Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your rate sounds a bit low for such short and somewhat specialized gig in the bay area.
It's about right for what you'd pay to get something machined :)
A Look Inside Apple’s New Campus
391–400 of 440 posts
Re: A Look Inside Apple’s New Campus
#392Earlier quoted context omitted.
Peopleware/Mythical Man month. Anyone who has ever done any amount of software development professionally.
Yes, you have no objective evidence that this layout results in improved productivity, yet casually throw that assertion around as if it were fact.
"Workplace Quality and Product Quality - Companies that provide small and noisy workplaces explain away complaints as workers campaigning for the added status of bigger, more private space. To determine whether noise level had any correlation to work, we divided our sample into those who found the workplace acceptably quiet and those who didn't. Then, looking at workers within each group who completed the entire exercise without a single defect: > Workers who reported that their workplace was acceptably quiet before the exercise were 1/3 more likely to deliver zero-defect work. As the noise level gets worse, this trend gets stronger:
Zero-defect workers: => 66% reported noise level OK 1-or-more-defect workers: => 8% reported noise level OK A Discovery of Nobel Prize Significance - On February 3, 1984, in a study of 32,346 companies worldwide, the authors confirmed a virtually perfect inverse relationship between people density and dedicated floor space per person. If you're having trouble seeing why this matters, you're not thinking about noise. Noise is directly proportional to density, so halving the allotment of space per person can be expected to double the noise. Even if you managed to prove conclusively that a programmer could work in 30 sq. ft. without being hopelessly space-bound, you still wouldn't be able to conclude that 30 sq. ft. is adequate space. The noise in a 30 sq. ft matrix is more than triple the noise in a 100 sq. ft. matrix, which could make the difference between a plague of product defects and none at all."
So everyone should just put on headphones, right? Peopleware says no.
"experiment done at Cornell -- they gave two groups a complicated task involving a long string of calculations. One group listened to music while performing the task, and one group had silence.
What they didn't tell either group is that the complicated string of calculations always returned the original number.
It turned out that not everyone figured this out, but of the people who did, a large majority came from the group that did not listen to music.
The theory apparently being is that listening to music is somehow engaging the part of the brain involved in creative thought, keeping it "busy" enough not to be able to look at the big picture of the task being performed."
All developers should consider their surroundings and how they affect their thought process. I actually stopped listening to popular music while developing, after I read this and some other studies about it's effect at keeping part of your brain (the language processing parts) occupied. I still listen to music part time, and try to listen to instrumentals only.
Re: A Look Inside Apple’s New Campus
#393Earlier quoted context omitted.
Stop being deliberately obtuse. We don't want companies using their leverage to change city regulations, even if it's something we agree with.
why not? you rather suffer out of principle? what difference does it make if it's company or local citizen chalenging stupid rule? I fail to see difference if it's something majority will benefit from
Re: A Look Inside Apple’s New Campus
#394Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is all a bunch of weird handwringing... >Child care is a competitive business that can almost always be provided better and cheaper elsewhere. So it's much better to use stipends to subsidize employee child care. Child care facilities aim for profit like any other business, and a corporate add-on doesn't need to seek profitability (and even if they did, assuming it's on-site the operational overhead is ultimatel…
>Making something non-profit doesn't make it efficient. If your business is child-care, it's your job to know the cheapest/best way to comply with regs, build child-care locations to meet market demands, hire child-care staff, enforce appropriate rules and procedures, etc, etc, etc. You hire someone for this >Running a software company doesn't give you any of those skills. Someone specializing in the business of chil…
Are they skilled at it? You don't know, their resume looked good to you, but your expertise is elsewhere.
Are their policies correct? Again, you don't know.
Are your liabilities reasonably covered? Who knows?
And you still have to manage that person on a day to day basis. You have to be able to fire them if they screw up, you have to know whats going on in their department.
You can educate yourself, but again you won't become an expert and that's time you could spend building your business.
Even for Apple, and Tim Cook, it's easier to rely on the competitive market to provide child-care. The best of all worlds would be to rent space to a child-care provider, and bid out the service to get the best child-care possible. There are still issues, such as you don't want the low bidder, and you have to do research to pick the best bidder. But at least you aren't running it day to day.
Re: A Look Inside Apple’s New Campus
#395Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a copout. Cupertino demands it because businesses have abused public streets before (e.g. relying on public parking for business purposes); if Apple had gone to Cupertino with an actual plan, they may have allowed fewer spaces, but since Apple didn't and just accepted the requirement it is because Apple has no plans to reduce it.
Well it's not that clear. If, for example, Cupertino provide things like bike lanes, or public transportation, then it's not solely Apple's fault here. Maybe if the population density were to be increased (IE, removing restrictive zoning laws), they would reduce the need for people to use personal transportation. That's the problem with these kind of engagements. Companies and cities generally don't care to work toge…
Re: A Look Inside Apple’s New Campus
#396Earlier quoted context omitted.
If space was really that much of an issue, they would be using stacked parking lots like they do in NY. I assume on the Apple campus most of the parking is multi-level & underground. In that case, what's the issue?
Negative externalities of car use are the issue. Cars take up so much space on the road that they congest the roads and slow down other traffic. Cupertino and Apple are doing nothing to change this status quo. With the status quo maintained, car use is mandatory for Apple workers in Cupertino and traffic will continue to increase. Bay area taxpayers can look forward to paying more for new road expansion projects to a…
Re: A Look Inside Apple’s New Campus
#397Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not like these people are being irrational. If driving is faster, then these folks will do so. Given the property prices in the Seattle area, they are probably as close as possible to work as their budget will allow. They're probably at the edge of their tolerable commute as it is.
Maybe as self interested individuals they aren't being irrational, but collectively as a civilization, it's irrational. The early proponents of the mechanized garden city were naive, and we've carried on perpetuating that naivete for 80 years now, because that's just the way we do it. What a mess. If you find yourself in a hole, stop digging .
Re: A Look Inside Apple’s New Campus
#398Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd rather work from home, and have done for decades. I'm not convinced it's a beautiful building. It's a very careful building, trying to be a temple and - IMO - failing. What's missing? Randomness. Playfulness. Quirkiness. Fun. Colour. Warmth. Individuality. Art. At Pixar, everyone was encouraged to personalise their work space in a creative way. I can't imagine that happening here, because it would be a mortal wou…
yep, it looks really awful like something from 80s almost in par with commie architecture, these guys wasting money apparently never heard of Zaha Hadid and likes common, it's just massive boring circle, even Pentagon building is more original, there are only two things making this building interesting - size, Apple HQ make it ten times smaller and put there unknown company and nobody would bother to read about it
Re: A Look Inside Apple’s New Campus
#399Earlier quoted context omitted.
Typically we don't like having companies manipulating municipal policies. This is how we end up in situations where we have one or two ISPs in a market. Or a situation where ATT and Google have to go to court for access to that pole. That was my point. It was not a dis on Apple or a desire for things to not change. We just need to tread carefully when allowing business to dictate municipal policy.
what has decreasing parking limits per employee (especially in middle of nowhere, so it's not like they are gonna park on nearby streets) to do with company being monopoly? somehow I fail to see there any relation, it might as well be company with 200 employees challenging dumb rule it's not about business dictating rules, it's about 9000 parking spots for 12000 people, which sounds for someone from Europe completely…
Re: A Look Inside Apple’s New Campus
#400Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well then the next door business can either charge for parking and offer free parking validation after you buy something, or just have a tow truck waiting to tow people who park and don't enter the premises.
So, shift the burden to the business that actually paid to create enough parking for their customers?