I think it's important to realize that he didn't lose respect for Khan through that experience. He wasn't trying to put Khan down, or look for a reason to demote him. Possibly Cook looked at it as a teaching experience for Khan.
tomdell 10y ago
I like this - "The first all-new device during his tenure, the Apple Watch, is not yet a mega hit." - as if some day it just is going to be a mega hit.
- mwfunk 10y ago
  I interpreted that as, someday it might yet be a mega hit. It's still a relatively new product that's only had one iteration, and even though it didn't set the world on fire, it didn't bomb either. Most tech companies iterate on things a few times before giving up on them, unless they are just fundamental market failures like the iPod HiFi. What did you like about that statement? Your interpretation made it sound like you didn't agree with it.
  - TheOtherHobbes 10y ago
    I certainly don't agree with it. Wearables have a lot of potential, but wearable watches are fundamentally not a great idea - for practical reasons (screen too small, limited battery life) and for marketing reasons (can't compete at the low end, certainly can't compete at the lifestyle/status display high end). Watch isn't even primarily a watch - it's an iPhone remote. And that's getting into rarefied meta-product territory. So unlike the iPhone and the home computer, both of which have obvious use cases, Watch is still trying to define a compelling reason for existing. But this just highlights the current Apple problem. Cook designs products using a very simple heuristic - smaller, bigger, thinner, more colours: basically good enough. Jobs used to use a different heuristic - magical, original, creative, obviously useful, with world-beating production values. It's a completely different approach. And you can see that in Watch. Watch has no magic. It's good enough - barely, more or less. But that's all it is. And if you're aiming for good enough instead of magical, it's too easy to fall short and end up with not quite good enough - which is where many Apple buyers are feeling the current product lines are heading.
    - coldtea 10y ago
      >I certainly don't agree with it. Wearables have a lot of potential, but wearable watches are fundamentally not a great idea - for practical reasons (screen too small, limited battery life) I'm not sure I follow. A wearable watch will have the biggest screen and better battery life combo than any other kind of practical wearable device I can think of (e.g. when not strapping a 3" screen and a battery pack the size of a Zippo on you and calling it a wearable). >So unlike the iPhone and the home computer, both of which have obvious use cases, Watch is still trying to define a compelling reason for existing. If not other things, Fitness/health/medical services would be a killer reason for existing.
rrggrr 10y ago
He can stop whining... I admire Cook and love and use Apple products, but he should try running a small business and experience real loneliness. As he points out Apple has the bank account to hire virtually anyone, the very best people to help its businesses and fix business mistakes. Small business leaders don't and fight most of the same battles, alone, getting pounded into dust by unforgiving regulatory, liability, tax and competitive forces. My sympathy for Cook is further attenuated by the billions in cash Apple is sitting on at home and abroad that in my opinion should instead be put to work in the US economy. Google too.
- ktRolster 10y ago
  He doesn't sound like he's whining, just describing.
- csallen 10y ago
  No matter what's plaguing you, there will always people worse off. That doesn't mean your problems stop feeling like problems, however. Human experience and judgment is extremely relative. We acclimate to our surroundings. Otherwise, we'd all be paralyzed by constant awe at things like cars and running water.
  - rrggrr 10y ago
    Yes, the shoe pinches the foot its on.
angry-hacker 10y ago
So what has Cook done to Apple besides that successful LGBT campaign?
- jodrellblank 10y ago
  Share price has doubled since August 2011, and 16x dividend payouts in that time - https://www.google.com/finance?q=aapl https://www.google.com/finance?q=aapl
LargeCompanies 10y ago
I'm a six year iPhone owner who based off of the iPhone 7 rumors it's going to underwhelm in the innovation department and lose this customer. The Note 7 looks awesome due to it being waterproof and other features Apple hasn't bothered to include. Also, Google Now in terms of it understanding me is light years away from Siri, which I have used since 2011. Goigle Now's AI puts Siri to shame! See ya Apple!
- coldtea 10y ago
  >I'm a six year iPhone owner who based off of the iPhone 7 rumors it's going to underwhelm in the innovation department and lose this customer. Yeah, because better CPU, GPU, camera(s), and such are not innovative enough... >The Note 7 looks awesome due to it being waterproof and other features Apple hasn't bothered to include. Yeah, for those of us using our phone on the shower it will be a god-send. Waterproof! Such innovation!
  - jacalata 10y ago
    Bizarrely, none of the phones I know of that died from water damage were being used in a shower. We must move in different circles.
    - coldtea 10y ago
      Pretty different, yes, cause I hardly know of anyone who lost their phone that way. I'm pretty sure there are a few. But I seriously doubt there are that many. In contrast, a phone being damaged because it fell and broke its glass etc, I've seen and heard stories of dozens of times.
  - detaro 10y ago
    Isn't "faster hardware" by definition not innovative?
  - Pxtl 10y ago
    I just got back from a Caribbean trip. I wish I'd had a waterproof phone+camera. That feature will be on my list of considerations next time I'm phone-shopping, since they're all sealed with glue and have non-removable batteries anyways these days.
gdilla 10y ago
So is being a janitor. you're well compensated for your trouble, Tim.
6stringmerc 10y ago
CTRL+F "music" & "iTunes" - only one result, as part of the framing by the writer. Unless Tim & co. decide to confront the reality that they're stepping up "vertical integration" model using the Robber Baron playbook when it comes to the actual arts, I think his "social responsibility" comments mean fuck-all. Go ahead, build a new environmentally friendly compound, that's great, good on you. And how's about that 30% you skim off the top of every non-Drake "Most-Favored-Nation" artist who has to go through your channels or lose out? Actions about social responsibility speak louder than words, and right now, Braeburn Capital and billions of dollars being slushed around offshore rather than pay the tax to re-patriate those funds means talk is cheap. I'm a contrarian by nature, but I know a puff piece when I see it. So Tim is good at hitting softball questions, whoop-dee-whoo. Of course it's lonely and isolating at the top of the mountain - just look at Kurt Cobain.
- discordance 10y ago
  "CTRL" is pretty revealing of inherent bias
  - tcpekin 10y ago
    So you must use a Mac to comment on Tim Cook or Apple?
    - Neeek 10y ago
      Only if you want to be the good kind of biased, the kind we can get behind here at HN.
- aedron 10y ago
  Big interviews like this come with a price. They are always puff pieces.
  - 6stringmerc 10y ago
    Well I remember that approach tended to gloss over a lot of the newsworthy stuff involving Tiger Woods. Says a lot about US culture when serious "leaders" will only sit down to have their egos stroked. See also: Donald Trump.
codefolder 10y ago
Just like everywhere else on the internet, there's no shortage of Apple apologists defending the fall of the consumerist junk paradigm.
thunderrabbit 10y ago
> What Apple paid for Beats, it’s largest acquisition ever its
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
KKKKkkkk1 10y ago
The full quote is saying the exact opposite of what's in the title: `And while he’s quick to trumpet Apple, he is also unassuming, quickly noting, after saying his job can be “lonely,” that “I’m not looking for any sympathy. CEOs don’t need any sympathy.”` Which is exactly why Tim Cook is such a great guy.
jamisteven 10y ago
Its gona be very, very lonely if he actually lets them turn the MB Pro into this HP-esq touch screen crap ive been seen floating around, as that will be the death of Jobs design philosophy on which this great company was built. Protruding cam lens and round edges on the Iphone6 were bad enough.

178 points by jerryhuang100 10y ago

PG talked about this in his talk 'before the startup' "Larry Page may seem to have an enviable life, but there are aspects of it that are unenviable. Basically at 25 he started running as fast as he could and it must seem to him that he hasn't stopped to catch his breath since. Every day new shit happens in the Google empire that only the CEO can deal with, and he, as CEO, has to deal with it. If he goes on vacation for even a week, a whole week's backlog of shit accumulates. And he has to bear this uncomplainingly, partly because as the company's daddy he can never show fear or weakness, and partly because billionaires get less than zero sympathy if they talk about having difficult lives. Which has the strange side effect that the difficulty of being a successful startup founder is concealed from almost everyone except those who've done it." http://paulgraham.com/before.html http://paulgraham.com/before.html

TekMol 10y ago
I wonder why he can't hire a "Sub CEO" whose job it is to handle 90% of the shit. Mission statement: "Act like the CEO. But you are allowed to pass the hardest 10% of your tasks to Larry. 10%. Not more.".
- blasteye 10y ago
  It's called alphabet ;)
- ghostly_s 10y ago
  Isn't this what a COO does?
  - unixhero 10y ago
    Yes.
  - aetherson 10y ago
    I think that every company handles its C-levels somewhat uniquely, for a variety of reasons. But if there's an archetypical COO job, I'd say it's the process-and-execution leadership job, but not the long-term strategy, big product vision job.
- modeless 10y ago
  His name is Sundar.
- samwillis 10y ago
  But that 10% hardest takes 90% of the time...
  - enraged_camel 10y ago
    Exactly. It's essentially the Pareto Principle at work. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle
- erdevs 10y ago
  This misses the point in that it is a function of your ambition and vision for the company. Page, or any CEO with significant control of a large, highly profitable company, could delegate any aspect of operations which fall below the level of governance by the board of directors. Or all of that except the biggest strategic projects. But with time then freed up, the question becomes how you spend it. Do you vacation? Do you start a side project, or a bevy of them? Or, do you invest your time and energy into your highest point of leverage: your existing large, profitable company. In the latter case, you still want ultimately to be CEO. Your goal then is to structure the company, if possible, so that it continues to fulfill its mission and to grow while you focus on the things that you feel are most important and which are most well-suited to your interests and perceived talents. For some company+CEO pairs, that may in fact be the core operations themselves. For others, it may be building toward conglomeration or investing in strategic R&D. This helps explain the Alphabet restructuring. But it doesn't mean that suddenly Page has less to worry about. He could if he chose to step back, but as long as he feels drive to make an impact, to make the highest use of his talents, and that he can do that largely through Google/Alphabet, he'll want to remain CEO, he'll want to work hard at the company, and he'll still feel the (admittedly self-induced, chosen) pressure. Let's also quickly look at each of the aforementioned areas of focus for a CEO who continues to have drive and believes that drive is best leveraged at their existing large, profitable company. For some company+CEO pairs, that may in fact be the core operations themselves. Apple is a good example here. Tim Cook could delegate whatever aspects of Apple's operation that he likes. But if he continues to have drive and views Apple as a great way to realize that drive, then his best use today is in focusing on Apple's core operations. This is because Apple's continued growth and profitability is, today, almost entirely dependent on continuing to frequently ship cutting-edge devices worldwide. That requires a very heavyweight operation, and there isn't much "revenue momentum". Apple gains network effects in the power of its brand, its distribution, and its manufacturing chain. But its revenue growth and profitability are dependent, today, on each new generation of devices. Thus, Cook had best focus there, while trying simultaneously to build toward greater "revenue momentum" in the future. Compare this to Google, who just like Apple is also primarily dependent on one profit stream. But Google's profit stream in advertising has more self-sustaining revenue momentum. This allows Google to have focused on other areas outside the core profit operation earlier, and helps explains the Alphabet restructuring. Apple may get there one day (and it seems to me they are trying to... witness all of their recent attention on and talk about services/subscriptions), but they're not there yet. In addition, Cook is an admittedly operations focused executive, while Page is more inclined toward R&D and long-term strategy. In combination, these things help explain how both Cook and Page can delegate as much as possible, but still remain very busy (and in very different ways) at both of their companies. The push toward conglomeracy that Google is undergoing now is largely based on build-outs of internal brands ad operations through R&D. Others, like Disney and GE, went down the conglomeration path through combinations of internal buildouts and acquisitions. While building a conglomerate, the CEO is wisest to delegate on the core profitable operations and focus on the conglomeration process itself. This is what we're seeing with Google now, and something we may see in the future with Apple. After achieving a large and diversified conglomeration, the CEO is wisest to focus on governance/guidance/measurement and strategic guidance of the groups as a whole. This is what we've seen with GE, Disney, et al in the past.
- dekhn 10y ago
  Technically, Larry is the CEO of Alphabet, while Sundar is CEO of Google. Larry doesn't deal with daily shitstorms- that's Sundar's job. By the way, Sundar is a genius- absurd level of memory recall, extremely logical (vulcan-class), and pretty personable.
k__ 10y ago
Well, no one force them to do it...
- thomasahle 10y ago
  I think that's the reason. It may be hard, but apparently it's worth it. Just like we don't have pity with athletes, even though they are clearly in a lot of pain a lot the time.
adamlett 10y ago
Who is PG?
- dgemm 10y ago
  The founder of Y Combinator
- pygy_ 10y ago
  Paul Graham, YC co-founder and original dev/admin of this message board.
- jganetsk 10y ago
  Paul Graham
- lsh 10y ago
  Phallis Giganticous https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2K8_jgiNqUc&feature=youtu.be&t=94 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2K8_jgiNqUc&feature=youtu.be...
- throwaway274739 10y ago
  Proctor & Gamble. Huge, diversified corporation. Google 'em.
Animats 10y ago
Google is in some ways easier, because there's no real threat to their cash cow, search ads. Apple has to stay ahead of competition in phones. That competition is now quite good, and usually cheaper. As CEO of Apple, Cook is expected to deliver the Next Big Thing. So far, he hasn't, and he's running out of time. (Cars? Tough, low-margin business. VR? Niche market. Watches? Tried that. Robots? Not ready yet. Voice AI? Already doing that, need to improve. Services? Crowded field, no edge.)
- agumonkey 10y ago
  Honestly, what could be the NBT in consumer tech ? I feel we reached cultural and ontological plateau in most areas. If there's a next it probably won't be a big thing.
  - yomly 10y ago
    I feel wearables - IoT could be the next big thing (...who isn't saying this...). Putting privacy concerns aside, imagine having contact lenses + voice and/or gesture control augmenting your life. Combine that with real-time health monitoring, all powered by your blood glucose. That's hinging on still quite a lot of big technologies delivering and becoming mass-consumerable, but that is one way in which I can see technology and connectivity being taken to the next level in a similar sense that smartphones did. Note: I am not particularly pro IoT nor wearables, but can see this becoming a thing in the future.
  - detaro 10y ago
    Home automation/IoT is still a thing that could be it. And I'm honestly surprised Apple hasn't been more aggressive with HomeKit etc. With more and more crappy IoT devices, Apple coming out with a reliable and well-integrated platform could be great. I don't have Apple stuff, but the people I know that do often cite good integration between everything as a reason, so I think that angle might work. They have voice control tech, they have end devices in all important form factors (TV, tablets, phones, watch), they have customers that like everything being tied together. Only issue is that I'm not sure if they could do it with external partners making most of the devices (how do you guarantee quality to people? Premium home IoT is scarce for now), and making everything themselves would be a lot of different pieces to make.
krisdol 10y ago
> and partly because billionaires get less than zero sympathy if they talk about having difficult lives That quote from the essay reminds me of a Silicon Valley scene [1] where the CEO of the pseudo-Google company in the show gets vilified (rightfully so in the show) for complaining about how hard billionaires have it in this country. I bet the creator's read PG's essay and were inspired by it. [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5zQpN28xa4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5zQpN28xa4
- justicezyx 10y ago
  I cannot believe that the privileged rich created such shows to disguise their unjustified fortune; and still intelligent people believe these superficial arguments. billionaires == jews? Can something be more wrong?
  - corysama 10y ago
    It's not clear to me if you are aware that the video you are commenting on is from a comedy show satirizing Silicon Valley and it's billionaires...
    - mulcahey 10y ago
      Gotta hand it to them for the realism though getting the actual code conference interviewers.
- rfrank 10y ago
  That scene was inspired by Thomas Perkins' letter to WSJ. http://www.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304549504579316913982034286 http://www.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1000142405270230454950457...
- tdaltonc 10y ago
  Or they read the news. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-01-26/kleiner-perkins-shocked-by-co-founder-comment-on-nazis https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-01-26/kleiner-p...
- 10y ago
coldtea 10y ago
>Basically at 25 he started running as fast as he could and it must seem to him that he hasn't stopped to catch his breath since. Every day new shit happens in the Google empire that only the CEO can deal with, and he, as CEO, has to deal with it. If he goes on vacation for even a week, a whole week's backlog of shit accumulates. With the difference that unlike a poor single working mother, or some 40-something factory worker, etc., he can quit anytime, and has billions in the bank to show for it...
- Olscore 10y ago
  > get less than zero sympathy if they talk about having difficult lives You just proved this part.
  - zyxley 10y ago
    coldtea's point is that "difficult" when you can walk away from it and never have to work another day in your life, and "difficult" when getting it wrong means that your life and your childrens' lives are ruined for years, live in two entirely different strata of meaning.
    - addicted 10y ago
      +++ Think about this way. Imagine if you could spend the next year absolutely any way you want to (within bounds of laws and human possibility and decency). Larry Page chooses to do his job instead of doing that. I can't imagine the unenviable parts of his job adds up to anything beyond a rounding error. The one part I can have some sympathy for is the lack of any sort of privacy (and the accompanying inability to go for a walk in the park by yourself), but those aren't the points mentioned here, and are worse for your regular TV/Hollywood types, who have less privacy as they are more recognizable, and much less money.
    - bane 10y ago
      Let's be honest, a billionaire could walk away and their next several hundred generations wouldn't ever have to work and they'd all live very comfortable lives.

justinv 10y ago

Full quote: "It’s sort of a lonely job. The adage that it’s lonely — the CEO job is lonely — is accurate in a lot of ways. I’m not looking for any sympathy. You have to recognize that you have blind spots. We all do. Blind spots move, and you want to not just have really bright people around you, but people who will push on you and people to bring out the best in you. People that amplify whatever you’re good at. And then also the people who plug the parts that you’re not and may never be."

helloworld 10y ago

In Tim Cook, it's interesting to see a leadership style that's so different from the Jobs/Ellison mold. Cook seems to have a very humble manner, and he emphasizes listening to and learning from people both inside and outside Apple. In the startup world, I wonder whether founders can find success in emulating Cook -- or whether a harder-edged, harder-driving style is required.

apozem 10y ago
Cook has his edges. He's supposed to be a demanding, logical boss. > One day back then, he convened a meeting with his team, and the discussion turned to a particular problem in Asia. “This is really bad,” Cook told the group. “Someone should be in China driving this.” Thirty minutes into that meeting Cook looked at Sabih Khan, a key operations executive, and abruptly asked, without a trace of emotion, “Why are you still here?” Khan, who remains one of Cook’s top lieutenants to this day, immediately stood up, drove to San Francisco International Airport, and, without a change of clothes, booked a flight to China with no return date, according to people familiar with the episode. The story is vintage Cook: demanding and unemotional. http://fortune.com/2008/11/24/apple-the-genius-behind-steve/ http://fortune.com/2008/11/24/apple-the-genius-behind-steve/
- 1123581321 10y ago
  I think about that story a lot because I'd like to know what happened in those thirty minutes. Presumably they continued to discuss the situation, and Cook's opinion of it worsened to where he demanded immediate action. It wouldn't make sense for Khan to leave the meeting and have to be caught up later on the situation he'd flown to China to resolve. Less likely possibilities: was Cook talking to someone in the other direction and only noticed Khan? Was he thinking to himself Khan should leave immediately but wanted to give him some time to make the call himself?
  - ktRolster 10y ago
    I think it's important to realize that he didn't lose respect for Khan through that experience. He wasn't trying to put Khan down, or look for a reason to demote him. Possibly Cook looked at it as a teaching experience for Khan.

tomdell 10y ago

I like this - "The first all-new device during his tenure, the Apple Watch, is not yet a mega hit." - as if some day it just is going to be a mega hit.

mwfunk 10y ago
I interpreted that as, someday it might yet be a mega hit. It's still a relatively new product that's only had one iteration, and even though it didn't set the world on fire, it didn't bomb either. Most tech companies iterate on things a few times before giving up on them, unless they are just fundamental market failures like the iPod HiFi. What did you like about that statement? Your interpretation made it sound like you didn't agree with it.
- TheOtherHobbes 10y ago
  I certainly don't agree with it. Wearables have a lot of potential, but wearable watches are fundamentally not a great idea - for practical reasons (screen too small, limited battery life) and for marketing reasons (can't compete at the low end, certainly can't compete at the lifestyle/status display high end). Watch isn't even primarily a watch - it's an iPhone remote. And that's getting into rarefied meta-product territory. So unlike the iPhone and the home computer, both of which have obvious use cases, Watch is still trying to define a compelling reason for existing. But this just highlights the current Apple problem. Cook designs products using a very simple heuristic - smaller, bigger, thinner, more colours: basically good enough. Jobs used to use a different heuristic - magical, original, creative, obviously useful, with world-beating production values. It's a completely different approach. And you can see that in Watch. Watch has no magic. It's good enough - barely, more or less. But that's all it is. And if you're aiming for good enough instead of magical, it's too easy to fall short and end up with not quite good enough - which is where many Apple buyers are feeling the current product lines are heading.
  - coldtea 10y ago
    >I certainly don't agree with it. Wearables have a lot of potential, but wearable watches are fundamentally not a great idea - for practical reasons (screen too small, limited battery life) I'm not sure I follow. A wearable watch will have the biggest screen and better battery life combo than any other kind of practical wearable device I can think of (e.g. when not strapping a 3" screen and a battery pack the size of a Zippo on you and calling it a wearable). >So unlike the iPhone and the home computer, both of which have obvious use cases, Watch is still trying to define a compelling reason for existing. If not other things, Fitness/health/medical services would be a killer reason for existing.

rrggrr 10y ago

He can stop whining... I admire Cook and love and use Apple products, but he should try running a small business and experience real loneliness. As he points out Apple has the bank account to hire virtually anyone, the very best people to help its businesses and fix business mistakes. Small business leaders don't and fight most of the same battles, alone, getting pounded into dust by unforgiving regulatory, liability, tax and competitive forces. My sympathy for Cook is further attenuated by the billions in cash Apple is sitting on at home and abroad that in my opinion should instead be put to work in the US economy. Google too.

ktRolster 10y ago
He doesn't sound like he's whining, just describing.
csallen 10y ago
No matter what's plaguing you, there will always people worse off. That doesn't mean your problems stop feeling like problems, however. Human experience and judgment is extremely relative. We acclimate to our surroundings. Otherwise, we'd all be paralyzed by constant awe at things like cars and running water.
- rrggrr 10y ago
  Yes, the shoe pinches the foot its on.

angry-hacker 10y ago

So what has Cook done to Apple besides that successful LGBT campaign?

jodrellblank 10y ago
Share price has doubled since August 2011, and 16x dividend payouts in that time - https://www.google.com/finance?q=aapl https://www.google.com/finance?q=aapl

LargeCompanies 10y ago

I'm a six year iPhone owner who based off of the iPhone 7 rumors it's going to underwhelm in the innovation department and lose this customer. The Note 7 looks awesome due to it being waterproof and other features Apple hasn't bothered to include. Also, Google Now in terms of it understanding me is light years away from Siri, which I have used since 2011. Goigle Now's AI puts Siri to shame! See ya Apple!

coldtea 10y ago
>I'm a six year iPhone owner who based off of the iPhone 7 rumors it's going to underwhelm in the innovation department and lose this customer. Yeah, because better CPU, GPU, camera(s), and such are not innovative enough... >The Note 7 looks awesome due to it being waterproof and other features Apple hasn't bothered to include. Yeah, for those of us using our phone on the shower it will be a god-send. Waterproof! Such innovation!
- jacalata 10y ago
  Bizarrely, none of the phones I know of that died from water damage were being used in a shower. We must move in different circles.
  - coldtea 10y ago
    Pretty different, yes, cause I hardly know of anyone who lost their phone that way. I'm pretty sure there are a few. But I seriously doubt there are that many. In contrast, a phone being damaged because it fell and broke its glass etc, I've seen and heard stories of dozens of times.
- detaro 10y ago
  Isn't "faster hardware" by definition not innovative?
- Pxtl 10y ago
  I just got back from a Caribbean trip. I wish I'd had a waterproof phone+camera. That feature will be on my list of considerations next time I'm phone-shopping, since they're all sealed with glue and have non-removable batteries anyways these days.

gdilla 10y ago

So is being a janitor. you're well compensated for your trouble, Tim.

6stringmerc 10y ago

CTRL+F "music" & "iTunes" - only one result, as part of the framing by the writer. Unless Tim & co. decide to confront the reality that they're stepping up "vertical integration" model using the Robber Baron playbook when it comes to the actual arts, I think his "social responsibility" comments mean fuck-all. Go ahead, build a new environmentally friendly compound, that's great, good on you. And how's about that 30% you skim off the top of every non-Drake "Most-Favored-Nation" artist who has to go through your channels or lose out? Actions about social responsibility speak louder than words, and right now, Braeburn Capital and billions of dollars being slushed around offshore rather than pay the tax to re-patriate those funds means talk is cheap. I'm a contrarian by nature, but I know a puff piece when I see it. So Tim is good at hitting softball questions, whoop-dee-whoo. Of course it's lonely and isolating at the top of the mountain - just look at Kurt Cobain.

discordance 10y ago
"CTRL" is pretty revealing of inherent bias
- tcpekin 10y ago
  So you must use a Mac to comment on Tim Cook or Apple?
  - Neeek 10y ago
    Only if you want to be the good kind of biased, the kind we can get behind here at HN.
aedron 10y ago
Big interviews like this come with a price. They are always puff pieces.
- 6stringmerc 10y ago
  Well I remember that approach tended to gloss over a lot of the newsworthy stuff involving Tiger Woods. Says a lot about US culture when serious "leaders" will only sit down to have their egos stroked. See also: Donald Trump.

codefolder 10y ago

Just like everywhere else on the internet, there's no shortage of Apple apologists defending the fall of the consumerist junk paradigm.

thunderrabbit 10y ago

> What Apple paid for Beats, it’s largest acquisition ever its

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

KKKKkkkk1 10y ago

The full quote is saying the exact opposite of what's in the title: `And while he’s quick to trumpet Apple, he is also unassuming, quickly noting, after saying his job can be “lonely,” that “I’m not looking for any sympathy. CEOs don’t need any sympathy.”` Which is exactly why Tim Cook is such a great guy.

jamisteven 10y ago

Its gona be very, very lonely if he actually lets them turn the MB Pro into this HP-esq touch screen crap ive been seen floating around, as that will be the death of Jobs design philosophy on which this great company was built. Protruding cam lens and round edges on the Iphone6 were bad enough.