I will argue that it's still too early to conclude whether Apple kept running during the pandemic thanks to WFH, or despite it. To use an analogy, say I am able to still complete running a marathon despite not having trained for half a year. That doesn't mean that I don't need to train for a marathon ever. It just means that I am fit enough that I can go for a while without training and still maintain my peak. Any more, and the drop in performance still start to become more apparent.
Personally, I am still of the opinion that Apple is right to be cautious when it comes to embracing a WFH paradigm, especially when its product design process relies heavily on close collaboration between all parties. I am also mindful of the various shortcomings and limitations of working from home as highlighted in this article, which is also a strong proponent of the "work 3 days in the office, 2 days at home" hybrid model.
Stanford's Nicholas Bloom says companies should adopt centralized hybrid work approaches.
www.charterworks.com
It's easy to point to companies like Facebook and Google, but they are (1) primarily in the business of software, which may lend itself better to not needing everyone to be present in a physical location and (2) we really don't know whether this arrangement will work out for them in the long run or not. For all we know, the downsides of working from home only start to manifest years down the road and by the time it's evident to the company in the form of a slower / inferior product release cycle, it's too late to put that genie back in the bottle because your workforce is now scattered all across the globe and it's not feasible for them to return to a centralised office even if they wanted to.