>"Arguments at Apple are personal and confrontational. This began at the top, and it is part of the company’s culture."
That sounds like a terrible environment.
That sounds like a terrible environment.
Also, that article is about a patent lawsuit being brought against a third-party software development firm. The plaintiffs probably requested that Apple take down the allegedly infringing app, and they did. Any curator, no matter how strict or liberal their policies, has the freedom to remove potentially patent-infringing content from their marketplace.
(Which, for the record, isn't to say I agree that the patent is legitimate. I really hope the small developer wins.)
> Andy Miller, who joined Apple as a vice president after Apple bought his mobile advertising company in 2009, asked Jobs if he could join the board of an independent company in a different business than Apple. “What?” Jobs responded. “You’re barely cutting it here,” Jobs said, which Miller understood to be relatively high praise, “and you want to go spend your time helping someone else’s company? I don’t even let Forstall out of the office,” Jobs added, referring to Scott Forstall, Apple’s mobile software chief, a high-ranking and considerably more influential executive than Miller. Needless to say, Miller declined the board membership offer.
Expecting a board member at a critical time in Apple's turnaround to dedicate 100% of the time to Apple is hardly controlling. In fact I would deem it common sense.
Second, the anecdote in question is about an Apple executive wanting to be a board member somewhere else. Plenty of executives (at companies other than Apple) are board members elsewhere, so Jobs' refusal is at least noteworthy. And since the refusal seems at least partly motivated by limiting an employee's outside interests, that does sound controlling (try replacing the subject of the conversation another professional activity that had a similarly modest time commitment).
It's also worth noting that the executive in question left Apple last summer.
Maybe a joke, but one only a very controlling person could make.
On another point, Facebook is by far the most popular social network, and it can hardly be argued that Facebook's policies are good for the users.
I believe such an environment can be very important. if you have very good people
Also, it's one thing to stand for your idea agressively, other, to just swear at people.
Steve Jobs was famously difficult. Certainly not the kind of boss I would want. But the turnover in his inner circle was really low. Craig Federighi who on Monday demonstrated the next OS X is a Guy from the old NeXT days. I think Jobs selected people as underlings who were able to stand up to him (sometimes).
When Apple says that battery-life is important in mobile devices, they mean it. If Samsung says it, maybe a year later they will turn around and bring out an eight-core phone that you can play a game on for forty-five minutes before having to plug it in again.
Apple isn't just opinionated: it's opinionated on hugely difficult technical issues that don't even exist in the wild yet. (As when they release a new category.) You only get that through violent discourse with egos on the line.
edit: a similar thing happens at Google, but not when it comes to ergonomics or user interfaces and usability with the same hardware devices Apple makes, but instead when it comes to solving certain problems on a massive scale. The result is that Google can't really release a laptop that's as usable as a Macbook in the same domain, and for everyone, and Apple can't really solve the ops issues that it would take to bring out a Google Search competitor. There is huge amount of discourse (of a radically different nature) at both companies.
No, they don't. They mean battery life is important in mobile devices as long as it doesn't get in the way of making them thin (among other things). After all, the modern smartphone with the best battery life is the Droid RAZR MAXX (soon to be dethroned by its international sibling the Motorola RAZR MAXX, which doesn't have the battery-life handicap of an LTE radio).
(likewise apple has its standards in a phone, which is not the standard you cite, but not 45 minutes either.).
Apple is opinionated on every part of the user interface and design, on usability and ease-of-use. They then go on to put their money where their mouth is, and practice what they preach. (For the most part.)
It's very hard to find design decisions at Apple that seem to have 0 thought or discussion behind them. This is the norm at other companies.
Of course, it's entirely within Apple's prerogative to ignore that very niche market (I would if I were them) and it seems to be working well for them, but every odd ball computer configuration you see was created to meet the needs of at least one market. You are not the target market for the desktop replacement laptop. I am.
That doesn't mean the result of said thought was good, however:
http://i.minus.com/dQhzPuq2CZUc/264182-apple-mac-os-x-lion-1...
I really hate all these fake textures they are going though.
That's too bad. I use my laptops as portable desktops, seldom away from a plug. So I have to heft around a giant battery because Apple decides that only one usage model is right?
RIM devices have, generally, dramatically more endurance than Apple mobile devices. Apple seriously compromised battery life on the burgeoning smartphone market because they prioritized other things like a nice interface and a bigger screen. They weren't the leaders in battery life, and it's weird that you compare them particularly to Samsung when most Samsung devices have comparable or battery performance.
False assertion. With a Macbook Pro, you get one of the lightest laptops of its size, plus very competitive specs in pretty much all areas. (This goes for the new Retina one as well as the standard one.)
Samsung series 9 notebook - 2.8lbs.
Macbook Pro - 4.4 - 5.6lbs.
Apple is a remarkable organization, but they are still using the same Intel processors and chipsets, SSDs and wifi chips as everyone else. Where they have a longer battery life it usually is because they filled every crevice with battery, as with the new Retina Macbook Pro. It could have been much lighter if they didn't so intently focus on a 7 hour battery life.
If you want to compare apples to apples, the 13" Air is a much more appropriate comparison to the original machine you were referring to. The Air has a faster processor (and an option to upgrade to an i7) and weighs almost exactly the same (2.96 pounds to 2.9--not 2.8 as you said).
So...you were saying?
You were wrongly saying?
So I think I'm done with you. HAND.
In the books I've read on the topic like _The Nine_, it's sounds like a terrific environment. You are incredibly respected by everyone you meet, you have a light workload which is self-chosen and also extremely important and you can see the consequences of your work without doubt, you work with other highly competent people, you can indulge in things like teaching your pet subject in your offtime and be paid very well for it, you get to select the most talented young lawyers as your staffers, and so on and so forth.