Sure, but isn’t that true of any company?
My point was that the really neat stuff Apple produced/produces wasn’t ever directly invented by Jobs. Even the early stuff was mostly Wozniak.
Jobs was from a shareholder perspective, a good CEO. He DID do the sort of “turning the supertanker” kind of change that Apple needed to stay relevant.
But he didn’t actually invent the products- his excellent engineering staff did that.
So maybe we can say that you need both to be amazingly successful; it’s as likely that without Jobs, some wonk at Apple would have come up with a proto-iPod or proto-iPhone, and the non-Jobs CEO would have done much like Kodak did with the digital camera- either actively suppressed it, or ignored it as “outside the core business” of making Macs. And we know that without Jobs, Apple was already struggling.