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

We’re Apple. We don’t wear suits. We don’t even own suits.

daringfireball.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 100 posts

Re: We’re Apple. We don’t wear suits. We don’t even own suits.

#51

Post by astrange »

billmcneale wrote: post #43
hyperbovine wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to their bios ( http://www.apple.com/pr/bios/ ), every senior exec who isn't doing hardware of software has either an MBA or a JD. More anecdotally, I know at least three people with MBAs working in middle management there. Apple does a good job of maintaining a counterculture image while remaining a pretty average place to work. Of course, you could make the case that Apple is run by one person, and he did…

It's way below an average place to work: these past years, Apple hasn't made it in the top 100 places to work a single time. Not a single time. In the Top 100. http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/bestcompanies/2010/fu... http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/bestcompanies/2009/fu... http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/bestcompanies/2008/fu...

That's a strange list and I can't really see how I'd use it to choose somewhere to work. Would you enjoy getting a CS degree and then working at Men's Wearhouse rather than Apple?

Re: We’re Apple. We don’t wear suits. We don’t even own suits.

#53

Post by alanstorm »

hokkos wrote: post #52
alanstorm wrote: post #31

Not that I don't ♥ The Gruber™, but the link should probably be pointing at the original article, as all John is doing here is quoting from the Wired piece.

The original article is not accessible.

Weird, it comes up fine for me

http://www.wired.com/magazine/2010/07/ff_att_fail/all/1

stupidbrokeninternet

Re: We’re Apple. We don’t wear suits. We don’t even own suits.

#55

Post by jarek »

Poiesis wrote: post #46
jarek wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FTA, implied to be more of less AT&T's argument: "It didn’t make sense to build phones and offer features that carriers couldn’t support." Message: AT&T expects to solve user experience problems by removing or restricting features, and this is a bad thing. Your post: "[T]he probability of a negative user experience is too high on AT&T's network ... Apple knows better than to let Facetime get a [bad] reputation[.]" Me…

Message: AT&T expects to solve user experience problems by removing or restricting features, and this is a bad thing. This is of course in contrast to Apple's usual product design approach, which is to solve user experience problems by removing or restricting features?

The double standard is exactly what I meant when juxtaposing the two quotes.

Re: We’re Apple. We don’t wear suits. We don’t even own suits.

#56

Post by simonw »

billmcneale wrote: post #43
hyperbovine wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to their bios ( http://www.apple.com/pr/bios/ ), every senior exec who isn't doing hardware of software has either an MBA or a JD. More anecdotally, I know at least three people with MBAs working in middle management there. Apple does a good job of maintaining a counterculture image while remaining a pretty average place to work. Of course, you could make the case that Apple is run by one person, and he did…

It's way below an average place to work: these past years, Apple hasn't made it in the top 100 places to work a single time. Not a single time. In the Top 100. http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/bestcompanies/2010/fu... http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/bestcompanies/2009/fu... http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/bestcompanies/2008/fu...

That's only "way below average" if you re-define average to mean "in the top 100".

Re: We’re Apple. We don’t wear suits. We don’t even own suits.

#57

Post by stefs »

FACT: They have even fought about wardrobe: When an Apple representative suggested to one of AT&T’s deputies that the AT&Ts CEO wear a turtleneck to meet with Apples board of directors, he was told, “We’re AT&T. We don’t wear turtlenecks. We don’t even own turtlenecks.”

Re: We’re Apple. We don’t wear suits. We don’t even own suits.

#58

Post by lionhearted »

Locke1689 wrote: post #48
hyperbovine wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to their bios ( http://www.apple.com/pr/bios/ ), every senior exec who isn't doing hardware of software has either an MBA or a JD. More anecdotally, I know at least three people with MBAs working in middle management there. Apple does a good job of maintaining a counterculture image while remaining a pretty average place to work. Of course, you could make the case that Apple is run by one person, and he did…

According to their bios ( http://www.apple.com/pr/bios/ ), every senior exec who isn't doing hardware of software has either an MBA or a JD. So everyone in the business management or legal side of Apple has an MBA or JD? Go figure...

> So everyone in the business management or legal side of Apple has an MBA or JD? Go figure...

Actually, that is significant. I studied undergraduate business and I can tell right away the difference between an MBA-run business and non-MBA-run type business. People with MBA's have a broad base of case studies, so they know how to handle some eccentric but important situations pretty well, but they tend to like formality, business plans, marketing plans instead of "screw it, let's mess around and see what happens" - not sure what the ratio of MBA to non-MBA in Google management is, but Google seems very much like a non-MBA culture. In fact, their CEO Schmidt has degrees in engineering and computer science. They probably have MBA-type people running Adwords, though, you'd almost have to.

Edit: chillingeffects.org and dataliberation.org are backed by Google, which is very much more a hacker ethos than an MBA ethos type move.

Re: We’re Apple. We don’t wear suits. We don’t even own suits.

#59

Post by tlrobinson »

pinstriped_dude wrote: post #54

Why is the DaringFireball article here? and why does it have a 100 votes? The guy has just quoted the Wired article without adding anything on his own?

Because it highlights the most interesting points of a much longer article?

I'm no Daring Fireball fanboy (the 1st derivative of an Apple fanboy?) but there is sometimes value in aggregation and summarization.

Re: We’re Apple. We don’t wear suits. We don’t even own suits.

#60

Post by jesseendahl »

pinstriped_dude wrote: post #54

Why is the DaringFireball article here? and why does it have a 100 votes? The guy has just quoted the Wired article without adding anything on his own?

It is particularly odd since the actual Wired article was already on the front page of HN when this was submitted.
Post reply on HN