Slashdot Mirror


Apple is About To Do Something Their Programmers Definitely Don't Want (medium.com)

Last week, The Wall Street Journal had a big feature on Apple Campus, the big new beautiful office the company has spent north of $5 billion on. The profile, in which the reporter interviewed Apple's design chief Jony Ive, also mentioned about an open space where all the programmers would sit and work. Ever since the profile came out, several people have expressed their concerns about the work environment for the developers. American entrepreneur and technologist Anil Dash writes: [...] There have been countless academic studies confirming the same result: Workers in open plan offices are frustrated, distracted and generally unhappy. That's not to say there's no place for open plan in an offices -- there can be great opportunities to collaborate and connect. For teams like marketing or communications or sales, sharing a space might make a lot of sense. But for tasks that require being in a state of flow? The science is settled. The answer is clear. The door is closed on the subject. Or, well, it would be. If workers had a door to close. Now, when it comes to jobs or roles that need to be in a state of flow, programming may be the single best example of a task that benefits from not being interrupted. And Apple has some of the best coders in the world, so it's just common sense that they should be given a great environment. That's why it was particularly jarring to see this side note in the WSJ's glowing article about Apple's new headquarters: "Coders and programmers are concerned their work surroundings will be too noisy and distracting." Usually, companies justify putting programmers into an open office plan for budget reasons. It does cost more to make enough room for every coder to have an office with a door that closes. But given that Apple's already invested $5 billion into this new campus, complete with iPhone-influenced custom-built toilets for the space, it's hard to believe this decision was about penny-pinching. The other possible argument for skipping private offices would be if a company didn't know that's what its workers would prefer.

56 of 315 comments (clear)

  1. Greatly Insane by Thud457 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    *pple has long been taken over by managers, marketers and fashion designers. The actual engineers are an afterthought.

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

    1. Re:Greatly Insane by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Sad but true. You can see it in the XCode UI changes. A decade ago, it was ugly and sometimes you had to go to the command-line, but it had all the necessary features and once you figured them out it was easy to use.
      Now XCode is pretty but it looks like it was designed by a product manager, the UI changes fairly often and the actual meaning of buttons is utterly opaque.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    2. Re: Greatly Insane by green1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yet it seems that no company on the planet is willing to put out "usable", they'd all much prefer "beautiful"

      It's extremely frustrating, in so many places you can tell that they probably spent an absolute fortune deciding the exact shade of each colour used, and the exact diameter of each rounded corner, while completely ignoring that the most commonly used task is 32 menus deep, and doesn't maintain it's state between app launches.

      Honestly I'll take something designed by an engineer over a designer or "UI expert" any day. The one made by the engineer will just work, the designer or UI expert will have some squiggly line on an icon that you're only able to interpret if you can read minds, and won't do what you needed in the first place. They'll probably also remove all ability to actually do what you need the item to do in the name of "simplification"

    3. Re: Greatly Insane by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 2

      Yet it seems that no company on the planet is willing to put out "usable", they'd all much prefer "beautiful"

      And the reason is because "beautiful" is immediately apparent while "usable" can usually only be determined by extensive actual use after the product is bought. Thus, "beautiful" outsells "usable".

    4. Re: Greatly Insane by KlomDark · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This is a great comic about how bad UX Experts suck:

      http://slapthebaldy.com/comics...

  2. This should not be a surprise by DickBreath · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's been a long time since Apple was (primarily) about technology. Apple is about fashion. Form over function. Appearance. Show. Illusion.

    Apple has great technology. But unlike in the 80's and 90's, technology comes second (or lower) at the Apple of today. I remember when Apple was a great company. When BYTE magazine wrote that the history of the microcomputer industry was an effort to keep up with Apple, it was true, back when Apple was a truly great company.

    Open plan space for developers to work? No surprise. Quite a difference from the day when Apple would do whatever it took to make developers productive.

    --

    I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    1. Re:This should not be a surprise by Evangelion · · Score: 2

      Well, yes, that's the point of Open Source. (Google did the same thing with Linux and Android).

      However, it's worth noting that in both the cases of iOS and Android, the kernel talking to the hardware is all that it really is. Darwin uses a bit more of the BSD userspace, but it's still only half an OS without the actual OS/X layer ontop of it. The value that the systems bring to the table are from the layers in the middle. No one would use just Darwin, and no one would use an Android device without the touchscreen UI.

    2. Re: This should not be a surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, they should've used a proper copyleft license then. I adore the BSD license and its community of devs but I'm also under no illusion about how shitty human beings are. The GPL is like a lock on a door; it'll keep out the honest, the lazy, and the stupid, but there's some legal force to hit back against the thieves with, whereas the BSD license is like leaving your door unlocked.

    3. Re: This should not be a surprise by jcr · · Score: 2, Informative

      The BSD appropriation was, and is, morally outrageous.

      Go fuck yourself. Apple has contributed as much as any organization to the maintenance and improvement of the BSD codebase. Just ask Jordan Hubbard. Not to mention giving away LLVM and LLDB, you ungrateful prick.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    4. Re:This should not be a surprise by Wraithlyn · · Score: 2

      Yeah, I'm not going to waste my time getting into the weeds with you.

      Because you know what? The onus is on YOU to explain how the iPhone DIDN'T completely transform the smartphone landscape. Because everyone else (without their head entirely up their own ass that is) recognizes that as a simple obvious fact.

      Here's a few articles to get you started. (But don't worry, you're right and the rest of the world is wrong) https://www.google.com/search?...

      --
      "Mind, as manifested by the capacity to make choices, is to some extent present in every electron." -Freeman Dyson
  3. 3rd choice by Nidi62 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    But given that Apple's already invested $5 billion into this new campus, complete with iPhone-influenced custom-built toilets for the space, it's hard to believe this decision was about penny-pinching. The other possible argument for skipping private offices would be if a company didn't know that's what its workers would prefer.

    Or the 3rd choice: They don't really care what their employees prefer.

    --
    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    1. Re:3rd choice by swillden · · Score: 5, Interesting

      But given that Apple's already invested $5 billion into this new campus, complete with iPhone-influenced custom-built toilets for the space, it's hard to believe this decision was about penny-pinching. The other possible argument for skipping private offices would be if a company didn't know that's what its workers would prefer.

      Or the 3rd choice: They don't really care what their employees prefer.

      Actually, it's a fourth: They believe that open plan offices promote creative interaction while closed offices promote focused productivity, and they choose to favor the former over the latter. There's also an element of flexibility. The theory is that it's easier for people in open-plan offices to use noise-cancelling headphones to focus when they need to be productive than it is for employees to walk out of their office and into a colleague's office when they need to collaborate.

      I'm not saying that money never enters into it. But clearly for the likes of tech companies sitting on enormous cash reserves, money isn't the primary consideration. Competitiveness is. Staying ahead of the rapidly-changing technology world is. And they believe that open plan office spaces, with lots of additional space for ad-hoc collaboration in meeting rooms, lounge areas, volleyball courts, etc., is the best way to do that.

      I'm not willing to say that they're unequivocally right, but they're certainly not completely wrong, either.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    2. Re:3rd choice by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Actually, it's a fourth: They believe that open plan offices promote creative interaction while closed offices promote focused productivity, and they choose to favor the former over the latter. There's also an element of flexibility. The theory is that it's easier for people in open-plan offices to use noise-cancelling headphones to focus when they need to be productive than it is for employees to walk out of their office and into a colleague's office when they need to collaborate.

      Whereas it is undeniably true that an open office results in more dialogue, I don't think that is the only way to encourage it. Nothing beats face-to-face and easy access to encourage collaboration, but the problem is, not many people are going to want to work like that.

      I know I quit a job primarily for the reason of switching to open-office. (I had other issues with the place, but the moment they switched to open-office I updated my resume and started job hunting)

      Open office is simply a much less pleasant environment in which to work.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    3. Re:3rd choice by eth1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Or the 3rd choice: They don't really care what their employees prefer.

      Definitely this.

      One of my primary red flags for bailing out of a place (or avoiding working there in the first place) is when they start opening up/making less private work areas, accompanied by some huggy-feely BS about why it's a good idea.

      It's a sure sign that management either doesn't know or doesn't care what people want/need - either way, time to think about leaving.

    4. Re:3rd choice by Nidi62 · · Score: 2

      My floor just went to an open plan a few months ago. Half of our team rooms-the ones that actually were big enough for 5-6 people to work in together-have already been turned into official offices (with desks and internet hook ups installed) while a good 1/3 of the desks on our floor have no one assigned to them, forcing us to either jam people into small rooms or working feet from other people at their desks. The only people that were all for the change to an open floor plan were the ones that got to keep their offices.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    5. Re:3rd choice by tsqr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The theory is that it's easier for people in open-plan offices to use noise-cancelling headphones to focus when they need to be productive than it is for employees to walk out of their office and into a colleague's office when they need to collaborate.

      As if the need to collaborate with colleagues is something new. The part about "they believe that open plan office spaces, with lots of additional space for ad-hoc collaboration in meeting rooms, lounge areas, volleyball courts, etc." sort of contradicts the claim that open-plan offices reduce the need to walk away from your desk to collaborate. Does anyone in an open-plan setting really collaborate by yelling to a colleague on the other side of the room (who can't hear you anyway, 'cause he's got his noise-cancelling headphones on to avoid being distracted)? Or do you send an IM saying, "Hey man, take of your headphones; I need to yell at you"?

    6. Re:3rd choice by Roadstar · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The theory is that it's easier for people in open-plan offices to use noise-cancelling headphones to focus when they need to be productive than it is for employees to walk out of their office and into a colleague's office when they need to collaborate.

      Noise-cancelling headphones won't help with the visual distraction of people moving in your field of vision. Unfortunately I'm speaking from experience, at least I can't help registering extra movement in my field of vision even if I'm trying to concentrate on what's going on my displays. Sure, there are some occasions where I've picked up a valuable piece of information from conversations going on around me in an open office, but most of the time they are just an annoying distraction. As far as I'm concerned, open-plan office isn't the right place for developers.

    7. Re:3rd choice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Open office is simply a much less pleasant environment in which to work.

      That's why everyone has moved to libre office plans now.

    8. Re:3rd choice by markana · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm stuck in an open plan office, and there's plenty of dialog all right. Almost none of it about actual *work*. We have lots of Sales/Marketing/Communications types right next to the small developer group. And boy, do they talk. And talk. Loudly. And about every aspect of their personal lives that we really don't care about. The managers of those group work in a different state, and couldn't care less.

      Noise cancelling headphones work great on repetitive sounds, like engine noise on a bus. But human voices (especially some of these people) cut right through. Most of the development colab happens on email/im/etc anyways, so we're almost always more productive working from home.

    9. Re:3rd choice by green1 · · Score: 2

      I worked at a small ISP at one point, the owner was... I'll politely call him "cheap". Everything we had was the cheapest item he could find, but what helped a lot was when you looked in his office, he was using the same particle board desk and same cheap plastic rolling chair that the rest of us had.
      It goes a long way in garnering good will if the CEO is doing the same things the rank and file are expected to do.

      As for your example. The CEO, CFO, and VP of HR had offices because they had private conversations. Does that mean nobody else had a need to have private conversations? Nobody else had a need for silence and to have the ability to take calls? I doubt it. It sounds like yet another example of the CEO and CFO thinking they were above everyone else and that their decisions shouldn't have to affect them.

    10. Re:3rd choice by swillden · · Score: 2

      It also doesn't help with boorish coworkers who get in your face who, when you had a door you could close, would often go away because as clueless as they are about social interactions they would see a closed door as 'privacy needed.'

      You just have to establish some clear social norms. Where I work (though it's not relevant for me because I'm remote), you never speak to anyone who is at their desk working, without first instant messaging them to ask if they're interruptible. And "no" is a perfectly acceptable answer. Those who don't even want to be interrupted by an IM request log out of IM or mute their IM notifications (you can see if someone is muted).

      This leads to lots of seemingly-odd things like sending an IM to the guy sitting right next to you, even though it would actually be less effort to tap him on the shoulder. It also appears to undermine the "free interaction" goal of an open plan office, but it really doesn't. If you can see that the person isn't focused on something, you can skip the IM, and in any case the IM overhead is minimal. I tend to just send "irq", and colleagues respond with "ack" or " ak", or even just "a" or "n".

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    11. Re:3rd choice by chihowa · · Score: 2

      Open office is simply a much less pleasant environment in which to work.

      Of course it is, as demonstrated by the people who made these decisions giving themselves offices with doors. Executives and upper management, whose almost entire job function is socialization and "collaboration" don't deprive themselves of offices with doors.

      I think it's all about management not having a very solid understanding of what the workers do and needing to literally see them in their seats furiously tapping at their keyboards to feel like they're "managing".

      --
      If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
    12. Re:3rd choice by lgw · · Score: 2

      It doesn't mater how close you are to one another: you can't talk without going somewhere else or you'll disturb everyone else. With offices, you and a colleague can discuss anything at one of your desks, with a whiteboard, and without disturbing others.

      Plus, you're not being treated like fucking cattle. Maybe that doesn't matter to enough people, but it should.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  4. Brain Dead by byteherder · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't know why companies like Apple hamstring their developers with these open office design abominations. Study after study shows that developers are most productive when they have an office with a door they can close. The pointy headed bosses argument that they can wear headphones or take their laptop and move to a conference room doesn't work in reality.

    For the salary they pay software engineers, it would seem that companies would not still be practicing outdated, brain-dead policies that are costing their company millions. Or in Apple's case billions.

    just my 2 cent worth.

    1. Re:Brain Dead by byteherder · · Score: 2

      It is hard to get buy-in to open office plans if one of the requirements is that I need a space with no distractions. That just doesn't work with the open plan. Now if you are all in offices and want to collaborate with a fellow developer, you both can go into one office or book a conference room to share ideas. Best of both worlds.

      Some methodologies are more about collaborate like pair programming. For that case, two developers can share an office. There is nothing about agile methodology that forces collaboration. I am working on an agile project right now and almost everyone is working independently, communicating when needed.

    2. Re:Brain Dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm willing to bet PoopJuggler's nearby coworkers hate the open-plan.

    3. Re:Brain Dead by Seven+Spirals · · Score: 3, Interesting
      I worked as a C developer in a shop that converted to both open floor plan and Agile development. They had previously had been using something like a loose waterfall-method combined with offices and fairly private cubicles. Here's what happened.
      • Productivity fell drastically. Less code was checked in and less of it was high quality code (more comments and BS/fluff).
      • Morale dropped quickly. We all complained about how much we hated the noise, disruptions, and distractions.
      • All the best developers (including myself) quit. They specifically cited both Agile and the open floor plan, as did I, on the way out.
      • We all got better jobs making more money working for people who didn't want to force terrible ideas down our throats.

      Interestingly, we all choose to let our next employers know that open floor plan was a dealbreaker. We didn't have to worry about Agile as much. Folks were already starting to to get disillusioned and looking for the next magic-bullet development method by then. In my case the employer specifically had to provision an office to meet my demands. Funny thing is, a C programmer can be a bit choosy vis-a-vis, say a Javascript & PHP coder. Maybe that's because good embedded programmers are about 100x more rare. Anyhow, cue the violins for the Agile cheerleaders to come break down in tears now that someone has said they didn't like it.

    4. Re:Brain Dead by Dog-Cow · · Score: 3, Funny

      If I juggled shit for a living, I'd want to stay away from walls, too. Not sure what that has to do with software development, though.

    5. Re:Brain Dead by jareth-0205 · · Score: 2

      Every company I've worked at has been open-plan...

      So then.... you have no way of comparing because you have never had a private space?

  5. So even Apple can do utterly stupid things by gweihir · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Who would have thought. The next thing that happens is that the best ones leave for greener pastures where they _can_ close the door.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  6. For most places... by Junta · · Score: 2

    It's a simple matter of the real estate cost of square footage, and in the case of office space, the cost of the building. The 'everyone sits around a table' and even 'you don't need enough seats for everyone, and just assume x% of work from home' is all about that. Of course the problem is people *believing* the warm sounding rationalizing and starting to adopt it for things like this, where *clearly* cost efficiency was not at the top of the list.

    --
    XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    1. Re:For most places... by networkBoy · · Score: 3, Informative

      I am currently in an office that *just* went open plan...
      Support folks like it because they can communicate easily. Devs... not so much, and now there are additional issues.
      Case in point, I put on my headphones so I can exclude other sounds, unfortunately my office mates can hear my music and it annoys them, so I can't actually listen to my music while I code. Instant 30-70% hit on productivity, since now I hear their conversations and my brain is dragged away from its focus.

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    2. Re:For most places... by apoc.famine · · Score: 2

      You've got the wrong headphones. You'll save your hearing and your sanity if you get the right ones.
       
      I have a fairly cheap $20 pair of earbuds with a thick rubber insert, and they do wonders for dampening the world around me. As a side-effect, I don't need my music up very loud, and you can't hear it from 2' away when I have them in. If I can accomplish that with a $20 pair of earbuds, you should be able to do the same with a more expensive (and likely more comfortable) set of headphones.
       
      If you can hear them and they can hear your music, your headphones suck. Make everyone's life better by finding the right pair.

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
    3. Re:For most places... by byteherder · · Score: 2

      I have had the exact same experience. People who need to communicate a lot like open plans. They want to talk to their coworker around them.

      People that have to think, as opposed to talk, want quiet spaces, free from distractions. Headphones can block out some of the noise but not all of it. If you turn it up too loud it distracts your neighbors. Also, there is the visual distractions. Nobody has told me how to get rid of those.

    4. Re:For most places... by DigiShaman · · Score: 2

      Nah man, real programmers are going to sit around the campfire that will be lit ablaze right smack in the middle of the ring; arms in lock singing Kumbaya.

      Don't you love the smell of burning plastic? Ohh the toxic fumes! *whiffff*

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
  7. Google does it, therefore we must by ErichTheRed · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'll refrain from the obvious jokes about the workers' pods only having rounded corners...

    I really think the companies that get this trend right and actually want to keep employees happy will eventually settle on a mix of public and private spaces. Those of us who are older and like our private spaces have to remember that this is the age where "social media manager" is a real, full-time, highly compensated position. There are some people who thrive on collaborative spaces, constant noise and distraction, and love to work at cafeteria tables with zero personal space. There are also some (me included) who can't get any serious work done unless I'm in a private location with the door shut and "do not disturb" turned on in my various messaging accounts.

    Unfortunately, the more extroverted among us tend to have the ear of HR more than heads-down workers like me. In addition, most corporate HR departments just copy what Google is doing verbatim regardless of fit. Google's where all the kids work, and companies love to have as many young exploitable employees as possible, so it makes sense...sort of. Unitl it meets an organization with a high average age of employee, that lives and dies by conference calls and work that requires concentration.

    1. Re:Google does it, therefore we must by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There are some people who thrive on collaborative spaces, constant noise and distraction, and love to work at cafeteria tables with zero personal space.

      I've yet to meet any of those people.

      To clarify: I've met people who love that sort of work style, and *claim* to be productive... but they don't seem to actually be getting much real work done. They're good at deflecting, and subtly throwing others under the bus, when asked why A and B and C aren't done or are done badly.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    2. Re:Google does it, therefore we must by ErichTheRed · · Score: 4, Interesting

      'a workspace designed from the ground up for the millenial generation'

      Agreed it's not all about age, but I generally haven't seen older people outside of sales and marketing who love working in one of these Millenial workspaces. I have seen that younger workers are coming into the workforce being used to more distractions, so while they may not be getting a lot of work done, they prefer the "collaborative preschool" environment with the bright colors and the beanbag chairs. It's different from a more traditional work-style, where older people are used to going to an office, doing their work and leaving. Younger people (at least in IT/development) seem to want to continue their college years and work in a dorm-style atmosphere. Without as many commitments at home they find it appealing to basically live at work, which is a huge bonus for employers.

    3. Re:Google does it, therefore we must by bungo · · Score: 2

      'a workspace designed from the ground up for the millenial generation'

      Agreed it's not all about age

      I think it is about age, and not generational. As you said, Millenials like it because they are younger and has less commitments.

      When I worked for a large tech company, about a dozen miles south of the San Francisco airport, I happily spent most of my time there. It was 25 years ago, I was young, no wife/kids. All of my friends and everyone I knew worked at the same place. If I went out for a drink, it was with the same people. I went on holidays with the same people. The office wasn't open plan, but cubicles. Everyone walked around and talked to each other all of the time. We were even encouraged to do it. Were we less productive than we could have been? Probably.

      That was my life at the time, and I was happy and had a great time. Now, I'm married, kids, lots of commitments. I try to do my work and go home, but when that doesn't work out, I'm not hanging around at the office, but I continue to work from my home office - but usually after I've got the kids to bed. I could never go back to how I worked 25 years ago.

      Once the millenials get kids and settle down, the next generation will be doing the same thing, and the millennial will be telling them to get off their lawn.

      --
      "The best part? I became an ordained minister while not wearing pants." -- CleverNickName
  8. Is this reductio ad absurdum? by rbrander · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Let's consider the opposite strategy, then, if programmer is the 'single best example' of needing flow.

    Should Apple sacrifice, I dunno, half the open area to work-pods you slide into like a fighter pilot? Basically a ring of three 4K monitors wrapped around you, the backs of the monitors 6" from the walls? I'm thinking four feet by six or seven. No windows, obviously. Sound insulation.

    Is there no minimum to the amount of "distraction", that is, anything but what's on your monitors - that should be removed for optimum results?

    If so, you've got the only argument they'll listen to - that you will take up even less of that precious office space. Open plans were never about anything but reducing that square-feet per person number.

    That, and one other thing: 10x10 private offices were often places where people had some privacy in which to goof off. Watch YouTube in an open plan, and people notice. This is just not a real issue in a well-run place where the supervisor knows what the hell all her subordinates are doing and has done the work herself so that she has an idea how far along everybody should move every day. But when the super is too dumb to measure outputs, they will measure inputs.

    1. Re:Is this reductio ad absurdum? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2

      Today all you need is a network connection to know what your employees are or aren't doing. You don't need to look at the screen.

      For the life of me I don't understand why most engineering spaces don't have private offices surrounding an open area for collaboration or whatever. If you need to save money on your workers square footage requirements you are doing something wrong and you certainly aren't Apple who could afford a McMansion for every coder and engineer on the payroll.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  9. Because managers don't generally get it .... by King_TJ · · Score: 5, Interesting

    When one of our corporate offices moved to a new location and got a ground-up remodeling as part of the deal, there were great opportunities to make a more functional space for everyone. Instead, the top level management for that location took charge of everything, designing a floor-plan the way THEY envisioned it. The "rank and file" employees barely got a chance to see it before it was approved and work begun on it.

    The group of us in I.T. got a sneak peak at it, just before work started on it, and we collectively said, "Woah! Hold up! BAD ideas here!" The whole space was an open floor plan, except for a row of 6 "phone rooms" where you could shut the door to talk on a phone, placed on a small table, with a few chairs around it. That, and one short hall of offices with doors.

    To be fair, it is a marketing oriented company, BUT a lot of the people working in this space are designers, or at least have jobs that require a lot of conference calls, video-conferences, and negotiating with clients over the phone. In other words, lots of need for quiet in the surrounding space so you can sound professional while communicating with people.

    Our opinions held no weight though, and everything proceeded despite our complaints. So now? The office tends to be largely empty, because everyone decided they can get work done more effectively by just working from home whenever possible. The upper management folks who pushed for it? Well, they're rarely in the office anyway because they're constantly traveling. I guess they think it's fine when they finally come back for a few days though, since it's so quiet with so few people wanting to come in now?

  10. form over function by Lead+Butthead · · Score: 3, Interesting

    reminds me a lot of Detroit in the 50s and 60s. The cars looked nice, but most are absolute crap under the hood.

    --
    ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
  11. Re:I'll take your open office, by networkBoy · · Score: 2

    Headphones don't work.
    Even good ones let enough sound in that you can hear conversations, if you turn up the volume enough sound leaks out that your co-workers will complain about your music selections.

    --
    whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
  12. Re:I'll take your open office, by phantomfive · · Score: 2

    For a while I tried earplugs + shooters ear muffs. It didn't work: at some point you block off your ears enough and bone convection brings the sound to your ears through your skull. Also when you open your mouth things get louder.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  13. it's a fad by roc97007 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Open office plans seem to be the fad for this decade. (See: "Management by magazine article".) The fact that it demonstrably only works for certain types of environments, and doesn't work at all in an environment where the workers are expected to dive deep and perform long complicated tasks, hasn't made an impression on upper management yet.

    As our group had more than one physical location, conference calls were common. Very quickly after we switched to an open office plan, came an edict that employees would be required to book conference rooms for calls. The noise was, naturally, disrupting the people trying to write or debug software. (It wasn't just that the cubicle walls were gone, it was also that we were all sitting elbow-to-elbow in a 1950's-era bullpen arrangement. Wow, how progressive...)

    Shortly after that, it was discovered that we did not have enough conference rooms to meet demand. This was never solved, and it became common to see employees in the cafeteria or visitor's lounge trying to manage a conference on their cell phones, with laptop balanced on their knees. This raised the issue of discussing company intellectual property in a semi-public place, but I don't think that was ever solved either.

    --
    Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
  14. Re:Balance. by mysidia · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You need a manager/marketer/fashion designer at the top, because engineers wouldn't know UI if their asinine choices bit them in the ass.

    That's not true. You need Marketers/Fashion designers to guide project requirements and approval the results NOT to decide working conditions for professions conducting work they know almost nothing about.

  15. Re:The very idea by swb · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It seems like when big-name companies build new office space the people at the top of the organization value HUGE open spaces for their dramatic value. I've walked into wholly owned office buildings where the main entry way is like walking into a cathedral, a giant mostly empty space meant to make a big statement to visitors (possibly even the same psychological impact cathedrals were meant to have to peasants).

    At Apple the building is so large that they have to have the "main cathedral" for the really big impact, and then mini-cathedrals for various major departments and to provide a secondary impact for people having meetings with specific departments or who didn't use the main entrance.

    The Pentagon comparison is interesting -- I got a tour inside last year, and there's like a ton of space used for what amounts to a freaking mall *and* a mall-sized food court, so that they fit even more people is surprising. Combine this with the huge amount of security, where lots of areas are extra-secured and hence totally walled off, which I'm sure results in a large amount of space inefficiency and Apple's space seems REALLY ostentatious.

  16. Re:All of the options suck. by mbkennel · · Score: 2

    Offices, with closable doors, surrounding nice communal areas. Steve Jobs designed the Pixar building that way to encourage the right amount of interaction and production.

  17. Re:I'll take your open office, by Arkham · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I work in an open office in Atlanta. It's so damn loud that some days I just send my developers home to work.

    I bought some $300+ Bose QuietComfort 35 headphones to cancel the noise -- they help, but it's not enough.

    I can use the foam earplugs you use for working around heavy machinery, but honestly, at that point how much degradation of productivity have you taken on when that's your own recourse?

    I truly don't understand the open floorpan. It's only result is unhappy employees.

    --
    - Vincit qui patitur.
  18. Re:Every dev job I've had since the turn of .... by jcr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The number of times that another employee has distracted me in that entire time is zero.

    Lucky you, but I've been in places where people were tossing beanbags and nerf balls around, and it gets old, really fast.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  19. Re:Jony Ive is a no talent hack by green1 · · Score: 2

    Minimalism has been redefined recently to mean the fewer controls the better.
    It's completely lost the context that fewer is only better if you don't lose the ability to access the needed functions.

  20. Re:I'll take your open office, by lsllll · · Score: 2

    I work in an open office in Atlanta. It's so damn loud that some days I just send my developers home to work.

    You are in a position where you can send developers home, but you don't have an office with a door?

    --
    Is that a roll of dimes in your pocket or are you happy to see me?
  21. Re:I'll take your open office, by Arkham · · Score: 2

    You are in a position where you can send developers home, but you don't have an office with a door?

    Nobody in our office has a door (even the VP in charge of the whole site). We have the entire development staff in one large room (300+ developers and QE). I measured the noise level today at 67dB. It's really absurd.

    --
    - Vincit qui patitur.
  22. No programmers in the Spaceship by ghoul · · Score: 2

    The Spaceship is reserved for corporate, designers and marketeers. So duh it is open plan. Most programmers at Apple just book the conference rooms for coding sessions. Its absolutely impossible to get a conference room at short notice on any of the campuses.

    --
    **Life is too short to be serious**
  23. Re:Stop with the clickbait title by Wootery · · Score: 2

    Yep, clickbait horseshit. Deliberately thin on information.

    A good title should be as informative as possible given the space constraint.