or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple planning massive 12,000 capacity "spaceship" campus in Cupertino
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple planning massive 12,000 capacity "spaceship" campus in Cupertino - Page 8

post #281 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloudgazer View Post

Apple is a consumer electronics firm. It's like asking a bank to provide free local laundry facilities. Sure their employees and customers may use laundries, but it's really nothing to do with them.

While I agree with your analogy, Apple is way more than a consumer electronics firm IMO.......
post #282 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dlux View Post



What a great solution.

I'd hate to be near the top floors of this if it caught on fire.......
post #283 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by GlynParish View Post

I'd hate to be near the top floors of this if it caught on fire.......

There are no top floors. They just keep going.
post #284 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by flippysc View Post

Services include transportation and the council should have inquired more, perhaps starting with, "how can we work together to best minimize traffic during peak times that would benefit both Apple and Cupertino?" When are the peak times? Where are the site access points? Are people going to be traveling between the two campuses and when? Would they consider light rail between the two campuses? (This could be the impetus to declare eminent domain against the apartment complex.)

I doubt there will be much transit between the two sites, certainly not enough to justify a light rail. And eminent domain can't be used in california to benefit a private developer at the expense of residential property. A constitutional amendment was passed preventing it shortly after Kelo vs New London.

Quote:
How are emergency vehicles going to have access to the entire building.

That gets discussed in different meetings with the emergency services themselves.

Quote:
No mention of water management strategies -- I presume another impact on city services.

The site has already been developed so presumably the water use won't be changing much.


Quote:
If I recall, Mr. Jobs stated they will have their own generators, but still use the grid. If he did actually say they may use the grid, the city should have asked him under what scenarios. They should have asked where the generators are going, and if close to the property lines, then to provide noise abatement.

He said in the presentation that the grid was likely to be used just as redundancy in case of a generator failure. As for noise, modern gas turbines are remarkably quiet, quiet enough for domestic use! They'll certainly be quieter than the freeway that runs right next to the property.


Quote:
This is not the "greenest" building in the world, but like with any building project, there are trade-offs. This building would be more environmentally efficient if it had a smaller footprint, making it more vertical.

I'll be extremely interested if you can provide a link to any kind of study demonstrating that taller buildings are more environmentally efficient. I seriously doubt you'll be able to. Lowrise buildings have several intrinsic advantages, it's easier to naturally light them, the ground acts as a thermal buffer, elevators are power hogs etc. Given the ratio of building footprint to landscaping he's

In fact at the other extreme, earth sheltered buildings are incredibly energy efficient.

We don't know how green this building will end up being, we won't until it's considerably further along the design process. We don't even know what the final design will be, all that Jobs is getting approval for at this stage is the master plan for the site.
post #285 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph L View Post

Bull. This is classic sprawl architecture. It uses WAY too much land compared to other styles of building.

Howsabout a smaller footprint and more open space? Howsabout building big, giant skyscrapers (which include office, residential and retail?) next to major transportation hubs? Howsabout trying to eliminate car trips and huge parking lots?

Suburban sprawl is horrible for the environment. And Apple's architects too often aim for a "look at me" style rather than integrating into the built (or natural) environment. The retail stores stick out like sore thumbs, with featureless glass plopped down in neighborhoods of detailed masonry.

Sorry, but I think different.

You have GOT to be kidding!
post #286 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

40 miles away in comparison to England.

I suppose you think that all of Apple's employees are paid as much as he is so that they can afford to move anywhere?
post #287 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by rtm135 View Post

Didn't Google give everyone in Mountain View free WiFi? It's not totally out of the question to request it.

Google is doing an experiment. Remember that that their business depends on people getting high speed Internet service. Even with iCloud, for Apple; not so much.

And Google like using publicity stunts to get positive public attention. Apple; not so much.
post #288 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by flippysc View Post

Brilliant presentation, though it was a dog and pony show to introduce the project to Cupertino. The real battles usually occur behind close doors with the owner's team and the municipality's staff.

The City should be only concerned with how the project impacts services provided by the City and how it impacts the "neighborhood".

Services include transportation and the council should have inquired more, perhaps starting with, "how can we work together to best minimize traffic during peak times that would benefit both Apple and Cupertino?" When are the peak times? Where are the site access points? Are people going to be traveling between the two campuses and when? Would they consider light rail between the two campuses? (This could be the impetus to declare eminent domain against the apartment complex.)

How are emergency vehicles going to have access to the entire building.

No mention of water management strategies -- I presume another impact on city services.

If I recall, Mr. Jobs stated they will have their own generators, but still use the grid. If he did actually say they may use the grid, the city should have asked him under what scenarios. They should have asked where the generators are going, and if close to the property lines, then to provide noise abatement.

The "green" items mentioned likely were the ones that best describe how the project is going to improve and have a positive impact on the "neighborhood." I am sure there are others.

This is not the "greenest" building in the world, but like with any building project, there are trade-offs. This building would be more environmentally efficient if it had a smaller footprint, making it more vertical. At 4 to 5 stories, with my guess of 15 to 16 feet floor to floor heights, it is still a tall building that is not as human scale as a two-story building. As some discussed, the trees will not provide shade to the upper floors. However, a large percentage of the workers are going to have natural daylight and tremendous views. (The downside is the ultraclear glass Mr. Jobs likes is much more of a bird killer than a wind turbine.)

In my opinion, this will be an excellent office building, but not the best. My favorite is the John Deere administration building, that is one of the few buildings in the world that looks better at nearly 50 years old then when it was new. The beauty of the Apple building will not be from looking at the building, but looking from the building. The interior courtyard office views and much of the exterior views of the landscaped areas are going to be wonderful when the vegetation matures. The Apple building will look spectacular from a hot air balloon as demonstrated in the renderings. At eye level, there is much work to be done. Though "God is in the details", there needs to be context of place. It is a huge building that could be hugely boring at the pedestrian level if there are huge distances between what appears to be 4 nodal points. There is no playfulness nor rhythm of materials. Perhaps they should have more nodal points. Perhaps have offsetting circles where in relationship to the overhangs, the glazing is recessed on the south sides and more flush on the north in order -- allowing for glass shading where it is needed most.

My guess is the interior is going to have the longest corridors in the world. And they may never end! The horizontal spread may be a challenge where is looks like a walk between two points could be more than a 1/2 mile.

A number of the questions you have posed here were answered in the video, and in the pictures presented there.

As far as the Deere building goes, well, the eye of the beholder and all.
post #289 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

You have GOT to be kidding!

Don't confuse humor with stupidity.
post #290 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph L View Post

Nope. Not kidding. Neither their sterile low-rise glass ring in the 'burbs nor their featureless glass facades in the midst of brick and granite neighborhoods strike me as good architecture.

Well, it's a good thing we haven't posted OTHER examples of Apple's architecture that you've completely ignored here to pretend that your point still has merit.

Oh, wait.

And double-spacing after sentences. That's funny. That takes me back a ways...

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #291 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

And double-spacing after sentences. That's funny. That takes me back a ways...

- yikes, I do that too

It's a really hard habit to break. In my defence I got taught to type that way back in 1985.
post #292 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

And double-spacing after sentences. That's funny. That takes me back a ways...

That's nice, what does that have to do with the article?
post #293 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

Robre, How do you know it *will* have solar? It seems like if it was planned the presentation would likely have included it.

Geez, what I've been saying if you've actually read all my posts is that this whole concept from Steve and Apple is pretty impressive overall.

It's just that at this stage what we know of it does not automatically make it the best green building out there in the world, which some posters agree. Just because it's designed by Apple.

Yes Apple will do the best they can but let's be realistic, it may not be *the very best green building in the world*.

Various posters are thinking about different aspects... Why no mention of solar? Any more details on the gas turbine technology? Some people have raised concerns about the glass, etc.

I was also just mentioning that the city council had some pretty silly questions. They could have asked something like, what about solar energy? You know, being in the commie liberal land of California (sarcasm). That's a legitimate question, and Steve probably would have had a good answer, which unfortunately we never got a chance to hear because they were too busy asking for free WiFi and showing off their iPads.

Of course I understand this was a limited public presentation and a lot more details will be forthcoming over the next several years.

As with some other posters I also raised a question about earthquake-proofing which was something else the city councillors could have asked about, instead of just the guy asking about "so it's going to be safety [sic] right?" or something like that.

Hey Nvidia, I actually agree with your line of thinking, I was just saying that your time zone works against you when have to lay out the first terms of the thread before everyone else is in. Others also point out later that this was just a formality of a presentation, and clearly the council has already approved the project in some major way. It was a show. Maybe they get serious later in the process, like you say.
post #294 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph L View Post

Nope. Not kidding. Neither their sterile low-rise glass ring in the 'burbs nor their featureless glass facades in the midst of brick and granite neighborhoods strike me as good architecture.

Well then, maybe you're faking. And Cupertino along the 280 is not the suburbs.
post #295 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post

Hey Nvidia, I actually agree with your line of thinking, I was just saying that your time zone works against you when have to lay out the first terms of the thread before everyone else is in. Others also point out later that this was just a formality of a presentation, and clearly the council has already approved the project in some major way. It was a show. Maybe they get serious later in the process, like you say.

Cool, cheers. I guess that response of mine was directed mostly at user Robre and one or two others.

Yeah, because of my time zone sometimes I'm either too early in a thread that then gets stuffed with responses, or I'm rather late to the thread and trying to catch up.

No worries, it all adds to the fun!

It's only usually a "problem" with the long threads like this one. Plus there are enough forum regulars that seem to be on at all hours of the day so things aren't too lonely.

As with most AI threads, after some initial direct conversations it usually becomes people taking one of two sides once more posts are added in, things clarified, etc. Peppered of course with the crackpot comments. My posts usually fall on one of both sides, hopefully not under the crackpot category.
post #296 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph L View Post

...in the midst of brick and granite neighborhoods strike me as good architecture.

Are you suggesting a new brick building in a seismic zone?
post #297 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dlux View Post

Are you suggesting a new brick building in a seismic zone?

Actually I think he's suggesting a skyscraper for the seismic zone, he's saying that the midtown NY apple store should have been brick because there are no glass facades in midtown manhatten.

post #298 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by lowededwookie View Post

Because solar is still extremely inefficient. There is more power from a gas turbine than could be made with a massive array of solar panels which is actually an environmental nightmare when you're talking about so many trees.

The reflection from the panels will make those trees a ticking time bomb and I'm sure that's exactly what California needs is more risk of fire.

WHO SAYS THEY WILL BE USING A GAS TURBINE. the interview says they will be making electricity from natural gas. But what i don't see on the design are any cooling towers to provide the turbine with the necessary cooling facility to run optimally.

I wouldn't be surprised if apple would be building a massive solid oxide fuel cell, like the ones made by bloom energy. Bloom energy developed a cell that still costs you a pretty penny, but produces twice as much electricity from a cubic foot of natural gas as a turbine does. The trick is to run this ceramic fuel cells at high temperatures (close to 1000 C) and the natural gas will transform itself into C02 and H20 and FREE electrons... no more magnets spinning in a big machine and there is no thermodynamic phase changes. everything happens in a quite little box. another advantage of such a system is that you can produce power that DC (direct current) and goes straight into a server. No need to create an AC/DC electrical circuit, to then be transformed at to server level back to DC. The drawback to providing a DC current to your servers is that your power generator has to be very close to your power consumer.

If so I wouldn't be surprised that Apple's massive underground parking structure, might have a few extra underground floors and house a server farm.

Anyway. check out the BloomBox

Bloom Box on 60 Minutes
post #299 of 304
Very cool. Not carbon-free but at least a step in the right direction. Maybe there's hope yet. Would be interesting to see some numbers on how this compares to solar.

Does natural gas + bloom boxes still cost more than solar panels? Over what timespan? Curious.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rolivier79 View Post

WHO SAYS THEY WILL BE USING A GAS TURBINE. the interview says they will be making electricity from natural gas. But what i don't see on the design are any cooling towers to provide the turbine with the necessary cooling facility to run optimally.

I wouldn't be surprised if apple would be building a massive solid oxide fuel cell, like the ones made by bloom energy. Bloom energy developed a cell that still costs you a pretty penny, but produces twice as much electricity from a cubic foot of natural gas as a turbine does. The trick is to run this ceramic fuel cells at high temperatures (close to 1000 C) and the natural gas will transform itself into C02 and H20 and FREE electrons... no more magnets spinning in a big machine and there is no thermodynamic phase changes. everything happens in a quite little box. another advantage of such a system is that you can produce power that DC (direct current) and goes straight into a server. No need to create an AC/DC electrical circuit, to then be transformed at to server level back to DC. The drawback to providing a DC current to your servers is that your power generator has to be very close to your power consumer.

If so I wouldn't be surprised that Apple's massive underground parking structure, might have a few extra underground floors and house a server farm.

Anyway. check out the BloomBox

Bloom Box on 60 Minutes
post #300 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

Yes, I don't think Apple should have carte blanche to do what they want just because it's already so stunning... Maybe the real questions the city council as well as the state should be asking is what about solar? There are many new office buildings around the world being built that are already "greener" than this. Yes, architect students will come to see it but it's not really an epitome of a green building.

Wow! Really? They shouldn't? They probably aren't going to break any laws building it (considering they have a pretty good track record with all the Apple Stores) other than the imaginary ones you are proposing... isn't California already a bit hostile to business?

well... it's an outrage I tell you... OUTRAGE! They should dedicate part of that land to wind turbines, wave machines, and geo-thermal, offer local co-op organic farming, dedicate some habitat for the rare Madagascar fractured moth mosquito, open a orphanage, give away have their profits to those less fortunate in the area, set aside 15% of the land for native Americans, make reparations to descendants of slavery, make sure that at least 22% of all R&D goes towards designing products that don't use any energy, minerals, metals, tree or dinosaur based products, chemicals or child or Asian labor. Perhaps they should convert the garage for all those cars to a public ice-skating rink, make everyone ride bikes to work and once they get to work, they walk on treadmills to generate power to run their Macs. And then at the end of the week, when they stop by the payroll window to pick up their weekly check, since they will obviously be in a higher tax bracket, then can (willingly) donate all that extra money they make (after 36% fed and 11% state, Medicare, FICA, and Healthcare), to help pay down the national debt because they probably stole every dime they ever made and need to pay their fair share.

Then again, maybe we can wait and see what Apple plans on doing on the who, what, when, where and whys of construction before we gather up the pitchforks and torches and storm their stores for being such a bad corporate citizen... unless you somehow gleaned their "green plans" by looking at artists renderings on a slide presentation from a youTube video at 360p. If you have such knowledge... please, share with the rest of the class.
post #301 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by ravedog View Post

Wow! Really? They shouldn't? They probably aren't going to break any laws building it (considering they have a pretty good track record with all the Apple Stores) other than the imaginary ones you are proposing... isn't California already a bit hostile to business?

well... it's an outrage I tell you... OUTRAGE! They should dedicate part of that land to wind turbines, wave machines, and geo-thermal, offer local co-op organic farming, dedicate some habitat for the rare Madagascar fractured moth mosquito, open a orphanage, give away have their profits to those less fortunate in the area, set aside 15% of the land for native Americans, make reparations to descendants of slavery, make sure that at least 22% of all R&D goes towards designing products that don't use any energy, minerals, metals, tree or dinosaur based products, chemicals or child or Asian labor. Perhaps they should convert the garage for all those cars to a public ice-skating rink, make everyone ride bikes to work and once they get to work, they walk on treadmills to generate power to run their Macs. And then at the end of the week, when they stop by the payroll window to pick up their weekly check, since they will obviously be in a higher tax bracket, then can (willingly) donate all that extra money they make (after 36% fed and 11% state, Medicare, FICA, and Healthcare), to help pay down the national debt because they probably stole every dime they ever made and need to pay their fair share.

Then again, maybe we can wait and see what Apple plans on doing on the who, what, when, where and whys of construction before we gather up the pitchforks and torches and storm their stores for being such a bad corporate citizen... unless you somehow gleaned their "green plans" by looking at artists renderings on a slide presentation from a youTube video at 360p. If you have such knowledge... please, share with the rest of the class.

That was quite a rave... I mean rant. Have a look through all 8 pages of this thread and then get back to us. I clarified what I meant by "it may not be the epitome of a green building" in various subsequent posts. We have also discussed what Apple could do. Yes, some of the land could be a public park, some could be a building for education/ courses/ seminars. I'm not the only one that had this idea. Various companies like Google have solar installations, it's not outrageous to wonder whether Apple would/ should do so.

As for:

"Then again, maybe we can wait and see what Apple plans on doing on the who, what, when, where and whys of construction before we gather up the pitchforks and torches and storm their stores for being such a bad corporate citizen..."

That's pretty much what we've decided on this thread, we await more news eagerly. Nice strawman and hyperbole but I never said Apple was being a bad corporate citizen nor that the spaceship should be a hippie utopia. Nor did anyone say employees should be forced to contribute monetarily to anything, which is ridiculous. My angle was more towards what questions the city council should have asked instead of free wifi and free iPads (if the free iPads were for Cupertino schools or interesting pilot projects (with subsequent purchases borne by the institutions/city council) then it would have made some sense).

Then again you might have gleaned all this if you have actually read the whole thread.
post #302 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

The day after giving a keynote at the Worldwide Developers Conference, Apple CEO Steve Jobs presented the company's plans for a second campus in Cupertino, Calif., which would feature a round building that would hold 12,000 Apple employees, to the city council.

This building begs for a giant propeller in the middle.
post #303 of 304
It's somewhat reassuring (in a twisted way) that my city council is not the only one that asks stupid questions.
post #304 of 304
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joseph L View Post

Nope. Not kidding. Neither their sterile low-rise glass ring in the 'burbs nor their featureless glass facades in the midst of brick and granite neighborhoods strike me as good architecture.

Then that's just your taste.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple planning massive 12,000 capacity "spaceship" campus in Cupertino