[SmellyGeekBoy]

I'm not usually one for fanboyism (and I say this as a full time Linux desktop and Android user) but Apple really do seem to be trying to do right by their customers in most cases. Certainly more than the competition. I've been considering switching for a while, but it seems the quality of their hardware and to some extent their software has slowly been going downhill post-Jobs.

[nneonneo]

iTunes wasn't fantastic while Jobs was around, either. The first versions of OS X downright sucked. The build quality and aesthetic of the iPhone X rival anything from the Jobs era in my view, and the recent improvements on mobile performance have been nothing short of amazing.

I feel like people get these rose-tinted glasses when they look back on past Apple products, like they were all 100% perfect or something. Truth is - they all had little issues, but they were still often miles ahead of their competition.

[joejerryronnie]

My concern with a post-Jobs Apple is not their ability to iterate on existing product lines. I'm not confidant Apple can shift paradigms and disrupt whole industries the way the did under Jobs' leadership.

[danaris]

You know that happened twice, maybe three times, right? The iPod and the iPhone were it (and maybe the iPad).

It's not something Apple did twice a week like clockwork while Jobs was alive, then just suddenly stopped when he died.

This is exactly the kind of rose-colored glasses nneonneo was talking about.

[joejerryronnie]

Here are some things I can think of off the top of my head that Jobs had a hand in during his career:

- Created the personal computer industry (Apple Inc)

- Revolutionized the personal computer industry (Macintosh)

- Revolutionized film animation (Pixar)

- Shifted the electronic device industry to minimalist industrial design (iPod)

- Changed the entire music industry's distribution model (iTunes)

- Completely shifted the paradigm of a cellular phone and arguably began the adoption of the mobile internet (iPhone)

There are several other things people may consider visionary (candy colored iMac, getting rid of floppy drives, OSX, Newton, stuff at NeXT, tech advertising with the 1984 & Think Different campaigns, etc). I'm not even including things like the iPad, Apple Watch, Apple TV, health metrics, etc which Jobs may have been working on before his death. Clearly Jobs had lots of help along the way and is not singularly responsible for each of these things - but he's the one who oversaw and, in many cases, drove the vision.

I'm no Apple fanboy and Jobs had a very dark side to his particular brand of genius, but I find it incredibly disingenuous to dismiss the impact that Jobs had on Apple and the industry in general. Tim Cook is a very solid Tech CEO, maybe even a great operational leader, but he is not a visionary leader and my concern is that Apple lost a fundamental element with the passing of Jobs.

[FireBeyond]

> There are several other things people may consider visionary (candy colored iMac

Come on. "We changed the color. Visionary!"

> - Revolutionized film animation (Pixar)

Pixar was doing lots of work before Jobs was on the scene (after seven years, when Lucasfilm decided it was successful / profitable enough on its own to spin it off) - he was an investor.

[joejerryronnie]

Hey man, I know it's kind of ridiculous but bringing whimsy and a bit of fun into hardware design could be seen as somewhat visionary. Before this, the boldest thing hardware manufacturers did was change the beige case to black.

[kazinator]

When the iMac burst on the scene, clothing irons immediately jumped on its design. And they have not jumped off since.

[matwood]

Even if Jobs was still here, I'm not confident Apple could do it again. That kind of thing is hard.

One place Apple has disrupted/built an industry is with the smart watch. I was skeptical, but got a Series 2 on sale to try it out and recently got a Series 4. When I got the Series 2 I wasn't sure what I would use it for, but it's something I would miss not having now.

[maroonblazer]

> Apple really do seem to be trying to do right by their customers in most cases

Another possibility is that they don't have to take advantage of their users' data because their business is largely a hardware business, with the software a loss-leader.

It might seem like a distinction without a difference but one has to consider intent when scoring individuals and companies' moral high ground.

[soneil]

I'm not sure it even boils down to doing the right thing for the customer. Apple want you as a customer. Google want you as a user. It's that simple.

[compcoffee]

The cringe was more related to "we as a society should be grateful to Apple".

It's an utterly laughable statement. Not surprised it upset a few worshipers of the Tech Overlords. Apple, the billionaires it produced and the people it employs should be grateful to the rest of society.