or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Architecture critic pans Apple's 'spaceship' campus as 'troubling,' 'scary'
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Architecture critic pans Apple's 'spaceship' campus as 'troubling,' 'scary' - Page 2

post #41 of 194
All forms of design, including architecture, has "problem-solving" at its heart.

Research the list of building codes, work/life considerations, budgetary constraints, manufacturing challenges, etc. -- all of those integral factors and many more -- and this may appear to be an elegant solution.

Dig no deeper than the surface and your critique seems.. thin.
post #42 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaphodsplanet View Post

And why should anyone care what this idiot "Architecture Critic" has to say about anything?? You guys on this site need to do a reality check. People like this bring NOTHING to the party. What has he created? What has he built from scratch? Who has he employees?

NOTHING, NOTHING and NOBODY!

This is still America. How many of you have bothered picking up a copy of our constitution and read it? If you haven't please do so. If Apple decides it wants to build a freaking space ship and put the first store on Mars.... IT'S THEIR MONEY.... they can do whatever in the heck they want to with it. It's not the shareholders.... it's the company's. The CEO, board and shareholders all have input... but not some loser moron of an "Architecture Critic"..... What a freaking joke.

Uh, what, freedom of the press is a "joke"? Guess you're reading some other Constitution in which property rights are enshrined but the right to free speech, which is more important than any other right in ensuring democracy, is omitted.

Apple may build whatever moronic or genius building they want (as long as it's legal).

Goldberger and other critics may write whatever moronic or genius treatise they want on corporate architecture, and you and Apple are free not to listen, or invite the critic "to the party", as they see fit.

That dual right is what is supposed to define America/democracy. Take away either side and you have some other political/cultural system, take your pick.
post #43 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

I can't even find his exact criticisms even after reading the source article.

His only argument seems to be that it "lacks human scale" and then throws in some vague references to the pentagon. That's just a crap criticism given the information we have (almost none).

In fact he deduced "no human scale" from the architectural renderings none of which (among those published) showed the interior - which is where human scale would really matter.
If you are going to insist on being an ass, at least demonstrate the intelligence to be a smart one
Reply
If you are going to insist on being an ass, at least demonstrate the intelligence to be a smart one
Reply
post #44 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by WardC View Post

I think the current "Infinite Loop" campus has some of the best=looking buildings around...

The Infinite Loop site itself started out in the mid-70s as Four-Phase Systems headquarters. (They're long gone, but were a venture by ex-Fairchild people to make the first all-LSI minicomputer systems.)

It's been tweaked since then, but started out with pretty good usability, including features like tapping into the AC system to preheat water fed into the water heaters for the bathrooms. Nice for the time.

I worked there when I started out as a tech writer, going across the street about 18 months later to join Apple for a few years.
post #45 of 194
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDI-a...4PxS_w&index=2

I've always felt Howard Roark to be Steve Jobs.
post #46 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Takeo View Post

I agree. However, this building is not unique and it's certainly not modern. At least not in the sense I assume you meant "modern" (i.e. current). Not by a LONG shot. It's aesthetic is more closely aligned with the failed utopian visions of the early modernists like Le Corbusier from 100 year ago.

Since all utopian visions are essentially doomed to failure, your phrase "failed utopian visions" is a res ipsa loquitur, and how in the world do you tie in that to the architectural rendering of the new campus? You seem to be hung up on the form and not the substance of the thing. Try again, and this time bring us some support for your statement. After all, we obviously don't have the deep background and experience in architecture your statements claim for you.
If you are going to insist on being an ass, at least demonstrate the intelligence to be a smart one
Reply
If you are going to insist on being an ass, at least demonstrate the intelligence to be a smart one
Reply
post #47 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wovel View Post

I am not sure what he is upset about either. I would like to know if you believe this critic raised valid concerns. If he did, what were they? I read it twice now and can't find any.

I didn't really look at his criticisms in detail but my point is that any knowledgable critic should be allowed to voice his concerns. Architecture is centred around aesthetics and functionality in a geographical / social context. That leaves a lot of room for deep debate and differing views.

Personally? The 'spaceship' certainly looks impressive on paper. It also looks ominous and 'blank faced', almost threatening, like a futuristic closed fortress. It doesn't appear to have any nooks and crannies outdoors. Nooks and crannies can be created through landscaping. Maybe an Apple Village would have been a better solution in the long term... or just nicer for the people working there. I don't know. But the Spaceship is very Jobsian, so it makes sense. But often great minds need tempering through imposed limitations to be truly great. Once they rise above that and can freely unleash their 'vision' unhindered, it becomes bigger, grander, more impressive, but less great. So, I don't know. I am seduced by it at the moment on a purely visual level.
post #48 of 194
Critics of the new Apple campus need to get a life. It is not a commercial Apple product. It's a building.

Everyone who ever broke from the norm and successfully created something different, received similar criticism along the way.

Please update the AppleInsider app to function in landscape mode.

Reply

Please update the AppleInsider app to function in landscape mode.

Reply
post #49 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Takeo View Post

OMFG. Seriously? Look, Steve Jobs has created some amazing products but for pete's sake... he's not an architect. Nor should he try to be one. He should stick with what he knows. This building is a disaster.

Do you think Steve Jobs' designed the building himself?

You don't think that maybe, just maybe, Apple hired a competent architectural design firm to help out a little bit?

You are going to have to say a little more than "this building is a disaster" if you want us to believe it. What exactly is wrong with it? And don't say "it looks like a doughnut, because, well, unless you are 100 feet tall, you aren't exactly going to notice.
post #50 of 194
A building in a public space can (and maybe should) be measured by how it "fits" (which could be: in how far it harmonizes or provokes).

This building is in a private space and it exposes its inhabitants - everybody is visible and you can look into it from every angle. How much more "human" can a building get? Yes, it is not the Taj Mahal, and not remotely that beautiful - but how "human" is a tomb? It is no castle - nobody is hiding in there, but why should they? It is a functional building that transforms its space into something with a different meaning. According to D. Byrne, that is what "humans do".
post #51 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by jd_in_sb View Post

Critics of the new Apple campus need to get a life. It is not a commercial Apple product. It's a building.

Yeah, this is absurd. The slavish worship of Apple by fanboys is beyond parody. Exhibit A: this thread LOL....
post #52 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

There's something odd about placing the words parking and spaceship in the same sentence.

It would be even odder to double-park a spaceship. Where would you put the ticket? Would it be considered double parking only if it were next to the first spaceship? What if it were above?
post #53 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaphodsplanet View Post

IT'S THEIR MONEY....

Actually, it's part MY money -- the money belongs to the shareholders...

The new campus itself is fine -- I think others are correct that it will be a modern classic. From the air, it's a sort of ugly to me, but from the side views, I like it.

The only concern I have is to make sure that Apple is spending money in the places that have the highest return.
post #54 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman View Post

Defensive much? Often critics raise valid and interesting points. Architecture is a broad subject and I see nothing worn with critics voicing their opinion here. Ambitious projects like this are often controversial. And I don't see what this has to do with it being America, and whether it is Apple's money or not. In fact, I really don't know why you are so upset about this.

And often they are talking out of their ass, case in point:

Elizabeth Warren running for the Senate in Massachusetts trying for the Democrat seat to run against Scott Brown. This is a law professor at Harvard. She was at Rutgers. She has had numerous sources of income. At one time I remember asking, "I wonder how many pensions this woman has," but she's not poor, and she is the quintessential example of what she's talking about. She's never produced anything but a bunch of confused minds. She's never produced anything but skulls full of mush. She hasn't taught anybody anything that's the truth. She hasn't produced a product, she hasn't performed a worthwhile service, and she's done pretty well. She earns six figures. In Obama's parlance, she's a "millionaire and billionaire" with a corporate jet. Here's what she said earlier this month.

WARREN: I hear all this, "You know, well, this is class warfare. This is whatever." No! There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody! You built a factory out there? Good for you! But I want to be clear: You moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for. You hired workers the rest of us paid to educate. You, uh, were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn't have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory and hire someone to protect against this because of the work the rest of us did.

This is the type of idiots in Congress now. We don't need any more so says this "non-critic"!
/
/
/

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply

Ten years ago, we had Steve Jobs, Bob Hope and Johnny Cash.  Today we have no Jobs, no Hope and no Cash.

Reply
post #55 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

A prominent architecture critic has panned Apple's plans for its new Cupertino, Calif., campus, suggesting it is a "wildly ambitious, over-the-top headquarters" out of sync with the company's beautiful and functional products.

These critics said the same thing about the Stata Center at MIT.
Didn't stop them from building it.



post #56 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaphodsplanet View Post

And why should anyone care what this idiot "Architecture Critic" has to say about anything?? You guys on this site need to do a reality check. People like this bring NOTHING to the party. What has he created? What has he built from scratch? Who has he employees?

NOTHING, NOTHING and NOBODY!

This is still America. How many of you have bothered picking up a copy of our constitution and read it? If you haven't please do so. If Apple decides it wants to build a freaking space ship and put the first store on Mars.... IT'S THEIR MONEY.... they can do whatever in the heck they want to with it. It's not the shareholders.... it's the company's. The CEO, board and shareholders all have input... but not some loser moron of an "Architecture Critic"..... What a freaking joke.

Were you the architect or something? Your post makes it sound like you were personally attacked. Why so angry?

As for the critic, he makes some valid points. But as a critic, they are his opinions. As you said, it's still America. People are allowed to have opinions still... I hope.
post #57 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman View Post

Defensive much? Often critics raise valid and interesting points. Architecture is a broad subject and I see nothing worn with critics voicing their opinion here. Ambitious projects like this are often controversial. And I don't see what this has to do with it being America, and whether it is Apple's money or not. In fact, I really don't know why you are so upset about this.

Agreed...

There are some thoughtful criticisms based on initial design. If Apple were smart (and they are) they will incorporate those and fix any they feel might actually be valid.

In fact, Apple is probably thrilled about this. How many other companies get such wide ranging free advice for their designs?
post #58 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by tenzo View Post

These critics said the same thing about the Stata Center at MIT.
Didn't stop them from building it.

I'd never seen that before. It looks pretty awful and I don't care who made it or designed it. It looks like the aftermath of an earthquake.
post #59 of 194
Ironic that he praises the iPad, given the avalanche of criticism the iPad received when it was first announced. But now it's "obvious" to everyone how great the iPad is.

I wonder what will be "obvious" about the new apple HQ 5 years after it's built.
post #60 of 194
Like I said before, it's de rigueur to bang on Foster...and Apple for that matter.
post #61 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Takeo View Post

OMFG. Seriously? Look, Steve Jobs has created some amazing products but for pete's sake... he's not an architect. Nor should he try to be one. He should stick with what he knows. This building is a disaster.

Most architects design garbage and display an amazing arrogance for the people they design it for. They make the mistake many people that study do to confuse the diploma they get with talent for the field of study and in this case having good taste.

J.
post #62 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by delete View Post

How big is the "adjacent structure" to park the cars for 13,000 employees?

Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Parking is going to be underground, I believe.

Nope - *massively* big parking structure stretching along I-280. I'm really disappointed in Apple both for including this gargantuan structure in the campus (when it runs so counter to the purported goal of having open space and a 21st century campus), as well as in the fact that none of the published drawings show this behemoth.
post #63 of 194
The cool thing about architecture is that no matter what kind of architectural jargon these critics use, nothing can circumvent my opinion.

I think the building looks awesome. It's unfortunate that some out-of-work armchair critic didn't get commissioned to build an iconic building. Thus, let's lambast it.
post #64 of 194
"Bitter architect wishes he was the one who designed Apple's spaceship".
post #65 of 194
Non-architect, critic, realizes he can gain notoriety/infamy from trolling Apple, just like analysts in tech can.

He's known for banging the preservation stump, which makes critique of modern design coming from him as legitimate as critique of foreign policy coming from me. You can count on the periodic "get off my lawn" tripe from critics like Goldberger.
Snarky Mac commentary, occasionally using bad words.
themacadvocate.com
Reply
Snarky Mac commentary, occasionally using bad words.
themacadvocate.com
Reply
post #66 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

I'd never seen that before. It looks pretty awful and I don't care who made it or designed it. It looks like the aftermath of an earthquake.

Exactly my point...
It doesn't matter who likes it or not. If they want to build it, they will.
post #67 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaphodsplanet View Post

And why should anyone care what this idiot "Architecture Critic" has to say about anything?? You guys on this site need to do a reality check. People like this bring NOTHING to the party. What has he created? What has he built from scratch? Who has he employees?

NOTHING, NOTHING and NOBODY!

Oh goddess, here we go again.

What he "brings to the party" is years (in fact, in his case decades) of experience in exploring, examining, advising and critiquing architecture. I guess you believe that expert knowledge is pointless, that a janitor is as good a person to advise on a building's form and function as a professionally trained architect with decades of experience?
post #68 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

I am going to play a critic for a minute and I'm going to critique Paul Goldberger's style.

how infantile
post #69 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Takeo View Post

OMFG. Seriously? Look, Steve Jobs has created some amazing products but for pete's sake... he's not an architect. Nor should he try to be one. He should stick with what he knows. This building is a disaster.

+1

Love his products; eagerly awaiting the iPhone 5. But sorry, this 'spaceship', it's divorce from the local surroundings, its lack of public transit access, and its behemoth parking structure are all *not* perfect gifts from on high that we should worship. They're one view of what could be done with the site, and there are a lot of legitimate ways it could be improved.
post #70 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sierrajeff View Post

how infantile

One could say the same about the vacuous critique that started this.......
post #71 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post

Those who can... do

Those who can't... teach

Those who can do neither... become critics

I propose a cleaner version.

Those who can, do.

Those who can't, teach.

Those who don't know anything at all about the topic become analysts.

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 #72 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by fecklesstechguy View Post

After all, we obviously don't have the deep background and experience in architecture your statements claim for you.

That's painfully clear.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fecklesstechguy View Post

Since all utopian visions are essentially doomed to failure, your phrase "failed utopian visions" is a res ipsa loquitur, [...]

And you're clearly not a lawyer either. I think you mean to allege that the phrase is redundant. Res ipsa involves something not readily known or witnessed, but which nevertheless has to have happened or been the case based on current conditions.
post #73 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sierrajeff View Post

how infantile

What can I say, that's how I roll. Do you not have any sense of humor? Even though my critique was written mostly in jest, I do feel that my advice was actually good advice and he should lose the rest of his hair, speaking purely from an artistic point of view.
post #74 of 194
when frank lloyd wright put up the guggenheim museum on fifth ave in nyc, people were jumping out of their skin.

fifth ave is a very very upscale quiet type area. when the guggenheim was built some people wanted it torn down. steve job's design is pedestrian if you wanted to make a one on one comparison.

now, 30-40 years later (estimate), the guggenheim fits in like it was destiny. nobody complains and the same series of events will propel steve job's building to success.
post #75 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman View Post

Personally? The 'spaceship' certainly looks impressive on paper. It also looks ominous and 'blank faced', almost threatening, like a futuristic closed fortress. It doesn't appear to have any nooks and crannies outdoors. Nooks and crannies can be created through landscaping. Maybe an Apple Village would have been a better solution in the long term... or just nicer for the people working there. I don't know. But the Spaceship is very Jobsian, so it makes sense. But often great minds need tempering through imposed limitations to be truly great. Once they rise above that and can freely unleash their 'vision' unhindered, it becomes bigger, grander, more impressive, but less great. So, I don't know. I am seduced by it at the moment on a purely visual level.

Very well said. If (when) it's built, it will undoubtedly be impressive, hailed as an achievement, and be a landmark for decades to come. And rightfully so, just as the Pentagon is impressive and a major landmark.

But that doesn't mean that the new HQ is inherently, axiomatically *the* best iteration of what could have been done there. And it's entirely possible that once it's built, some people will love it, and some people will see limitations or deficiencies in the plan and/or in using the space on a day-to-day basis.
post #76 of 194
The design is not really my taste but you can't see it from my house, so it is fine with me.

Looks like it would be easy to get lost inside without navigational aids. I would expect they will have high speed horizontal transportation implementations of some sort.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #77 of 194
Clearly this Green Site is making the critics green with envy. I'd love to work in an office surrounded by natural beauty/parkland. It'd be even better with real cows grazing!
post #78 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sierrajeff View Post

Nope - *massively* big parking structure stretching along I-280. I'm really disappointed in Apple both for including this gargantuan structure in the campus (when it runs so counter to the purported goal of having open space and a 21st century campus), as well as in the fact that none of the published drawings show this behemoth.

I've seen plenty of drawings that show the parking structure. Only two levels of the four will be visible from the campus and structure along the 280 side will be almost invisible, sitting in a depression next to the 280 and hidden by trees.

head on over to this page and get the site drawings offered at the bottom of the page:

http://www.cupertino.org/index.aspx?page=1107

The link to "Floor Plans" has drawings of the garage.
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #79 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

I am going to play a critic for a minute and I'm going to critique Paul Goldberger's style.



One first notices that he's bald. He really needs to lose whatever hair he has left on the left and right side above his ears. It is not a modern style at all and sporting something that makes somebody look old is reminiscent of an outdated sense of fashion and it is no longer appropriate in this current century. I find this most troubling, and not to mention, a little bit scary.

For perfect symmetry to be achieved, he needs to go with the clean look and shave everything off. That would produce much smoother, cleaner and purer lines and it would also be more harmonious with his surroundings and with nature. His current style is quite similar to what a 16 century monk would sport on their heads. It is simply put, not aesthetically pleasing and I find it to be a follicle disaster of enormous proportions.

AHAHAHA!!! WIN!
"Don't be a dick!"Wil Wheaton
Reply
"Don't be a dick!"Wil Wheaton
Reply
post #80 of 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman View Post

I didn't really look at his criticisms in detail but my point is that any knowledgable critic should be allowed to voice his concerns. Architecture is centred around aesthetics and functionality in a geographical / social context. That leaves a lot of room for deep debate and differing views.

Personally? The 'spaceship' certainly looks impressive on paper. It also looks ominous and 'blank faced', almost threatening, like a futuristic closed fortress. It doesn't appear to have any nooks and crannies outdoors. Nooks and crannies can be created through landscaping. Maybe an Apple Village would have been a better solution in the long term... or just nicer for the people working there. I don't know. But the Spaceship is very Jobsian, so it makes sense. But often great minds need tempering through imposed limitations to be truly great. Once they rise above that and can freely unleash their 'vision' unhindered, it becomes bigger, grander, more impressive, but less great. So, I don't know. I am seduced by it at the moment on a purely visual level.

I agree in general. My problem is that there is nothing in this piece that can be reasonably defined as criticism, not in the professional or journalistic sense.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Architecture critic pans Apple's 'spaceship' campus as 'troubling,' 'scary'