The Impact of Low Salaries At Apple 782
orenh writes "Recent data indicate that Apple engineers have significantly lower salaries than their Silicon Valley peers: $89,000 at Apple, versus $105,000 at Yahoo and $112,000 at Google. Paying lower salaries had a major impact on Apple's bottom line when it was struggling in the market up until 2004. But now that Apple is highly profitable, these lower salaries are no longer a factor in Apple's success. Will Apple have to raise salaries to match the market rate, or face defections?"
Will Apple have to raise salaries? (Score:4, Funny)
Yes!
Re:Will Apple have to raise salaries? (Score:5, Informative)
I live in the area, and let me tell you, people would rather KNOW they are going to have a paycheck, at least in theory because of seniority if nothing else, than NOT because they jumped ship to get a 20K a year raise.
Not when you paid nearly a million dollars for your 3 bedroom house.
There ARE people within a few miles of my house paying 25 thousand dollars a month in RENT.... My neighborhood is in the 2 to 3K a month range, and if I KNEW I could pay my bills with the economy going to the toilet, there is NO good reason for me to jump ship for a raise.
Three years ago, they ALL would have jumped ship. It's a different type of world now, since foreclosures, etc. are looming everywhere. Local trash mags have foreclosure sales listed, as do newspapers.
Apple should pony up some of those profits, but a smart board and CFO would realize, they might need a bit of cheese to get them through the thin period we can all see coming.
--Toll_Free
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Will Apple have to raise salaries? (Score:5, Insightful)
A couple of adjustments, like paying off a car and riding my motorcycle to work everyday instead of 3 or 4 times a week and I hardly notice. The bills are paid, I still have a growing 401k, and the credit card debt is going down instead of up. Maybe not as fast as it did a year ago, but in the right direction.
I can't speak to the Apple engineers, but I will argue that taking another job purely on salary isn't always the best thing to do. And ratings in magazines rarely add in other perks.
Re:Will Apple have to raise salaries? (Score:5, Interesting)
I went from that job to another job (again, non-IT related), I earned less money BUT at the same time, I had alot more perks. I was head of a department in an section of the retail sector which provides stable long term employment. My co-workers were down to earth genuine people rather than egotistical pricks like I've seen in the IT world. Sales representatives giving the ability to get things at wholesale prices (for my own person consumption etc).
Believe me, before I went back to University, I had a pretty sweet time in that job.
Re:Will Apple have to raise salaries? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Will Apple have to raise salaries? (Score:5, Insightful)
Anyone who pays that amount of money just to rent, needs to have their head examined.
Re:Will Apple have to raise salaries? (Score:5, Interesting)
This is the Bay Area. We have more millionaires than SoCal. Of course, their wealth is all subject to the ups and downs of their stock options, but...
http://sfbay.craigslist.org/pen/apa/723370120.html [craigslist.org] twenty three thousand a month.
http://sfbay.craigslist.org/nby/apa/723180186.html [craigslist.org] 10,000 a month for a 3 bedroom
http://sfbay.craigslist.org/search/apa?minAsk=10000 [craigslist.org] Lets just make it easy... Theres all of them above 10k. Granted, some of them are for sale prices in the ghettos, but.... Gives you an idea of WHY people out here make what they do.
And one of the reasons I left the rat race of IT after a LONG time.
--Toll_Free
Re:Will Apple have to raise salaries? (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes!
Pride in what you do and a sense of corporate individuality is a huge factor in determinining the loyalty of employees.
Look at Games Workshop as an example. They borderline brainwash staff to love their job, and then they pay them so little that they generally have to share accomodation with fellow staff. And yet the staff turnover is surprisingly low for such a relatively crappy and intensive job.
Re:Will Apple have to raise salaries? (Score:5, Interesting)
I agree, but I think you overestimate this effect. In Apple, with Ive and Jobs generally being the public faces, it's rare for the guys in the trenches to get noticed. Not everybody's ego is pleased with a pat on the back. They need public accolades, more money, or a mix of both.
Also, as sexy as Apple's products are, they don't have a very large lineup. There's no dearth of sexy products in the rest of the tech. world, and people do often move -- we'd probably be surprised at the number of people who have worked for at least 2 companies out of Apple, Google, and MS.
The numbers in TFA (Glassdoor) are based on a sample set that's way too small to be a statistically "representative sample". So we don't even know if Apple engineers really are paid less than the average silicon valley employee.
The one effect the article seems to miss: Apple's stock has been on fire for some time now. So if Apple employees are getting stock awards and have a decent employee stock purchase plan, the raw salary numbers aren't telling us the whole story.
Re:Will Apple have to raise salaries? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Will Apple have to raise salaries? (Score:5, Informative)
$89K/year won't get you a house even with today's market. Maybe an OK condo, assuming a bank will give you a loan. But if you don't mind driving 100+ miles each way, then you could get a decent structure, though the neighborhood might be in the middle of nowhere. Rents are going back up, but if you don't mind living in small apartments to be able to have some play money, then sure, $89K is enough.
For those who just see the numbers and have no idea about cost of living, $700 for an apartment is awesome in the midwest, but $1400-1600 in the Valley will at least keep you out of the bad neighborhoods. After gas, food, and utilities, you'd be lucky to have anything left over to go out and socialize. In the midwest, you'd live like royalty.
Re:Will Apple have to raise salaries? (Score:5, Informative)
Wow....I mean, I figure if you've got a few years experience under your belt...$89K/yr is really NOT that great?!?! And I mean not great in areas that aren't nearly as expensive as out there in Silicon Valley.
As the parent said...people paid over a million dollars a pop for homes out there that aren't that palatial. How they hell does anyone make a house payment like that on $89K/yr? Hell...how do you pay for what a condo or apt must cost out there on that salary? I'm not even talking having wife and kids to support....
$89K is not a high salary in this day in age...it is middle class...medium-low end of it really.
This is what bothers me in the presidential rederick that is going on wanting to raise taxes on the rich. Use to..the rich was $250K and up....today...well, apparently it is $75K and up from what I've seen. Notice where the tax rebates started declining in full value recently? Yep....$75K and you start getting rich and don't deserve a full rebate.
Re:Will Apple have to raise salaries? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Will Apple have to raise salaries? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Will Apple have to raise salaries? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Will Apple have to raise salaries? (Score:5, Insightful)
One rationale for having a progressive tax system is that people should be taxed less on that portion of their income necessary to meet basic needs (like renting a two bedroom apartment) than on the optional "luxury" expenses (like golf club memberships). The problem is that the United States Federal Income Tax rates are not indexed by geographical cost of living. A family making $80K a year in a small, low cost, burg in Indiana can join a low end golf club while the same family living and working in San Mateo, CA will barely be able to rent an apartment, eat, and buy gas.
Note that Medicare benefits are already, to some extent, indexed geographically. The amount that the Feds will pay for taking out an appendix in Burg Town, IN is much less than they will pay in San Mateo, CA. Why not afford this to taxes as well?
IMHO, if we are going to have a progressive Federal income tax, the tax tables should be indexed by cost of living by geographical area. (Although, I'd rather just have a flat tax with no deductions for things like mortgage deductions).
Also, anything that raises an individual's taxes when not accompanied by an income increase is a tax increase. Allowing a long standing law to expire is no different than passing a new law that that reverts an existing law. Ethically and morally, they are identical as each lawmaker should make exactly the same decision in both cases regardless of if the tax increase is the result of failing to sponsor/vote for a bill to continue the "expiring" law X or actively sponsoring/voting for a bill to override X.
Re:Will Apple have to raise salaries? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Will Apple have to raise salaries? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Will Apple have to raise salaries? (Score:5, Funny)
if (! $existing_device_features->$feature) {
$whining_on_slashdot = kINSIGHTFUL;
} else {
$whining_on_slashdot = kREDUNDANT;
}
}
Seriously, we get that one of the two things he complained about is a problem. But it's valid to point out that ONLY one of the two things is a problem, and the other is either a troll, or honest misunderstanding, and there's some value in calling out either one (entertainment or learning respectively).
Logical Development (and a question) (Score:4, Funny)
Mod Child Down.
...
Just wondering... If we had a -1 Down mod, wouldn't it be a bit retarded?
Re:why don't you find out for yourself? (Score:5, Funny)
They keep me chained to a radiator making iPods in return for a bowl of rice a day. If I forget to check post anonymously the Apple police will hunt me down and kill me for Thinking Different.
Free iPhones! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Free iPhones! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Free iPhones! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Free iPhones! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Free iPhones! (Score:5, Interesting)
iTunes Store #1 music retailer, relies on QuickTime
iPod #1 MP3 player, relies on iTunes and QuickTime
The iPhone is quickly rising, so it may, in a few years, become the #1 smartphone, with heavy reliance on Safari Mobile, OS X Mobile, and of course, iTunes and QuickTime.
So to put your post in perspective: If you want to be in consumer electronics, web services, online stores, consumer applications, or media players, you want to work at Apple.
I mean, you have heard of the iPod, iTunes, and iPhone, right? Nearly everyone who uses an iPod uses QuickTime, and there over 170m sold, plus 6m iPhones, that suggests nearly 1/6 of the US population is using iTunes and therefore QuickTime
Re:Free iPhones! (Score:5, Funny)
Pedestal (Score:5, Funny)
Now you're just putting them on a pedestal!
The Novelty (Score:3, Insightful)
Or not.
It's not like we're just talking free soda here.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
As the old saying goes... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Careful how you say that (Score:5, Funny)
On the other hand, why are Yahoo engineers so overpaid...
Google's "talent" is vastly over-rated. (Score:5, Insightful)
What's really terrible is Google operates with a quit long interview process, often with a number of people. These people are all very similar and have huge chips on their shoulder and only look to hire people much like themselves. That is people from academia with not too much real market experience. They are quickly becoming a very self referential mono-culture of people who genuinely believe they are better, but without the actual experience to back it up. A telling sign is their over reliance on logic puzzle interviews, raw information queries and needing to gel solidly with a large number of people. They ask very few "how would you do X" or "how do you deal with Y" questions, instead thinking that the raw intelligence is the best feature to grade an applicant on.
Anyone who has dealt with tech "darlings" knows the danger of this. Sure they may be smart as fuck, but it doesn't mean they know how to finish or deliver. It may be hard for the slashdot poster to believe but people used to dream of working at microsoft (and before that IBM) the way they talk about google now. It's just another cycle.
Re:Google's "talent" is vastly over-rated. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Google's "talent" is vastly over-rated. (Score:5, Funny)
(Seriously, over here a 'vet' is a vetinary surgeon. I did a bit of a double take when I was living in Houston and I saw a bumper sticker saying 'If you value your freedom, thank a vet' - and I thought, well, it's all very nice having someone to give my cat his annual FIV vaccination, but I didn't realise vetinary surgeons were the vanguard of freedom fighters too!).
Re:Google's "talent" is vastly over-rated. (Score:4, Insightful)
Have you seen some of the tech the military is dreaming up? THAT is the frontier of IT... yes, they readily engage academia, but what successful cutting edge organization doesn't?
I've worked with many former military people and I tend to be impressed with their self discipline and ability to deliver... they are by no means automatons. In fact, they are usually the people who have the balls to speak up when a project goes south, and are willing to put the work in (and cut the fat) when others are too timid.
I'd be surprised if you've actually worked with a military person in IT, or perhaps you don't know who on your team has been in the military.
Lastly, on top of the obvious flaw in your logic, by your assumptions, you're clearly shitting on the heads of those that have served the US to the best of their ability. It's your choice, but I think it's a bad one. Whenever I interview I give deference to the people who have served, and I've never been disappointed.
Re:Google's "talent" is vastly over-rated. (Score:4, Insightful)
And another nail in Google's eventual coffin; the obsession with youth isn't all it's cracked up to be. In my experience, most software developers don't come into their prime until they are at least 25. Before then, they are still too inexperienced and make too many mistakes due to inexperience.
What? (Score:5, Insightful)
Benefits. I make less then I could, but the benefits of where I work more then make up for it.
So, what are their benefits?
Re:What? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:What? (Score:5, Insightful)
I worked for a company that went through a profit cycle after a long period of doing nothing. I was expecting the company to do something to compensate the engineers who had been patient through the hard times, but then I realized something. They didn't have to. We all had significant stock options, and now that the stock was worth something we would all think twice about leaving (even though there were no raises or bonuses that year).
On the other hand, when the stock price went back down, people were dropping like flies. Eventually Apple will have to make corrections, but they are probably not there yet.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:What? (Score:5, Insightful)
But I think the greatest thing is working with other extraordinarily talented people passionate about Apple. I don't know how else to explain it. I've told this to countless people, but I think the thing that Apple does the best, bar none, is hire the right people. The process is long and arduous (even for the lowest of the low), and they make you feel very special. It's also something you notice after a while, but almost everyone else at Apple kind of behaves the same. Always upbeat, hip, and very passionate. Most have hardcore hobbies (from playing in bands to mountain climbing, almost to a person it seems), and are very goal driven. But, who wouldn't want to hire people like that? The execution at Apple in this regard is just brilliant.
Lastly, and why this has to be explained, and why nearly no one here has mentioned it is quite strange... money is not everything, not even close. Yes, the stock (not options, actual stock placed in an ETrade account, all set up for you to sell at your convenience, although I wouldn't!), 25% off product is nice, the free shit is also nice, and well, working for a great company means a hell of a lot, but the salary isn't at the top of the list of things most of the employees are wanting as far as compensation, it's all the rest, and being able to be who they are (when you saw a suit, you knew they were from out of town) and being pushed to be passionate... it's not that money, at least to the type of people Apple hires... which is my point.
Re:What? (Score:4, Insightful)
They provide employees with some unusual (but reasonably cheap) benefits and promote an image to both the inside and the outside that by being with them you are somehow part of a select clique.
The same process is used in elite military forces, religious cults and even in street gangs.
I bet you're surrounded by mostly males, in their late teens and twenties - they tend to be the most susceptible to this kind of group conditioning.
Uh, Google has fairly low pay, too. (Score:5, Informative)
They got paid significantly more at Intel, for what was effectively a lower-level job. (Not directly comparable in job function, but in heirarchy.) Google pays on the order of 25% less.
Comparing one single job isn't the way to go. Apple may pay less than Google or Yahoo, but, really, what job position at Apple are they referring to? TFA just say "engineers". Well, what kind? If you're comparing, say, the guy who designs the box that the iPod comes in to the guy who designs Google's customized Linux kernel, then it's not even close to comparable.
Re:Uh, Google has fairly low pay, too. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Uh, Google has fairly low pay, too. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Uh, Google has fairly low pay, too. (Score:5, Funny)
The interior of my iPod box was completely dry.
Don't think it's a problem (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Don't think it's a problem (Score:4, Insightful)
No, if you're working in an engineering capacity what matters are things like how "interesting" the projects you're assigned are, and the support you receive from the non-engineering staff. I have worked on software projects that were utterly mundane in their purpose and end use (military fuel management systems), but were extremely interesting to work on. Slick packaging and good interface design aren't what make you want to get up in the morning to go to work.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Don't think it's a problem (Score:4, Insightful)
To me, that's a bit like a store with a low price guarantee on a product - if you show them a competitor's ad that has a lower price, they call and find out if the product is actually in stock and the shopper can head over right that moment and buy it. If so, then the opportunity has actually presented itself and so they honor the price.
If you take a poll of competitive salaries for similar positions at Google to your employer and demand a match, the might be inclined to determine whether any of those positions are actually opportunities for you, or if you're just trying to give them the squeeze.
Not saying that you will never get what you want, but:
a) Consider how important the difference is to you , versus...;
b) Consider the risk of losing your job over such a high differential demand with no backup plan.
For what it's worth, companies DO (sometimes) review employee compensation to ensure that they are keeping the ones they want and trimming the ones they don't, and in time Apple may end up doing the same. Any corporation worth its salt knows that its greatest asset is its workforce talent.
Work/Life (Score:5, Insightful)
People like working for Yahoo, but my friends there tell me they work 60+ hrs/week.
People tell me they love working for Apple, because they only work 50hrs/week.
Maybe the salaries reflect that? Maybe the salary difference between Yahoo/Apple reflects the relative financial positions of the company? Maybe the salary differences have to do with Cupertino vs Mountain View cost of living? Maybe Apple employees have made buttloads of stock and HR doesn't need to pay them $20k more because they're making $50k each year in restricted stock that's vesting? Maybe Apple gives 30% bonuses and the others don't?
I don't know, you tell me. I know Salary vs Salary is normally a weak comparison.
You only work 70 hours if you want a pay raise (Score:5, Interesting)
The only people working 70+ hours/week at Google are the folks nearing a deadline, putting out a fire, or dealing with some other emergency. Some other folks do get close to that, however. The fresh out of college, in-a-new-town sort of folks have no life and so they work all week. Google gives them dinner (though I suspect dinner service will be stopping soon; shortly before I left, they were sending out surveys to see how they could "serve you better"), there are showers, and if you're young and energetic you can hook up with another geek. You get a few years before you burn out, so these guys are fine; they'll learn.
The other ones working insane hours are the people that want a pay raise. You have to get promoted to get a raise at Google. And since promotions are essentially popularity contests, you need to Be Seen (and be seen as a go-getter). Since I'm getting up in years, and I have a family life I enjoy, I never bothered to nominate myself for a promotion. It meant a few years without a raise, but the stock did well so it was a wash in my mind. The bonuses were fairly generous anyway.
The final group working long hours are those who are doing a 20% project. These are few and far between, the 20% project being primarily a myth to entice people into applying for a job. (I did a lot of interviewing, and about half the interviewees would ask about 20% projects, what mine was, etc. I could never quite bring myself to lie to them and say that there was ever the slightest chance they'd get to choose and work on a 20% project). There's been a real severe crackdown on 20% time. There's just less need for a "throw everything at a wall, see what sticks" mentality. They have a core set of products, so what you'll see from here on out is acquisitions as a way to get into offering new products/services, and add-ons to existing products (new features in Google maps, etc). There's actually a little room for 20% time in the latter areas, but the barrier to entry is non-trivial. Long gone are the days when you could host some new whizz-bang idea on your workstation or a borrowed machine in a coloc. If you want to integrate with existing services, you have to speak borg, borgmon, etc.
Anyway, there are a lot of people who put in a normal working week at Google an dare perfectly happy. They won't get promoted as often (or ever), and they won't get involved with the internal Google hip-crowd, but they can have happy, productive careers there. It's actually a pretty non-stressful place to work, once the golden handcuffs come off. I don't know that I'd work there again, but it's a fun place to be, with a lot of energy about the place.
As far as Apple, the stuff I was hearing is that there's a lot of fear for one's job, everyone needs to swear allegiance to the Cult of Steve, etc. I gather it's not a very fun place to work, and I gather that long work weeks are all but mandatory. That could just be sour grapes from overworked engineers, though.
-B
Apples and Oranges (Score:3, Funny)
It's not all about salary (Score:5, Insightful)
Additionally, and more to the point, the environment has a huge impact on the salary I'll require.
In the words of a friend of mine: My ability to tolerate bullshit is commensurate with my salary.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It depends (Score:4, Insightful)
We have to remember too that Apple is not really a direct competitor to Yahoo or Google. Sure there is some significant overlap but the real question is what are their competitors at Dell, HP, Nokia, RIM, Motorola, and Microsoft paying. I suspect Apple is likely fairly competitive on the pay. HR folks are pretty aware of what the going rate for talent is in a given area.
I don't know too much about Apple's corporate culture but clearly they are able to attract some pretty talented folks. All other things being equal people talent will migrate towards higher pay but things are rarely equal. Speaking for myself I'd rather make a little less in a fun place with interesting work and cool co-workers. Benefits are also a consideration.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
As Steve Jobs supposedly said to John Sculley... (Score:3, Insightful)
There's more to a job than the salary.
Of course, we all know how well that worked out for John Sculley.
Look at the stock (Score:5, Interesting)
That's why you don't hear me complaining about salaries.
MOD UP (Score:3, Interesting)
OBjoke (Score:5, Funny)
Problem with the article: Apple retail staff (Score:5, Insightful)
It takes Apples R&D budget and spreads it over the total number of employees from Apple. It then gets to the conclusion that Apple has underpaid its software engineers especially in the last few years as the R&D budget was not nearly as big as it should have been for the number of employees Apple has.
The problem with this conclusion is found in this article [daringfireball.net], which estimates that half of Apples employees are now working in retail i.e. in an Apple Store. Since Google and the likes do not have a brick and mortar business, so most employees are actually engineers, the simple calculation from the article might work there, but with Apple, it is a bit more complicated than that, especially since the retail store business has just been built in the last couple years
Dont understand me wrong, Apple could still by all means underpay its engineers, but the conclusion of the article is too simple, I think.
Small sample size, self-selecting, etc (Score:5, Insightful)
In addition, they don't verify the information they're given (how could they, anyway?), nor do they have any idea who is actually posting those salaries. Interesting idea, but very suspect methodology.
Pathetic (Score:5, Insightful)
I turned down job offers easily 30k more than what I make now. They weren't where I wanted to be for one. Also, while at my current employ I had to have some major surgery on my ankle. I spent 3 weeks "working" from home, which was really little more than keep up on what was going on and help with what I could through the fog of pain killers. No vacation or sick time used. Then when I did take some vacation time they had to get a hold of me for a few things, on those days they didn't charge me vacation time. I enjoy the people I work with, my boss is great about letting me just get things done (I have worked for micromanaging cockmasters before so this is GOLD in my book), and generally enjoy doing my work even on the shitty days.
job security? (Score:4, Insightful)
No clue as to whether Apple has job security, but I'm guessing it would be a huge factor if they do.
Sample Size Matters... (Score:4, Informative)
Only 89,000? (Score:4, Funny)
Non-money issues. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:But !? Apple is 'cool' ?!? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:But !? Apple is 'cool' ?!? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Calling all fanbois! (Score:5, Insightful)
How about "non-monetary benefits"?
Not everyone will jump at a job that pays more - I suspect for a growing number of people, there are certain non-monetary benefits that are worth way more than dollars. Things like flex time, telecommuting, vacation are often things that people may value more than their equivalent dollar value.
Maybe Apple offers a no-nonsense environment where they can work on their stuff until "it's done right" rather than "we must ship, fix it later" mentality. Maybe they like Apple. Maybe Apple as an employer treats them fairly. Who knows (I don't work for Apple). Or maybe the work environment is such that it's a healthy one, or stimulating, or something people can feel happy about and look forward to going to everyday. Or maybe they're working on a pet project (after all, Apple has hired a number of people from the open-source community, like FreeBSD developers), and they're getting paid for what would otherwise be volunteer work.
Money isn't everything to a job. For some, it's the most important thing, but for others, once they have enough to satisfy their material needs and current wants, excess money just goes to taxes. Sure other jobs can pay more, but they may make demands that are incompatible with how one wishes to spend their time. In fact, I might say if all that keeps one to a job is money, then there's something wrong.
Or, to answer the original quote - maybe the reality distortion field works great.
Re:Calling all fanbois! (Score:4, Interesting)
Not sure how well that applies here though, as Google has a reputation for being pretty fun while Apple has a reputation of having people scream at you when your project is late or experiencing difficulties. I guess some people are gluttons for pain
Re:Calling all fanbois! (Score:5, Interesting)
True, but those salaries don't meet their material needs.
Median cost of a home in Cupertino: $649,000.
Median mortgage payment: $2,145
The rule is, you take your annual salary ($89,000), you take 28% of that, and divide by twelve, and that is your upper bound for mortgage payment ($2,076).
Want to work for Apple? Odds are you'll be renting.
Re:Calling all fanbois! (Score:4, Interesting)
If anything, Yahoo should question why they're paying their engineers so much.
What a crock (Score:5, Insightful)
"This isn't like Wal-Mart dragging down the wages of an entire town"
Everywhere Wal Mart has gone, its had beneficial effects for the area as a whole. Mom and Pop dime store go out of business because of big bad Wal Mart? So what? Small food stores and delis go under because of chain grocery stores too. General stores and hardware stores went under when Sears and JC Penney were dominant.
Wherever a chain store like Wal Mart or Target or Costco opens, a whole ecosystem of small stores spring up around it. You not only get cheaper prices with chains, you also get a much better selection of goods. The tax base always... always increases in that area, not decreases. And last I checked, Wal Mart isn't the only chain that doesn't pay big bucks to their employees. Are you bitching about Best Buy, Circuit City, and Food Lion as well? Do you shop at those stores anyway, or do you voluntarily pay higher prices at places like Whole Foods? Do you seriously expect anyone to pay good money for slinging stock at a department store? Had Wal Mart never come to these small towns, how is it that you figure their income or the town's tax base would have increased otherwise?
You people act like Wal Mart conquers and forces entire populations to shopping enslavement. This is a market economy, and businesses succeed because they give customers what they want, or someone else comes and takes their business away. If there's money, there's going to be competition for it. Mom and Pop stores, cute and quaint Americana that they were, weren't getting it done. Someone else built a better mousetrap. For that matter, why don't you bemoan the loss of small bookstores, neighborhood gas stations, and Five and Dimes while you're at it? They've all been swept away too, and Wal Mart had nothing to do with their death.
While you're at it, would you like to curse the web? Amazon and their like are also doing what Wal Mart did, only on a wider scale, and you don't get the benefit of any local brick and mortar presence... or the tax funds they bring. But would you argue that Amazon has been a bad thing? If you feel that strongly about small businesses, you patronize them, by all means. But don't expect to be able to force myself and other customers to shop at such places when there's a better alternative.
Re:It's not always salaries... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:It's not always salaries... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:It's not always salaries... (Score:5, Interesting)
At Apple, you're expected to be available from 6.00 am to 9.00 pm or later some times. There is no idea whatsoever of a work-life balance. You get great discounts on hardware, but corporate clients of Apple get an Apple staff discount too - my current employer fits in that category.
I wouldn't go back in a fit - they'd have to offer me a lot more money if they wanted that.
Re:It's not always salaries... (Score:5, Funny)
I know you're sarcastic, but... (Score:4, Insightful)
I know you're being sarcastic, but that does touch a subject that I've genuinely wondered about.
See most stories we're graced with from Apple (which isn't to say it's a comprehensive set, but just that that's the image that Apple itself is perfectly happy to give) is that everything happened because of the Great Man Steve Jobs, and (thinly veiled) in spite of those lazy incompetent engineers. X is all due to the Great Man's vision. Y was personally tested by the Great Man. Z only happened because the Great Man yelled at the engineers and told them to make the things He wants. W happened because, frighteningly enough, the Great Man didn't yell for a change, but just fixed the engineers with his iciest stare and asked them when are they going to get it done. Etc.
Frankly, it gives the impression of something more like Stalin's USSR or Mao's China than anything even vaguely resembling a company or a boss I'd like to work for. Not saying that it's necessarily that bad, I wouldn't know, but that's the impression that Apple's propaganda machine leaves. Seen from outside, and if the question came, "well, would I want to quit my job and try to get a job there?", it doesn't exactly sound motivational, to say the least.
Even skipping past the other implications, I never heard the Great Man giving credit to anyone else but himself. You hear all the time about how the iPod's success is because Steve Jobs himself said how loud the volume button should go, but you never hear who was actually the guy who designed the bloody thing. Well, not from Apple. It's not hard to dig up the names, but I'd like just once to hear Apple just come out and say "we'd like to thank these guys for making it possible."
Even from MS, for all its other sins, you hear about who championed, say, their getting into the whole Internet thing, against Bill Gates's vision. Or about those two guys whose bright idea was to make DirectX instead of just going with the OpenGL flow. Heck, you even hear about the Bob clusterfuck being the brain child of Melinda Gates. Good or bad, it's not particularly hard to find out who was really behind what.
I'm not saying that Bill Gates is a nice guy, and Ballmer probably even less so. But between one narcissistic bully who at least gives credit, and a narcissistic bully who doesn't, Bill comes out as a bit less of a low life on my scale.
Frankly, just about the only positive thing I hear about Apple as an employer, is that they don't discriminate against anyone. Their world is so centered around the cult of Steve Jobs, that there is no room for caring whether you're black, gay or whatever else. You're the worthless peon, and that's enough about you already.
Now I hear that the wages aren't that great either.
So, really, please help me understand. Why _do_ those guys go work there? I'm genuinely curious.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Hehe, I got modded flamebait for pointing that out [slashdot.org] recently.
Re:I know you're sarcastic, but... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I know you're sarcastic, but... (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't think it's really possible for any company to make products that so many consumers are ridiculously passionate about unless the employees working on it are at least as passionate about their work. I'm not sure how Apple specifically motivates their employees, but I'd wager a guess that they seek out people who are already fairly strongly-self motivated for whatever reason, and once you've got people like that, as long as you keep them busy with work that they feel is worthwhile and they feel like they're producing something of quality, then it's pretty self-perpetuating.
We've all had the experience where a project that we were doing (maybe not at work, maybe as a hobby) becomes so engrossing that we willingly stay up to the wee hours of the morning, because we're really enjoying what we're doing. If a job can provide that on any sort of consistent basis, then it's a good place to be. The stuff that I read about Apple makes it sound like it's that sort of place for a lot of people.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Steve Jobs style (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Steve Jobs style (Score:4, Insightful)
At the end of the day, however, Steve Jobs is the face of Apple, the figurehead. He couldn't have achieved Apple's current success without thousands of people supporting him, but Apple couldn't have gotten to this point without him either. Remember that the Board of Directors was considering selling the company off when Jobs returned to the company in in 1997.
Re:Steve Jobs style (Score:5, Informative)
He returned to his previous job at Atari and was given the task of creating a circuit board for the game Breakout. According to Atari Founder Nolan Bushnell, Atari had offered US$100 for each chip that was reduced in the machine. Jobs had little interest or knowledge in circuit board design and made a deal with Wozniak to split the bonus evenly between them if Wozniak could minimize the number of chips. Much to the amazement of Atari, Wozniak reduced the number of chips by 50, a design so tight that it was impossible to reproduce on an assembly line. At the time, Jobs told Wozniak that Atari had only given them US$600 (instead of the actual US$5000) and that Wozniak's share was thus US$300
Re:I know you're sarcastic, but... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I know you're sarcastic, but... (Score:5, Interesting)
Steve Jobs trots out a half-dozen people, remarks how this person worked on this and that person lead this great team who did that, and generally gives credit to lots of other people, including people who aren't even directly part of Apple. He's done this at EVERY keynote speech pretty much since he's been giving them.
Honestly Steve Jobs hasn't been one to toot his own horn. Sure there isn't a lack of OTHER people doing it but you'd be hard-pressed to find many places where he says that he was the only one who did X, Y, and Z for Apple.
If you want to see some good history about all the old Macintosh crew, go take a look at Folklore.org [folklore.org]. There's a lot there about Steve Jobs for sure, but also a lot about all the other people who worked on the first Macintoshes. Steve Jobs is hardly the only one who is recognized for his work at Apple.
Re:I know you're sarcastic, but... (Score:5, Interesting)
But yes, much of what Apple was originally and is again now, is due to Jobs' marketing savvy and seemingly magical ability to know when a device is ready (as opposed to needing another 3 months of work) and how people can be doing something in the future without worrying so much about the limitations the rest of us are aware of. There are lots of people who are great long-term visionaries, and lots of folks who are great engineers capable of building most anything you can imagine, but there are very few short-term visionaries capable of really knowing what needs to be built 12-24 months from now.
If you've never worked with a fantastically inspirational and inspired boss, it's hard to understand. Sure, over the long term it can be tiring, and after the twentieth time you go back to the drawing board because his inspiration just doesn't match up with the laws of physics, you want to set his house on fire. But when every talented engineer in the room says something is impossible, and the boss insists you do it anyway, and 6 months later you're all amazed because you managed to make it work -- that's a great feeling.
Most programmers, designers, and engineers I know complain that projects get rushed out the door before they're done, that they never get a chance to really use iterative design techniques to create a better widget, because once it is "good enough", they have to put it in a box and move on to the next project. Being able to work at a company where "good enough" is NOT good enough, is what many people dream about -- knowing that you can create the whole project, then throw it out and do it RIGHT, is a blessing. Yeah, if you just want a job with direct deposit where you don't have to do much other than punch the clock, it isn't the best company to work for. But if you want to create products people will use every day -- and LOVE USING -- while keeping enough time for family and a normal life, it's a pretty great company.
Re:I know you're sarcastic, but... (Score:4, Insightful)
Jobs himself often points out that it's the apple staff as a whole which produces great products. Their success has been due mostly to good research, listening to their customers and realising that their survival relies on innovation (apple have one of the largest r&d capabilities of tech companies, originally apple directed all advertising dollars into r&d.)
For every apple success there is a history of modern flops such as: apple hifi, apple tv mk 1, the cube, xserve raid, etc, many of which Jobs had a direct hand in designing. Apple's modern successes are Mac OS X, iMac, iPod, iPhone and iTunes. Which are maintained and proliferated by huge teams of staff which Jobs does not oversee directly.
Re:They won't have to. (Score:5, Insightful)
Um, most people do expect that there will be layoffs and cutbacks when a company is losing money. It's certainly not uncommon. Getting let go with 10 minutes notice is a pretty steep pay cut by any standard.
I'm glad you're not my boss, though. Not only do you seem to be completely clueless about the value of experience and qualifications (no, interns or Indians really can't replace most skilled labor, no matter what your consultants try to sell you for $600/hour), you seem to be downright contemptuous of anyone who isn't sufficiently grateful that they aren't homeless and starving.
Of course, given your words here, I suspect all your qualified people have already quit, so hiring a bunch of Indians probably WOULD be just as good as whomever has such lack of career options as to stick around and take your attitude.
It makes me think of all the ads I see on craigslist where companies want to pay $10/hour for someone to do some technical job, inevitably they get several replies telling them what cheapskates they are and that nobody qualified would apply. The beauty is, they'll get all sorts of unqualified people applying, and then when the project fails, they'll pat themselves on the back for being so smart as not to pay more than $10/hour, because after all, if the cheap ones couldn't do the job, the more expensive ones would have just wasted even more money!
Re:They won't have to. (Score:4, Insightful)
For one thing did I say anything about any indians, are you singleing them out for any specific reason?
Probably because, at the moment, they are the most common in this country when it comes to outsourcing and/or H1B holders.
Also, anyone that is dumb enough to use consulants is an idiot
Nice generalization there. Sorry, man, but while some consultants are overpaid, a lot of us are more than worth what we get paid. Then again, I'm talking as one of the consultants that people call when there's an emergency or things absolutely have to be done right and have to be done right now.
Maybe I didn't explain my self enough earlier, american employees in general are too spoiled, and expect too much from companies.
Oh really? Is that why so many companies that I've seen expect their employees to work insane hours with absolutely no job security? In fact, they work longer hours than other countries who, apparently according to you, are less "spoiled".
It seems that you think people are "too spoiled" because they look out for themselves because they *know* that half of the companies out there are going to try to screw them over.
But anyone that agreed to do a job and signed a contract to work for a company, and then thinks that they should get more because the company did well all of the sudden, is a greedy bastard and doesn't deserve a job with them.
Expecting a wage in line with the average in the area for your position and skill level is not being greedy. In fact, in most companies in this country, in order to get a raise that amounts to anything at all, you have to change jobs.
Sorry to tell you this, but that rather points at the company as being the greedy bastard; not the person who wants a decent wage.
I have to say honestly that you have no idea what in the hell you're talking about. Quit while you're ahead.
Re:They won't have to. (Score:4, Insightful)
You better bet that we, as employees, look out for our own best interests, and that includes the amount we are paid. Nobody else will.
That said, I have to tell you that there is basically zero chance I would want to work for you. In a few lines, you've proved that, if you *are* a manager (which I doubt), you don't value your employees, aren't in touch with the realities of business, and create an adversarial environment in your workplace.
That's not conducive to getting good people.
I have news for you - quality people *aren't* cheap and *aren't* easily replaced. This is especially true mid-project when the time for a new person to figure out what they are doing is, to say the least, non-trivial.
Re:No need to raise salaries (Score:4, Insightful)
Motivation is not the sole determinant.
You, sir, do not know what you are talking about (Score:5, Informative)
Mac OS X is the *first* UNIX(tm) *not* derived from AT&T sources.
I was one of the people who made Mac OS X into UNIX(tm), and we started from not even being able to compile the test suite.
My first one line header file change to xnu to test the water (not defining size_t in ) broke 156 projects, including Open Source that was written by people who assumed promiscuous #include files, in violation of the standard.
A relatively small team of us fixed well over 40,000 total test case failures in a period of about 2.5 years, many of those in command line tools, most of that code being pushed back out to the various Open Source projects. Like, oh, "gcc", "bash", "vim", "tar", "bc", "pax", and hundreds of others, which are now UNIX conformant because of us.
In the middle of things we were working 80 hour weeks, sometimes more.
At the end... *almost no one noticed the changes*, because we worked our *asses* off to make sure there was so close to zero *both binary and source* compatibility issues that it would *not* be noticed. One member of the team put it this way: "It's like raising everyone 12 feet into the air, and replacing the Earth underneath them, then lowering them back down to the ground".
All told, we changed more lines of code in the kernel, libraries, compiler, and UNIX(tm) standardized utilities, than all of the non-conformance related changes in Tiger and Leopard combined. I counted.
And then we published the sources for everything needed to build your own Darwin system that could pass the UNIX(tm) conformance test, including our kernel.
So let me repeat: you, sir, do not know what you are talking about.
-- Terry