A lot of what he said was straight from Tim Cook Public Comments Greatest Hits Vol. 1 — the interview shows an executive that is strictly on message. But he actually said some new stuff we haven’t necessarily heard yet, including his plan to bring some Apple manufacturing back to the U.S. next year. Here are some of the other interesting points he made, pulled from the Q&A:

On why he got rid of Scott Forstall and John Browett: He said Apple was already good at collaboration, but needed “to be an A-plus at collaboration. And so the changes that we made get us to a whole new level of collaboration.”

On that note, he values humility and detests internal office politics: “We admit when we’re wrong and have the courage to change. And there can’t be politics. I despise politics. There is no room for it in a company. My life is going to be way too short to deal with that.” And he will not put up with turf-grabbing: “There is nothing I won’t do to guard that. Let me just put it like that.”

Jony Ive

Why Jony Ive gets to be responsible for the look of iOS devices and iOS now: “I don’t think there’s anybody in the world that has a better taste than he does. So I think he’s very special. He’s an original.”

He doesn’t really care that you keep saying he’s not a product guy: “I’ve never felt that I had to know it all, do it all, any of those things. I think you could have an S on your chest and a cape on your back and not be able to do all those things. I know of no one that can do all that. Maybe there are, but I’m not. So I rely on a lot of people for a lot of different things.”

Why he’s made such an effort to be more open about things: “We decided being more transparent about some things is great—not that we were not transparent at all before, but we’ve stepped it up in places where we think we can make a bigger difference, where we want people to copy us. So there are things that are different, but the most important thing by far is, the fiber of the place is the same.”

He was actually surprised by the public attention that comes with being the CEO of Apple: “This has been different. So I have had to adjust to that. I’m a private person, so that’s been a bit of a surprise for me, not something I would have predicted. Maybe I should have.”

He sort of forgets about Apple TV sometimes: When describing the breadth of Apple product line, he says, ”I mean, if you really look at it, we have four iPods. We have two main iPhones. We have two iPads, and we have a few Macs. That’s it.”

He might be the only person on the planet who likes email: “I get e-mails all day long, hundreds, thousands per day from customers who are talking like you and I are talking, almost like I’ve gone over to their home and I am having dinner with them. They care so deeply about Apple they want to suggest this or that or say, ‘Hey, I didn’t like this,’ or, ‘I really love this…’” “I love it. I don’t know if there’s another company on earth this happens with. It’s just not people from the U.S. These are people from all over the world. I look at it, and I go, ‘This is a privilege.’”

There’s much, much  more. You can read the rest of the interview here.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Siri: Say hello to the coming “invisible interface”
• How consumer media will change in 2013
• Development strategies for the app-developer community

Since the early days of Apple, their approachable design made digital software and interfaces accessible and usable, to the extent that even a child could use them. But their innovation since the launch of the first iPad has either been incremental (for example iOS or the iPad Mini) or flawed (for example Siri and Apple Maps). Their software design has also remained stale with many contending that a refresh is overdue. Arguably, Apple is now playing defense, giving competitors like Microsoft and Google space to innovate and set trends in interface design across devices and platforms.

Steve Jobs was—notoriously, to many members of the design community—a fan of skeuomorphism, a style that relies on real-world metaphors and textures in digital interfaces. Fake leather, wood, paper and glass became commonplace in Apple applications, in addition to real-world metaphors like bookshelves, paper shredders, and even casinos. While skeuomorphism might have been beneficial in the early days of computing in helping less-tech-savvy types navigate a user interface, it now feels out of place in a world where most people are using a host of digital interfaces throughout the day, and where younger people have never even experienced physical rolodexes, paper shredders or giant desk calendars. From a design perspective, when used excessively skeuomorphism is at best out-dated, at worst confusing and tasteless. More importantly though it feels at extreme odds with Apple’s hardware, which is designed with sophistication and constraint. So where might Apple’s designs go?

Image courtesy of Apple

Looking at competitors like Microsoft, its new Windows UI style, across operating systems, is at the direct opposite end of the spectrum from skeuomorphism. It’s a modernist Swiss style, where all excessive embellishments are removed. The life in the experience comes from content and transitions, not from visual UI ornaments.

The wildly successful Android OS lands somewhere in the middle of the spectrum, between skeuomorphism and the new minimalist Windows style. While visually Android is not leading the way (and here I include all of the Android licensees), there are now several interaction patterns and solutions that are better designed and more advanced than what iOS offers.

Microsoft has claimed the minimalist corner, and a radical Apple departure from their current UI style could be confusing to existing users, and would also admit defeat (which is not a very Apple-like trait as well). Apple has long had a human-centered design focus, and has gone further than most to make technology accessible to everyone. Apple’s challenge then is formidable: To retain the focus on simplicity, accessibility and ease-of-use, while at the same time refreshing their UI style and introducing design consistency across their increasingly wide range of software and services. It’s a tall order, and will need investment, focus and talent.

The most transformative devices today are ingenious pieces of software wrapped in desirable hardware. The Nike+ FuelBand or the self-learning Nest thermostat are examples of new software products that are wrapped in well-designed hardware. Apple has long been the master at this, but competitors are encroaching on their territory. Microsoft has gone against its hardware suppliers in creating its own showpiece for Surface—a move it had to make to ensure that the hardware maximized the potential of the software. But creating this combo is not easy, and Apple will have to work hard to stay on top. Various pieces of Apple software on a range of different devices connect to incredibly advanced services and algorithms in the cloud. Orchestrating this, and presenting the services to people in a way that’s easy and delightful to use, is very challenging. Not many companies do it well and consistently (which is why the relative failure of the complex Siri and Apple Maps services weren’t a big surprise for some).

With iOS, Apple showed the world how the graphical touch paradigm should work. Modern touch interfaces are now characterized by responsive, fluid and direct interaction, while tapping, swiping and pinching have become dominant gestures. Apple led the way in making touch interaction mainstream. Looking ahead, interactions will move beyond the screen into thin air, and both input and output will increasingly use voice. Apple now has an opportunity to once again lead the way and design the dominant interactions for what comes next in computing.

The wearables category will need great design to go mainstream, and Apple’s entry in the race could be inspiring. A radically redesigned iOS would be very interesting, and a confident Apple entry into “control point” services like search or commerce would be fascinating. If Cook and Ive are able to succeed with a bold investment in a service play, they will not only create immense value for Apple, but also demonstrate that they can pull off their own innovations, rather than just incremental changes to what Steve Jobs envisioned.

Om Malik’s recent piece here about the change-up at Apple highlighted an increasingly schedule-driven release culture under Tim Cook’s leadership. This might indeed become a challenge for software innovation. If the question “when do we ship” ever becomes more important than “what do we ship,” true innovation, risk-taking, and design excellence become hard.

A radical refresh of iOS, a category-defining entry into wearables, or a confident push into services like search or commerce could spell the real making of Tim Cook. Right now the jury is still out. For us designers, Jony Ive now has the chance to upgrade his status from mere legendary design Lord to design demigod. I hope he takes it.

Olof Schybergson is CEO and Co-Founder at the service design consultancy, Fjord. (Twitter: @fjord.)

Apple image courtesy of Shutterstock.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• The importance of putting the U and I in visualization
• CES 2012: a recap and analysis
• Connected world: the consumer technology revolution

And since we are talking about Scott Forstall, senior vice president of iOS and someone who had worked with late Steve Jobs since NeXT, the news is getting dissected in countless ways.

A lot has already been reported – the New York Times has a fairly good summary and behind-the-scenes color. John Gruber’s analysis of the situation can be summed up in two words: Ive Up. And Gdgt’s take is pretty spot on. Now here is what my sources deep within Apple are telling me.

• There has been a lot of talk about Scott Forstall being asked to sign an apology letter for the Apple Maps debacle. He refused. None of my sources were able to confirm this bit of news, though The New York Times reported that is indeed the case.
• Forstall’s firing was met with a sense of quiet jubilation, especially among people who worked in the engineering groups. Or as one of my sources quipped: there are a lot of people going for celebratory drinks, even if there is a little bit of doubt about their roles in the future.
• While the now-rescinded resignation of Bob Mansfield was masterfully planned, my sources say that Forstall’s exit was fairly last minute and not something he initiated. Many within the iOS and OS X teams only heard about it minutes after the news went out. Engineers were caught off guard, a source told me.
• Many feel that Craig Federighi, who is taking over Forstall’s job in addition to overseeing the Mac OS X software business, is someone who needs to prove himself. He is not as decisive and divisive as Forstall.
• There is a sense of excitement around Jony Ive taking over as head of the newly created human interface group. The reason for the excitement: hope for a new design direction for many software products. Most think Eddy Cue taking over Siri and Maps is a smart and natural thing to do.
• According to my sources, there have been fissures in the management team for a while. Steve Jobs and Forstall were close, but none of the executives really cared for the deposed iOS chief. He really built a reputation by executing on Steve’s vision and acting as Steve’s mouthpiece.
• Forstall had less-than-pleasant relationships with many senior executives, including Cue and Mansfield. My sources confirm what the Times reported earlier – Ive and Forstall had a rocky relationship .

Schedule-driven follies

In conversations, I learned about something that is troubling from a long-term point of view. Unlike in the Jobs era, when the company would ship features when they were ready for primetime, a culture of schedule-driven releases has become commonplace.

The time-based schedule is one of the reasons why Siri and Maps arrived as half-baked products and were met with derision. Many engineers inside Apple could foresee problems with Maps. Why? Because Maps were driven by a time schedule.

Maps and Siri are complex products whose dependencies (for the lack of a better word) go deep into different parts of the phone and even the network. The schedule-driven release culture makes folks less daring — why take arrows in your back for failing to deliver a radical new feature on a pre-dictated time? If this cultural warp continues, Apple might have a bigger headache on its hands. Ive’s appointment as the Human Interface honcho means that more risk-taking needs to come into the products. Ironically, the news that should garner more attention has flown under the radar.

Bob Mansfield will lead a new group, Technologies, which combines all of Apple’s wireless teams across the company in one organization, fostering innovation in this area at an even higher level. This organization will also include the semiconductor teams, who have ambitious plans for the future.

In other words, Apple understands that in our cloud-centric connected future, the company needs to not only care about the “human interface” and the “industrial design” but that all of those pieces have to work seamlessly with the guts and nerves of digital devices — chips and the networking technologies. With Cue, Ive and Mansfield, Cook has ensured that Apple is putting its best foot forward. Forstall is no longer part of this future.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Facebook’s IPO filing: ideas and implications
• 12 tech leaders’ resolutions for 2012
• Connected consumer first-quarter 2013: Analysis and outlook

Apple fired two from its leadership team: SVP of iOS Software Scott Forstall, and SVP of Retail Operations John Browett. Sure, the company didn’t outright say it had dismissed the two men, but in the carefully crafted world of public relations, the message was clear. The move was pitched as part of a large-scale reorganization of the top leadership team’s responsibilities, and emphasized “improving collaboration” between groups at Apple, which are otherwise clearly doing a lot of things right since Cook took the helm.

Cook had made some tweaks to the team since he became permanent CEO in August of 2011 — promoting Eddy Cue from VP to SVP of Internet Software and Services right away, and in January he filled the retail operations position with Browett. But nothing like this. The decision to remove company veteran Forstall — as well as his own new hire Browett — is the boldest and most significant move Cook has made in his 14 months as chief executive.

Scott Forstall demonstrates a feature of Apple Maps. The problems with the product likely led to his ouster at Apple.

Browett clearly wasn’t working out, something predicted by many company observers, so his departure isn’t much a surprise. But Forstall’s removal would have been unthinkable just a year ago — after all, he was mentored by Jobs himself going back to their days together at NeXT in the 1990s and mentioned as a possible future CEO of Apple. Cook’s decision to let him go after a major misstep involving Maps shows that Cook is unafraid to remake Apple into a company that works for him, not just for Steve Jobs.

The Maps mess

Forstall was hired to work on Mac OS X starting in 1997. But he will be remembered for leading the development of iOS, which started out as a top-secret project within Apple to power the first iPhone. Today, the software Forstall created is on 400 million devices. And that still wasn’t enough to save his job.

Fault for the Maps debacle can be laid squarely at Forstall’s feet. As head of software for the iPhone it was his responsibility, and the poor state of the software at launch – with incomplete and sometimes wrong data, without integrated transit directions, and worst of all, without a “beta” label — was shocking to many customers. The uproar over the software’s severe shortcomings threatened to overshadow the iPhone 5 launch, although the device appears to be selling well. Such events are usually publicity boons for Apple, but instead of simply reveling in yet another successful device launch, just a week later Cook was forced to publicly apologize for Maps.

Not only was Cook unafraid of getting rid of a Jobs’ protégé, he also doesn’t appear to mind admitting he made a huge mistake. Browett’s tenure leading Apple’s retail empire lasted less than nine months. Cook was the one who signed off on Browett’s hire, and he did so despite the obvious cultural mismatch identifiable by anyone who’d shopped at a Dixon’s in the U.K. before: the discount electronics retailer with middling customer service seemed the polar opposite of Apple Stores. The failure of Browett is clearly Cook’s fault. But to his credit, he didn’t waste too much time; he didn’t even wait to hire a replacement before letting him go.

The new-look Cook era

There’s a domino effect in the decision to let Forstall go, and years from now, the result will likely characterize how we think of Cook’s tenure at Apple.

The move should have a noticeable impact on Apple products and overall direction. Cook put iOS development into the hands of the same guy who’s in charge of Mac software, Craig Federighi. Apple has always treated to the two operating systems as distinct, but complementary. However, OS X has been taking on more and more features initially developed for iOS, and this new organizational direction foretells possibly even deeper integration between the two divisions and their software for future devices.

SVP Eddy Cue will take over Siri and the problematic Maps app in CEO Tim Cook’s major company shakeup.

Another possible impact of the change: the overall look and feel of Apple products. Forstall had reportedly clashed with Jony Ive over the design philosophy that underlies iOS and Apple’s own apps. The philosophy, called skeumorphism, was favored by Jobs, and continued to be championed by Forstall. Some designers regard Apple’s software design for applications such as GameCenter and Passbook as cheesy and outdated. By removing Forstall, it appears Ive will have full control over the look and feel of hardware and software.

Cook also chose to put Maps and Siri into the hands of Cue. While it means Cook trusts Cue with these products that are particular weak spots for Apple, don’t expect an instant fix. Online services in general, which Cue oversees, are Apple’s big weakness — problematic Maps and Siri are joining iCloud, whose record for reliability is far from spotless.

Some Apple watchers thought Cook wouldn’t be up to the task of leading the kind of company that Jobs built; the thinking was that he’d look at his role as simply a caretaker, and that he lacked the capacity to be bold or visionary like his predecessor.

But the move today contradicts that thinking, and the result is a pretty different organization, one looks less like Jobs’ Apple and more like Cook’s.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• A look back at mobile in the third quarter
• Analyzing the wearable computing market
• Takeaways from connected consumer’s second quarter

Apple’s iPad sales will still be growing, but it’s clear there’s an opportunity in small slates. And iHS iSuppli points this out, suggesting that “the 7.x-inch category will be helped by the launch of lower-priced tablets in that size segment, along with what is widely believed will be a product offering from Apple later this year for a smaller iPad.”  I suspect that if Apple does launch a smaller iPad, the 7-inch segment will be even higher than the forecast because it’s clear that there’s a market for small slates.

I noted why this tablet size — and the portability it brings — was appealing more than 18 months ago after spending several weeks using a 7-inch Galaxy Tab as well as a 9.7-inch iPad:

“I’m willing to give up a smidge of usability or a wider array of software to gain the ability to easily use the device everywhere I go. It’s this very concept that makes the smartphone so enabling, regardless of make, model or platform: the ability to be connected everywhere is what’s driving the mobile revolution forward. In fact, I’m actually using my Android smartphone less as well. The Tab does all of the same things as my Nexus One, but on a larger, higher-resolution screen, making for a better overall experience.”

Indeed, even some at Apple joined the bandwagon back then, only we didn’t know that until last month. During the Apple v. Samsung trial, Apple’s Scott Forstall read aloud an email sent to him from Eddy Cue in January 2011. Cue read the the GigaOm article I wrote explaining the benefits of smaller tablets, agreed with many of the points made, and passed it along to Forstall as well as Apple CEO Tim Cook. Cue said, “I believe there will be a 7-inch market and we should do one,” which has prompted hope for a 7 or 7.85-inch iPad tablet.

Portability and functionality are only part of the small slate success factor, however. Lower prices are surely prompting some to see if a 7-inch tablet can fit their needs. One only has to spend $199 — 40 percent of the lowest new iPad cost — to try a tablet. Low pricing by itself isn’t a driver though; after all, there have been cheap Android tablets for the better part of three years since the Archos 5 launched. Yet, small slates have only recently begun to make a dent in the tablet market that Apple’s iPad has dominated.

That’s because for $199, you now get a solid experience. Look to the Nook Tablet, Amazon Kindle Fire or Google’s Nexus 7 tablet as examples. They may not be quite as polished as the iPad to some, but they’re not junk either. If you can get 80 percent of the iPad’s satisfaction in a smaller Android tablet that costs 40 percent less, is it a good buy? Clearly, the answer for a third of the current tablet market is yes.

I don’t think that small slate sales are hurting Apple’s 9.7 iPad very much, if at all, however. Due to the price and size, I’m not sold that the majority of potential customers actually compare the two directly. There can be two successful sub-markets here, both large slates and small slates. I own both and often turn to my new iPad for content consumption on the larger screen when I’m around the house. On the go, however, the iPad stays at home and my Nexus 7 pulls the load. Maybe that will change if Apple does offer that mythical small slate.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Analyzing the wearable computing market
• Takeaways from mobile’s second quarter
• Mobile Q2: Smartphone growth surges; iPad’s rule continues

Eddy Cue, Apple SVP of internet software and services

On the stand Forstall was asked to read an email sent to him, as well as CEO Tim Cook and others, by fellow Apple executive Eddy Cue in January 2011. AllThingsD, reporting from inside the San Jose, Calif. courtroom, recorded Forstall’s reading of the email:

“I believe there will be a 7-inch market and we should do one,” Cue wrote in the e-mail, which forwarded an article written by a reporter that switched from the iPad to a 7-inch Samsung tablet. “I tend to agree with man of the comments below,” Cue wrote.

Turns out that “article” in question was this one, by our own Kevin Tofel.

CNBC reporter John Fortt, who was also present for the testimony, reports on Twitter that Steve Jobs (who was famously anti-7-inch tablets) “seemed receptive” to the idea.

This is obviously going to add to the speculation — backed up reports from Bloomberg and the Wall Street Journal and others — that Apple is set to introduce a smaller iPad perhaps as early as next month.

This post was updated Aug. 4, 4:37 a.m. with detail about the article in question.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Flash analysis: Steve Jobs
• Forecast: Tablet App Sales To Hit $8B by 2015
• How consumer media will change in 2013

While Scott already has thousands of followers, he’s currently only following Conan O’Brien, who recently tweeted “I found a huge design flaw in my new iPhone. People get angry when I talk on it during a funeral!”

Behind the times

While Apple makes the products that we all use to get involved in social media, the company itself is way behind the curve in this area. Although Apple provides marketing tweets from such accounts as iTunesTrailers and iTunesMusic, it has yet to use Twitter or Facebook to respond to customer concerns about Apple products. In sharp contrast to Apple, its U.S. partner for the iPhone, AT&T, has a great presence in social media. Tweet a problem to @attcustomercare and its crack team resolves the problem in a jiffy. Post on its Facebook wall and receive similar executive class service. Personally, they’ve solved my problems on more than one occasion.

[inline-ad align="right"]When people complain on Twitter about a surly Genius, or a botched online order, the voice of Apple is silent. Steve Jobs might respond to some of your select emails, but apparently if you tweet instead of write him directly, you won’t be heard by Steve or for that matter anyone at Apple. Don’t even think of making him your friend on Facebook or connecting with him on LinkedIn! Of course, Apple employees can be involved in social media on a personal level, although obviously they can’t speak on Apple’s behalf. Their reluctance to be involved in social media is atypical of the tech industry.

Why has it taken so long?

Apple likes having strict control over communication, with one voice and one venue for communication: Apple’s PR department. Unlike other companies that encourage their executive staff and customer service personnel to go out and meet their customers and address their concerns, Apple stays away. This may simply be because Apple doesn’t think it has to. It considers the Genius Bar and its Tech Support department to be the proper way of getting your concerns addressed. While Apple has lots of informal fans and followers on social media, Apple has yet to get involved in this international conversation, until perhaps today.

Could Scott’s Twitter account be a new method of damage control for Apple and possibly even help iPhone owners with problems? As “Antennagate” spun out of control, Steve Job’s response “you are holding it wrong” conflicted with Apple’s official statement that it’s not a hardware problem, but a software issue. Thus it seems logical that the head of iPhone software might be the first official verified account from Apple. Why verify with Twitter unless you are going to speak on behalf of Apple? Imagine how different the problem might have been perceived if people weren’t using social media like Twitter, Facebook, and blogs to amplify and broadcast their their concerns? People are shouting because it doesn’t seem like Apple is listening.

If Apple had been fully engaged in the world of social media, would Antennagate have reached the level it did? Possibly not. iPhone owners would feel the issues were being addressed and Apple was working on the problem. Not responding to your customers concerns except through random CEO emails and rare formal press releases is not the way to do public relations, unless of course you work for Toyota or BP. I encourage Scott and his team to step up to the plate and start addressing not just the antenna concerns, but the variety of other problems iPhones owners have.

Alternatively, this could all be an elaborate hoax and a testament to user frustration that Apple isn’t addressing their concerns.

If you have a problem with your iPhone, tweet @forstall and you might just get a response. And if that doesn’t work, you can simply follow my previous guide on getting satisfaction from Apple.

So what should Scott’s first tweet be? What will your first tweet to him be?