It's all so extremely hard to judge. I don't plan on ever taking small decisions like this one into account when I evaluate Cook. Not because it's not valuable

It's all so extremely hard to judge. I don't plan on ever taking small decisions like this one into account when I evaluate Cook. Not because it's not valuable information, I just feel that you would have to be Steve Jobs to judge whether something was right or wrong and I'm no Steve Jobs. Tim Cook is closer to being Steve Jobs than I will ever be. More often than not reversals are probably not a sign of Cook's poor performance. But sometimes they could be. There are times when it pays to be stubborn. How am I supposed to judge whether Tim Cook is exactly the right amount of stubborn? I think the only (more or less) good way of evaluating Cook is to look at Apple's financial performace and even that is hard. Limitless growth is likely not possible, so when Apple's growth inevitably slows or stops, is that a sign of Cook's poor performance or would that have happened anyway? I think I should right now write down some criteria by which to judge Cook or else I'm in danger of endlessly shifting goalposts. Truly, we need a second universive with a healthy Jobs to compare.