Apple Agrees to Pay $490M to Settle Lawsuit Alleging That Tim Cook Defrauded Shareholders

[citysnaps]

'basic computing'. To me being old school that does not equate to using a computer for browsing or similar, to me computing in the true sense is the act of calculating something, adding it up, multiplying it, or doing more complex math functions or programming or other functions. You have quantified that you don't mean finding the next prime number etc. etc., but in my book using a computer as a basic internet machine, or word processor doesn't really equate too computing albeit I realise the definition seems to have diluted somewhat over the years. (excuse the pun and tic)

Many people use the phrase "basic computing" to mean simple needs running applications that don't require a lot of memory or higher performance CPUs. Let me know if you need some examples.

Many MR readers here have recently given examples of 8 GB entry level Apple computers meeting their needs just fine.

If your computing needs are more complex, the good news is you can have your Apple computer delivered with more memory by simply paying for it.

 

[Motorola68000]

Probably is time for Tim to move out, but whether you like him or loathe him, at the helm he has seen Apple's value increase dramatically (probably from selling 8Gb instead of 16Gb) computers. (TIC).

Seriously there's no room for hate Tim Cook, as too much of that in the world already.

As for another Steve Jobs. As I communicated with Steve and contrary to films etc., never found him aggressive at all, but very very passionate about what he was doing and intending to do, so yes, he was very much driven.

He was the right person, at the right time, but whether he would even fit in with Apple's philosophy now, I'm not convinced.

However big a multi national becomes, history demonstrates that they can still end up in the has been's of history, and I'm hoping Apple doesn't go that route.

Technological change, whilst great for most consumers, puts a real strain on companies producing or seeking to produce ever more wonderful products, and that rate of change does not look like slowing down, albeit there is a limit to what you can get or want a phone to do, a watch to do, and even computing devices without customer fatigue setting in.

Whilst I see comments about waiting for M2, M3, M4, M5 it does not necessarily herald new innovative products, or in a lot of cases the consumer need for such powerful devices without innovative new applications requiring that increased power.

Steve was the innovation Apple needed, and whilst there's no doubt Apple need a bit more innovation, and in my opinion less glitz, where for me a new emoticon doesn't really tick many boxes, but I'm sure someone will arise, because sure as eggs is eggs, if they don't, another company will rise up and be the Apple of tomorrow.

 

[Manzanito]

Instead, I like the current Apple as it is - a well-oiled machine capable of updating its numerous operating systems in lockstep every year…

I mostly agree with your post, but not with this. Apple doesn’t seem to be that good at delivering good OSs every year. I don’t know the reason, probably being able to obsolete products sooner, but I very much prefer bi-annual updates on oses.

It’s not only bugs, it’s also that os upgrades can break compatibility. Do I need a new version of parallels, capture one etc every new year? No way. Much less so to pay for a new version every year 😂.

And back to your post, sometimes I have the feeling that the second Jobs era is remembered with religious fervor, but it also had its fair share of fails. The Cook era has lasted as much as the second Jobs era (more, if we count the leave of absence Jobs took leaving Cook at the helm), and apple has delivered wonderful products. I can only imagine the big deal Jobs would have made of the apple silicon or the watch. But at the end of the day, they would have been the same products, no matter who introduced them.

 

[Qubelek]

"Defrauded stakeholders" sounds very funny... Like it's Apple's fault? Cmon.
It's sad that some parasite tries to destroy Apple from the inside. These shareholders are in the awesome position. Apple revenue increases - they have more money in their pockets. Apple revenue decreases - did someone notify? No? Let's earn some money due to "failure of informing".

 

[Abazigal]

And back to your post, sometimes I have the feeling that the second Jobs era is remembered with religious fervor, but it also had its fair share of fails. The Cook era has lasted as much as the second Jobs era (more, if we count the leave of absence Jobs took leaving Cook at the helm), and apple has delivered wonderful products. I can only imagine the big deal Jobs would have made of the apple silicon or the watch. But at the end of the day, they would have been the same products, no matter who introduced them.

We will never know if something like the iPad Pro or the Apple Pencil would have been released under Steve Job's watch. But it was released under Tim Cook's tenure, and it's by far the best stylus I have used so far.

Maybe Apple might be better off were Steve Jobs still alive now, and maybe it won't be. We really won't know. But I am satisfied with the Apple of today. That's not to say that Apple is perfect or infallible, but nitpicks like Siri still being crappy or airpower never coming to fruition seem like precisely that - nitpicks when viewed in totality of what Apple has accomplished under Tim Cook. How many products has Google cancelled in comparison?

And it's okay to acknowledge Tim Cook's many milestones. It doesn't diminish Steve Job's legacy one bit.

 

[Lioness~]

If he defrauds shareholders now too....
Customers have been mlked a long time.

 

[Hellokittystampmyfacein]

My portfolio dip $25,000 because of this I just got paid for the iPhone 4 incident so I’ll get a little bit back in about 20 years, right? Checks in the mail

 

[TallManNY]

Agreed. I know some people have said they don't get the Tim Cook hate but what do you actually think the strategy is for the next decade for Apple, just iterative updates of the same products? It's served Apple well for over a decade since Steve Job's passing but eventually you have to do something different.

The company seems rudderless at the moment and is clearly in need of new direction.

Views like this have been silly for a long time. But they became absolutely ridiculous after the launch of Apple Silicon which was industry changing for the PC world and happened firmly under Cook's leadership. And the view that Apple can't innovate seem even more silly coming basically weeks after launch of Vision Pro. Apple is launching Fortune 500 sized businesses on a pretty regular basis. Perhaps you would like Apple break into something truly "different", but for now Apple seems focused on delivering computer products of all sizes and shapes for mass numbers of people to use on a regular basis.

 

[TallManNY]

The only ones that actually benefitted from this in any meaningful monetary way are the lawyers.

God bless the legal system

In some ways, this is true. The lawyers who brought the case will pull about 20% of award and be quite rich from this settlement.

But the way society benefits from this is that public company executives know they have to be honest and clear in their public statements or they will be sued by the lawyers who watch their statements and then compare against stock price changes and future events. Basically the lawyers are filling a role of watchdog on public statements. There are many folks who think this has significant benefits for society. Without this mechanism, it would take governmental action to hold the public company executives accountable. Maybe that would be a better system, but it would take the government to build out an army of lawyers and huge budget to finance the litigations (though maybe government could collect enough fines to basically turn that division into a profit center for the government).

 

[TimHalfCooked]

at least we know why we don't hear anything about the vp these days

 

[TracesOfArsenic]

It's 490 million to stop them digging further and unveiling more Cooking of the books.

 

[Macbookey]

What an excellent post!

You are so right about Craig Federighi, especially how he has "seemingly no concern for the software being exceptional or enjoyable to use". I still remember how arrogant and smug he was when introducing iOS 7 and taking verbal shots at Scott Forstall's use of skeuomorphism in previous versions of iOS. Federighi fails to realize that the level of graphic artistry that went into the skeuomorphic design of iOS 6 made it exceptional in comparison to all other smartphone operating systems out there. Now, iOS has flat design which looks like Android, Windows, and all the other cookie-cutter flat design on the Internet. Federighi also fails to realize that one of the many benefits of skeuomophism is that it made software enjoyable to use.

You are also so right when you said, "Apple will never be brave enough to hire the next Jobs." Tim Cook proved that to be true when he actually fired the closest thing Apple had to the next Jobs: Scott Forstall. Forstall masterminded the Mac OS X GUI, the iPod GUI, the iPhone GUI (and thus by extension, the iPad GUI, too). Forstall's skeuomorphic graphics help make computing fun, and also provided visual cues that helped people not familiar with computers, such as many elderly people and children. They also had culture in the sense that there were many cultural references to popular objects. It had a playfulness to it.

Another excellent post right here. Wasn’t Scott responsible for the Dock in OS X too? Craig is a great personality for keynotes, and obviously has merit having come from Next, but no one can deny how the platforms have suffered in a number of ways under his leadership. People equate skeuomorphic with Forstall, but overlook so many things beyond that which made his team Jobs’ choice for the iPhone (iOS) platform. It was Ives that drove Scott out ultimately and sucked the whimsy and delight out of a lot of things. They couldn’t stand each other. I personally cannot stand Ives without Steve having him on a leash. Glad his pretentious and narcissistic affects are history. Forstall was a brilliant engineer, and I would love to have seen where we would be today had he remained at the helm. Bugs will always exist in ever increasing complex software, but there are so many things that feel neglected and inconsistent with the growing platforms. Cook was the right choice for the financial well being of Apple, but for everything else it has been a mixed bag.

 

[fpnc]

They already wasted 10 billion on a car that will never see the light of day they’ll be fine

Exactly this and Tim Cook'e job should be hanging by a thread.

 

[Razorpit]

I am pretty sure that if my actions lost my employer nearly half a billion dollars I would be fired.

Not if you're bringing in hundreds of billions annually. That's .12% of their revenue last year from the reports I found.

 

[VulchR]

Not if you're bringing in hundreds of billions annually. That's .12% of their revenue last year from the reports I found.

Cook is not personally bringing billions. Apple's workers are.

I am not gunning for Cook, but I do think there is a general pattern that in US companies executives are far too shielded from personal responsibility, and workers, who accrue the true value of a company, often pay the price of executives' poor decision-making. Just my two cents...

 

[Razorpit]

Cook is not personally bringing billions. Apple's workers are.

I am not gunning for Cook, but I do think there is a general pattern that in US companies executives are far too shielded from personal responsibility, and workers, who accrue the true value of a company, often pay the price of executives' poor decision-making. Just my two cents...

Personally I don't like the guy, but Tim is THE "Apple worker". He's ultimately responsible for the good and for the bad.

 

[citysnaps]

Cook is giving what Apple’s (roughly) 1 billion customers want. Year after year after year. And is why Apple is one of the most successful tech companies in the world.

 

[maxoakland]

Personally I don't like the guy, but Tim is THE "Apple worker". He's ultimately responsible for the good and for the bad.

That’s incorrect. The workers are the ones who are most important

Think about it: the company could keep going for quite awhile without Tim. Couldn’t do anything without the workers

 

[Razorpit]

You are right about one thing, although you don't understand why. Thanks to the position Tim put them in, Apple could run for years without him.

Using your logic, are we to blame "the workers" for the failures of 90's Apple? Were the workers so bad back then that "the workers" of Microsoft had to come in and practically keep Apple from going bankrupt? Or was it another leader, Bill Gates that helped them?

Tens of thousands of workers have come and gone over the years Tim Cook has been in charge. In that same time Apple's market capitalization has grown around 600%, and its annual revenue has more than doubled. Yes, workers are important, but it takes a leader to organize them and keep them focused.

Argue all you want about whether Tim is the best person to be running Apple, but remember this, things could have easily gone to hell once Jobs passed but they didn't. Cook deserves credit for that.

 

[Chopper9]

Depends on how you measure Tim Cook's performance. . . in the year ending 2011, total sales was $100B. Most recent revenue figures show sales of $385.7B.

Revenue Growth

Exactly. And you still don't see the problem?

 

[PlayUltimate]

That’s incorrect. The workers are the ones who are most important

Think about it: the company could keep going for quite awhile without Tim. Couldn’t do anything without the workers

Wow. So you’re implying that the CEO does not matter. IMO, there was a big difference between CEO Gil Amelio and CEO Steve Jobs.

 

[PlayUltimate]

Exactly. And you still don't see the problem?

What problem do you see?

 

[Razorpit]

Exactly. And you still don't see the problem?

Too much growth?

 

[maxoakland]

Wow. So you’re implying that the CEO does not matter. IMO, there was a big difference between CEO Gil Amelio and CEO Steve Jobs.

Of course the CEO matters. But you’re stuck in the mindset that the CEO is the most important. It’s not true. Workers are the ones who do the work. The CEO is a manager and guide

Apple could survive for a long time without changing direction. The company couldn’t do anything without the workers

 

[PlayUltimate]

Of course the CEO matters. But you’re stuck in the mindset that the CEO is the most important. It’s not true. Workers are the ones who do the work. The CEO is a manager and guide

Apple could survive for a long time without changing direction. The company couldn’t do anything without the workers

I agree that someone needs to be around to do the actual work. However, CEOs and Boards think and plan in terms of years; workers are usually focused on the task today or next week. And thus, the “workers“ could survive for awhile without a CEO. But the company overall will eventually suffer and the “workers” will suffer as well.