I thought that Google didn't really have 20% time anymore.
They do. Many Googlers don't use it. I've had many 20% projects over the years (and still do.)
Apple fires up its version of Google’s "20% time"
61–70 of 87 posts
Re: Apple fires up its version of Google’s "20% time"
#62Google's 20% time was great while I was there. Not everyone takes advantage of it (which is a good thing in many cases - you shouldn't force someone to). But it won't be very beneficial at a company as internally locked down as Apple. It only works when there is open communication of ideas internally. Google, for instance, has internal career fairs where you can check out less-well-known projects for 20% or full time opportunities.
Re: Apple fires up its version of Google’s "20% time"
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd write it up this way: Tim Cook is a remarkable individual, but he's not exactly the fountain of creative ideas that Jobs was (how original those ideas were is an ongoing debate, but nevertheless). I think it's a remarkably introspective move, recognizing weakness and moving to rectify it. Put another way it's much better than the "strategy" of suing everybody who uses fruit or 4 sided shapes in their products as…
Forgive me if this is pointless cynicism but fountain of creative ideas ? * A music player * A phone * A portable computer Not exactly the most innovative product categories?
wow.
Re: Apple fires up its version of Google’s "20% time"
#64Instead of version, I think it would be more accurate to say 3.8% time (two out of fifty-two weeks). 20% time would be over ten weeks by my arithmetic. Although I think it's a generous gesture for a mega cap like Apple, I think this is a little silly. At a big company such as Apple can't you gain or lose 3.8% of your day simply by shuffling around your coffee break or gratuitous meeting schedule?
Re: Apple fires up its version of Google’s "20% time"
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bootlegging is an unnatural term, and has a historically negative connotation. The definition mentions secrecy and unauthorized projects, yet a few paragraphs later awkwardly adds a permitted form.
You seem to have confused a few monkeys tapping on keyboards "collaboratively" for some kind of trustworthy source of definition. Good thing Kenneth E. Knight introduced the notion bootlegging in 1967 ; well before the gnomes could ever get their filthy mitts near it. Try not to let a few control-freaks on Wikipedia desecrate your language more than it already has. You owe them nothing.
The official definition from Knight's seminal paper "A Descriptive Model of the Intra-Firm Innovation Process" [1]:
"Bootlegging: In some instances the innovator may be able
to implement a new idea by keeping the development under
cover from the disapproving power in the organization
until it is introduced. At that time it may be impossible
for the organization to reverse itself."
Re: Apple fires up its version of Google’s "20% time"
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
They have their own aluminum alloy made specifically for the phone. Custom plastics, dyes, colors, etc. They've got enough scale/buyer power to optimize to the n-th. Not to mention that the A-series processor is Apple only, they get early access to the best screens, etc.
Not to mention they use forging instead of casting for the aluminum bodies, and have their own white paint formula (most manufacturers don't even bother trying to make white devices). Plastic was still the norm for PCs until the "Ultrabook" wave came along.
>Not to mention they use forging instead of casting for the aluminum bodies
Apple currently CNC mills all their aluminum bodies.
Re: Apple fires up its version of Google’s "20% time"
#67I thought that Google didn't really have 20% time anymore.
FWIW, 20% time was always controversial. I was part of 'the surge' (a big hiring wave that peaked in 2006 and then died off) and a common complaint was the low number employees had 100% time (they could work on what ever they wanted) and high number employees had to get their manager's approval, and their manager only approved it if it was something the manager needed doing.
Given the nature of that particular 'perk' it was really hard to quantify it for the employee handbook. I came to believe that it was a sort of test, kind of like the tests in Starship Troopers where if you did something that clearly was going to be a Google product or feature then you got points for that, but if nobody could figure out what use it would be, you got penalized. And the option was like either +1 point or -10 demerits (i.e. very unbalanced).
So over my four years the strictures on what was or wasn't 'acceptable use' of your 20% time got more and more constrained. I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest if the language had morphed into 'if your really a star performer we'll let you pick your next project' rather than the oft misunderstood 20% to do whatever you want.
Re: Apple fires up its version of Google’s "20% time"
#68Best of luck to the ones "affected" as everyone that I know who works at Apple are already overworked, stressed and being asked to work while on vacation.
Indeed. Ditto for certain groups at Google ( cough android cough ). Either have a dedicated research group, or give people a pass at being 20% less productive at their regular job. Here's a novel idea.. increase your workforce by 20%? I know, that's just crazy talk. :)
You know that part of the reason that Google's interviews are so difficult is that they can hire younger people that have bright minds, no families, and that will work crazy hours?
The side benefit is that they have geniuses working there.
Re: Apple fires up its version of Google’s "20% time"
#69Didn't apple use to have an R&D department and one of the first thing Steve Jobs did when he came back to Apple was he scrapped it?
I can't say I disagree with not having dedicated R&D. The notion of having an R&D department is stuck in the 1950's where the geeks and the worker bees didn't mix. Everyone should be able to and be encouraged to innovate.
Re: Apple fires up its version of Google’s "20% time"
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not to mention they use forging instead of casting for the aluminum bodies, and have their own white paint formula (most manufacturers don't even bother trying to make white devices). Plastic was still the norm for PCs until the "Ultrabook" wave came along.
Not sure the white paint is relevant, there are quite a few white androids (most notably the HTC One X, which in my opinion is the best looking phone on the market).
White paint is probably irrelevant, but the important part is white paint formula. I own One X but it is not as clean-looking white as iPhone or iPad (it looks somewhere around #FFFFF6, if iPhone's white is considered #FFF). It's still a very good looking phone, though.