As a counter-example, another modernist building by Saarinen is the IBM T.J. Watson Center [1], where "none of the offices have windows".
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_J._Watson_Research_Cente...
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_J._Watson_Research_Cente...
http://docomomo-nytri.org/event/30/
Chris Alexander is the feel good source for software design patterns and architectural design. But in the end there's something to be said for functional design in programming and in architecture.[1]
If people sit in their office, they don't talk. Putting common spaces along the glass curtain wall also democratizes access to light.
Finally, from a practical standpoint, the first thing people who spent all day in front of a CRT tended to do in a daylit office was draw the blinds and turn down the lights to reduce glare.
[1] What makes Alexander useful in architecture is that a great deal of architectural function is related to habitation and architectural patterns double back on themselves in terms of users whereas software design patterns tend to be focused on the programmer's pleasures.
My personal opinion is that it better corresponds to current software architectural practice because whereas A Pattern Language is entirely focused on habitability for end users, both current software architectural practice and Notes on the Synthesis of Form emphasize habitability for the architect/programmer - e.g. three tiered systems make the job of the programmer easier, they don't necessarily improve user experience, but light on two sides does.