So M1 only came into existence by two random software developers at a water cooler? Its just a CHANCE occurrence? What if Fred hadn't gone to the water cooler at that specific second of that specific day. No M1?
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 Staff Complain About Plans for Return to Office Work in Letter to Tim Cook
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You are too focussed on paradigm shifts or giant user-facing innovations. You refuse to accept the idea that each year a developer, engineer, or designer comes up with a dozen or dozens of innovative solutions to the little problems they face. Innovations range from “lets change the aspect ratios of the standard cells in this chip” to “let’s switch to Arm architecture” and everything in between. And random interactions are the source of many of these.
Maybe not. I can’t prove a negative - I can’t tell you what innovations we won’t see in the next few years because all these employees were at home. What I *can* tell you is that I’ve seen countless that have arisen from such interactions. From overhearing a conversation over a cubicle wall. From seeing something on a white board as you walk by an office. From a discussion that veers off-topic to an issue you’ve never thought about but which is a problem your colleague has been stuck on for a few weeks.
That you have only recognized a handful of innovations in the last 10 years, doesn't take away from the dozens of innovations that has found it's way into the hands of consumers. Innovation is defined as improvements to processes.
And as such it isn't necessarily something a consumer or end-user would see 100% of the time, or something that couldn't be facilitated at a water cooler (also not something that is precluded from happening on zoom).
So making the argument that because you don't see innovation happening at the water-cooler doesn't mean it's not.
And it is entirely impossible for someone to message someone stating "Hey I have an idea I would like to run past you"? It HAS to be a physical water cooler?
Again, we have made small innovations, and I am fairly certain Apple has too just by emails and meetings and general Slack messages. Its not 100% physical contact that results in even the smallest of innovations.
People over abuse innovation I think. Having the next macOS is just general improvements not "innovation". Apple watch, iPhone - those are innovative products. Simple enhancements I do not think should be called "innovation".
You are dismissing something that I have seen personally. Water cooler conversations are just that. In a large corporation with thousands of employees bouncing ideas off of one another between the soccer talk.... that type of interaction adds up at a high level.
Are the people who are criticizing these employees critical of the attitude expressed by the employees or the concept of working from home (or both)?
Again, so it is entirely impossible for someone to message someone on Teams saying "hey I have an idea I want to bounce off you"? I HAS to be a physical water cooler for this to happen?
Some of these comments are hilarious, you can tell who are the micro managers or maybe people who don’t work in tech. They assume if you aren’t in the office, you aren’t working. My only perspective are for software engineers so I can only say that my productivity and the rest of my colleagues have increased and even been acknowledged by the executive team.
TL;DR - I'm with the workers on this one.
Three (3) critical albeit short observations:
One might convincingly argue that Apple's lay worker(s), namely those who don't make CEO-levels of take-home compensation, spent the last 13+ months retooling, refocusing their productive lives while rebalancing their lifestyles as a whole (e.g., more time with family coupled with less work hours, more time at home, well-being, contemplating better opportunities elsewhere, etc.).
Just from a financial point of view, a few reasonable and concrete possibilities come to mind when working from home...
I'm compelled to side with the workers on this one, and I think even TC knows 3x a week is not going to work for everyone. Reading the tea leaves, attrition was very likely considered well before this went public so the tea leaves may reasonably manifest in an already plausible number of the resignation letters that may likely follow this decision.
Three (3) critical albeit short observations:
- Language. I don't see the letter so much as a "diatribe" as some have labelled it but simply unvarnished and visceral. --these are people, not objects; people are social and emotional beings, it's scary easy to forget that.
- Normal vs. "Normal". Apple, like x-number of companies across the US and the World, is guilty of the same fumbling toward normalcy. More specifically, Apple wants to compel workers to return to the office x-times a week yet for many who were affected, directly or indirectly, that sort of fumble nay gamble on normalcy is neither feasible or possible for them at this time. At-best, TC's message was imprecise but little more than a basic "fumble" rather than a drop or carry of the message; however, at its worst, it creates nay injects anxiety, uncertainty, and struggle into already anxious people currently struggling during uncertain times.
- Control. Aside from the curious phenomenon of people lauding democracy in the workplace yet neglecting it so easily and for so long as a practice in representative government, it was very clear (at least to me) that TC's letter did one thing well or well-enough for the workers to develop a shared consciousness of their unique if not unenviable situation; it was a decision was made for the workers, not by the workers. People, especially workers, are more likely to suffer a consequence or struggle so long as it is shared one, and it is painfully obvious by now that the differences between themselves and VP/CEOs are no more similar than they are equitable. (spoiler: yeah, they need a union)
One might convincingly argue that Apple's lay worker(s), namely those who don't make CEO-levels of take-home compensation, spent the last 13+ months retooling, refocusing their productive lives while rebalancing their lifestyles as a whole (e.g., more time with family coupled with less work hours, more time at home, well-being, contemplating better opportunities elsewhere, etc.).
Just from a financial point of view, a few reasonable and concrete possibilities come to mind when working from home...
- Childcare costs range from negligible to non-existent.
- Food costs are much lower.
- Car/vehicle maintenance is lower.
- Move to areas farther away from work; lower housing costs
I'm compelled to side with the workers on this one, and I think even TC knows 3x a week is not going to work for everyone. Reading the tea leaves, attrition was very likely considered well before this went public so the tea leaves may reasonably manifest in an already plausible number of the resignation letters that may likely follow this decision.
Love all of the entitlement comments. Honestly, people that don't work in technology really don't have valid opinions on this.
People working from home really isn't all that different from them working in another office. The tools to connect you are the same. (and Apple IS very much a global company). Not very many of their 150,000 employees actually get to work out of "the orchard" - yes - that's damn well what they should have called it - we all know that!
The pandemic has changed things. Permanently. People have embraced work from home and found the mechanisms to make it work. Now, they don't want to give that entirely up. Leadership still wants occasional face time. There needs to be a balance. (we're contemplating a few days a month when they're on day shift for our 24/7 rotating operations teams).
Apple should embrace this - if they do, they'll be able to dramatically reduce their office real estate - having a higher percentage of employees calling "the ring" their home when they are in the office.
Oh...and dedicated remote workers also tend to give a lot more hours a week to the company. That lack of commute and their increased productivity tends to spill over.
People working from home really isn't all that different from them working in another office. The tools to connect you are the same. (and Apple IS very much a global company). Not very many of their 150,000 employees actually get to work out of "the orchard" - yes - that's damn well what they should have called it - we all know that!
The pandemic has changed things. Permanently. People have embraced work from home and found the mechanisms to make it work. Now, they don't want to give that entirely up. Leadership still wants occasional face time. There needs to be a balance. (we're contemplating a few days a month when they're on day shift for our 24/7 rotating operations teams).
Apple should embrace this - if they do, they'll be able to dramatically reduce their office real estate - having a higher percentage of employees calling "the ring" their home when they are in the office.
Oh...and dedicated remote workers also tend to give a lot more hours a week to the company. That lack of commute and their increased productivity tends to spill over.
Thank you. I almost did the same. I'm convinced they put these words in there as poison pills.
If the target of the writing doesn't agree, then the writer can say, "Look! They're not in support of inclusivity, empowerment, and [all the other SJW buzzwords]".
The more they use these kinds of "words" unnecessarily, the less impact they have.
I agree the above happens as you say, except it's much more effective in person...when one can go into a conference room and hash things out on a board. Seems like Tim Cook believes that in-person interaction has value as well.
There are many unique situations and one size doesn't fit all. As I said previously it all depends on many, many factors.
Exactly. If people can permanently work from home, then companies can hire less Americans and hire more from Asia.
Basically using “muh diversity” as an excuse to stay home “For Inclusion and Diversity to work, we have to recognize how different we all are, and with those differences, come different needs and different ways to thrive. We feel that Apple has both the responsibility to recognize these differences, as well as the capability to fully embrace them.” Shameful.
Sure, but in my situation, based on my year+ on zoom and teams, we got a massive amount of work accomplished with super-human effort and many hours behind the keyboard. Not the way I want to proceed in the future. The super-human effort was to make up for the lack of in-person collaboration.
Both. Working from home is not a good space for businesses to thrive in. People being isolated, not communicating with others leads to major disconnects.
Collaboration is actually better remote. If I need to collaborate with a co worker pre-pandemic, I would need to hover over their cubicle, MAYBE have enough room for my laptop in a cramped space or maybe not and work with them. Now, we just get on a call, where we both have our full computing experience at our disposal, and we can work at full capacity. I don't need to fight with a trackpad, I can use a mouse. If I need to look at a lot of information, I am not limited to a small 13" screen, I have two 27" screens same with the co worker.
Speaking of proving negatives, can we prove that the net effect of working remotely has had a negative effect on this kind of work?
Perhaps this is all just confirmation bias. I’m not going to doubt your lived experience of the positive effects of the paradigm you grew your career in. That said, the difficulty in the shift to remote could just be the limitations of trying to adapt the old paradigm to the new. There are undoubtedly advantages to remote work that you and even I are not accounting for because we can’t see them the way you see a whiteboard when you walk past.
Imagine if you started in 1996 remotely, but with the tools/tech we have today. I have to believe that you and your engineering colleagues would’ve developed workflows/standards that equaled or exceeded the paradigm your experience has familiarized you with.
That’s why I don’t think it’s fair or particularly forward-thinking for the many here—not saying you specifically—dunking on the “new generation” for the “new way” of working…they’re measuring on a scale that doesn’t apply.
Just like your lived experience “proves” that unplanned interactions facilitated by physical proximity are of great value, the writers of this letter have lived experience over this past year and a half that “proves” their way is better.
I think it’s disingenuous for so many—again, not you specifically—who came up in one era to categorically dismiss the advantages of remote work, as if they don’t even exist, and people arguing on behalf of remote work are somehow making it up to be lazy snowflake slackers.
Working in an office is not for anyone’s convenience but the CEO having control over the employee’s lives. It’s a sad reflection on Apple that the world’s leading technology company doesn’t have the vision or sufficient technology to allow 100% remote work.
In general I do share your views about the impact of informal interactions. However, I (partially) disagree with the “Zoom” part and the need for physical presence for informal exchange. I guess the issue is the assumption that a Zoom call is necessarily something formal. However, you can have informal exchange over digital formats as well.
The whole young generation shows how digital formats can be used for complete exchange, even on a global scale. I got to know wonderful and interesting people over digital that I’d otherwise never met in the physical world. Throw in a couple of team diners or parties to reinforce the bonds and you’re set.
There are even advantages in meeting “at a virtual water cooler” for chit chat, as you could include people not present on site. Maybe your buddy Joe has moved to another (faraway) town and he would be just the right one to bring in his experience and point of view. You’d most probably not be able to make him come over for an informal chat at the water cooler. But you could have a good chance to get him into an online meeting. Perhaps even on short notice.
If you are somehow “less valuable” than an ordinal overseas worker, then it’s dubious you were qualified for it to begin with or the job wasn't worth your time either.
Last edited:
What is disingenuous is the one-size fits all mentality that seems to be pervasive with respect to this topic...without understand every situation is unique, and some may have a broader view than others. One thing is clear, everyone has to take care of themselves.