Skip to main content

Fortune somehow names Tim Cook #2 Businessperson of the Year behind Google’s Larry Page

COV.W.12.01.14.indd

Fortune has somehow named Google CEO Larry Page its 2014 Business person of the Year beating out rival Apple CEO Tim Cook who earns the number 2 spot (despite stock prices) on Fortune’s list of 50 executives.

Nearly four years into his tenure, Page has shown himself to be the world’s most daring CEO. His fabled “moonshots” now launch with regularity. Any one of them could change the lives of billions and help Google to remain at the top of the technology heap for generations. Improbably, Page has built his factory of the future while keeping Google’s multi-billion dollar business humming and positioning the company for a dominant role in the era of wearables and Internet-connected cars and homes. In a world where only the paranoid survive, Page has redefined paranoia into unbounded ambition.

Fortune published an article that goes more in-depth about why Page earned the top spot in this year’s list noting groundbreaking ‘moonshot’ projects as part of the company’s experimental Google X department as a big motivating factor. Included is a wide-ranging interview with Page where he discusses everything from recent acquisitions to what he learned from Steve Jobs: “I used to have this debate with Steve Jobs, and he would always say, ‘You guys are doing too much stuff’ …. He did a good job of doing one or two things really well…. We’d like to have a bigger impact on the world by doing more things.”

For Cook’s part, Fortune had this to say about the CEO earning the number two position:

Replacing a legend is an exercise filled with peril. Yet three years into his stewardship of Steve Jobs’ company, it is becoming increasingly clear that Tim Cook knows what he’s doing as CEO of Apple. The company’s stock is at an all-time high. Booming sales of larger iPhones and renewed enthusiasm for Mac computers are making up for slowing growth in iPads. The coming Apple Watch and the already released Apple Pay service show that Apple remains an innovator—even under a CEO known more for operational prowess than product savvy. Cook has replenished the management ranks at the top of Apple with relatively little rancor. The company remains secretive but has a whiff of openness. And with the purchase of the Beats headphone and streaming-music offering, Apple is reversing Jobs’ abhorrence for high-priced M&A deals. The low-profile Cook even stole the spotlight by matter-of-factly becoming the first openly gay CEO in the Fortune 500. The light still shines brightly in Apple’s executive suite, even without the legendary impresario who switched it on in the first place.

Page’s top spot over Cook comes despite Google’s stock price not performing nearly as well as Apple’s over the last year. While Fortune notes Google has grown 20% annually for three years running, it also points out that it lags Apple’s growth despite outpacing the NASDAQ. AAPL compared to GOOG over the past year below:

9to5-image 2014-11-13 at 11.25.18 AM

Fortune also highlighted the top 10 executives on the list as well as some other notable tech execs that made the top 50:

Fortune’s 2014 Top 10 People in Business:
1. Larry Page – Co-Founder and CEO, Google
2. Tim Cook – CEO, Apple
3. John Martin – Chairman and CEO, Gilead Sciences
4. Montgomery Moran and Steve Ells – Co-CEOs, Chipotle
5. Denise Ramos – CEO and President, ITT
6. Robert Iger – Chairman and CEO, Disney
7. Ken Hicks – CEO, Foot Locker
8. Mary Dillon – CEO, Ulta Beauty
9. George Scangos – CEO, Biogen
10. Jack Ma – Founder and Executive Chairman, Alibaba

-Mark Zuckerberg (#13), Jeff Bezos (#25), Warren Buffett (#34) and Howard Schultz (#47) all made the list for the fifth straight year.
-There are 7 women on this year’s list.

The full list of 50 executives on Fortune’s 2014 Business person of the year list is available to view here.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

You’re reading 9to5Mac — experts who break news about Apple and its surrounding ecosystem, day after day. Be sure to check out our homepage for all the latest news, and follow 9to5Mac on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn to stay in the loop. Don’t know where to start? Check out our exclusive stories, reviews, how-tos, and subscribe to our YouTube channel

Comments

  1. philboogie - 9 years ago

    Time behind Larry? What has the world come to?

  2. eswinson - 9 years ago

    So basically you if you make a bunch of noise, commit to borderline schizophrenic business plans and release a bunch of betaware without a real place in the market you get to best someone who runs a solid, laser-focused business that makes money hand over fist quarter after quarter.

    • herb02135go - 9 years ago

      … and copies its rival and calls everything “new.”

      Tim Cook ought to work for Xerox.

      • bobyey - 9 years ago

        This made me laugh. But seriously herb, do you just like coming on here and starting shit? Just a place to have fun bantering people?

      • 89p13 - 9 years ago

        Don’t Feed Herb-The-Troll. Let Him Starve For Attention!

      • jrox16 - 9 years ago

        God you’re such an entertaining idiot! LOL, I love it, people, feed herb please! The comedy is just so good. He knows nothing of what he speaks, nothing of the history of licensing between Apple and Xerox since those eggheads didn’t know what to do with what they had and INVITED Jobs to see it and give it a purpose which his vision did and created the first home PC of any degree of popularity, first GUI PC as well as first PC to use a mouse…. and then the copying of the rivals comment, LOL. Awesome!

        His worldview is so backwards, he really thinks Apple copies Samsung and Google because they added a notification pull down gesture, LOL, like that was a big deal. Never mind the historical facts that Google scrapped Android 1 after they saw the iPhone and copied iPhone OS rather than their original plans to compete against Blackberry. Their entire product is stolen from day one, as Steve Jobs always said after that snake Eric Schmidt saw it and then stabbed him in the back and took the ideas to Google. Ahhhh, but herb doesn’t care about history or facts, and that’s what makes him so darn entertaining and cute.

        Come on herb, play another one! LOL

      • eswinson - 9 years ago

        And GM copied ford because they decided to go with 4 wheels too…

      • herb02135go - 9 years ago

        Hey Bob, glad you enjoyed my comment about Cook working for Xerox.

        Consumers who blindly exhibit brand loyalty are hurting innovation.

      • Albert Davis - 9 years ago

        ” Their entire product is stolen from day one”

        Talk about someone who knows nothing. You are a clown jrox, just like you are on TheVerge.

        “copied iPhone OS”

        Again, wrong.

        “nothing of the history of licensing between Apple and Xerox ”

        They didn’t license otherwise Xerox wouldn’t have sued. But hey, let’s keep re-writing history. You Apple clowns are good at that.

        “Ahhhh, but herb doesn’t care about history or facts, and that’s what makes him so darn entertaining and cute. ”

        How utterly ironic.

      • Rocwurst (@Rocwurst) - 9 years ago

        @Albert Davis
        “They didn’t license otherwise Xerox wouldn’t have sued.”

        Actually, Apple paid Xerox $1 million in pre-IPO Apple stock for the privilege of getting access to Xerox PARC. That is one reason why Xerox’s case was dismissed.

        ““Ahhhh, but herb doesn’t care about history or facts, and that’s what makes him so darn entertaining and cute. ” How utterly ironic.”

        How doubly ironic.

      • Albert Davis - 9 years ago

        “Actually, Apple paid Xerox $1 million in pre-IPO Apple stock for the privilege of getting access to Xerox PARC. That is one reason why Xerox’s case was dismissed.”

        You can’t be serious? Paying for ACCESS and licensing, not even CLOSE to being the same. Xerox TRIED to license with Apple, Apple refused.

        “He said efforts to reach a settlement with Apple, including a licensing proposal, had been rebuffed. #1979 Visit Recalled But Xerox, based in Stamford, Conn., has begun entering licensing agreements with other companies, including Sun Microsystems Inc. and Metaphor Computer Systems Inc. And it announced in May that it intended to fully protect its licensing rights.”

        This is really that simple. Apple never licensed anything. Period.

      • Rocwurst (@Rocwurst) - 9 years ago

        @Albert Davis
        Considering Xerox was letting plenty of other companies through PARC without charging them, what exactly do you think the $1 million (in 1979 dollars) in pre-IPO Apple shares were for if not payment to allow Apple to use PARC’s ideas as inspiration for their quite different realisation of the WIMP interface?

        Xerox didn’t sue till a decade later. In contrast, neither Microsoft nor Google nor Samsung paid Apple anything when they copied not just the ideas, but the complete look and feel as well.

        Have you not seen how radically different the Mac OS was from PARC’s original work. This was no cookie-cutter copying (unlike Windows 95 or Samsung Galaxy S or Samsung artwork and packaging).

    • jrox16 - 9 years ago

      People are excited by flash and flair.
      So a company that actually puts out like 10% of the things it works on and the rest is always a beta or just vapor ware that never materializes, but gets printed online in tech blogs, makes Google look so amazing. But the reality is that its a search company that collects user data and sells targeted ads and makes great web services, (cause the search ads are 90% of where the money comes from so THAT is what they do) and everything else is just hobby for fun or attention. They have lots of money they need to spend on something. Doesn’t matter if that something fails or not, people have short memories. After project Lego Phone flops, everyone will move on and get distracted by the next cool thing Google does. No one remembers the Nexus Q anymore right? A company that only does data collection and internet advertising wouldn’t get much attention and have a rising stock price for long. So they need to constantly play with various ideas and be very vocal about it, and it doesn’t matter if it’s ever going to be real or not. It’s a great mind fuck really and it’s brilliant.

      That is the “flash and flair” and that impresses people a lot. We have yet to see a single improvement to humanity or a real tangible product to come out of all these side projects, besides just a lot of talk and hype. When I see that, I’ll be impressed too. But otherwise, it’s just fun and games.

      • Albert Davis - 9 years ago

        Don’t be such a butthurt fanboy jrox, maybe next time Tim will be 1.

    • William Christian - 9 years ago

      Yes, because revolutionary products don’t come from incremental upgrades or a push button watch dial.

      • spanky2112 - 9 years ago

        No they come with selling your info.

    • giskardian - 9 years ago

      Android owns the smartphone market. Deal with it.

      (I say this as someone with a 6+.)

      • spanky2112 - 9 years ago

        Ownership is not the key, positive momentum is. Just ask Microsoft and Blackberry.

      • beta382 - 9 years ago

        @spanky2112 I’d say that Android has more momentum than the iPhone right now. Google has taken progressively larger leaps forward with Android as an operating system (especially with L, the UI direction and backend improvements, especially with the move to ART from Dalvik, are massive), while iOS has been incremental and constant with regard to progress. Both are making progress and improving, but Android is without a doubt improving faster. While I believe that Android still is behind iOS in quality, I think that Android will surpass iOS in the near future unless a fire gets lit underneath the iOS team. The overall lack of attention to details in iOS 8 is a testament to this; there are a bundle of minor UI issues, heaps upon heaps of rotation-related weirdnesses, and sub-optimal extension APIs, I think “rushed” would be an apt description (a partial solution could be Apple separating themselves from a synchronized hardware-software release cycle).

        However, it’s a tricky comparison to make. Google as an entity doesn’t really have much of a share in the smartphone market, since they own the operating system, but not necessarily the devices. They have the Nexus; it’s other companies that build with Android (i.e. Samsung) who dominate the market.

      • Android owns the smartphone market? I beg to differ. Just because they have the world wide market share means nothing as Apple laughs all the way to the bank being that they only compete in the high end spectrum of the market. They have no intentions of making cheap phones with no real revenue. I’m sure Apple is more than happy to let Android OEMs run this part of the smartphone market. Android should be beating the pants off of iOS being that it is being ran on literally hundreds if not thousands of different phones in all parts of the world, but they aren’t. Apple is still close even when the only phones they sell are a phone (or two as with the plus and C from last year)a year while Android OEMs like Samsung who released probably around 50 phones. The point is world wide market share means nothing when Apple is making far more money per phone sold than any Android OEM and it isn’t even close. Thats sad considering a free Android software can’t beat a locked down iOS that runs on 1-2 different phones released a year. I’m sure Apple is up at all hours of the night trying to figure this problem out /s.

      • Albert Davis - 9 years ago

        “Thats sad considering a free Android software can’t beat a locked down iOS, IMO, that runs on 1-2 different phones released a year. I’m sure Apple is up at all hours of the night trying to figure this problem out /s.”

        FTFY

      • How is that in my opinion? I remember reading last year that Android has a world wide market share of 80+% (this might have changed and I would love to see that after the dust settles of the iPhone 6 and 6 Plus) while Apple has near 12.5% yet Apple has over 55% of all the money made in the smartphone market. This was based off a quick Google search and an article written last year this time. Like I said, I don’t think Apple is losing any sleep right now over market share and why would they be? Market share of a free OS means nothing especially when going up against iOS that only runs on Apple devices. There is no one (or even group of phones made by Samsung or others) that competes head to head with the iPhone or iPad. Why do you think Samsung is so content with not releasing numbers and instead hangs its hat on the world wide market share numbers? Why do you think Samsung is down quarter over quarter, but is quick to say this isn’t due to a decline in their Galaxy S variants? I’ll tell you why. Most of the numbers they throw around are cheap off contract phones that barely run a version of Android and are usually still running Gingerbread.They know they don’t compete with Apple in the high end smartphone market and that is where all the money is. I would hardly say thats an opinion.

      • Albert Davis - 9 years ago

        How is it NOT an opinion? It’s your OPINION that it BEATS iOS. It’s subjective at best. And I think it’s absolutely disgusting that Apple has as little market share as they do yet, they make the most money. If that doesn’t say “being ripped off”, I don’t know what does. But, that’s MY opinion. Samsung is losing because it’s a saturated market.

        “Most of the numbers they throw around are cheap off contract phones that barely run a version of Android and are usually still running Gingerbread.”

        You have no clue what the numbers are.

        Android 4.4 KitKat: 24.5 percent, up from 20.9 percent last month

        Android 4.1-4.3 Jelly Bean: 53.9 percent, down from 54.2 percent

        Android 4.0 Ice Cream Sandwich: 9.6 percent, down from 10.6 percent

        Android 2.3 Gingerbread: 11.4 percent, down from 13.6 percent

        Android 2.2 Froyo: 0.7 percent, held steady from last month

        These are the version shares…

        You are saying The S4/S5/Note don’t compete? Huh?

        As

      • KitKat has a whole 20% wow, Google must be doing something right. It’s been out for well over a year. Still, that leaves at least 30% of all Android “so called smartphones” running an OS that was released in the end of 2011 at best and some released back in 2008. That is hardly making strides in the market and leaves most phones in the market (based on your numbers 80+%) on an OS that was released 1.5 years ago and not even seeing the slightest release. Most won’t ever see an update. Android is the wild west. Based on your own numbers where does Samsungs phones lie? Even if they are all running KitKat (which you and I know aren’t) that doesn’t leave them much room to be competing especially when iOS has almost 50% of the market here in the states and over 30% world wide when also adding in phones you and Ive never heard of.

        I don’t get your argument that the market is disgusting because Apple knows how to make money. They focus on one or two phones a year while making them the best they can. They then update that phone for the next 3-4 years while focusing on the market. What is disgusting about the market is the way Google does things. Lets look at their core business which is marketing (not Android). They make no money on Android outside of their 30% cut from the Play Store. So where do they make their money. Ill tell you where. They take all Android users data and sell it to their REAL customers which are their marketing partners. That is what Google has been since day one. How is that not where the real problems lie and how can you defend a company that makes you a second class customer by association and only to get your data and selling it to the highest bidder?

      • sircheese69 - 9 years ago

        Cute how you glossed over the 54 percent for JB. Second, Google doesn’t actually sell your data, but that seems to be a popular misconception amongst the clueless Apple users.

      • What do you call selling your browsing habits to their marketing partners? I call that selling your data. Why did Google buy Android? Was it to be nice and give the world a free OS? No, it was to ensure that Google remains used on this new way to access the internet so they can continue to sell ads and collect data. If this is a misconception to us Apple users (which by the way I barely call myself as I buy a Nexus device every year along with my iPhone as Android is a pretty exciting platform) then what am I missing here?

        Cute how I missed the fact that half of the phones run JB that came out 2-4 years ago (based on the JB version since Google had JB for years). I hate to break it to you, but that is hardly something to brag about my friend.

    • South Jersey Droid - 9 years ago

      So Google had Maps, and now Apple does… COPY
      Android had the notification bar, and now iOS does… COPY
      Android phones were bigger than 3.5 and 4 inches, now so are iPhones… COPY
      iPad was said to never be smaller (SJ), Nexus 7 came out, Apple had an iPad Mini… COPY
      Widgets… Almost COPY
      NFC… COPY
      Apps integrated into the OS… COPY

      Thank God for Larry Page, or else Apple wouldn’t know where to go next. I am sure I can come up with more examples if needed.

  3. Arnold Ziffel - 9 years ago

    I doubt the people at Gurgle buy this.

  4. 1sugomac - 9 years ago

    How is Elon Musk not on that list?
    Larry Page…Most ambitious
    Tim Cook…Most Successful

  5. This is really built off the strength of the new book that he just put out. It’s covering “why” Google does what it does. Has been making the talk show and business talk show rounds promoting this book (and Google)… so it’s really because “He’s in the news RIGHT NOW”… Before it was Tim in the news and he was the media darling. I wouldn’t put to much into this.

    BUT… I will say this… when Page was on Serious XM Business radio the other day he spoke on all the beta software and buying so many companies. On the companies: he said they average about 15 companies per month that they purchase (I thought this was a large number) and that many of them are doing the same things. So they wait and see which group/companies actually produces and come through on their product. Whichever is the rock star then they push it. The others? Some they let keep trying while others they fold the engineers into Google. So, even if the product of company “B” doesn’t get used because the similar company “A” succeeds before them, they still get the engineers as part of their teams and they move them into other areas of Google. So, that also answer the “beta” software (and that there are soooo many different beta programs)… it comes from all the companies they purchase and from ideas they have internally.

    The interview was eye opening and gave a very different perspective on Google and the “why’s” of what they are doing. I’m still an Apple guy, but I appreciate some of what they are doing.

    • paulywalnuts23 - 9 years ago

      I can’t not respect someone that runs a business with the business model like google regardless of how successful the business is. Making money off of people’s privacy/data isn’t anyone I want to look up too. Might as well be the Matrix where we are being used for our energy…

    • Google buys innovation while Apple chooses to innovate. Sure, Apple buys companies like Beats as well, but they buy with an intention to move into something else while Google is content with the throwing a bunch of products against a wall and seeing what sticks. Both are great companies that lead technology as a whole and do it in very different ways. I choose to throw my money at Apple as I want a company that focuses on hardware and selling ideas not a company like Google thats sole reason for innovating is to gather up my information and sell it to marketers. That really is what the Android product is. They have no intention of making great hardware they simply want data and it just so happens that the mobile market is the place to get it. I don’t see why people take up for a company like this. Apple has always been a company about making great tech and making things that are already in the market better like they did with the personal computer, iPod, and iPhone. They also come to market with great new ways of using technology like the iPad. Apple has never been a company of being first just a company of making things better and it shows as every tech company waits on Apple to innovate and then responds to that innovation. This is evident in every facet of the mobile market. Why do you think Samsung releases its Galaxy S almost 6 months to the day after the iPhone hits? Why do they then release the Note within two weeks of the iPhone launch? Everything Apple does impacts the market. It’s evident who the real innovator is right now. I wish that would change, but it doesn’t seem like that will ever happen.

      • Albert Davis - 9 years ago

        Man, packaging other peoples parts, so innovative! /s

      • Packaging other people’s parts? I would love to hear your reasoning behind this post although I’m sure I’ve heard it hundreds of times on the internet. “Apple uses Samsung chips and displays!” You do know that Apple designs the displays and chips and simply has Samsung and others mass produce them, right? Why do you think Apple’s A Series chips wipe the floor with the competition at half the speed and cores (not to mention on average 1/3 the RAM)? If this was Samsungs intellectual property and it ran this well and was this power efficient wouldn’t they be using it themselves? You do know Samsung is a conglomorate of a bunch of self ran companies that carry the brand, right? It sure doesn’t sound like you know very well what you came to an Apple site to troll. You might want to look into it a little more.

  6. Marc-Olivier Dufour - 9 years ago

    It’s because he’s gay! Joke :)

  7. thecodee - 9 years ago

    Jeff Bezos is on the list, and John Legere isn’t? Hmmm.

  8. George Pollen - 9 years ago

    Most ambitious CEO for good reason: the search patents are expiring and Google has no replacement.

  9. Lol anything that doesn’t confirm your own bias on this site is wrong. I’m convinced that the writers on this site have you all duped into starting pointless, idiotic conversations in the comments section. Have fun!

    • George Pollen - 9 years ago

      And over on 9to5google.com, you can hear the crickets chirp. It must be lonely for you.

      • mrobertson21 - 9 years ago

        Oh you mean that site that I visit with my both of my MacBooks, my Mac mini, my PowerMac G5, my iPhone 6 and my iPad mini? Yeah, you’re right.

        It’s actually possible to be a fan of a product and not be stupid. Try it sometime.

      • George Pollen - 9 years ago

        You alone have posted infinitely more times on a site you disrespect (9to5mac.com) than anyone has ever posted on 9to5google.com
        *chirp* *chirp*

  10. Sumocat (@SumocatS) - 9 years ago

    So basically Larry Page is getting credit for Sergey Brin’s work on Google X. It’s good to be the boss.

  11. giskardian - 9 years ago

    “Somehow”? Page BUILT Google. He is a visionary. Cook is the guy who makes the trains run on time – still important, but not the guy to change the world. All he did was step into the place of visionary CEO who died too young. The best that can be said for Cook’s rule so far is that he hasn’t fucked everything up…yet.

  12. mrbozak - 9 years ago

    Making 10 different sizes of the iPod Touch hardly qualifies you as innovative…

  13. William Reid - 9 years ago

    It is becouse Google is alot more deversified than Apple. Google is expanding into alot of diffrent areas, from search, to books, Robotics, software, and other areas. Apple Right now is only iMac, Macbook, iPhone, iPad, IOS, & OSX, and if there is a consumer shift in taste all of Apple’s bussness would be affected at the same time.

  14. “Any one of them could change the lives of billions and help Google to remain at the top of the technology heap for generations. ”

    Wake us when *when* it occurs.

  15. smigit - 9 years ago

    I don’t think it’s a bad choice. Googles been doing some pretty interesting things outside of the standard web and android fields these past 24 months while continuing to remain competitive in their existing markets.

    In contrast Apple had been pretty quiet up until the iPhone 6 and Apple Watch were announced this year at which point we got a bit of an avalanche of product including the new iPhones, iMacs, Apple Pay and we have Home Kit to look forward to as well.

    I think it’s a good thing this isn’t list isn’t just based on stock prices.

    • herb02135go - 9 years ago

      Good analysis but how has Apple really done anything noteworthy?
      Bigger screen size and taking features from Android – that’s about it.
      Sure. Good sizzle but leftover steak.

      • smigit - 9 years ago

        Personally, I think Apples more note worth announcements in the past 12 – 18 months have been Apple Pay, HomeKit and Car Play. The first two in particular could end up being really important not so much because Apple is the first or only company doing NFC payments or home automation, but because it has a huge mass of consumers behind it and their closed ecosystem compared to other companies allows an opportunity for things to be more streamlined for consumers.

        Car Plays something that interests me too, and while it may be off to a slow start I think that’s probably to be expected for technology that integrates into vehicles that have relatively long life spans as far as technology goes. I also expect that Car Play could shine if integrated with HomeKit to provide some useful automation scenarios.

        The iPhones and recent iMac are sort of icing on the cake and we’re yet to see what impact the Apple Watch announcement will have, but I think it will be a success even if I have a gut feeling this will be another iPad like product where the second generation device far eclipses the first.

        Google’s more interesting things have been in autonomous vehicles, Google Glass and the like. Much of it will likely sizzle but that’s fairly consistent with how Google operates. If 10% of their ideas stick you can still end up with something pretty cool for consumers. That and their purchase of Nest puts them up there in home automation as well, and I think that could be one of the next break through markets.

      • herb02135go - 9 years ago

        Smigit, thanks for prefacing your comments with the note that this is your opinion.

        Away from this site, few people care about the things you mentioned.
        Health integration and home automation are nothing new.
        Car Play? Isn’t that a Disney movie?

        NFC payments have been around for years and very popular already around the world.

      • smigit - 9 years ago

        NFC has been available but it hasn’t taken off in terms of payments made through a mobile phone as of yet (in mass volume). Touch less payments themselves are prolific here in Australia where almost all stores support them, and apparently in Europe and elsewhere, but in terms of people using Google Wallet and the like reception appears to have been luke-warm so far. Really, most consumers are making those payments through a credit card and likely will be for some time. Apple Pay really isn’t brand new as I noted, but Apples name brings visibility to the technology and momentum and that’s possibly more exciting than the technology itself. By all reports Google Wallet and other providers have seen a sudden up spike in usage coinciding with the release of Apple Pay.

        That’s not to say no one was using their mobile phone to make payments, but I think one would be hard pressed to argue that Apple hasn’t brought some media attention to the technology. If you’re in the US (which I’m not), it also seems it is encouraging more retailers to jump on board too so everyone benefits be you Apple, Google or whoever.

        Home automation is a relatively immature market so I wouldn’t expect it to have a huge following just yet. Realistically all Apple has so far is a development kit and some chips to give to suppliers. Equally Google, Samsung and other players are by and large either just getting developer tools out there or have a product line-up that can be counted on one hand. It’s a field that I strongly suspect will ignite soon and will begin to get the mass markets attention, but naturally that will happen when products begin to ship and realistically besides a few early market leaders, we still have 6 to 24 months to wait until we start to see too many of these devices hit the market.

        There’s also a cost hurdle that needs to be crossed, since very few people are going to pay in the realm of $200 for three light bulbs.

        Even when home automation gains momentum, which I fully expect it to, it could be somewhat of a slow burner since people don’t replace their houses locks, light bulbs, blinds and the like all that often. Over the course of a decade though I suspect we’ll be seeing a big shift.

  16.  (@suttonmontreal) - 9 years ago

    Fortune’s CEO must be an Android user

  17. dksmidtx - 9 years ago

    Do we have to cry about everything? So what if they like Page better than Cook? I’m glad I’m invested in Apple, not Google, and I assume you are as well. Just relax and laugh your way to the bank…

  18. pluto1966 - 9 years ago

    And who cares?

  19. Fred Hills - 9 years ago

    What did Cook do to be on 2nd position? He should be on 20th or 200th.

    Congrats to Page.

Author

Avatar for Jordan Kahn Jordan Kahn

Jordan writes about all things Apple as Senior Editor of 9to5Mac, & contributes to 9to5Google, 9to5Toys, & Electrek.co. He also co-authors 9to5Mac’s Logic Pros series.