Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I Quit: What really goes on at Apple

roadlesstravelled.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

551–560 of 566 posts

Re: I Quit: What really goes on at Apple

#551

Post by abc_lisper »

cgio wrote: post #412
abc_lisper wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I don't agree with many of the comments here, I agree with yours specifically. I really hate the phrase human resource, like it is something that is ready for exploitation. One of the many reasons I never worked for big consulting companies is that, they look at things as problems vs resources. If the problems cannot be solved by X resources, try X+1. There they are called resources, not even human resources.

In consulting, your only resources are human.

You don't get it. People are not resources.

Re: I Quit: What really goes on at Apple

#552

Post by agapos »

na85 wrote: post #488
shostack wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are painting with an overly broad brush. Where I work, our Support Heroes (yes, we call them Heroes because the lengths they go to for our customers are heroic) are one of the main reasons so many of our customers love us and stick with us so long. You've probably heard that it can cost ~5x more to acquire a new customer than retain an existing one. An exceptional Customer Support team is your front line in fight…

>If customer support is a "cost center" for you, you're doing it wrong. But Google showed us that you can build a billion-dollar multinational with abysmal customer support. Valve Software performs similarly well, and is renowned for having awful customer support.

One of the few reasons why I prefer GOG.com over Steam.

Re: I Quit: What really goes on at Apple

#553

Post by EdwardDiego »

mtarnovan wrote: post #533
EdwardDiego wrote: post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What troubles you about that statement? It may well have been a situation where the person was presenting a threat to others and he had to decide how to how much threat was being presented and how to prevent that.

I misread that as "holding a gun at someone's head", as opposed to "holding a gun aimed at someones's head". My bad. But even so, should police officers really aim for the head?

> But even so, should police officers really aim for the head?

That's a good question.

Re: I Quit: What really goes on at Apple

#554

Post by [deleted] »

nathan_long wrote: post #520
swayvil wrote: post #517

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the place I worked we had this old ho who could take 3 in the ass, 3 in the vag and 2 in the mouth. Simultaneously. We called her a hero. That stupid stretched-out bitch made us a pile of money. Of course we never called her a "stupid bitch" to her face, that would be tactless. We called her a "hero". I think she died of kidney failure or something.

Oh my gosh. I don't know if this was supposed to be a joke, but it is not funny at all.

[deleted]

Re: I Quit: What really goes on at Apple

#555

Post by [deleted] »

nathan_long wrote: post #520
swayvil wrote: post #517

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the place I worked we had this old ho who could take 3 in the ass, 3 in the vag and 2 in the mouth. Simultaneously. We called her a hero. That stupid stretched-out bitch made us a pile of money. Of course we never called her a "stupid bitch" to her face, that would be tactless. We called her a "hero". I think she died of kidney failure or something.

Oh my gosh. I don't know if this was supposed to be a joke, but it is not funny at all.

[deleted]

Re: I Quit: What really goes on at Apple

#556

Post by swayvil »

nathan_long wrote: post #520
swayvil wrote: post #517

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the place I worked we had this old ho who could take 3 in the ass, 3 in the vag and 2 in the mouth. Simultaneously. We called her a hero. That stupid stretched-out bitch made us a pile of money. Of course we never called her a "stupid bitch" to her face, that would be tactless. We called her a "hero". I think she died of kidney failure or something.

Oh my gosh. I don't know if this was supposed to be a joke, but it is not funny at all.

some might call it tragic

Re: I Quit: What really goes on at Apple

#557

Post by zaroth »

eitally wrote: post #510
dietrichepp wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a low-base / high-commission model is proven to attract and incentivize talented reps and drive out the low performers I'm interested in hearing how this is proven. I've seen incentivized sales reps close deals that damaged the company, just like I've seen "successful" marketing campaigns that eventually killed their products. If you use bookings as your metric for bonuses and then turn around and use bookings to m…

Here's an anecdote: at my company, sales reps start with an average base for their first year, then move to a low base (like 30-40k + commission + kickers) afterward. In an average year, our top sales folks have the highest comp of all but the very top (CxO and a couple EVPs) executives, usually in the 600-700k USD range. The Eastern US VP of Sales works out of the same office I do and has a $2m home. Just to give yo…

It does seem like a common metric for small to midsize companies, that your #1 salesperson should earn as much if not more than the CEO. It's funny because CEOs will say, without a second thought, those are the dollars they are happiest to spend.

What makes the rockstar saleperson's commission so much happier spending compared to the rockstar engineer's salary? I think simply the ability to measure the ROI on those dollars. The day anyone figures out how to directly measure ROI of engineering dollars with the same "obviousness" as sales quotas / commissions, it would completely change how we hire and retain engineers.

Re: I Quit: What really goes on at Apple

#558

Post by cududa »

api wrote: post #120

Apple has built one of the most successful businesses in the world on mostly one thing: design. (And user experience, which is design more broadly applied.) Undortunately, it seems to me that good design requires totalitarianism. Apple's products are comparatively coherent, clean, unified, and aesthetically pleasing. This is achieved via a culture of totalitarianism that extends all the way down to the device. OSX ha…

I don't want to refute your argument point for point, but just reading the first sentence... It sounds like you're using "design" in the same way one might use "aesthetic". User Experience is just as much about engineering as it is aesthetic. It's a disservice to the craft of software engineering to meet design requirements as well as the engineering process of architecting a user interface to debase it as you do.

Re: I Quit: What really goes on at Apple

#559

Post by tjarratt »

rikkus wrote: post #468
tjarratt wrote: post #419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I worked at Apple on OS X server in various capacities for a few years, and really loved the experience. As an open-source user and advocate, I was really sad there because they have a very hostile and defensive position about open source (which is a very reasonable stance, in my perspective). The fact that there aren't any prolific bloggers, open source contributors or HN commentators is an artifact that the company…

How is it reasonable for them to have a hostile and defensive position in relation to open source when so much of their software is either built upon or enabled by open source?

It's reasonable within their own worldview, which is secretive and closed. I will gladly admit, that was one of the largest driving factors for me leaving the company.

Re: I Quit: What really goes on at Apple

#560

Post by astrodust »

deegles wrote: post #541
astrodust wrote: post #528

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's two sides here. The company making profit enables it to take more risks, try new things. The employee making a higher salary has other benefits, some of which might benefit the company, but the company itself will have to be more careful when hiring and take fewer chances both on people, products and strategy. Imagine if Apple had to pay $300K per employee what kind of a landscape that would be. Nobody but Ap…

> "the company itself will have to be more careful when hiring and take fewer chances both on people, products and strategy" If employees getting a lower salary enables a company to take risks, doesn't that mean the employees are shouldering the risk?

It depends on how you define risk, or what angle you're looking at it from.

With lower salaries, the company can assume more risk, there's more room for failure. With higher salaries the employee becomes an increasing liability.

Just compare how hiring in France is, where terminating people is significantly more difficult, with an at-will environment like California.

Post reply on HN