You be clueless.
https://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose...on-silicon-valley-leasing-spree-as-deals.html
Apple is buying and leasing property all over the valley.
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.
MP 7,1 Waiting for Mac Pro 7,1 A1991 (no more)
- Thread starter Mago
- Start date
-
- Tags
- macpro 2016
- Sort by reaction score
https://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose...on-silicon-valley-leasing-spree-as-deals.html
Apple is buying and leasing property all over the valley.
That article is from 2015, before Apple Campus was completed. It even says so in the article:
(I agree better integration of or closer proximity to public transport should have been part of the design, though)
I am in a similar but more difficult situation.
My music oriented business has been primarily Mac, with only few Wintel machines running custom accounting software. We currently are planning to move to a new and bigger premise, with a proper dubbing stage, increasing staff count in an open office area, and expand into video/photography as a media outlet. If the expansion happened in 2008 then the decision would be clear - just switch everything to Macs. The sheer ease in dealing with mountains of interfaces and various media alone was worth it. But now it is a tough call. CoreAudio is still there (despite its stability lately), but the power for DAW is too expensive to get. Video centric workflow is dandy with FCPX, but it is a limiting option in both workflow if not hardware performance. Even general day to day tasks on macOS isn't as responsive and rock solid as the Snow Leopard days, the GUI lag is noticeable even for the reception lady.
What Macs still somewhat excel is the rather painless plug&play nature, driver related issues are there but a hell lot less than on Windows. But if the Touch Bar MBP with just USB-C, and iPhone 7 axing 3.5mm, or all new Macs losing aux-in & TOSLINK are any indication, it seems Apple isn't so determined to offer this painlessness if it benefits them to lock users in, or just plain bean-counting. I still find it unbelievably difficult to get my iPad Pro to collaborate with my Macs where the best method is still AirDropping files back and forth...
We don't use Windows 10 heavily but I have to occasionally do things in it, have to say it has gotten much better since Vista days, but still lacks a certain degree of coherence and comfort. I don't know which is harder, hoping Apple to pull out of its rear, or waiting Windows to suck less. Even with machine cost out of the question, the sheer uncertainty concerning Apple's commitment to the platform is troubling enough.
Last edited:
I can't imagine how many people would rate "no standard local and network traversable open & save dialogue" and "no ability to make arbitrary folders in the userland storage of the local device" as the biggest painpoints of iOS for utility as a work tool. I know I'd buy an iPad Pro in an instant, IF it could look through my mac pro to all my project folders and open / save files to them.
People obviously rate it. The sandboxed app idea while workable for the average folk, but we are talking about the iPad Pro, with the Pro moniker the user is assumed to be productive with it. Very seldom can work be done within just one app or even suite of apps, only exception is something like Lightroom Mobile perhaps, which has enormous resource in development and its own 3rd party cloud supporting it. I use Procreate frequently, it is easy to tell the developers already tried their best to ensure different saving and sharing methods are readily available, but as soon as I need to export something to a Mac then it has to either go through the Cloud or with bluetooth AirDropping, even discounting the ridiculousness of not doing a plain old WLAN file transfer, but the fact the two file systems fundamentally alienate from each other with no concept of sharing the same file with any sense of versioning is astonishingly backwards.
I know this iOS talk may be slightly off topic, but considering Apple's intent on using ARM for Macs, that may entail some degree of macOS and iOS marriage on a deeper level, for better or worse that may help bridge the gap.
Yes, I know. The valley only has so much space, with so many residences for employees, and the more companies lease the more costs go up.
It does not make sense for Apple to continue to host more campuses in the valley. Even if you built the offices who can afford to live there? Especially on an Apple salary?
I mean your second article talks about how employees already find the commute from San Jose to Cupertino a huge issue.
The commute from San Jose...
...to Cupertino...
...an issue.
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/San...d3fe1a3e178b4!2m2!1d-122.0321823!2d37.3229978
It just sounds crazy.
My commute is about twice as long as San Jose - Cupertino and is almost entirely Interstate Highway (my home is literally 100 meters from an on-ramp/off-ramp and my work has direct freeway access). During peak times, it can easily take over an hour. So to be honest, I can relate.
Sure, but what's the point at this... point.
If it takes too long to get from San Jose to Cupertino, and you can't operate them as the same campus, why not just build somewhere else.
It's not like housing prices are dramatically cheaper in San Jose. Heck, the article wasn't even talking about hiring more employees. It was talking about people who already work for Apple now working in San Jose.
Apple's biggest problem is that they don't have enough engineers and that well is already pretty dry in the valley. Google and Apple (and others) are all fighting over the same pool, and if Apple isn't willing to out bid Google for employees (and they haven't been), Apple will never be able to dramatically expand in the valley.
AirDrop isn't primarily Bluetooth. It is a Personal Area Network (PAN) Wi-Fi connection. The bluetooth is only used to set up a trusted PAN ( does system A trust system B and system B trust system A ). After the "trusted" square dance is done, the files transfer is at Wi-Fi speeds.
Moving from your iPad to your Mac should be closer to Handoff than AirDrop.
"plain old WLAN file transfer' doesn't get you past locking and synchronization issues.
In January, the median price for a single family home in Cupertino (95014) was $2.18M.
The median price in San Jose (95131, where the Apple buy is) was $0.99M.
That's rather dramatic....
(Edit: The price includes condominium units...)
Last edited:
Completely understand and have been though very similar myself. Bottom line, I feel entirely comfortable with Win10 now and the productivity /power increase far outweighs the relatively minor learning & familiarity curve. Further, now that all that is established, the workstations (Dell T7910) require almost zero intervention and just 'do the job'. Good luck.
Sure. it goes from incredibly unaffordable on an Apple salary to fairly unaffordable on an Apple salary. Which is a big reason Apple is bleeding employees to Google.
It's not just that homes are expensive. It's also that Apple doesn't pay their employees that much for the Bay Area.
The median rent in San Jose is $3500 a month. And that's the "bargain" price of living in San Jose, not Santa Clara or Cupertino.
Chuckle. 990,000 single bedroom condo on the take-off/landing approach to San Jose Airport ... what a bargain. *cough* [ Silicon Valley prices are straight looney. I known folks in SV try to normalize these in regular conservation, but they are. ]
The primary reason why zipcode 95131 is so "low" is because most folks with lots of money don't want to live there. Major Airport level of noise. Large oil storage/distribution facility. For most part it is zoned industrial. segmented Berryessa schools.
The different isn't all that dramatically difference for someone on a $100-200K salary. Strict lending requirements isn't going to qualify for either one of those (barring some stock option lotto win.)
I lived in SV for a long time. This location tangent is beyond goofy.
1. Apple Park is located relatively near the Infinite Loop campus. The hard fact that no new one campus was going to be big enough to move all the critical mass into. Apple will pay less in leasing but it isn't gong to go to zero. Some simple shuttles can reasonable get folks between Inf Loop , Apple Park , and the new Wolfe road buildings.
2. Whatever Apple stuffs into the SJC airpport / 101 fwy location I'd guess won't have a high density of folks in it. Or they are mostly folks lower down on the totem pole. Also makes for a nice location for folks who jump and planes and fly somewhere else a significant percentage of the time. ( also for some aquihires they may do that are already in San Jose. Dump that companies leased space and fold into Apple without moving too far. )
3. Light rail to Cupertino (and mid pennisula area) ... ha. CalTrain is an option primarily because it is a legacy route from the Leland Stanford era. ( i.e, the 1800's. ). Historically the cities on the bulk of the Peninsula have blocked "mass transit" and at this point it is what it is. At these current ridiculous land values extending lines will never make the money back in fares (and ridership). [ Light rail got shoved up to Moffett Field in Mtn View, but that was up First St. which is most often much longer than car trip down. google didn't do anything amazing for their light rail tie in or in picking up Moffett Field after the gov't decided to largely dump a big chunk of it. ]
Raise the BS flag. If the massive Ego hadn't wanted to make a statement, Apple Park could have been a number of high rise office buildings - instead of a misguided attempt to recreate the fruit orchards of a century ago around a dysfunctional doughnut-shaped building.
Or Apple could "think different" and use a tiny fraction of their megatons of cash to bore some tunnels between those facilities and move people quickly between the sites without adding to surface traffic. (Think of the autonomous trains at DFW, but put them underground.)
Actually, VTA light rail goes about 4 km past Moffett to correspond with Caltrain at the downtown Mountain View station.
And, if you want to see mass transit in the Peninsula really work - go to the Mountain View CalTrain/VTA station whenever there's a baseball or football game. SRO trains on double schedule.
Maybe. But it's still a chicken and an egg problem. Even if you built facilities that could house all of Apple's employees with room to spare, unless Apple does a salary bump, there is no one to hire.
Apple does have space issues, but more significantly, they also have not enough employees. People don't just magically come with the building. And if the valley is too expensive for Apple salary no one is going to show up for any opened positions.
Without getting into a lot of specifics, Apple not being able to reliable ship and declining software quality is connected to them trying to do too much with not enough people. But Apple also has an internal resistance to large satellite campuses and larger teams, just because that was the Steve way when they shipped less products, and smaller products.
Another option is Apple just increases their pay to start poaching from their neighbors, but you'd also want to increase pay on existing positions, and that's going to create a hit large enough to be felt by shareholders.
Shareholders are more likely to feel pain from low quality based on the current low salaries.
Thanks, I stand corrected. So what I was trying to say is exactly the ad-hoc nature of AirDrop, which is a useful and appropriate method to transfer among free moving devices. But when I intend to collaborate between a Mac and an iPad Pro, then I am expecting an AFP/Samba like connection that is always ready upon establishment, preferably looking at the same directory from all devices. Unlike AirDropping which entails creating separated copies that requires manual management. Apple probably thinks iCloud is a solution for this use case, but like said, it is unnecessary traffic going out of my LAN, especially concerning bandwidth and security/privacy.
Have you tried exploring alternatives in the interim ? iOS’ file handling leaves a lot to be desired but maybe solutions like iexplorer might help.
Apple probably doesn't. More likely they are looking for someone else ( or maybe get around to it themselves later ... although with their SMB track record it may be wise for them to wait until they get their act together) to have a SMB app integrate with Files.
Distant "Cloud" or LAN "Cloud" there is little material difference. The primary difference with the "LAN Cloud" file service is that it could be unavailable even if LTE and Wifi are still on (but users is remote from LAN). That is different from the remote distant cloud being operationally down, but not in sense can't get to the files. Just a substantively different root cause ( too far versus server down). Either way the Files app is gong to need to indicate "can't do that now".
that would still be a "check in / check out" baseline paradigm. The paradigm where the files are never one the iPad at all... I wouldn't hold my breath on baseline support for that in iOS apps. All apps on local APFS (copy on write) is the model they'll stick with for a while.
It's actually perpendicular to the airport - no planes overhead. And if you go to Zillow or any other real estate listing site you'll see that the average listing price in Cupertino is above anything in the San Jose area around Apple. (The SJC airport only has two parallel runways at 30/12 - so if you start close to the airport and move northeast or southwest you'll be moving away from overhead traffic.)
And if you want a fixer-upper in a very nice section of San Jose close to Cupertino - here's one for $799,000.
Last edited:
If I was designing a Mac Pro, I'd build it up from the the Mac Mini, so its a modular computer with how many modules you want, and connect your modules as stackable units or side by side etc. So if you want a gun graphics card, pop it into a graphics expansion box that looks like the Mac Mini CPU. And have a similar chassis for mini SSD drives, and one for hard disks that you just plug into the expansion box and off you go. Connect them with the high speed thunderbolt cable.
thunderbolt is to slow and with an mini desktop class cpu you only get 16 pci-e on cpu. Now apple will need an switcher to make use of the cpu pci-e vs the slower DMI pci-e.
Say X4 base ssd and 3 TB 3 channels on CPU?
Apart from TB not being up to the task , the costs for a solution with seperate modules would be ridiculous .
Love the idea, but the prices even for TB externals havn't come down to a reasonable level after years .
Apple has not shown many signs of properly supporting , much less developing their own external TB hardware in as many years either .