4 ms·
No, they mean Ive. > The email alarmed Ive and Dye. They feared that the message Chaudhri sent could be interpreted to mean that Apple’s best days had passed.
by jasonlotito 4y ago
No, they mean Ive.
> The email alarmed Ive and Dye. They feared that the message Chaudhri sent could be interpreted to mean that Apple’s best days had passed.
It’s clear from the article that both Ive and Dye were directly involved in the firing.
- kumarmanket 4y ago
- smugma 4y agoIt’s hearsay, as even the article says it was Dye who did the firing. I’ve read many articles/interviews where Jony talks about being “hurt” by something. As in, he puts everything he has into these creations and certain things he takes very personally, as if someone is trying to stomp on a rose in his garden. Chaudhri is known to have a big personality himself and went to start a company that has hired a lot from Apple (not exclusively but sometimes browsing LinkedIn it looks that way). So he sends an email while resting and vesting (and also planning his next big thing), and they decide to cut ties, as he’s now seen as a potential liability. It doesn’t need to be petty or vindictive, but a decision based on bad vibes they got. Chaudhri could have given his notice two months in advance and cruised and sent the email on his last day, but he didn’t.
- capableweb 4y ago> It’s clear from the article that both Ive and Dye were directly involved in the firing. It's really not. The part you quoted doesn't say that Ive was "directly involved" in the firing, it says he felt something about the message Chaudhri sent. The article states Dye was directly involved in the firing, and mentions nothing about if Ive was involved or not, so we should presume he wasn't. Otherwise the article would say so.