There's no doubt that Cook was a great CFO, but he's clearly not the visionary Jobs was.

"I also think the overseas employment issues and the tax evasion allegations chip away at the positive perception in their brand."

Maybe to people in-the-know, but I doubt the average consumer gives two shits about that when they're deciding about what their new phone will be.

I disagree with that -- I would argue that the employment issues and tax issues are what make the nightly news and the huff post headlines that the average joe, who doesn't know one model from the next, read.

Corporate numbers crunchers are killing Apple. Siri, a product Jobs overwhelmingly rejected, was taken off the shelves and used as a promotional tool upon his death. Pathetic. Just one example of a company that has completely lost is vision. It truly shows the power of one man with great ideas....and the devesating loss his death was.

"Corporate numbers crunchers are killing Apple. "

Don't doubt that. Although it's odd when you consider Apple is one of the most successful companies of all time. You'd think they'd just sit back and happily count their money.

As for "tax evasions" issues - that is one hundred percent bullshit. Apple is operatig 100% within the law. Why should they be ridiculed for doing everything they can to make money....which IS the purpose of a corpoation. Apple is not a charity and never was. Jobs was not a particularly charitable person. He did everything he could to make mmey, period, and just happened to do itwith great product and vision...but the bottom line was ALWAYS the bottom line.

If you want to be mad about Apple's finances, you can point the finer squarelymat the Unied States government that sets the tax code.

@Mapu

Maybe. At the same time, I heard plenty of jokes about Antenna-Gate, Map-Gate, and Foxconn, but that never stopped Apple from breaking records every time they came out with a new product.

"Jobs was not a particularly charitable person."

In fact, he was one of the *least* charitable people.

Abge - the problem with number crunchers is that the see something like Siri, for example, and say "wasted development costs....why aren't we selling this?" and don't have the Vision of a Jobs to understand you can't sell it because it is stupid and disfunctional. There is an amazing amount of *bad* tech on the market today ...Ford's Synch System, for example, has been froughtwith problems. Jonbs rarely repeatable gift was his abilty to grasp the consumer, to envision thefuture,etc.

Bill Gates is much the same , as much as he is desised. Listen to an interview with Gates from 20 years ago mandhis vision for future tech was very accurate, whatever people may think about Microsoft.

I think that some people ascribe too much weight (credit?) to what Jobs did inside of a company like Apple. Especially towards the end, the company was too large for him to have reasonable control over individual projects. People forget that Apple put out a couple of bricks even in Jobs' lifetime - the Apple Lisa (heh, remember that?) was particularly unpopular.

Well that's really the question at hand: how much control did Jobs really have at Apple and how much of the company's success is due to him?

Also we're really talking about Apple 2.0 here (after Jobs was rehired). I'm really not sure the Lisa is too relevant.

krellin is in the right of it though - Apple has not done tax evasion. Tax avoidance, yes, but not evasion. It's nothing that Google, Starbucks and hundreds of other corporations aren't already doing.

As someone who only has an iPod from Apple, I can't say much about how it has changed. I can say though, that a lot of it's success is built upon it becoming a status symbol abroad. Foreign first users aren't buying it because they like it (well, some are) but because it's a symbol of their wealth and status in society. That positioning of the brand came from Job's days. Whether it's attributable to him or not, I don't know.

"It's nothing that Google, Starbucks and hundreds of other corporations aren't already doing."

And that makes it a non-issue?

Tax evasion is illegal. Tax avoidance is not, that's all I'm saying. There's not much governments can do about it either. The Starbucks one was a big deal in the UK, and Starbucks eventually voluntarily gave like 40 million pounds to the government.

Abge - Apple #1 was a great company, with a good product and bad business plan. THEN Jobs left and the company fell apart. Apple #2 (w/out Jops) sucked nuts. Apple #3 when Job returned was a Monster. Apple #4 is quickly rerailing from greatness.

One man made all the difference, and my understanding is that he had Dictatorial control over design and release decisions, which I think is now obvious.

"And that makes it a non-issue?"

Absolutely it makes it a non issue FOR APPLE. It's an issue you shoudl address with the Feds.

Bo, when you become a big boy adn start paying taxes, maybe you should let us know how much EXTRA you VOLUNTARILY pay, or if you will look for every deduction posible. You CAN pay more if you want...We'll see if you do...

I'm going to have to side with krellin on this one. It's not a company's responsibility to hurt itself just because a government has shitty laws. This is clearly a problem with federal tax law and it's the fed that needs to fix it.

Where do Apple post their jobs, I wouldn't mind applying

The Internet, same as everyone else.

"Apple, Post-Jobs" has this Matrix-like ring to it. Like we're in a post-scarcity economy and all in these giant smooth cornered pods so the iEarth can stay charged.

For a minute, I thought the OP was saying Apple had some job listings posted somewhere.

The OP is advertising jobs at Apple, but why, is he on a commission?

@Nigee

You're confused. I'm telling Apple to post jobs.

Oh sorry, you're seeking a job in New York, got it now. We'd all like a job in the Big Apple. Thanks for clarifying

Actually, I think Abge is looking for a job as a supervisor in a Chinese child-labor sweatshop making iPhones.