Your argument is fundamentally unconvincing because you're using unsubstantiated, subjective claims that anyone can disagree with and thereby nullify. While yo

Your argument is fundamentally unconvincing because you're using unsubstantiated, subjective claims that anyone can disagree with and thereby nullify. While you say that Jobs curbed "bad" decisions, and that now the company is "money grubbing," and that he alone kept Apple going in the "right" direction, you don't explain why you think so. Someone could say the opposite (I don't have an opinion). For example, far more people choose to purchase iPhones for far more money than they did during Steve Jobs' tenure, so there is some evidence that "bad" product decisions from your perspective are actually good product decisions in the eyes of Apple's customers. Likewise, Apple's efforts to emphasize ethics and responsibility with respect to the environment, diversity and privacy are mostly new to the post-Jobs era. It may prove hard to argue that spending so much money on those priorities amounts to "money-grubbing," but I can't say for sure because you haven't really tried to argue anything at all.