Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Property Mogul Recalls Apple Store Fifth Avenue Planning, Says Steve Jobs Wanted 40-Foot Cube

MacRumors said:
Jobs initially wanted a 40-foot cube, leading the designers to set up a scaffolding mockup of the building. However, once Jobs and other Apple executives went to go see the mockup, all agreed that it was too big and obscured the vision for the store.
Click to expand...

I think that story really illustrates what made Steve Jobs great.

While he always dreamed big - it wasn't ridiculous dreams. He didn't say "build me a 100 foot cube." He also never hedged his bets: he knew enough to know that 10 foot cube would look like a shed. But he was also flexible enough to know that a first idea (even when they were his first ideas) can be improved upon.

Its also amazing how "hands on" Jobs was. That he instinctively knew that Apple's Fifth Avenue store was going to have a tremendous impact on how Apple was going to be seen. That, even if they didn't go inside, millions of people from around the world were going to see this totally unique, totally cool storefront in the center of the most important city in the world.
 
Can everyone please stop playing "engineer"? It's entirely irrelevant to the article and your calculations are all irrelevant also: nobody cares about the weight or cost of the cube, even if your estimations were correct, which they likely aren't given the assumptions you seem to have made.

The only calculation which was relevant was the cube volume, but not from a weight perspective, from a size perspective.

tl;dr a 40' cube is much, much more imposing than a 30' cube.
 
Does anyone suspect that Jobs arrived at his cube idea after having seen the glass pyramid leading to the subterranean museum entrance designed by architect I.M. Pei for the Louvre in Paris? Kind of like shades of Xerox Parc and Apple’s graphical user interface?
 
FieldingMellish said:
Does anyone suspect that Jobs arrived at his cube idea after having seen the glass pyramid leading to the subterranean museum entrance designed by architect I.M. Pei for the Louvre in Paris? Kind of like shades of Xerox Parc and Apple’s graphical user interface?
Click to expand...

Note that Apple licensed Xerox's PARC stuff, which is something that the lore forgets to mention.
 
jayducharme said:
And that's probably why -- no one felt threatened by a struggling tech company. I'm sure negotiations would have been a bit different if Apple was the world's wealthiest company back then.
Click to expand...

That's precisely what I was going to say. I venture that it would be much, much harder for the Apple of today to get the same deal, or even the same space today.

I think they'd even have a harder time getting the Grand Central space today. They're a lightning rod, and haters are amassing their troops at the border in greater numbers every day.
 
PinkyMacGodess said:
It was a space probably more suited for an equipment vault. No windows, only small doors, no street access. I'm sure they had to put dehumidifiers in to keep the moisture down. Popping the hole in it and building the cube over it was an EPIC idea. You basically get your 'storefront' for a 'dungeon' and get to scream 'I'M HERE!' in a very unique way.

It was a very creative way to make the space usable.
Click to expand...

Until it floods anyway... :D
 
Macklowe's real estate attorney also later regretted not negotiating a higher "percentage rent" with Apple, which saw his client receiving a portion of the store's profits. Macklowe called the negotiations "horrendously low," and claims that Apple had no idea just how well the store was going to do in business per year.
Click to expand...

So, if Apple had no idea how well the store was going to do, that means they get way more rent than anticipated at the time of negotiation. And he still regrets not getting even more. Wow.
 
Cuban Missles said:
According to the article, it does not seem that Jobs was woried about the square footage or the weight of the glass. To quote, "all agreed that it was too big and obscured the vision for the store." This is my original question, what was the vision that 30 feet complimented but 40 feet obscured?
Click to expand...

He wanted it to look like a giant glass cube. If they made it too big, you wouldn't get that sense unless you stood much further away. Given the limits of the plaza space, that would actually have reduced the effect.
 
SgtPepper12 said:
So you can cube two numbers and divide them by each other. That totally validates your authority to question some other's mathematical education. You must be one genius.
Click to expand...
I'd say anyone who can't do the above is certainly worthy of reproach. Basic arithmetic is still an important skill. The OP clearly stated that a 30' cube is nearly the size of a 40' one, which is utter nonsense. Taking the time to think things through before posting is a sign of respect that we need more of.
 
rdlink said:
That's precisely what I was going to say. I venture that it would be much, much harder for the Apple of today to get the same deal, or even the same space today.

I think they'd even have a harder time getting the Grand Central space today. They're a lightning rod, and haters are amassing their troops at the border in greater numbers every day.
Click to expand...

No. Not at all.

The fifth avenue lot was a horrible place. Honestly, if not for the amazing decor put in, its still not great-Apple took a location with no advantage, a hole in the ground, and made something out of it.

I don't think people knew at the time-including Apple-that Apple had a golden touch, so no one thought of making them pay through the nose. Now would be different.

The GCT location is very different. Prime real estate in one of the busiest areas of NYC-no need for a car. Central location. And it isn't without controversy, contrary to your outlook: http://appleinsider.com/articles/12...ple_had_unfair_advantage_in_grand_central_bid

I, for one, think that Apple did get preferential treatment. Of course, since pretty much only the super rich can afford that spot, I don't really care either. While it is true people do complain more about Apple now than previously, it is simply because Apple effects more lives now than ever before. Haters amassing their troops? What, is this an invasion? Apple is a corporation. It is a person, and can defend itself.
 
gatortpk said:
Wow, this started in 2003 and the iPod was still young, iTunes for Windows was only a month old, etc. Of course there was no iPhone or anything after that. Apple wasn't that big yet!

Steve Jobs still managed to get such a prime spot.
Click to expand...

His obsession for perfection, uniqueness and a perfect balance between form and function, were there all along, but the world had not learned of it yet….. negotiating that ultimate 'prime' spot, a direct result of his legendary persuasive powers.
 
The whole article is wrong, wrong, wrong!

The glass cube idea came from Peter Bohlin, FAIA of Bohlin Cywinski Jackson Architects. Steve jobs recognized the brilliance of Peter's wonderful concept and embraced it. Bohlin Cywinski Jackson's execution of the glass cube was absolutely brilliant.
 
vrDrew said:
I think that story really illustrates what made Steve Jobs great.

While he always dreamed big - it wasn't ridiculous dreams. He didn't say "build me a 100 foot cube." He also never hedged his bets: he knew enough to know that 10 foot cube would look like a shed. But he was also flexible enough to know that a first idea (even when they were his first ideas) can be improved upon.

Its also amazing how "hands on" Jobs was. That he instinctively knew that Apple's Fifth Avenue store was going to have a tremendous impact on how Apple was going to be seen. That, even if they didn't go inside, millions of people from around the world were going to see this totally unique, totally cool storefront in the center of the most important city in the world.
Click to expand...

And that's why Steve was such a visionary.
 
proline said:
I'd say anyone who can't do the above is certainly worthy of reproach. Basic arithmetic is still an important skill. The OP clearly stated that a 30' cube is nearly the size of a 40' one, which is utter nonsense. Taking the time to think things through before posting is a sign of respect that we need more of.
Click to expand...
So he compared the edge lengths of the cubes and you compared the volumes. There is no way of saying which one is more correct. They just are different approaches and it has nothing to do with algebraic skills. Your response was unnecessarily arrogant and offensive. If you want to add something to a discussion, try to do that without proclaiming that everyone is stupid because they have a different opinion than you. It's really helpful in everyday life, too.
 
Gasu E. said:
He wanted it to look like a giant glass cube. If they made it too big, you wouldn't get that sense unless you stood much further away. Given the limits of the plaza space, that would actually have reduced the effect.
Click to expand...

This makes sense. Thanks for the reply. All the math geniuses take note. From what I understand of Jobs, this here is what was important to him. Not 2.whatever repeating or the weight.
 
SgtPepper12 said:
So he compared the edge lengths of the cubes and you compared the volumes. There is no way of saying which one is more correct. They just are different approaches and it has nothing to do with algebraic skills. Your response was unnecessarily arrogant and offensive. If you want to add something to a discussion, try to do that without proclaiming that everyone is stupid because they have a different opinion than you. It's really helpful in everyday life, too.
Click to expand...

Yes, I'd much rather have everyone walk on eggshells and attempt to be nice than have people actually know math. Who cares if the giant glass cube falls down and kills me? At least the architect was nice to others. :rolleyes:
 
PinkyMacGodess said:
DOH! No coffee at that point... Fixed.
Click to expand...

I personally think it was useful to think in terms of cubic feet. I think it gives a good illustration of the size of the thing once inside. Just looking at square feet would not portray that. Is like being in two different 1000 square feet houses... one with 8' ceilings, one with 20' vaulted ceilings. Big difference. So stay with your original math!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back