First images of 'Stanford 2' Apple Store renovation surface, hint at new design language [u]

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
As construction continues at Apple's Stanford 2 retail location, new pictures reveal the store will boast a "glass box and floating roof" design, the first of three Apple Stores to receive the refreshed design aesthetic.

Stanford Apple Store
Source: ifoAppleStore


Update: A previous version of this article incorrectly credited Foster + Partners, and not Bohlin Cywinski Jackson, as its designer.

The photos, obtained by ifoAppleStore, were taken from within the construction site of the Northern California Apple Store, which is nearing the end of a substantial overhaul. Previously, only a rendering of the location had been available for public viewing.

According to the publication, the Stanford 2 Apple Store will be the first of three to sport a "glass box and floating roof" design that affords window shoppers a 180-degree view of the store's interior. The other two outlets slated to take on the new architectural language are located in downtown Portland and France.

Apple Stores are known for their unique and open designs, with all-glass storefronts and trademarked interior layout. The Stanford 2 outlet, designed by Bohlin Cywinski Jackson, takes the idea further with steel beams and glass that wraps around toward the rear of the store.

The company's flagship San Francisco store, dreamed up by Foster+Partners, was recently in the news as Apple plans to move from a location on Stockton and Ellis, to a large space in Union Square. There was a minor controversy surrounding the supposed removal of a 40-year-old fountain sculpture, though further investigation showed the art piece will in fact go untouched.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 30
    gwmacgwmac Posts: 1,797member
    That is the last place I would want to be during an earthquake with all that glass.
  • Reply 2 of 30
    pedromartinspedromartins Posts: 1,333member
    wow it already looks more original (and better) than all MS stores or places gwmac would like to be during an earthquake.
  • Reply 3 of 30
    damn_its_hotdamn_its_hot Posts: 1,185member
    Kinda of hard to get a feel for it from the photo. In the picture it looks like a glass barn with steel beams. I suspect it will look quite different when they get the protective panels off the side and removed all the debris from the site.

    The rendering makes this glass part look like an empty gallery (wight the possible exception of some art on the stone wall. I am sure it will make more sense with furnishings but rather an empty shell as is.
  • Reply 4 of 30
    nagrommenagromme Posts: 2,834member
    I remember Windows trolls saying the the iMac was terrible because it could fall on you in an earthquake! :D

    P.S. Just checked out my local Microsoft Store... truly a blatant copy of an Apple Store, with a couple colored Windows banners added. And yet... it was a ghost town. Compared to SRO at the Apple Store nearby.
  • Reply 5 of 30
    macinthe408macinthe408 Posts: 1,050member
    @gwmac We're in California, not Bangladesh. The codes here are pretty strict. I doubt anyone Palo Alto code inspectors received a handout to signoff on a permit.
  • Reply 6 of 30
    jessijessi Posts: 302member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by macinthe408 View Post



    @gwmac We're in California, not Bangladesh. The codes here are pretty strict.


     


    Strict, but not necessarily good for surviving earth quakes.  I know a geologist who was having a house built in an area where the bedrock was relatively close to the surface. He wanted to sink pylons down into the bedrock so that the house would be immune from the liquefaction that would occur if there was an earthquake.


     


    This is in california.  The building codes would not permit him to build an earthquake resistant house using a well known technique. 


     


    His only choice was to build a stupid slab foundation design that will fall apart if there's an earthquake... or move to another state. 


     


    Just because government regulates something, don't assume their regulations are intelligent.  In most cases, they aren't, they're political, and designed to benefit certain people over others-- generally certain builders in this case-- not to protect people.


     


    Protecting people is just the excuse to make you think that government is something other than mafia with good PR.  Ever seen those mafia movies and how the mafia talk about how they "protect the neighborhood"?  That's government to a T. 

  • Reply 7 of 30
    stelligentstelligent Posts: 2,680member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by gwmac View Post



    That is the last place I would want to be during an earthquake with all that glass.


    There is such a thing as seismic codes. The plans for new constructions have to meet these codes before work can proceed. Having said this, design using structural glass remains an emerging field (not restricted to or even pioneered by Apple, btw). 


     


    Do not forget that Apple stores use glass not just for walls, but also for stairs. Finite element analysis is remarkably accurate in predicting failure modes, including the behavior of load-bearing structures under seismic stress. 


     


    There are three components to designing using structural glass. First, material selection. Second, the design of the structure. Third, the design of the joints. 


     


    Apple is known for having invented novel joints in the form of what some refer to as mechanical glazing, which you can observe as stainless steel, knob like connectors. Apple is not the first to use such a joint concept. But, for reasons unknown to me, they developed their own. Another joining method, in use for a few decades now, is known as silicone structural glazing. Silicone joints can not only seal and insulate, but can also bear significant loads. I am not sure if Apple uses silicone glazing for any of their structural glass.

  • Reply 8 of 30
    isaidsoisaidso Posts: 750member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by nagromme View Post



    I remember Windows trolls saying the the iMac was terrible because it could fall on you in an earthquake! image



    P.S. Just checked out my local Microsoft Store... truly a blatant copy of an Apple Store, with a couple colored Windows banners added. And yet... it was a ghost town. Compared to SRO at the Apple Store nearby.


    Those were no ordinary trolls. Those were the original troll Kings (one of them) themselves. Either John C. Dvorak or Paul Thurrott who said that.


     


    PS


    I swear I couldn't remember these guys names. Don't seem to hear so much from them anymore. (I guess ever since they claimed what a failure the iPhone would be back in earlier times)

  • Reply 9 of 30
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 4,627member
    gwmac wrote: »
    That is the last place I would want to be during an earthquake with all that glass.

    Whatever Mr. Doomsday.

    I'm sure those panels are in place with a kind if floating design. It'll give.

    So, don't live by the beach cuz a tsunami will kill you.

    Don't live in the Midwest cause the tornados will kill you.

    Don't live in California cuz earthquakes will get you.

    Any other things you want to add??
  • Reply 10 of 30
    SpamSandwichSpamSandwich Posts: 31,135member


    People who shop in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. :D


     


    I wonder if Apple's ultimate depiction of an Apple Store is one that barely even exists.

  • Reply 11 of 30
    nasseraenasserae Posts: 3,157member
    jessi wrote: »
    Strict, but not necessarily good for surviving earth quakes.  I know a geologist who was having a house built in an area where the bedrock was relatively close to the surface. He wanted to sink pylons down into the bedrock so that the house would be immune from the liquefaction that would occur if there was an earthquake.

    This is in california.  The building codes would not permit him to build an earthquake resistant house using a well known technique. 

    His only choice was to build a stupid slab foundation design that will fall apart if there's an earthquake... or move to another state. 

    Just because government regulates something, don't assume their regulations are intelligent.  In most cases, they aren't, they're political, and designed to benefit certain people over others-- generally certain builders in this case-- not to protect people.

    Protecting people is just the excuse to make you think that government is something other than mafia with good PR.  Ever seen those mafia movies and how the mafia talk about how they "protect the neighborhood"?  That's government to a T. 

    WHAT?! He is building a house and he wanted to use pile foundation system!!!! How big is his house 20 story high?!

    Second, the government is not the one making those building code. Building codes such as IBC and ASCE-7 are developed by organizations and committees of professionals not by the government. They might have rejected your friend plans because of a situation unique to his land. I have never seen anything in the buildings codes that says you cannot use piles as a foundation system in seismic areas.. Actually.. It is highly recommended that you do specially for high rise.
  • Reply 12 of 30
    gwmacgwmac Posts: 1,797member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by macinthe408 View Post



    @gwmac We're in California, not Bangladesh. The codes here are pretty strict. I doubt anyone Palo Alto code inspectors received a handout to signoff on a permit.


    Oh I know that but your codes aren't close to as strict as they are in Japan and I was there during the Hanshin quake. My apartment was on the 7th floor and it shook forever it seemed. That is the last earthquake I ever want to go through again. Strict codes or not, glass breaks if the quake is strong enough and I wouldn't want to be in that building if one happened. But it does look like it will be a very aesthetically pleasing building but I still wouldn't want to test how strong that glass is during a big one.

  • Reply 13 of 30
    isaidsoisaidso Posts: 750member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by gwmac View Post




    Quote:

    Originally Posted by macinthe408 View Post



    @gwmac We're in California, not Bangladesh. The codes here are pretty strict. I doubt anyone Palo Alto code inspectors received a handout to signoff on a permit.


    Oh I know that but your codes aren't close to as strict as they are in Japan and I was there during the Hanshin quake. My apartment was on the 7th floor and it shook forever it seemed. That is the last earthquake I ever want to go through again. Strict codes or not, glass breaks if the quake is strong enough and I wouldn't want to be in that building if one happened. But it does look like it will be a very aesthetically pleasing building but I still wouldn't want to test how strong that glass is during a big one.



    Ridiculous. EVERYTHING breaks if shook hard enough.


    Glass can be stronger than steel, and IS stronger than concrete.  How'd you like to be in a brick building in an earthquake?

  • Reply 14 of 30
    citycity Posts: 522member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by isaidso View Post


    Ridiculous. EVERYTHING breaks if shook hard enough.


    Glass can be stronger than steel, and IS stronger than concrete.  How'd you like to be in a brick building in an earthquake?



    I would like to be in a brick building in an earthquake.


     


    Assuming it was built in California within the last 40 years, the masonry is reinforced. If its older, it has likely been retrofitted which would allow enough time to escape. I have been through several quakes.

  • Reply 15 of 30
    stelligentstelligent Posts: 2,680member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by isaidso View Post


    Ridiculous. EVERYTHING breaks if shook hard enough.


    Glass can be stronger than steel, and IS stronger than concrete.  How'd you like to be in a brick building in an earthquake?





    You are the one being ridiculous - ridiculously rude, ridiculously and unjustifiably arrogant.


     


    Materials cannot simply be compared on the general basis of "stronger" or "weaker", particularly when they are being assessed for use as structural material. In your eagerness to put down someone just for the sake of it, you are just revealing your own ridiculous ignorance.


     


    Get some help.

  • Reply 16 of 30
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,438member
    gwmac wrote: »
    That is the last place I would want to be during an earthquake with all that glass.

    For that would be the first place, even if I had my boots on.

    People who shop in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

    400
  • Reply 17 of 30
    nasseraenasserae Posts: 3,157member
    stelligent wrote: »

    You are the one being ridiculous - ridiculously rude, ridiculously and unjustifiably arrogant.

    Materials cannot simply be compared on the general basis of "stronger" or "weaker", particularly when they are being assessed for use as structural material. In your eagerness to put down someone just for the sake of it, you are just revealing your own ridiculous ignorance.

    Get some help.

    Well he is right. Structural glass is "stronger" than concrete (based on mechanics of materials) since its modulus of elasticity is higher than that of concrete. . However, each material suffer weakness some how. In concrete, it is tensile strength (this is why concrete is reinforced with steel). In glass, it is imperfections in the material itself that causes stress concentration at loads close to failure. Furthermore, glass is brittle material.
    About 9 years ago I met the structural engineer who designs Apple stores glass structures in a conference about transparency in tall buildings. He told amazing things about the glass as structural material. Long story short, the structure is well designed and will perform as well as any other building in earthquake or during high winds.
  • Reply 18 of 30
    anantksundaramanantksundaram Posts: 19,164member
    Fascinating discussion, guys. Seriously.
  • Reply 19 of 30
    elmoofoelmoofo Posts: 100member
    I guess Microsoft will have to move their store now, since their way of competing is to operate right next door. Their old store's foot traffic is going to dry up.
  • Reply 20 of 30
    Kinda of hard to get a feel for it from the photo. In the picture it looks like a glass barn with steel beams. I suspect it will look quite different when they get the protective panels off the side and removed all the debris from the site.

    That was my first thought, too.

    BTW, shouldn't I be able to pinch an zoom the photo? I'm using a n iP4s...
Sign In or Register to comment.