This campus is going to be epic. It will be in architecture and design text books for years. I wonder if Apple would ever be so generous as to let us take a peak in the form of a tour? That'd be pretty cool. Not likely, but cool.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Campus 2 Designer Gives Insight Into Planning Process, Talks Scale
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
". . . these studies finally morphed into a circular building . . ."
That's Norman Foster telling you that they did not start out with Steve's preconcieved idea for a circular building.
Your other points are based on a confusion between an ordinary office building which must fit into a public space, and this building, which is designed for Apple employees who need to be associating with each other away from the public. You are trying to apply rules to this building which do not apply, and so I don't find your points worth discussing, really.
On your side, there are architechture critics who agree with you, but they are similarly confused. Wouldn't be the first time critics get things very wrong.
I'm willing to go through X-ray security scanner, if that's what it takes to be allowed a non-employee tour.
Hey, ..don't take that too literal now .lol. But fwiw, an elongated rectangular building, for comparison's sake, might also have multiple floors, and to get from one end of the building to the other end, on a different floor or not, would take longer than crossing the inner courtyard on a circular building of similar square footage, that's all I'm saying.
True, with doors and stairs, or elevators, there are too many variables to pin it down exactly, but if the average trip from A to B is shorter, then that makes it more efficient to get around.
That new campus apparently "spans more than a mile around"; imagine stretching that out into a rectangular building of similar width, and then having to go from one end to the other?
Design
I love the design of this building and the sheer scale of it. Plus how good it is for the enviroment, with the thousands of trees being planted and the use of bikes to get around the site.
Would love to see it in person once it is built.....a small trip over the pond from the UK
I love the design of this building and the sheer scale of it. Plus how good it is for the enviroment, with the thousands of trees being planted and the use of bikes to get around the site.
Would love to see it in person once it is built.....a small trip over the pond from the UK
I read that part, but don't buy it. We know full well that Steve had a strong bias towards forms that he considered to be "pure" and a very deep aversion to anything with a square corner. Architects do not naturally gravitate towards either of these dicta, and not especially towards building plans that don't read from ground level, where the people who see and use buildings are actually located.
Foster is the one who presented the analogy between this building's use of outdoor spaces and the quadrangle at Stanford and the London square. He is the one who is trying to apply these rules to the Apple building. I am the one who is arguing that they don't apply for the obvious reason that they are functionally not even remotely analogous. Again, there will be no "public" space anywhere on this site. It is all private. So these traditional site planning concepts can't be called the inspiration for this building when they are totally disembodied from what makes them functionally significant.
You don't find my points worth discussing because you have no argument against them, really. I am not confused about anything, except your puzzling argument.
----------
Imagine organizing the space in a sensible way, instead of comparing this design to an even more insensible one. This is what Foster does, and why his rationale for this design comes off as so self-serving.
Haha right. I wouldn't deem such an idea impossible on their part. It would be very rudimentary and would just take us through basic day-to-day operations. Obviously we wouldn't see Jony Ive's top secret design lab or anything, but just some "ooh' and "ah" stuff.
Actually, I will bet good money that Apple's rivals like Samsung have every intention of trying to infiltrate the deepest bowels (restricted areas) of the Apple Mothership Campus. Corporate espionage has been going on for ages.
I'm sure they will, since the "landmark" is important to Apple. Regardless, I'd rather they spent more effort twisting TomTom's arms to update its Maps database to be more accurate and up-to-date as possible. Accuracy of basic street-maps is more important than fancy satellite or 3D images.
good
I'm sure they will, since the "landmark" is important to Apple. Regardless, I'd rather they spent more effort twisting TomTom's arms to update its Maps database to be more accurate and up-to-date as possible. Accuracy of basic street-maps is more important than fancy satellite or 3D images.
I'm sure they will, since the "landmark" is important to Apple. Regardless, I'd rather they spent more effort twisting TomTom's arms to update its Maps database to be more accurate and up-to-date as possible. Accuracy of basic street-maps is more important than fancy satellite or 3D images.
This is true. But even the White House has tours... the White House. And that's national security at stake there. So it's kind of funny that that big corporations wouldn't let you get a little sneak peak at their campus. Although, now that I think about, I believe Google does something to that effect. You don't get to go spelunking into the bowels of their secrecy, just the cool layer on top.
First of all, I was not one of the people that ever said (here) that big corporations do not allow non-employees to tour or enter their campuses. In fact, that's an outright lie if anyone has said that on this thread. Apple in the current 1 Infinite Loop campus does allow people to enter the campus and allows them access to limited areas of the campus. Areas that are "allowed" include the Apple Company Store. See link and screenshot below.
http://www.apple.com/companystore/
Welcome to the Apple Company Store
The Company Store is the original Apple Employee store located at Apple's headquarters in Cupertino. We are open to the public, but we are a little different than your local Apple Retail Store. While we don't sell computers, iPhones or have a Genius Bar, we are the only place in the world that sells Apple logo t-shirts, caps and accessories. So, if you find yourself in the San Francisco Bay Area, please stop by and visit us.
Anyways, this discussion was just speculating that the NEW Alien Mothership campus, which people are marveling as an architectural work of art, might have much more strict access and security. That's only a guess. No one knows for sure at this time.
Visitors to the current Apple Company Store go there and only there. I don't recall from my visit that I was allowed wander anywhere else on the campus. The new campus isn't likely to be less restrictive to visitors, and since they will no doubt be dealing with a lot of curiosity seekers, more restrictive seems likely.
You seem to be taking my replies as arguments. And if that's true, I apologize. I agree with you completely. I'm just offering up various speculations.