That sounds like a terrible environment.
Also, that article is about a patent lawsuit being brought against a third-party software development firm. The plaintiffs probably requested that Apple take down the allegedly infringing app, and they did. Any curator, no matter how strict or liberal their policies, has the freedom to remove potentially patent-infringing content from their marketplace.
(Which, for the record, isn't to say I agree that the patent is legitimate. I really hope the small developer wins.)
I believe such an environment can be very important. if you have very good people
Also, it's one thing to stand for your idea agressively, other, to just swear at people.
Steve Jobs was famously difficult. Certainly not the kind of boss I would want. But the turnover in his inner circle was really low. Craig Federighi who on Monday demonstrated the next OS X is a Guy from the old NeXT days. I think Jobs selected people as underlings who were able to stand up to him (sometimes).
When Apple says that battery-life is important in mobile devices, they mean it. If Samsung says it, maybe a year later they will turn around and bring out an eight-core phone that you can play a game on for forty-five minutes before having to plug it in again.
Apple isn't just opinionated: it's opinionated on hugely difficult technical issues that don't even exist in the wild yet. (As when they release a new category.) You only get that through violent discourse with egos on the line.
edit: a similar thing happens at Google, but not when it comes to ergonomics or user interfaces and usability with the same hardware devices Apple makes, but instead when it comes to solving certain problems on a massive scale. The result is that Google can't really release a laptop that's as usable as a Macbook in the same domain, and for everyone, and Apple can't really solve the ops issues that it would take to bring out a Google Search competitor. There is huge amount of discourse (of a radically different nature) at both companies.
No, they don't. They mean battery life is important in mobile devices as long as it doesn't get in the way of making them thin (among other things). After all, the modern smartphone with the best battery life is the Droid RAZR MAXX (soon to be dethroned by its international sibling the Motorola RAZR MAXX, which doesn't have the battery-life handicap of an LTE radio).
In the books I've read on the topic like _The Nine_, it's sounds like a terrific environment. You are incredibly respected by everyone you meet, you have a light workload which is self-chosen and also extremely important and you can see the consequences of your work without doubt, you work with other highly competent people, you can indulge in things like teaching your pet subject in your offtime and be paid very well for it, you get to select the most talented young lawyers as your staffers, and so on and so forth.
http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/11/11/the-gervais-principle-i...
"If you’re not scared, you’re not focused" sounds like "Babytalk" - the language that sociopaths and losers use to speak to the clueless - who actually take these statements at face value.
It's a great, intriguing read - certainly one that was genuinely new and unexpected to me.
I think it's a faulty claim. Doesn't work like this in many fields: science, martial arts, medicine (particularly neurosurgery), etc.
Say that you'd like to work on two projects - A and B. Atleast one of them needs to succeed or you'll go bankrupt(or something). Now, most people will probably think that if they divide their attention between both projects, they have a higher chance of bringing in some money. The thinking here is "Even if A doesn't take off, B might still bring in some money". So, B is the cushion against failure of A (or vice-versa). But this plan lacks focus - You cannot fully focus on A or B. Removing either improves focus but it also removes the cushion.
That's what he means by getting "scared".
How ironic -- when I was at Apple in the 90s, our meetings were scattered creampuff things and this is how I imagined Microsoft would be. Now that I'm at Microsoft it's the other way around . . . :-)
Not fixing that typo, because my Android keyboard is insurmountably glitch.
Nine months later and I've just finished my probation period at a small, scrappy startup with a very specific market niche. Focus is really hard and it has to be driven by leadership from the top.
These are the moments where you see if your management consists of (war) leaders or administrators. I say leader for lack of a better word for it. What I have seen is that there are some people that are really good in tough, critical situations and others in the routine day-to-day situations. It's more than just rare that you have both abilities in one person.
Maybe that's why some tribal culture have different leaders for war and peace time.
Podcast: http://ecorner.stanford.edu/authorMaterialInfo.html?mid=2931
