Apple culture of secrecy claimed to cause Swift lead's exit, but Chris Lattner denies repo...

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 60
    dws-2dws-2 Posts: 238member
    Whatever. He left for a better, more exciting job. It's clearly a huge promotion, likely a better salary, and a chance to dramatically influence the next big technological change. Who wouldn't make the switch he made, given the opportunity? 
    StrangeDaysbloggerblog
  • Reply 22 of 60
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,373member
    Apple's go-it-alone and keep-cards-close-to-vest strategy might get tougher and tougher to pull off. Developing more partnerships, sharing, and collaborations are increasingly the order of the day. 
    And less useful. The era of truly groundbreaking releases is over. It was very useful to keep the iPhone as secret as possible, because it dropped like a bomb. It's another thing entirely when the only "secret" is that it has 16 Mpx instead of 12. The only thing that truly surprises me at Apple announcements now is what useful feature they removed.

    How quickly you forget the rush of products that always come out over every Apple rumor of a new product, so secrecy is understandable.  Judging by Tim's financial success as CEO during his amazing tenure I certainly wouldn't want to criticize.  Remember all the so called Watch killers that came out prior to its launch? Plus the mystique is all part of the Apple sales and marketing MO in IMHO.  
    StrangeDayscali
  • Reply 23 of 60
    I've never been with a single job for more than three years. 
    And I've been, for many more than three years. So what?
    My point is the regular Apple hand-wringers have been all over the interwebs trying to paint this as more DOOM, a Cook failing, yada yada, when the reality is most people don't stay w/ a tech employer for over a decade as these last two guys in the news have. Most people change jobs more frequently. In 17 years of Fortune 100 tech employment I can count on one hand the guys I know who put in a decade w/ one gig.
    Oh, stop with the "hand-wringer" strawmen. I could care less what your "interwebs" say. I am interested in the conversation here. 

    The fact that you've seen something in your career amounts to a hill of beans. Why don't you then explain Cook, Ive, Schiller, Cue, Frederighi, pretty much every board member of Apple, etc. and how much they "...put in w/one gig"? 
    It's not a straw man -- even on AI there are plenty of people in the original story comments who used this as an opportunity to wring their hands over the sign of impending DOOM this surely means.

    Like I said, I work in big tech and a guy staying for over a decade is rare. Citing the very top echelon of executive leadership with their millions upon millions of personal stock investment has very little bearing on the conversation of what is normal. You get that, right?
    Yeah, I "get that."  Not sure you do, if you think people like Cook and Ive are staying on at Apple because they have "millions upon millions of personal stock investment."  That's pure, unmitigated nonsense made up to support your false premise. Please move along...
    Nice dodge -- you're still pretending as if what is normal for the top executives has any bearing on what is normal for normal employees. Again -- non-executives staying with a job for over a decade in tech is not the norm. I'm speaking from nearly two decades of software dev experience at household name Fortune 100 companies, and my assertion still stands -- a guy leaving after over a decade is not a sign of DOOM or division within the ranks of Apple.
    edited January 2017 brucemcroundaboutnow
  • Reply 24 of 60
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 21,117member
    sog35 said:
    scottkrk2 said:
    Apple's place in the world has changed, under Steve Jobs Apple was an innovator and a leader, now it has become a follower with a great legacy of design, retail, engineering and supply chain management that Jobs built up over a decade.

    Apple management needs to change it's approach to adapt to its new place in the world and ditch the secrecy.

    PS Could someone please tell Phil Schiller that he is not channeling Steve Jobs or being 'courageous' by dropping 3.5mm headphone on the iPhone 7 (Apple should have waited to next year's new design), neither was ditching USB-A ports, magsafe, etc on the new MBP (should have just replaced the two TB ports with USBC/TB3 ports).
    anyone with less than 100 posts should be ignored
    Feel free to ignore anyone. I on the other hand have found several informative nuggets posted by new users. Some of them bring a nice fresh breeze with them. 
    edited January 2017 bloggerblogbkkcanucksingularityIcisz
  • Reply 25 of 60
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,324member
    I've never been with a single job for more than three years. 
    And I've been, for many more than three years. So what?
    My point is the regular Apple hand-wringers have been all over the interwebs trying to paint this as more DOOM, a Cook failing, yada yada, when the reality is most people don't stay w/ a tech employer for over a decade as these last two guys in the news have. Most people change jobs more frequently. In 17 years of Fortune 100 tech employment I can count on one hand the guys I know who put in a decade w/ one gig.
    its fairly common at the higher levels at Apple to stay for decades though. This is changing. 

    prokip said:
    Are you listening Tim Cook, are you listening??  Steve has gone.  Now work out what areas and products really need secrecy and what areas do not.  Otherwise lose good people who actually give a s**t !!
    What absolute nonsense, a true low value post. Also, pro tip: Cook doesn't read these forums.

    People in Apple probably do read this forum, possibly even Cook and other executives. If not they should 
  • Reply 26 of 60
    sirlance99sirlance99 Posts: 1,155member

    scottkrk2 said:
    Apple's place in the world has changed, under Steve Jobs Apple was an innovator and a leader, now it has become a follower with a great legacy of design, retail, engineering and supply chain management that Jobs built up over a decade.

    Apple management needs to change it's approach to adapt to its new place in the world and ditch the secrecy.

    PS Could someone please tell Phil Schiller that he is not channeling Steve Jobs or being 'courageous' by dropping 3.5mm headphone on the iPhone 7 (Apple should have waited to next year's new design), neither was ditching USB-A ports, magsafe, etc on the new MBP (should have just replaced the two TB ports with USBC/TB3 ports).
    Sour grapes nonsense. Apple isn't following with the best smartphone, tablet, notebooks, desktops, payment system, smartwatch, and now wireless headphones. Each of these devices has a mind-blowing amount of hardware engineering innovation, much of it invisible from the outside and thus overlooked by most. And you cite supply chain management but you do realize they're still king of JIT supply chain and Cook brought that.

    But oh, not enough legacy USB ports. Uh huh.
    Payment system?!?! Mind-blowing innovation?!?! Not really. Other things you stated sure. But not Apple Pay. 
    brucemc
  • Reply 27 of 60
    The problem is Apple secures the wrong things. The ones who control secrecy are hiding their incompetence and not protecting the things that made Apple exciting, the product chain. 

    There has been a big exodus over the past few years of talent that made Apple great. The ones who filled their shoes are very lacking in talent. Anybody who works there and uses their internal software knows that's true.  Too many idiots hired from EA and other places have clogged the command chain with people who don't know what they are doing and they use secrecy to cover it up.

    You might remember Scott Forestall was used as a scapegoat for the Maps disaster. Problem was, he wasn't the only one who knew there were problems. He just wasn't liked by Cook, Ive and Federighi, so they used secrecy to get rid of him.

    Apple now uses secrecy as a weapon internally to weed out people they don't like and not to protect their products. If they did BGR and Sonny Dickson would have harder jobs. 
    brucemc
  • Reply 28 of 60
    canukstormcanukstorm Posts: 1,970member
    With a few very specific exceptions, Apple's culture of secrecy is key to their success. Whether they're particularly good at that secrecy *today* is beside the point. The reasons for it are understandable.

    Those who don't fit that culture shouldn't stay. It's just that simple. 
    Secrecy is important when you're creating new hardware products (ie: iPhone pre-2007 or Project Titan) but what purpose does stringent secrecy serve once these products are out the door? This article states that not only did Lattner (who was a star employee at Apple) leave but the entire networking team left in 2015. What's more important, being able to hire & retain the best talent or culture of secrecy? There needs to be some balance there somewhere.
    cropr
  • Reply 29 of 60
    igorskyigorsky Posts: 425member
    I don't understand the criticism when it comes to Apple trying to maintain secrecy.  Literally every company in their circle is trying to rip off their ideas and take away their marketshare.  Samsung Mobile has a business based around that principle.  What are they supposed to do, exactly, to maintain their competitive edge?
    brucemc
  • Reply 30 of 60

    I suspect that Chris' vision for Swift encompassed almost every level of development/programming at Apple, including:

    • [re]writing Apple's OS APIs (in process)
    • [re]writing the Apple OSes themselves (in process)
    • [re]writing Apple's App offerings (in process)
    • [re]writing Apple's Tool offerings (in process)
    • replacing Apple's low-level and high-level OS Scripting Languages
    • an alternative to Node.js as a server runtime environment
    • an alternative JavaScript as a universal scripting language
    • becoming the language of choice for both client and server programming
    If most of this is true, then Swift Development touched almost every secret project at Apple (and at Apple's partners).  Then, it would be next to impossible for Chris to talk in any detail to anyone about anything!
    edited January 2017 palomine
  • Reply 31 of 60
    calicali Posts: 3,495member
    scottkrk2 said:
    Apple's place in the world has changed, under Steve Jobs Apple was an innovator and a leader, now it has become a follower with a great legacy of design, retail, engineering and supply chain management that Jobs built up over a decade.

    Apple management needs to change it's approach to adapt to its new place in the world and ditch the secrecy.

    PS Could someone please tell Phil Schiller that he is not channeling Steve Jobs or being 'courageous' by dropping 3.5mm headphone on the iPhone 7 (Apple should have waited to next year's new design), neither was ditching USB-A ports, magsafe, etc on the new MBP (should have just replaced the two TB ports with USBC/TB3 ports).
    LMFAO

    "Apple is a follower"

    "they shouldn't have dropped the headphone jack"
  • Reply 32 of 60
    calicali Posts: 3,495member
    I don't understand why secrecy would bother anyone. Secrecy is essential to success.

    Imagine the sales Apple Watch would have gained if there were no leaks and those crap smartwatches wouldn't have released prior?

    I used to follow Nintendo closely(another secretive company)
    Nintendos biggest regret is showing off 3D gaming(Mario 64) too early. This gave Sony enough time to change their strategy and copy them. 20 years later and they're STILL losing money because of this decision.
    Nintendo kept the Wii under wraps until they announced it late on their terms and it became the most successful game console ever.
    holyone
  • Reply 33 of 60
    rob53rob53 Posts: 2,086member
    Does he think Tesla is really going to be anymore open than Apple? If they are, how long do you feel they will stay in business before all their "secrets" are used by other companies, including the big three (are they even the big three anymore???). What makes me mad about all the secrets that aren't being kept secret, is that a lot of people are corrupt and unwilling to keep secrets, they'd rather expose confidential items for their own purpose. Did Lattner accidentally or purposely expose Apple trade secrets? I hope not.

    As for spending too much time with one company, it all depends on what that company does, how they change and grow, and whether you feel you can contribute anything of value to it over the long term. I spent 33 years with one company and except for a few years here and there, it was well worth it and I got to see lots of brand new technologies, including many that were secret.
  • Reply 34 of 60
    mjtomlinmjtomlin Posts: 2,020member
    Gotta love when when people comment on unofficial "reports" and start to lay blame where ever they can. 

    I have first hand hand knowledge that Chris was planning on leaving Apple after Swift went open source and was "finished". Which was version 3.0.

    This ridiculousness about secrecy is pure speculation. All of his projects are opened sources. 
    palomineNotsofast
  • Reply 35 of 60
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,518member
    See Gruber's link to a post by Chris Lattner today. I get an impression the situation is much less sinister than this "stifling secrecy" narrative implies.

    http://daringfireball.net/

    On the other hand, industrial secrecy in the software field may be inherently more problematical than in hardware, because software is so mental and therefore more part of our common need as humans to communicate what's on our minds.
    edited January 2017
  • Reply 36 of 60
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,518member
    scottkrk2 said:
    Apple's place in the world has changed, under Steve Jobs Apple was an innovator and a leader, now it has become a follower with a great legacy of design, retail, engineering and supply chain management that Jobs built up over a decade.

    Apple management needs to change it's approach to adapt to its new place in the world and ditch the secrecy.

    PS Could someone please tell Phil Schiller that he is not channeling Steve Jobs or being 'courageous' by dropping 3.5mm headphone on the iPhone 7 (Apple should have waited to next year's new design), neither was ditching USB-A ports, magsafe, etc on the new MBP (should have just replaced the two TB ports with USBC/TB3 ports).
    Yeah, like Cali points out above, it looks like you jumped the shark here already, and after only seven anti-Apple posts. Apple is such a follower that they actually get ahead of theselves sometimes, like removing the headphone jack a whole two months before the AirPods are ready to ship, right? Samsung and HTC are actually who Apple is following, because they're coming out with jackless phones now, right?

    You guys tie yourselves in knots sometimes to be negative. 
    edited January 2017 bkkcanuckbrucemcroundaboutnowIcisz
  • Reply 37 of 60
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 21,117member
    rob53 said:
    Does he think Tesla is really going to be anymore open than Apple? If they are, how long do you feel they will stay in business before all their "secrets" are used by other companies, including the big three (are they even the big three anymore???). What makes me mad about all the secrets that aren't being kept secret, is that a lot of people are corrupt and unwilling to keep secrets, they'd rather expose confidential items for their own purpose. Did Lattner accidentally or purposely expose Apple trade secrets? I hope not.
    I don't know if you were aware that all of Tesla's patents are free to use, so at least by appearances they aren't all that "secretive". 

    You might question whether they really are free. When asked what negotiations and contracts with Tesla are necessary before their patents are used:
    Musk: We actually don't require any formal discussions. So they can just go ahead and use them. 

    Reporter: Is there a licensing process? 

    Musk: No. You just use them. Which I think is better because then we don't need to get into any kind of discussions or whatever. So we don't know. I think you'll see it in the cars that come out, should they choose to use them.

    anantksundaram
  • Reply 38 of 60
    mjtomlin said:
    Gotta love when when people comment on unofficial "reports" and start to lay blame where ever they can. 

    I have first hand hand knowledge that Chris was planning on leaving Apple after Swift went open source and was "finished". Which was version 3.0.

    This ridiculousness about secrecy is pure speculation. All of his projects are opened sources. 
    Wasn't ABI Stabilization part of the original Swift 3.0 plan?  If so, then it's not finished.

    Apple’s Chris Lattner, original creator of the Swift language, has recently announced on the Swift Evolution mailing list that ABI stability, one of the goals originally planned for Swift 3, will be postponed.

    In Lattner’s own words:
    Some of the loftier goals that we started out with aren’t going to fit into the release - including some of the most important generics features needed in order to lock down the ABI of the standard library.

    https://www.infoq.com/news/2016/05/swift-3-no-stable-abi

    flaneur said:
    See Gruber's link to a post by Chris Lattner today. I get an impression the situation is much less sinister than this "stifling secrecy" narrative implies.

    http://daringfireball.net/

    On the other hand, industrial secrecy in the software field may be inherently more problematical than in hardware, because software is so mental and therefore more part of our common need as humans to communicate what's on our minds.

    Has anyone here seen any official comment by Apple?  It seems very unusual that Apple wouldn't make some comment!
    edited January 2017
  • Reply 39 of 60
    am8449am8449 Posts: 343member
    With Samsung and every other smartphone maker copying Apple, it seems to me secrecy is still necessary at Apple. If Apple became looser on secrecy and Samsung beats Apple to market with even more products incorporating rumored Apple tech, you'd have even more people complaining about Apple "no longer innovating".
  • Reply 40 of 60
    igorsky said:
    [...] What are they supposed to do, exactly, to maintain their competitive edge?
    Deliver great products. That's it. If it's better than the alternatives I'll buy it. People who are willing to buy copy-cat knock-offs aren't likely to buy a genuine Apple product anyway, so I'm not sure that keeping plans out of the hands of competitors even matters. I'm not saying it doesn't, just that I wonder.

    I don't pretend to know whether it's ultimately better for Apple to be secretive or open about its plans, but I do know that more "roadmap" information would be useful to me.

    I know to a reasonable level of probability that a new iPhone will be announced in the fall. I can plan my budgeting and carrier agreements accordingly. I don't necessarily need to know the specific features in advance, but a predictable date of availability is useful.

    I don't have that same security if I want to buy a computer. Especially a mini or Pro. Are they dead? If not, are updates imminent or still a year or two away? The current versions are not what I want, so should I buy another brand or is there something coming that IS what I want, and what is the timeline? I'd like to be able to ask "Will there be a quad-core mini within 12 months?" and get a simple yes or no answer. I would think that would be a competitive ADVANTAGE, because it might prevent me from buying something else instead.

    I'm just spitballing and obviously am only talking about what's best for me, but I am leaning towards believing that Apple could be considerably more open in its communications with customers without giving away the farm.
    roundaboutnowavon b7
Sign In or Register to comment.