Tim Cook's Clock
Steven Levy
There's a lot that Steven Levy is able to pull out of his interview with Tim Cook – despite Cook's attempts to stonewall (as always). A few key bits:
Another thing I’m reminded of on my return to the Ring is how skillful Cook is at touting the results of his big decisions, from the Apple Watch to his bet on custom silicon chips, which unleashed innovations that boost Apple phones and laptops. (And not mentioning decisions that didn’t pan out, like that multibillion-dollar smart-car project.) When he strolls into the conference room where we’re meeting, I know Cook will be meticulously cordial, displaying manners honed during his Alabama boyhood, while calmly hyperbolizing the virtues of Apple’s products and fending off criticisms of his very powerful company. (And when asked for comment on the election results, which came in after our talk, he chose to keep his views to himself.) Steve Jobs would come at a journalist like the rain in Buenaventura, aggressively pitching his message; Cook envelopes his interlocutors in a gentle mist and confides awed assessments of his company’s efforts.
It really is something how different the forward-facing styles of Jobs and Cook are. Both effective in entirely different and basically opposite ways. One wonders what Steve Jobs might have done with Donald Trump, for example – something Cook's style seems suited for and Jobs style seemingly would not be!
In your presentations you use Apple Intelligence almost as a synonym for AI. Do you think people fear AI?
I think that does exist. We batted around names for everything and decided on Apple Intelligence. It wasn’t a pun off of artificial intelligence. In hindsight, it seems so straightforward.
Come on. Even if it wasn't the main intention in naming it, obviously they recognized the nice overlap there. It's clever! And Apple, of course, loves renaming things that already exist. See also: "Spatial Computing" which is definitely not VR/AR/XR. Totally different.
Some companies charge for AI-enhanced services. Did you consider that?
We never talked about charging for it. We view it sort of like multitouch, which enabled the smartphone revolution and the modern tablet.
That's interesting in that everyone assumes that Apple will, eventually, charge for some sort of AI – sorry, Apple Intelligence – services. But perhaps we can read that as what they've shown off to date will be free (beyond extended usage of ChatGPT), but other future Apple Intelligence features could come with a price.
I guess the counterargument is that back in the early days of internet search, people complained that no one bothered to memorize dates anymore: “I don’t need to. I have a search engine!” So no one has to learn history—and now, how to write a professional letter.
These worries have been around for years. I remember when people felt like the calculator would fundamentally erode people’s math ability. Did it really, or did it make something more efficient?
I used to know how to do long division. I don’t anymore.
I haven’t forgotten.
Agree with Cook here. And actually, I think it will elevate those who take the time to learn to write well. Just as I suspect AI will ultimately raise the value of many bespoke, human creations.
As for the long division flex, that's funny but is it actually useful to know long division? I mean, it's a good thing to learn, to better understand math, but beyond a few specific jobs, is it really that useful to actually know, versus relying on a machine to do it for you, faster? Again, it's technology freeing up time for you to work on something that's actually useful for you to know and do.
But there is one technology—world-knowledgeable large language models—that you’re outsourcing to OpenAI. When you announced the deal, it seemed framed as an initial arrangement. Is it inevitable that you will eventually build your own powerful LLMs?
I wouldn’t want to predict. We felt that OpenAI was the pioneer and was ahead. We felt that some portion of our customers would want access to world knowledge [that Apple Intelligence doesn’t provide], and we wanted to integrate it in an elegant way that still respected people’s ability to choose whether they wanted to do that or not.
"I wouldn't want to predict" is the dismissing tactic Cook often uses on earnings calls as well when asked about future paths. But this does not require Nostradamus. Cook knows that of course Apple wants to own this technology if it proves valuable to their users. And as such, they're undoubtedly at least putting the pieces in place to work towards that with some lightweight models and training while they wait to see how the market evolves. Just like with all of their other products!
The difference, perhaps, is that this market is moving so fast. There's a real risk that Apple gets left behind. Not now. I think they're in a fine position now. But if the market shifts and owning your own models matters. Again, I'm not sure it will, so I think it's a reasonable position for Apple to have right now – and certainly Wall Street appreciates the lack of billions burned!
I’m wondering whether there’s been a vibe shift in your relationship, even before you started using ChatGPT in your products. First Apple was going to have an observer on OpenAI’s board. Now you’re not. Recently it was rumored you were going to participate in their big investment round. You didn’t. Meanwhile, OpenAI has had some key employee departures, and the FTC is examining whether AI power is too concentrated. Has there been any cooling off?
There’s no truth behind that at all. And I would just say, our MO is not to go out and invest in a number of companies. It’s rare that we’ve ever done that. So it would be odd, an exception, for us to do that there.
So you never considered investing in OpenAI?
I’m not going to say we never looked at it. I’m just saying that it would be a rare move on our part to do that. We did ARM back in the day. Who else did we do? We did one or two others.
In other words, there's some truth behind that. Great, direct, quick follow-up by Levy to get Cook to backtrack. There was enough reporting on the matter (including the board position) from multiple outlets and many sources on all sides that it seems safe to assume there was a lot more going on behind the scenes in such dealings than Cook is willing to speak to. "No truth behind that at all" feels awfully disingenuous. Usually Cook is more savvy than that.
As for other investments – ARM was a good one, 35 years ago. Less good, a far more recent one: Didi. In 2016, Apple invested $1B with Apple's head of corp dev, Adrian Perica, joining the board. It was a big love-fest at the time. Cook even wrote the Time 100 blurb for Didi President Jean Liu! With a crackdown in China shortly thereafter, it was a disastrous investment for Apple, and they exited the board in 2022. Strange Cook didn't bring that one up as I suspect some lingering scars may have led to their decision not to invest in OpenAI amidst their own turmoil...
Let’s talk about your wearable display, the Vision Pro. Reports are that it hasn’t sold at the level that you folks expected. What happened?
It’s an early adopter product, for people who want tomorrow’s technology today. Those people are buying it, and the ecosystem is flourishing. The ultimate test for us is the ecosystem. I don’t know if you’re using it very much, but I’m on there all the time. I see new apps all the time.
I'm sorry, in what way is the ecosystem "flourishing"? Just saying it doesn't make it so. I've been using the Vision Pro more in recent weeks with some of the upcoming visionOS 2.2 changes making it more interesting as a Mac display, and some new content finally coming into focus. I load up the App Store on the device basically each time I use it. Either Apple is doing an awful job surfacing new apps or there aren't many. And why would there be? By Cook's own admission, there aren't a lot of users. So it's a chicken and egg problem.
Meta and Snap are leading us to mixed-reality glasses that we’d wear continually. Is the bigger, heavier Vision Pro ultimately headed that way?
Yes, it’s a progression over time in terms of what happens with form factors. AR is a huge deal. With Vision Pro, we’ve progressed to what is clearly the most advanced technology we’ve ever done, and I think the most advanced technology in the world in terms of electronics problems. We’ll see where it goes.
That was a nice quick "yes"! I mean it's obvious, but Cook is always so careful with his words. I read this as acknowledgement that the Vision Pro is not where it needs to be, but that he's confident Apple will get there. That's good, though I still can't help but wonder if having a pair of smart glasses, technology that can actually move in volume, wouldn't help Apple more in this space? And, I mean, why not both? Why not have, the Vision Pro working on the high-end, while 'Vision Glasses' work from the opposite end, helping to build up Apple Intelligence, etc? Focus, yes. But it's just not clear how long it will take Vision Pro to shrink down to a mass market device. Three years? Five years? More?
You mention the Steve Jobs Theater, which was designed with product keynotes in mind. Now you launch products with pretaped videos. Will you ever go back to live presentations?
During Covid we learned the audience is primarily online. Very few people can fit in the theater, and we wanted to have more people engaged in the announcement itself. You can do that a lot more productively on tape than you can live because of the transitions on stage and so forth.
But don’t you miss the vibe of a live keynote?
I do miss it. I do miss it.
Interesting... We have to go back, Kate.
Lastly, Levy smartly asks how long Cook sees himself remaining in the role. His answer sounds almost weary. While he gives no hints of imminent plans, it's clearly on his mind. You have to start wondering when the next obvious point would be. Steve Jobs run as CEO (including his time as 'iCEO') was 14 years. Cook is just over 13 years now in that role, he'll surpass Jobs next year, which is sort of wild. He'll hit 15 years as CEO in 2026 and then hit 30 years at Apple in 2028.
As this interview makes clear, one thing Cook clearly cares about is Apple's legacy with regard to health. Perhaps if Apple can get a blood glucose monitor in the Apple Watch working and out the door, or some other major health breakthrough, that can be Cook's 'one last thing'...
One more thing: an area it doesn't sound like Apple is touching? Nuclear power. While Microsoft, Meta, Google, and Amazon all have plans, perhaps because Apple isn't doing all the AI model training, they're happy to sit this movement out, it seems.
At least for now.