Funny... had Apple even whispered plans to cut back the spaceship campus based on costs, the haters and wall-street hoodlums would take that as an Apple-is-doomed scenario, hence resulting in a crash of AAPL.
But not Google, Alphabet, or whatever the hell that soup-mix is calling itself.
Their first-rendition would have been impressive to say the least. Their revised one looks like a giant pot-tent at BurningMan meant to be filled with hipsters.
Seriously, who cares? if you think this is a sign that Google is in trouble then you're as nuts as anyone who would think Apple were in trouble given the same news.
Google are fine, Apple are fine, and this Draco-Balboa grudge match the tech press wants to forment is non-existent. They're healthy competitors, and they push each other to be better. Be grateful for that.
Just like Palm was fine. And Microsoft was fine. And Motorola was fine. And Nokia was fine. And Xiaomi was fine. Companies don't go out of business as long as they have people posting their defenses in online comments!
Seriously, who cares? if you think this is a sign that Google is in trouble then you're as nuts as anyone who would think Apple were in trouble given the same news.
Google are fine, Apple are fine, and this Draco-Balboa grudge match the tech press wants to forment is non-existent. They're healthy competitors, and they push each other to be better. Be grateful for that.
Just like Palm was fine. And Microsoft was fine. And Motorola was fine. And Nokia was fine. And Xiaomi was fine. Companies don't go out of business as long as they have people posting their defenses in online comments!
Not even sure what point you're trying to make. Companies don't go out of business because tech journalists post articles about their scaled-back construction plans either. Why do you even respond to comments when you so clearly can't stand them?
- Palm weren't in particularly good shape even before the iPhone, I don't think many, if any, people were arguing that they were fine. - Microsoft? Microsoft are doing great. Their strategies have been a little confused in the past decade, but they've come through very strong and with very healthy business prospects in cloud and services. They've totally realigned their software model, and it's been a very successful shift. Hardware less so, but they're not a hardware company, and it's not a big problem for them. - Motorola and Nokia clearly weren't fine post-iPhone, and hardly anyone was saying that. They clearly don't compare to Google, which is massively popular, and profitable. - Xiaomi I know nothing about, maybe you're right.
How about Samsung? You've been relentlessly attacking them for years, have they gone out of business for any of the reasons you love to bash them for?
You frequently complain that there's "nothing to see here" on my posts and yet you have been wrong repeatedly.
Not sure I've ever made that complaint before. My complaints about your articles are usually about the unnecessary length, tangential journeys into rants about Apple's competitors, and repetitive fact-vomit of Samsung phones before-and-after iPhone infographics. I'm not sure where you think I've been "wrong".
At issue isn't whether my articles are bringing down multibillion dollar corporations (a very silly idea), but whether I'm reporting on important issues that few others are.
Are you kidding me? You're the one who brought up the silly idea of commentators on the internet having influence of companies going out of business.
Look, Google scaling back their HQ plans is news to someone, you're right. Someone, somewhere will be interested in it (Soli, case in point), That's absolutely fine. But your article didn't just report on that, you added 2 words of commentary about Apple Park for every 1 word of reporting. That's not important issues, that's conjecture fuelled by bias. You do this all the time, and it makes your writing so much worse than it could be if you stuck to the facts.
I don't write to dictate what is going to happen. I write to be accurate and informative. I want to be right about what's changing, not to affect global change. Nearly every comment you make appears to be aimed at changing reality, not accurately describing it. That's why, like the Verge, you're wrong about most everything you say.
Literally have no idea what you're talking about. I criticise you for editorialising, and you shoot back that I'm trying to change reality? Where have I tried to change reality?
Your over-defensiveness and inability to take criticism makes you spout nonsense.
Seriously, who cares? if you think this is a sign that Google is in trouble then you're as nuts as anyone who would think Apple were in trouble given the same news.
Google are fine, Apple are fine, and this Draco-Balboa grudge match the tech press wants to forment is non-existent. They're healthy competitors, and they push each other to be better. Be grateful for that.
Just like Palm was fine. And Microsoft was fine. And Motorola was fine. And Nokia was fine. And Xiaomi was fine. Companies don't go out of business as long as they have people posting their defenses in online comments!
Not even sure what point you're trying to make. Companies don't go out of business because tech journalists post articles about their scaled-back construction plans either. Why do you even respond to comments when you so clearly can't stand them?
- Palm weren't in particularly good shape even before the iPhone, I don't think many, if any, people were arguing that they were fine. - Microsoft? Microsoft are doing great. Their strategies have been a little confused in the past decade, but they've come through very strong and with very healthy business prospects in cloud and services. They've totally realigned their software model, and it's been a very successful shift. Hardware less so, but they're not a hardware company, and it's not a big problem for them. - Motorola and Nokia clearly weren't fine post-iPhone, and hardly anyone was saying that. They clearly don't compare to Google, which is massively popular, and profitable. - Xiaomi I know nothing about, maybe you're right.
How about Samsung? You've been relentlessly attacking them for years, have they gone out of business for any of the reasons you love to bash them for?
You frequently complain that there's "nothing to see here" on my posts and yet you have been wrong repeatedly.
Look, Google scaling back their HQ plans is news to someone, you're right. Someone, somewhere will be interested in it (Soli, case in point), That's absolutely fine. But your article didn't just report on that, you added 2 words of commentary about Apple Park for every 1 word of reporting. That's not important issues, that's conjecture fuelled by bias. You do this all the time, and it makes your writing so much worse than it could be if you stuck to the facts.
I don't write to dictate what is going to happen. I write to be accurate and informative. I want to be right about what's changing, not to affect global change. Nearly every comment you make appears to be aimed at changing reality, not accurately describing it. That's why, like the Verge, you're wrong about most everything you say.
Literally have no idea what you're talking about. I criticise you for editorialising, and you shoot back that I'm trying to change reality? Where have I tried to change reality?
Your over-defensiveness and inability to take criticism makes you spout nonsense.
You seem really confused. DED isn't a reporter, he's a columnist. Have you read a newspaper before? Do you know what a columnist is and does? Columnists are not beat reporters. Perhaps this misunderstanding of his job to be done is the root of your continual displeasure with the column.
As it was, I also found the topic of google backing down on its lofty ambitions interesting. To me it's part of the google pattern -- over promise, under deliver. It is yet another demonstration of the differences between Apple and Google, which is apparently part of their entire management ethoses from the top down. This is noteworthy, and certainly can fill a column.
If you're not interested in DED columns i'd suggest, oh i don't know, not reading them? Sure beats whining.
>>"The ground-level pic looks like a pagodayurt hybrid, >>the overview looks like Mother, landing and feeding..."
S**t - I've said it before, 'I hate autoblunder'... I also hate that I often forget to check the checker. So, for what it's worth, that was supposed to say, "the overview looks like MOTHRA, landing and feeding..."
Google should try cutting back on free gormet meals, a workplace is not feel-good social center or playground.
A workplace is anything an employer thinks it should be in order to attract the best employees, keep them happy and give them reasons to work a longer day. There's a very solid reason why employers subsidize cafeterias (to various extents). It keeps employees in the office instead of them going out for meals which takes longer and takes away from work hours. And there's been many studies of the negative health impact of sitting in one place all day and staring at a computer screen. So while I originally was very turned off by offices that had the obligatory Foosball game and the like, especially when I was busting a gut and others were having such fun, I can now see the value of such distractions as long as they're not abused.
There's a long list of benefits Google provides. I wouldn't want those if it meant substantially lower pay, but I'd certainly take them as part of the package.
But if you're happy working at the facilities of Dunder-Mifflin and bringing a PP&J sandwich with you to work for lunch, more power to you.
Google should try cutting back on free gormet meals, a workplace is not feel-good social center or playground.
A workplace is anything an employer thinks it should be in order to attract the best employees, keep them happy and give them reasons to work a longer day. There's a very solid reason why employers subsidize cafeterias (to various extents). It keeps employees in the office instead of them going out for meals which takes longer and takes away from work hours. And there's been many studies of the negative health impact of sitting in one place all day and staring at a computer screen. So while I originally was very turned off by offices that had the obligatory Foosball game and the like, especially when I was busting a gut and others were having such fun, I can now see the value of such distractions as long as they're not abused.
There's a long list of benefits Google provides. I wouldn't want those if it meant substantially lower pay, but I'd certainly take them as part of the package.
But if you're happy working at the facilities of Dunder-Mifflin and bringing a PP&J sandwich with you to work for lunch, more power to you.
Comments
Nice one, DE
Are you kidding me? You're the one who brought up the silly idea of commentators on the internet having influence of companies going out of business.
Look, Google scaling back their HQ plans is news to someone, you're right. Someone, somewhere will be interested in it (Soli, case in point), That's absolutely fine. But your article didn't just report on that, you added 2 words of commentary about Apple Park for every 1 word of reporting. That's not important issues, that's conjecture fuelled by bias. You do this all the time, and it makes your writing so much worse than it could be if you stuck to the facts.
Literally have no idea what you're talking about. I criticise you for editorialising, and you shoot back that I'm trying to change reality? Where have I tried to change reality?
Your over-defensiveness and inability to take criticism makes you spout nonsense.
As it was, I also found the topic of google backing down on its lofty ambitions interesting. To me it's part of the google pattern -- over promise, under deliver. It is yet another demonstration of the differences between Apple and Google, which is apparently part of their entire management ethoses from the top down. This is noteworthy, and certainly can fill a column.
If you're not interested in DED columns i'd suggest, oh i don't know, not reading them? Sure beats whining.
The ground-level pic looks like a pagodayurt hybrid,
the overview looks like Mother, landing and feeding...
For flushing all those moonshot projects when they fail...
💩🚽
>>"The ground-level pic looks like a pagodayurt hybrid,
>>the overview looks like Mother, landing and feeding..."
S**t - I've said it before, 'I hate autoblunder'...
I also hate that I often forget to check the checker.
So, for what it's worth, that was supposed to say,
"the overview looks like MOTHRA, landing and feeding..."
(Mom never did that)
There's a long list of benefits Google provides. I wouldn't want those if it meant substantially lower pay, but I'd certainly take them as part of the package.
But if you're happy working at the facilities of Dunder-Mifflin and bringing a PP&J sandwich with you to work for lunch, more power to you.