Losing Ive was probably a good thing for Apple. I often feel that after a few years these big guys have done what they could do and somebody else can take it from there. So far even losing Jobs didn’t hurt Apple as it looks.
The position that I have rather often read on the internet is: Jonathan Ive did very good work at Apple as long as there was a counterpart who could steer his creative vision. This counterpart was of course Steve Jobs. When Steve Jobs died, there wasn't such a counterpart anymore, so Ive's work for Apple got much worse.
I think this is true more often than many people want to admit. One of the most famous examples being Lennon and McCartney. Even though they couldn't stand each other near the end that tension helped produce their best music. They never did anything comparable as solo musicians.
Jony Ive wanted to chop down all the trees at De Anza Community College for something like 11 million dollars for an Apple event. There's a lot of ways he was demanding in the wrong ways for Apple
Man, I'd never heard that story, so I verified it. Turns out it was about two dozen trees and 25 million dollars, just to put up a big tent for an Apple launch event. (Yes, the trees were removed.) What a tool, he just lost my respect.
> Ahead of the event, Ive pushed CEO Tim Cook to remove two dozen trees from the De Anza College campus next to the Flint Center for the Performing Arts to erect an extravagant white tent for the hands-on area.
> So far even losing Jobs didn’t hurt Apple as it looks.
Who knows? Pure speculation? You can also say if Jobs was still around they could have 10x-ed it even further?
Apple car could have been a thing? Apple could have been way ahead and actually competing in AI and data centers? Who knows what else Jobs could have came up with?
