[lapcat]

> He was hardly responsible for what that product actually was.

This is ridiculous. I'm not going to argue with you after this reply, because you're rewriting history.

> I'd suggest actually reading up the product release and what happened after.

I'd suggest not making assumptions. I don't have to "read up [sic] the product release and what happened after", because I was alive at the time. Were you?

"The Macintosh sold 50,000 units in 74 days, outselling every other computer" "Apple had sold 280,000 Macintoshes compared to IBM's first-year sales of fewer than 100,000 PCs" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Macintosh#1985%...

>> Jobs was the leader of a team.

> Like Tim Cook.

No. As I already said, "Cook literally never led a software or hardware product team until he became CEO".

> Yes, and if you understand what happened there, it was the right thing to do.

It wasn't. Cook was purging a rival for power, and Maps was just an excuse. If it was right, then why didn't Jobs fire Forstall?

> By every account I've read, Jobs primary contribution was as an editor, saying "no" to bad ideas.

This is essential. I would love it if Cook said no to bad ideas. Soooooo many bad ideas lately. Terrible ideas.

> And again, by every "insider account" I've seen published, Tim Cook is doing the same.

Citations needed.

[subharmonicon]

>> He was hardly responsible for what that product actually was.

> This is ridiculous. I'm not going to argue with you after this reply, because you're rewriting history.

You're saying Steve Jobs designed the Apple II? Or had a substantial hand in the design? Sorry, Woz and history disagree.

> I'd suggest not making assumptions. I don't have to "read up [sic] the product release and what happened after", because I was alive at the time. Were you?

Yes, and in fact owned the first generation Mac upon release.

> It wasn't. Cook was purging a rival for power, and Maps was just an excuse.

Steve and the board chose Cook over Forstall. He didn't need to "purge a rival". Forstall was difficult to work with, and people wanted him gone.

>> And again, by every "insider account" I've seen published, Tim Cook is doing the same.

> Citations needed.

https://www.engadget.com/2014-06-16-jony-ive-talks-new-mater...

[lapcat]

You citation didn't say what you claimed. There's no mention of Cook saying no to bad ideas. All it said was "We meet on average three times a week." Which is kind of a joke, especially when you compare it to what Ive says about Jobs establishing enduring values and principles.

> Forstall was difficult to work with, and people wanted him gone.

Jobs didn't want him gone and didn't seem to find him difficult to work with.

Ok, now I'm really done.

[subharmonicon]

> There's no mention of Cook saying no to bad ideas.

Ive said:

"Steve established a set of values...with a small team of people [and] Tim was very much part of that team – for that last 15 or 20 years."

And you think in being a part of that team and as CEO he doesn't say "no"?

Sorry, time for you to provide those citations of how Tim Cook green-lights everything.

> Jobs didn't want him gone and didn't seem to find him difficult to work with.

They were friends for nearly two decades. It's not easy to fire friends, and by all accounts they got along. Forstall with the rest of the executive team, not so much.

[rasz]

>"The Macintosh sold 50,000 units in 74 days, outselling every other computer" "Apple had sold 280,000 Macintoshes compared to IBM's first-year sales of fewer than 100,000 PCs" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Macintosh#1985%...

Commodore 64 sold ~300K in 4 months of 1982 alone, and kept outselling everything up until ~1986. 1 million units in first 16 months. 3.5 million units year later https://pctimeline.info/c64/. 6 million at the end of 1986. https://www.pagetable.com/docs/c64_sales/12.png

[lapcat]

What is the point here?

I'm not claiming the Macintosh was initially the best selling computer of all time, merely that it wasn't a commercial failure as claimed. There's a huge range. Selling less than C64 or Apple II doesn't make a product a failure.

[rasz]

Not making any money on it for 3 years does.

[lapcat]

But that's not true.