|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
#76 |
|
The Verge has copies of the paper trail. Eric Schmdit up to his eyeballs in this too.
http://www.theverge.com/2013/1/23/39...ant-you-to-see
__________________
I love Apple products but am not a Steve Jobs fanboy |
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
#77 | |
|
Quote:
Kudos to Google for standing up to the Thermonuclear War.. |
||
|
|
5
|
|
|
#78 | |
|
Quote:
You had me till Google. ---------- As a company shareholder I expect any CEO to protect the company and it's employees
__________________
Psalm 91 |
||
|
|
2
|
|
|
#79 |
|
|
7
|
|
|
#80 | |
|
Quote:
But Schmidt will likely get a free pass, because... most people, even 99% of Android users, have no clue who the hell he is, or what he looks like. |
||
|
|
2
|
|
|
#81 |
|
You would call Apple scum because of this?
Or have you been waiting for some time for a negative story to come up on MacRumors?
__________________
Steve is smiling down from above. ![]() -darkfiber |
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
#82 |
|
For anyone interested, here's the list of companies Apple had some sort of do-not-hire on:
__________________
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
#83 |
|
Absolutely. I've also been in a company where a co-director was a scared clueless twat, and he operated in exactly the same way. When luckily he ended up with a great product thanks to the skills of his employees, he protected it by threats, fraud, and bullying tactics, rather than in any way trying to encourage our employees to carry on creating great things.
The outpouring of hero-worship that followed Jobs' death was just bonkers. What was that about? There are some guys at Apple who can do great stuff that matters. With luck, they may now be allowed to get on with doing it, and with a lot more luck they might be able to avoid getting too bogged down in lawsuits on the way. I'm sure the same applies at Samsung and Microsoft (and Google, probably).
__________________
rMBP15, 2.6/16/768, iPhone5/32, iPad 1+2+3, iPod nano 1+4, Lisa 2 + 5Mb ProFile, IIe
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
#84 | |
|
Quote:
Oh but let me guess.... the Media selectively reports Apple as the only guilty party in this whole fiasco.
|
||
|
|
1
|
|
|
#85 |
|
|
2
|
|
|
#86 |
|
If an employee is offered a job elsewhere but you want to keep them, then you offer them something better!
A slave is 'One bound in servitude as the property of a person or household.' If one can't get a job anywhere in your industry you are a commodified and effectively bound in servitude. Jobs' attitude is despicable. |
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
#87 | |
|
Quote:
She and most people don't realize how the non poaching agreements keep high level people from taking information from secret projects to another company and using it to furthur their personal agenda. And some of you should spend some time on Wall Street to get a taste of back room deals. This whole country is corrupt. Not just the tech industry. |
||
|
|
2
|
|
|
#88 |
|
Didn't the DOJ went after Apple and other companies for this anti-trust issue?
(conspiring with competitors to limit competitions) And last year, the DOJ and the EU anti-trust commission also went after Apple for conspiring with book publishers to fix the price of ebook. Most publishers have settled with both the DOJ and the EU that will allow retailers to compete against each others by offering discount. Before the price fixing: ebookstores are allowed to compete, offer discount, price competition possible. After the price fixing: ebook prices are fixed (same prices everywhere), no retail price competition possible. After the settlement: ebookstores are allowed to compete, offer discount, price competition possible. |
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
#89 | |
|
Quote:
She should be relieved of her duties in presiding over THIS (poaching) case, and the jurisdiction should be handed to another judge. |
||
|
|
2
|
|
|
#90 |
|
I think passion is getting in the way a little, here (now that's a surprise). According to the account and the Verge paper trail, companies in Silicon Valley had rules about poaching - that is the active solicitation of staff in another company. But, for the most part it does not say anything about not recruiting people from those companies if they initiate the discussion.
In some ways, it's understandable - if your company does consultancy and has got consultants on site with a customer, what's to stop your consultants finding the customer's best staff, hiring them and then selling them back to your customer as consultants? In practise, stopping someone from joining another company is legally questionable and its difficult to prove poaching in any case. If someone leaves Company A for Company B and then tells all his company A friends over a beer that Company B is a great place to work and they should apply for these vacancies.
__________________
Words and music written to order |
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
#91 |
|
article way back in 2010
http://techcrunch.com/2010/09/24/ant...ng-agreements/ DoJ Confirms And Settles Apple/Google Anti-Poaching Deal. Apple And Adobe Had One Too?! Back in June of last year, a report in The Washington Post stated that the U.S. Department of Justice had begun a probe looking into the hiring practices of some of tech’s biggest companies. The probe was at its early stages at that point, but they were specifically looking into if any companies had agreements in place not to recruit one another’s workers. In August of last year, we reported that two of those companies, Apple and Google, did have such an agreement in place — and we even obtained an email that seemed to confirm it. Neither Google nor Apple responded to our request for a comment on the issue. Of course, they couldn’t sidestep the DoJ so easily. And today, the government is announcing a settlement on the issue. Specifically, the DoJ is saying it is settling with six companies — Adobe, Apple, Google, Intel, Intuit, and Pixar — ensuring that they will not enter into no solicitation agreements for employees going forward. In the complaint and settlement proposal they’re filing today, the DoJ is saying their findings indicate that there were agreements in place between a mixture of these companies over the years that prevented poaching. Here’s how they outlined it: According to the complaint, the six companies entered into agreements that restrained competition between them for highly skilled employees. The agreements between Apple and Google, Apple and Adobe, Apple and Pixar and Google and Intel prevented the companies from directly soliciting each other’s employees. An agreement between Google and Intuit prevented Google from directly soliciting Intuit employees. Again, Apple and Google is the one we reported on.The DoJ says: Beginning no later than 2006, Apple and Google executives agreed not to cold call each other’s employees. Apple placed Google on its internal “Do Not Call List,” which instructed employees not to directly solicit employees from the listed companies. Similarly, Google listed Apple among the companies that had special agreements with Google and were part of the “Do Not Cold Call” list.
__________________
Top 100 Books Ranking (By Genre) rated by readers |
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
#92 |
|
After a friend and I read Isaacson's biography I asked my friend, 'Having read it, do you respect Steve Jobs more or less than you did before?' He thought briefly and then answered, 'Both!' I have to agree.
Steve Jobs, and the subject of his character, really tends to divide people here—as if he was either a heroic genius who could do no wrong, or a completely evil tyrant. Look, the reason he's such an interesting person, is that he can't be so easily pigeonholed. He wasn't a saint, and he wasn't the devil. He was brilliant. He made mistakes. He was insightful. He was stubborn. He was charismatic. He was manipulating. He inspired people to great things. He alienated others. He was sensitive. He could be cruel. He spoke a lot of wisdom. He was a hypocrite. He genuinely cared about the customer experience. He tried to stifle competition. We could go on and on. So, enjoy trying to paint this guy as either a good apple or completely rotten. I don't think it's so black and white. He was a lot of things, some good and some not so—a colourful character that is for sure. A lot like this apple in fact:
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
#93 |
|
Slavery?
Wouldn't you still be free to quit Apple and get hired by Google if you like to?
How is that slavery? Isn't poaching such an aggressive move to hurt a competitor, that you probably wouldn't do it anyway? Wouldn't Apple likely be able to poach all android developers given their huge bank account? |
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
#94 | |
|
Quote:
He had the unmitigated gaul to play hardball so Apple could move to the top and stay there. What a scumbag. How could he sink to such depths of depravity. Grow up.
|
||
|
|
4
|
|
|
#95 |
|
What did all that chest beating get Steve Jobs? A nice plot where the worms are eating him now.
__________________
iMac I5, Macbook, iPad 4, iPhone 5, iPod, ATV 3 |
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
#96 |
|
|
0
|
|
|
#97 | |
|
Quote:
__________________
Legend has it that a bad GPU driver killed Intel's father. To this day intel can't bring themselves to write a good one. |
||
|
|
4
|
|
|
#98 |
|
|
2
|
|
|
#99 | |
|
Quote:
I agree that tech companies want to poach in the hopes of gleaning info into a competitors upcoming tech or strategy. But the entirety of your comments on this thread suggest that you might think Jobs was pissed with Rubenstein for the same reason he was pissed with Schmidt. And I have a hard time buying that. |
||
|
|
0
|
|
|
#100 |
|
why not just add a clauses to your employees contract that prevents u from going to the competition within a certain time period. thats the most common thing here. like if i was working at IBM i could not quit and go to the competition working in the same field for 2 years or so
|
|
|
|
1
|
![]() |
|
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:24 PM.








rMBP15, 2.6/16/768,
Linear Mode
