Rob Enderle Quotes

Frankly, it has frustrated me for years to watch Apple's success — while traditional bumbling PC companies continue to ignore the obvious point that yes, design and presentation actually do matter.

Donald [Trump] has been branded by one of his competitors as a con artist and, in a sense, he is. But so was Steve Jobs.

[T]he litigation between Qualcomm and Apple/Intel ... is weird. What makes it weird is that Intel appears to think that by helping Apple drive down Qualcomm prices, it will gain an advantage, but since its only value is as a lower cost, lower performing, alternative to Qualcomm's modems, the result would be more aggressively priced better alternatives to Intel's offerings from Qualcomm/Broadcom, wiping Intel out of the market. On paper, this is a lose/lose for Intel and even for Apple. The lower prices would flow to Apple competitors as well, lowering the price of competing phones. So, Apple would not get a lasting benefit either.

[The iPhone]'s clearly going to start a wave towards a new technology — as I say, I'm not convinced that Apple's going to be able to ride this wave.

Bernie Madoff, who was put in jail for losing $64B actually looks damn good against the Cook's near 5X bigger loss.

Apple's two most memorable accomplishments are the GUI, or graphical user interface, and the mouse, both of which it literally stole from Xerox PARC.

[W]hen it came to the iWatch, also a name that Apple didn't own, Apple walked away from it and instead launched the Apple Watch. Certainly, no risk of litigation, but the product's sales are a fraction of what they otherwise might have been with the proper name and branding.

Chen is not only ahead of Steve Jobs in terms of turnaround speed, he has done something that both HP and Sun failed at: turned a hardware company into a software and services company, arguably something Jobs couldn't have done. ... Jobs smartly decided to kill the process at Apple to transition that company to software and services. Jobs didn't understand how to do that and would have likely failed because he was just a hardware guy.

Often, firms that were successful start to fail after a successful CEO departs, largely because they spent little time mentoring the successor in making successful decisions. ... I think we are seeing this play out at Apple at the moment ...

Apple's move to vertical integration with processors could end up killing the iPhone, and the benefit just doesn't warrant the risk.

We're creatures of habit. We lined up for the old Batman and Star Wars films long after they stopped being great, and we'll pay Apple the same courtesy if it loses its mojo.

[W]hen Apple wanted the name "iPhone" and it was owned by Cisco, Steve Jobs just took it, and his legal team executed so he could keep it. It turned out that doing this was surprisingly inexpensive. And, as the Apple Watch showcased, the Apple Phone likely would not have sold anywhere near as well as the iPhone.

Today's tech companies aren't built to last, as Apple's recent earnings report shows all too well.

Given Steve Jobs, for instance, is critical to Apple's success is there anything short of eating live babies on national TV that he should be fired for? Where would you draw that line or should he be held to the same rules and laws that the rest of us are held to?

Steve Jobs is the Ronald McDonald of Apple, he is the face.