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.
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.
I don't think we can make many definitive judgement about the building's eye level impact at this point. Like all minimalist design, the devil is in the details. With the right materials and construction techniques, a long unbroken arch in a wooded setting might be quite striking.
Quote:
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.
Again, no way of knowing at this point, but I would think that there would be a number of doors around the inner perimeter, so that you're never much off a straight line from any other place in the building-- which actually is the most efficient possible layout for minimizing the distance between every point.
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.......
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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...
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.
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.
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.
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.
Comments
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.
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.
I don't think we can make many definitive judgement about the building's eye level impact at this point. Like all minimalist design, the devil is in the details. With the right materials and construction techniques, a long unbroken arch in a wooded setting might be quite striking.
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.
Again, no way of knowing at this point, but I would think that there would be a number of doors around the inner perimeter, so that you're never much off a straight line from any other place in the building-- which actually is the most efficient possible layout for minimizing the distance between every point.
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.......
What a great solution.
I'd hate to be near the top floors of this if it caught on fire.......
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.
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.
How are emergency vehicles going to have access to the entire building.
That gets discussed in different meetings with the emergency services themselves.
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.
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.
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.
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!
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?
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.
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.
You have GOT to be kidding!
Don't confuse humor with stupidity.
You have GOT to be kidding!
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.
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...
And double-spacing after sentences. That's funny. That takes me back a ways...
It's a really hard habit to break. In my defence I got taught to type that way back in 1985.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
...in the midst of brick and granite neighborhoods strike me as good architecture.
Are you suggesting a new brick building in a seismic zone?
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.