Amaya Toman In today's installment of our throwback to the past, we look back at a time when Apple wasn't doing well at all - and when it looked like it just wasn't going to get any better. Shortly after Gil Amelio left the leadership of the company, Steve Jobs slowly began to prepare for his return to the head of Apple.
It could be interest you
On July 8, 1997, Steve Jobs began his journey back to head Apple. This happened after Gil Amelio left the management of the company, whose departure was decided after the huge financial losses that Apple suffered at the time. In addition to Gil Amelia, Ellen Hancock, who served as Apple's executive vice president of technology, also left the company at the time. After Amelia's departure, the day-to-day operations were temporarily taken over by then-CFO Fred Anderson, who was supposed to carry out these tasks until a new Apple director could be found. At the time, Jobs initially served as a strategic advisor, but it didn't take long, and his influence gradually expanded. For example, Jobs became one of the members of the board of directors, and also worked in the team of executive managers. Both Gil Amelio and Ellen Hancock have held their positions since 1996, having worked at National Semiconductor before joining Apple.
Gallery
The company's board was not satisfied with the direction Apple was taking during the tenure of Amelia and Hancock, and several months before their departure, the company's management said that it no longer expected the Cupertino company to return to the black. The management also admitted that 3,5 jobs need to be cut. Upon his return, Jobs initially did not speak openly about his interest in taking over its leadership again. But after Amelia's departure, he immediately started working to bring Apple back to prominence. During the second half of September 1997, Steve Jobs was already officially appointed director of Apple, albeit only temporarily. However, things took a rather rapid turn very soon, and Jobs settled into Apple's leadership "permanently".
no more information? weak article.