Yesterday the UK's Sunday Times released a rumor-loaded, for-pay article speculating on Jonathan Ive's future with Apple, and in a sad sign of our times, suggestions have been taken as fact and it's set off the veritable media shitstorm. Everything in the article should be taken with a grain of salt, as virtually nothing in it has been substantiated or corroborated.
The tabloid-style article claims Ive has expressed an interest in commuting to Cupertino from the UK. It then goes on to claim that according to "a friend of the family" Apple's board is denying the request. It's further filled with vaguely-worded allegations that Ive is "set to" do this and "about to" do that, which has in turn led to panicky headlines like "Ive rumoured to be leaving Apple" and "Apple Rumored To Be At Brink of Losing Design Guru" by blogs picking up the story, even though no one has suggested he will be leaving Apple, and the original claims have not been corroborated.
Because the article is for-pay, many of the blog pick-ups we've seen of this "news" have not actually read it first-hand, as we have; if they had, they would have hopefully sussed out the gossipy tabloid tone of the piece. We're writing this not to add fuel to the fire, but in hopes of being the sole voice pointing out that all of this is tabloid rumor.
If anything, our naive hope would be that this would inspire designers into discussions about what Ive has contributed to the field of industrial design, spark businesspeople into asking themselves what type of support environment fostered his creativity, and ask ourselves how we can try to create future design excellence by learning from a moment in time that may, or may not, be over.
We realize this is statistically unpopular, but we believe that Ive's personal desires (and financial situation, as the original article goes into) are actually none of anybody's business, like Steve Jobs' personal health. If you respect the deep contribution either of these two have made to product design, oughtn't you just leave them alone rather than probe into their personal lives?
I suppose it's no-ones business about footballers or the president/ prime minister lives, yet we hear about them all the time. Its the price you pay when youre at the top. And yes its fascinating to hear these rumors of such a giant of a company and a firm many designers look up to.
"Forthcoming with information...." huh. Unless you've been living under a rock, or a defunct IBM chess-playing supercomputer, you'd know that Ive is the VP of Design at Apple and on a short-list for running the whole show, though it looks more like Tim Cook will be the man.
Though the effects of Jobs' health and the supposed Ive fantasies can have an impact on the day-to-day stock price, I don't think they, or any other heads of companies, have any obligation to tell their stockholders about their personal lives. Buyer beware. Do your own reseearch.
I'm interested in Apple's hardware/ design department, and it's interesting that one company can spark such a rush of speculation - but this article doesn't explain to me who this Ives guy is. (I'm guessing the iMac and iPod? The retro-60's space-age look?)
Core77. Maybe that's why the design field is so hard to get into: no one is ever forthcoming with information. The elites get more elite and the young and new get deflected away...
Well, I guess the honeymoon is over between Apple and Murdoch. The Daily must really have flopped badly. Hopefully they made some money from the paywall because I bet they're off the invite list for Apple events from now on. It's a shame a paper like the Times has been reduced to this. At least it doesn't seem to have affected Apple's stock price this morning. Jobs and Ive will both eventually leave Apple. They are the public faces we've come to know, but they are not solely responsible for the output of the company in the last 10 years. The company didn't get to the position it's in now without building strong teams under both men. I'm sure they have succession plans in place, as most large corporations do, but like most large corporations, they have no compulsion to make those plans public until they're enacted.
When you run a business like apple does, where certain individuals have such a high stake in the company (this is often a good thing) their personal lives become somewhat relevant to the discussion. It literally becomes investors' business.
Steve Jobs' leadership is integral to the company's success. When his health fades the company will have an uncertain future. If Ive is having obstacles to his work because of his financial situation then he will have an impact on the future of the company. This makes it very much people's business.
Every company wants phenomenal leadership, but it comes with risk. Your eggs are in a minimal number of baskets, so those baskets get watched very closely by the people who are financially involved.
Given that, I agree. Right now this sounds like a nothing issue, but we will see how it pans out. Hopefully the brief push-back he will get from the erroneous press will actually help his negotiating power.
!Report as spam
Share your thoughts
Join over 240,000 designers who stay up-to-date with the Core77 newsletter.
Subscribe
Test it out; it only takes a single click to unsubscribe
Comments
Though the effects of Jobs' health and the supposed Ive fantasies can have an impact on the day-to-day stock price, I don't think they, or any other heads of companies, have any obligation to tell their stockholders about their personal lives. Buyer beware. Do your own reseearch.
Core77. Maybe that's why the design field is so hard to get into: no one is ever forthcoming with information. The elites get more elite and the young and new get deflected away...
It's a shame a paper like the Times has been reduced to this. At least it doesn't seem to have affected Apple's stock price this morning.
Jobs and Ive will both eventually leave Apple. They are the public faces we've come to know, but they are not solely responsible for the output of the company in the last 10 years. The company didn't get to the position it's in now without building strong teams under both men. I'm sure they have succession plans in place, as most large corporations do, but like most large corporations, they have no compulsion to make those plans public until they're enacted.
Steve Jobs' leadership is integral to the company's success. When his health fades the company will have an uncertain future. If Ive is having obstacles to his work because of his financial situation then he will have an impact on the future of the company. This makes it very much people's business.
Every company wants phenomenal leadership, but it comes with risk. Your eggs are in a minimal number of baskets, so those baskets get watched very closely by the people who are financially involved.
Given that, I agree. Right now this sounds like a nothing issue, but we will see how it pans out. Hopefully the brief push-back he will get from the erroneous press will actually help his negotiating power.