Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!apple!chuq From: chuq@Apple.COM (Chuq Von Rospach) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac Subject: Re: Apple's Cupertino campus Message-ID: <35875@apple.Apple.COM> Date: 24 Oct 89 16:47:56 GMT References: <3405@mace.cc.purdue.edu> Distribution: usa Organization: Life is just a Fantasy novel played for keeps Lines: 38 >Why doesn't Apple just build one or two big buildings and move everyone >into one place? In the long run, wouldn't that offer tremendous advantages >and actually save them money? Well, I'm certainly not an Apple spokesman on this, but here's why I think this is a bad idea: 1) There is simply no space to build really large buildings in the Cupertino area. 2) Cupertino doesn't have the infrastructure to support skyscrapers (which would be the kind of building necessary for this) and doesn't want it, either (I don't blame them...) 3) To build enough really large buildings to handle the 8,000 or so people we have, we'd have to leave Cupertino and go to some other area. Apple's roots are here, we don't want to leave.... 4) Really large buildings tend to be unfriendly, sterile places to work. Not fun. I've worked in skyscrapers (in Los Angeles). No thanks. The reason Apple does what it does is because it puts the environment of it's people and area above pure efficiency. And many of those 'efficiencies' are, in my mind, false ones -- sure, you can cut down on things like security guards and hallway square footage, but you also turn the company from a series of close, intimate groups of people working together into a large, faceless conglomerate where you're in a building with 1,000 other people and know none of them. Huge buildings go against the enviroment that makes Apple special. -- Chuq Von Rospach <+> Editor,OtherRealms <+> Member SFWA/ASFA chuq@apple.com <+> CI$: 73317,635 <+> [This is myself speaking] Trust Mama Nature to remind us just how important things like sci.aquaria's name really is in the scheme of things.