'Cultlike' Devotion: Apple Once Refused To Join Open Compute Project, So Their Entire Networking Team Quit (businessinsider.com) 239
mattydread23 writes: Great story about the Open Compute Project from Business Insider's Julie Bort here, including this fun tidbit: "'OCP has a cultlike following,' one person with knowledge of the situation told Business Insider. 'The whole industry, internet companies, vendors, and enterprises are monitoring OCP.' OCP aims to do for computer hardware what the Linux operating system did for software: make it 'open source' so anyone can take the designs for free and modify them, with contract manufacturers standing by to build them. In its six years, OCP has grown into a global entity, with board members from Facebook, Goldman Sachs, Intel, and Microsoft. In fact, there's a well-known story among OCP insiders that demonstrates this cultlike phenom. It involves Apple's networking team. This team was responsible for building a network at Apple that was so reliable, it never goes down. Not rarely -- never. Building a 100% reliable network to meet Apple's exacting standards was no easy task. So, instead of going it alone under Apple's secrecy, the Apple networking team wanted to participate in the revolution, contributing and receiving help. But when the Apple team asked to join OCP, Apple said 'no.' 'The whole team quit the same week,' this person told us."
odd--- (Score:5, Funny)
the cult-like Apple doesn't like competing cults?
Re: (Score:2)
Apple only likes cults that worship buying their stuff.
Re: (Score:2)
A company only likes organizations that likes to buy its stuff. Wow! And you figured this out all by yourself?
Re:odd--- (Score:5, Interesting)
the cult-like Apple doesn't like competing cults?
More like engineers are move devoted to their technology than to whomever happens to employ them at any given time. Particularly large, overbearing corporations that saddle them with a lot of rules and marketing idiots.
This is more a story about how technical people work than it is about Apple.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't forget to mention.
Who work in an area where they can easily find a job elsewhere.
I bet these guys had jobs ligned up before the "bravely" quit Apple.
Rarely a whole department will quit at the same time. If the job really sucks you will see a migration where people quit over the course of months. Because normally before you quit you need an other job.
Having Apple not join open compute sounds more liike the first intent to look elsewhere. Then the reason to quit.
I expect they all just got picked up b
Re:odd--- (Score:5, Interesting)
Don't forget to mention.
Who work in an area where they can easily find a job elsewhere.
I bet these guys had jobs ligned up before the "bravely" quit Apple.
Rarely a whole department will quit at the same time. If the job really sucks you will see a migration where people quit over the course of months. Because normally before you quit you need an other job.
Having Apple not join open compute sounds more liike the first intent to look elsewhere. Then the reason to quit.
I expect they all just got picked up by some companies they found out they were all quitting at the same time so they used that as the reason for their exit interview.
What they did was found a new company, SnapRoute - http://www.snaproute.com/our-s... [snaproute.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
If you are already considered good enough with the existing tech that unemployment isn't a serious concern; and your current employer is specifically denying you the opportunity to be part of the cool new tech, why would that inspire you to stay with t
Re: (Score:2)
Or their careers. Time spent becoming expert in a system that's not used anywhere else is time not spent becoming expert in stuff that might be needed in your next job. Getting locked in to your employer is very risky and has little if any benefit.
Church of the SubGenious? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No cult likes competing cults. What's interesting is that the cult of OCP is stronger than the cult of Apple, that open wins against closed. It's comforting.
Never Down (Score:5, Insightful)
This team was responsible for building a network at Apple that was so reliable it would never down. Not rarely — never.
Leave it to business insider to make ludicrous claims about network availability. If Apple's network had 99.99% uptime, and it would cost ten billion dollars to add another 9 to it, I'm pretty sure they'd rather pocket that money than spend it on more redundant switches/routers.
My network has 100% uptime. 2-0 team is undefeated (Score:4, Insightful)
100% uptime means the network wasn't down in time period you're talking about. My network has 100% uptime this week.
Maybe last year I had crappy up time, but this year my network doesn't go down (hasn't gone down).
I enjoy the first few weeks of football season because my team is always undefeated, at least until the end of the first game.
Actually 100% uptime even over a long period isn't THAT difficult - heteregenous reduncancy pretty much does the trick. That's heterogenous, not homogenous. In other words, you have redundancy for everything, but not by having two of the exact same things. You have a pair of connections (or sets of connections) to the outside world - a metro ethernet connection from one provider, and a direct MPLS connection from another. A Cisco router in the metroE and a Juniper on the MPLS.
It's extremely unlikely that both providers will go down at the same time. It's extremely unlikely that both the Cisco (or pair of Ciscos) and the pair of Junipers will crap out simultaneously.
Re:My network has 100% uptime. 2-0 team is undefea (Score:5, Funny)
It's extremely unlikely that both providers will go down at the same time. It's extremely unlikely that both the Cisco (or pair of Ciscos) and the pair of Junipers will crap out simultaneously.
...says the guy who has obviously never run a Juniper. :-)
Re:My network has 100% uptime. 2-0 team is undefea (Score:5, Funny)
My network has 100% uptime
so does mi
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
My network has 100% uptime
so does mi
Ahh, Slashdot humor. It never fails to serve.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Never Down (Score:5, Funny)
Marketing is 100% BS.
Re: (Score:2)
99.99% means about 1 hour (52 minutes and 33.6 seconds) a year.
For your work place that may be good but Apple is needed by thousands of places and that down time may not be acceptable.
Re:Never Down (Score:5, Insightful)
Full redundancy still has outages, even significant ones.
In my experience the more layers of redundancies, the more edge cases you need to catch.
Re:Never Down (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I worked for a company that had one of their data centres divided into 5 zones, each zone had its own UPS and generator. The was a transfer switch between each zone so that if one zone's backup went down it would be supplied by the adjacent zone which had enough capacity for two zones. After about 5 years there was a major power outage with the local utility. The whole place went down. The investigation found that:
a. For the last 5 years management had decided not to do annual maintenance since we were "too
You work for Delta (Score:2)
Reminds me of the Delta airlines story of a few months ago. They had similar systems, yet the whole thing went down shutting Delta down for a couple days. I believe the investigation found similar results with Management making decisions that ultimately compromised the system, where a backup generator catching fire essentially took it all down...
Re: (Score:2)
> I nearly sent them an energizer bunny ...
LOL.
> but decided it might be a CLM.
Ah, Career Limiting Maneuver -- yup, don't rub their faces in it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No not at all. Service contracts generally stipulate a percentage and a timespan. 99.99% per week is much cheaper than 99.99% per year. This is basic network engineering. What is your profession?
WTF? I've never seen anything other than a percentage guarantee, a stipulation of whether or not that includes scheduled maintenance, and a table of what that amounts to in minutes per year.
Re: (Score:2)
Someone can always take it down. So, go for 802.1x on every port to combat that. Now, if you radius server has an issue, nobody can work. Brilliant. Redundancy and securi
Re: (Score:3)
Basic networking. What's your redundancy? HSRP? What happens when someone spoofs your VIP/virtual MAC? Everything is down. I've seen large offices taken down becuase they used 192.168.1.1 as an important device, and someone plugged in a home router under their desk as an AP, causing a conflict that took down a "redundant" network.
Someone can always take it down. So, go for 802.1x on every port to combat that. Now, if you radius server has an issue, nobody can work. Brilliant. Redundancy and security reduce stability. Go back to networking 101. Even redundant SUPs in a chassis-based system have a single linked management. One wrong command in one of the SUPs and you can take down everything. Redundancy rarely survives user error, and makes it harder to bring it back up.
Um, you do realize that there are networking technologies to protect the network from practically every scenario that you mentioned? Even your port security example falls flat on it's face because you would have redundant radius servers, etc.
And no, redundancy doesn't make things harder as long as it's implemented properly (i.e. you have a well documented primary path that's always used unless there is a problem in which case the network switches to a well defined backup path). As for redundant Sups, most
Re:Never Down (Score:5, Insightful)
Um, you do realize that there are networking technologies to protect the network from practically every scenario that you mentioned?
There are no free lunches. You either have a simple network that could fail and is easy to understand and fix, or a complex network that could also fail but is a nightmare to understand and fix. The other big issue with the latter network, is the size and complexity makes upgrades and patching difficult and expensive, and if people leave it's difficult to bring them up to speed on how it works. The results is that it costs more to maintain than you would lose with a few hours downtime each year. So there is no such thing as a network that never goes down, you either have one that is cost effective or you don't.
Re:Never Down (Score:5, Insightful)
And no, redundancy doesn't make things harder as long as it's implemented properly
"properly" by your definition is prohibitively expensive. Almost nobody does it. Realistic redundancy leaves lots of gaps and holes. And in many cases, active/standby is dangerous. HSRP, STP, and many other protocols are active/standby with errors in the standby allowing massive networking failures. And, of course, the protocol to manage that redundancy is a single point of failure. You could abandon HSRP to avoid that single point of failure, and instead have multiple gateways and every endpoint running a dynamic routing protocol but that just moves the single point of failure to whatever routing protocol you pick, and isn't generally done for a variety of very good reasons.
Nope, the simplest network is often more reliable than the rube goldberg redundant networks I've seen experts like yourself put together. KISS is one of the first rules, and the more you know, the more it matters. KISS. Anything else is expense for the sake of complexity.
Re: (Score:2)
What the hell does the Symbionese Liberation Army have to do with this?
Everything, they have a huge stake in Omni Consumer Products.
Re: (Score:2)
"It was thrilling—and terrifying. When even one percent of Apple’s traffic gets stalled, it’s front-page news. And all too often, we were dealing with problems our vendors had never contemplated, much less figured out. We began exploring radically new approaches, including a handful of supposedly open-sourced solutions so we could dive into the guts o
Opportunists, not Cultists (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Perhaps if didn't call them opportunists [dictionary.com], they'd be more interested in joining you?
Which is why many people are starting to realize that 401k's are actually a better choice.
Re: (Score:2)
The thing to do with a 401k is change jobs. Then you can roll it over into an IRA, and invest it however you damn well please. It's not perfect, but it's the safest option we have.
Been there, done that, got cancelled (Score:5, Interesting)
I was part of Apple's licensing software team twenty years ago---1996.
At the time, the Common Hardware Reference Platform (CHRP) was the big item, essentially the same as OCP. Standardize the API at a hardware-abstraction layer, and let everyone build compatible machines. The manufacturer would write the HAL (BIOS) and a variety of operating systems can run on the hardware. (At the time, it was MacOS, OS/2, Novell Netware, and a couple others I've forgotten.)
My question at the time was "How does Apple make any money when the platform becomes a commodity, and millions of units come into the market on barges from Chinese manufacturers?" Naturally, Apple would cease to sell computers. This was the OS-licensing situation in spades.
Steve Jobs cancelled Apple's participation in CHRP as well as all OS licensing, knowing that Apple makes most of its money selling the computer. IBM got out of the PC business when Dell and Gateway built PC-compatibles cheaper. Now they're starving as Acer and everyone else builds the platform.
Why would this be any different today than it was two decades ago?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Here's a link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Hardware_Reference_Platform
Re: (Score:3)
This might have been interesting if OCP was in anything even approaching the same space as CHRP used to be.
It isn't.
Re:Been there, done that, got cancelled (Score:5, Informative)
No, they are not "starving". They got out of the PC business when it became a low margin business, a good decision.
Apple isn't selling server hardware anymore (they already failed in that market once).
As for Apple's desktops, they should get out of that market entirely because they won't be able to make the margins they are accustomed to in the future.
Re: (Score:3)
Never underestimate the allure of a white case with rounded corners. To some.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
CHRP cut directly against Apple's business of selling computers. OCP is gunning for servers and switches. Apple sells neither; but buys a lot of both given how much 'cloud' they are serving up these days.
Clearly they decided that it wasn't in their interests to participate(whether because they'd rather do
Apple makes stupid hardware decisions (Score:3, Insightful)
If I were an apple hardware engineer I'd quit too. Clearly a company that's selling 3-4 year old technology as a new "top spec" computer doesn't value their hardware wing.
Don't get me started on the fact that their only laptop with a network adapter is 4+ years old...
Re:Apple makes stupid hardware decisions (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Dell has been shipping "wigig" docks since at least 2013
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=wigi... [duckduckgo.com]
I used one last week with a new dell laptop. They have a range of only a few feet, but they do work and can share screens and network and all that over it. In fact the one i was using is second generation. Its an intel technology.
http://www.dell.com/support/ar... [dell.com]
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair, 802.11b is just 17 years old and couldn't beat 11 Mb/s anywhere. So the fact that 802.11ac can reach 1300 Mb/s anywhere and 802.11ad (WiGig) can do 7 Gb/s is amazing. But if I had a chance to redo my networking decisions from last year I would have saved $250 for an 802.11ac router and just bought a gigabit switch and kept us
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
apple is releasing a new computer line in 2 weeks.
Re: (Score:2)
You can't protect against everything. (Score:2, Troll)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I used the Carrington Event as an example because its effects were so spectacular, and its effect on the modern power/communications grid (and the computers that run it) could be equally wide spread. Take your pick of any kind of disaster that brings down a major portion of the grid and the result's the same: the data centers only stay up until their reserves of generator fuel runs out.
Multiple data centers in multiple regions will keep the corporate lights on... There... solved that for you... next... (grin)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
humanity's survival rate is 0% historically.
Re: (Score:2)
humanity's survival rate is 0% historically.
I just checked your figures and you're mistaken -- as of this moment, humanity's survival rate is 100%.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually more like 6% so far.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:You can't protect against everything. (Score:5, Informative)
A true Carrington Event level disaster will fry most IC parts, and has a high chance of setting back the entire human civilization by a century or so
Not even close. Geomagnetic storms, including the original Carrignton event, involve very slow changing magnet fields (10s of minutes to hours) over very large areas. The source of any damage (on Earth at least) comes from induced voltages, which depends on the rate change of the magnetic field and the area of the circuit of interest. You can work out the numbers, and find that the effect it will have on something small like a cell phone would be less than walking past a fridge magnet. Even a house sized circuit would struggle to produce significant effects, as a change of a couple microtesla of field strength over 10 minutes (on the fast side) would only induce more than a microvolt of voltage if you had multiple loops of unpaired wire around your house. The area within any paired wire is much, much smaller.
The only place such events can cause issues, due to the very small the rate change of the magnetic field, is by having lots of area. This is where power systems and old fashion communication systems are involved, because they can involve networks over very larger areas and can involve return paths through ground which is susceptible to ground currents in large systems. Modern communication based on fiber or twisted pair conductors would see no direct effect, and issues would just come down to what the power systems do. Even with the power systems, it comes down to having DC breakers installed in the right place, something already demonstrated to protect equipment just fine in past storms (a bigger storm wouldn't change that).
So no, such an even has nothing to do with destroying ICs or sending human civilization into some pre-electronic age. The only long term concern is what would happen to large power systems where corners have been cut and a potential mess for satellites, which is certainly capable of causing massive economic damage without becoming a prepper fantasy. Otherwise, there would just be a short term power and satellite communication interruption.
Re: (Score:2)
You only need to store enough fuel to last until your first contracted for tanker truck shows up. Typically two weeks of on-site diesel is more than plenty, as long as you have a good enough contract specifying ongoing deliveries in case of an emergency. In that situation, you can keep things running for as long as your generator equipment doesn't fail from use...hopefully you count that in months or ev
YOU HAVE TWENTY SECONDS TO COMPLY (Score:3, Funny)
OCP should just stick to robots that shoot people. It's what they do best.
Come on... (Score:5, Interesting)
I have friends that work for Apple, Google, Oracle, whatever. And I have friends that have quit en-masse from those companies. They almost always quit because they went from a cool startup to a tiny cog in a gigantic machine. These gigantic internet companies consume smaller companies and spit out all the parts they don't like. In many cases, that's most parts.
This is not an Apple problem, it's an industry and maybe even a societal problem. I don't even think it's possible to get a good job, get an A+ rating for every performance review ever, and expect to stay at that job for 5+ years. After 10 years, you are too expensive to keep around.
It's a race to the bottom. Throw enough cheap shit at the wall and you'll eventually meet your short term profit goals but, damn, that's a lot of shit to clean off the walls. In fact, you may not be able to clean it all off.
Greetings, Humans. The machine churns. I'd like to introduce you to the grinding wheel...
Re:Come on... (Score:4, Insightful)
This is not the same as hardware, because in real engineering work there are people who have a long time track record. (The phrase Software Engineering is an oxymoron.) Unfortunately the same short sighted behavior is starting to invade some engineering disciplines, so they will end up producing crap as well.
Re: (Score:2)
You want to know why software never really gets better? It's because "old timers" are deliberately flushed from the system, so there is no institutional memory.
Um, software does get better, it's why most of us prefer new software to old software. And it gets better precisely because young people with new ideas find better ways to do things.
Out of interest, if Software is getting worse, when was it exactly that you think software peaked? It didn't just so happen to be when you we're younger per chance? And you don't find that a huge co-incidence [mic.com] at all?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The definition of the term "better" is the key here. In broad terms, a product is "better" if it more closely meets the needs of the person or organization than what was previously being used.
One thing that comes to mind that made old software "better" was how much smaller it was. The oldest Microsoft Office ISO I have immediately available is 2003 Professional. It's 410MB for, if memory serves, everything including Access and Frontpage. The Office 2016 Professional installer is 2.4GB, and doesn't allow for
Re: (Score:3)
I agree on software footprint / resources.
The other thing I wonder about is continual refactoring of UI.
-CLI
-Desktop GUI
-Touch GUI
Those are three distinct usage modes that the UI has to be refactored for an app to go between them. I'm not talking about that.
But every time I update apps on my phone, usually they change the UI for no apparent reason other than trying to mimic the latest Android release "lets make them flat ugly colours this time!"
Chrome changes UI at random too "Lets make the 'hamburger menu'
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes.
I have an axiom that goes something like this: "If it takes 'N' people to create and sell a widget, then that widget has no business being owned by a company with 100*N employees. That way lies disappointment."
It happens over and over. Little company makes something cool. Big company buys the shiny little company for "diversification". Big company shits on it
Re: (Score:2)
This is not an Apple problem, it's an industry and maybe even a societal problem. I don't even think it's possible to get a good job, get an A+ rating for every performance review ever, and expect to stay at that job for 5+ years. After 10 years, you are too expensive to keep around.
Lol, just left one job after 10 years, not because I was too expensive but because the new company had more resources to spend and could offer me significantly more. The average seniority at the new company for IT workers is 17
They lost me at Goldman Sachs (Score:5, Funny)
If Goldman Sachs is involved I am very suspicious. They are never to be trusted.
Re: (Score:2)
There's at least two reasons here why GS would be interested:
1. High frequency trading, if you control the software and make it as fast as possible, then all that is left is the networking between you and the exchange. Controlling the networking is the next step, this is total control, total integration
2. Limit backdoors; if you own the system totally and completely, you can nearly guarantee your system has no backdoors from state actors.
If you're as big as GS, you definitely don't want to o
Never, eh? (Score:2)
Bet I could just walk onto campus and their wireless portion would cease working.
Hello 2.4 GHz HPF EMF device. Easily built for less than $10 if you know how to make the tank circuits yourself.
Re: (Score:2)
Bet I could just walk onto campus and their wireless portion would cease working.
Hello 2.4 GHz HPF EMF device. Easily built for less than $10 if you know how to make the tank circuits yourself.
Considering all the scary charges you'd get hit with, seems like you should just bring a hand grenade.
Re: (Score:2)
You assume anyone can pinpoint such a signal when it's bouncing off of buildings.
Try again when you understand the basic physics behind radio signals.
They violated Apple's first commandment (Score:5, Funny)
Thou shalt not have any cults next to me!
Who is Cult like? (Score:2)
I mostly see cult like devotion from Apple aficionados, who's typical answer to question "Why did you choose iPhone" typical boils down to "because Apple".
Writing on the wall (Score:2)
I expect it was less a "Cult" and more about being set up for failure.
Being asked to do something unrealistic, then on analysis coming up with the best option, then being told by Management to do something else, the team probably looked at the situation, realized they were being set up for eventual failure and rather than following through to the enviable conclusion decided to cut their losses and start looking for more rewarding work elsewhere.
In the end it was likely known that Management would throw them
Trust Your Engineers... (Score:2)
The company wants a network that never goes down---a very challenging project.
Then it prohibits the engineers from implementing the solution they chose.
So management is demanding a high-grade service and refusing the method chosen by their experts? I assume the engineering team would also be blamed when the service failed to perform as expected.
I would quit too. You don't get to ignore a consensus of experts and then hold them accountable for result. If they're skilled enough that you ought to be listening
stupid managers making clueless requirements (Score:2)
>> building a network at Apple that was so reliable, it never goes down. Not rarely -- never.
Thats logically impossible. No matter how many layers of failover and backup systems you have, each unavoidably has some probability of themselves failing. Even if VERY small, its still not never.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, if true, some of them are probably reading this right now. Anybody care to elaborate guys? Also, did you end up managing to make any meaningful contributions to the OCP after that?
Re:Probably a little more to it than that (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Reasonable (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Do I buy a Chinese brand, which I'm 99% sure has Chinese government back doors, or do I buy Cisco, which I'm 100% sure has a complete NSA spyware suite installed?
Re:Reasonable (Score:5, Insightful)
Cisco buys from the Chinese. All the best stuff is made in China
All the worst stuff too.
Re: After ripping BSD they deserve it (Score:4, Insightful)
> After ripping BSD
*facepalm*
Re:After ripping BSD they deserve it (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, you might also look up the word "cult" and realize that millions of Apple's customers do not belong in that definition.
So what? Many millions do
Re: After ripping BSD they deserve it (Score:5, Informative)
http://opensource.apple.com
Also, the one of the best things to ever happen to Linux and the open source OSes was Apple taking ownership of CUPS and making it usable.
Re: (Score:3)
Credit where credit is due.
It still sucks though. Just not as much.
Re: (Score:2)
It depends...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:After ripping BSD they deserve it (Score:4, Insightful)
First, Apple does have an edge in aesthetics in the judgment of most people. If that didn't matter, we Linux enthusiasts would be merrily running FVWM and Blackbox.
The iPhone is likely to get software updates and security updates from Apple much longer than the Android device. Software updates for the Macbook might only be for four or five years, while Windows 13 will probably run on the Dell. The new Apple operating systems are cheap, too.
And Apple support might charge through the nose, but it's fast and efficient. If you have to call Dell support, it's probably less painful to just light yourself on fire and be done with it.
Android and Windows own most of their respective consumer markets because the great majority of smart phone and laptop shoppers can't budget the iPhone and a $1000 machine. But for people who can afford high end devices, Apple is not a waste of money only pursued by fashion victims and phonies.