9 ms·
How much talent is Apple losing today?
by _1 10y ago
How much talent is Apple losing today?
- enraged_camel 10y agoThey have 115,000 employees. Losing two won't make a big difference (yes, I know those two are important, but still).
- baldfat 10y agoI think it is disingenuous to say that the lead programmer of Swift and Director of Machine Learning won't make a difference. I know if my company lost two important people in one week would be very significant.
- Gargoyle 10y agoI have faith a company like Apple can replace them with people every bit as talented and competent.
- nugget 10y agoIt's not always that simple. Execs like this take entire teams of talented subordinates with them. The headline focuses on one person but the real brain drain occurs when that person turns around and starts to poach the absolute best talent from their previous orgs. I've found recruiting and hiring at the very top to be as much (or more) about the individual exec/manager than the company itself.
- Gargoyle 10y agoNo one said anything about it being simple, just that it can be done when you have the resources and reputation of a company like Apple.
- rwc 10y agoFor what it's worth, Chris Lattner specifically said in his farewell email [1] that "we don’t expect it to impact day-to-day operations in the Swift Core Team in any significant way." If you take him at his word, presumably that would mean the brain drain will be a nonevent. [1] https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/Week-of-Mon-20170109/030063.html https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/Week-of-Mo...
- fpgeek 10y agoOr it may just mean that the brain drain won't have a direct day-to-day impact, just an indirect, growing decay in capacity and capability as people leave and the team struggles to replace them.
- bfstein 10y agoFWIW, a lot of companies have non-solications in place to try and prevent this kind of behavior. They're far from fool-proof, and there is nothing stopping an employee from leaving of their own volition, but I would guess both of them have some sort of agreement in place not to poach talent directly.
- rhizome 10y agoWhat you're describing is not only illegal, but also something for which Apple recently contributed to a half-billion dollar settlement: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust_Litigation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust_L... a lot of companies have non-solications in place to try and prevent this kind of behavior If you know of other companies engaging in backroom nonsolicitation agreements with each other, the responsible thing to do for your fellow STEM workers is to call the Department of Justice Antitrust Division and let them know that the Apple/Google/etc. settlement didn't achieve its intended effect.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- nostrademons 10y agoThe type of "no-solicit" that bfstein is talking about is very different from the one you're referring to. The no-solicit contracts that are common in Silicon Valley mean that you, as an ex-employee, cannot directly approach a current employee that you know there and offer them a job at your current employer. The no-solicits that they got in trouble with in the HTEAL were where the company's HR department refused to approach employees at other tech companies. The former is a contract between you and your employer, which is legal and enforceable. The latter was a verbal contract between competitors to the detriment of their employees, which is illegal. In practice, what most big companies do is they ask incoming employees for the names and personal contact info (and only that) of good employees that they have worked with in the past, and then pass that info on to HR, for a corporate recruiter to make the initial contact. Has the same effect, but no contracts are broken, since the corporation does all the soliciting.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- devy 10y agoNot entirely sure about the back story of Chris Lattner joining Tesla. But according to Techcrunch, Gross first found his way to Apple after Cue, formally called Greplin, was acquired by the company for $40 million back in 2013 for its predictive search capabilities. After spending the last three years in Cupertino, Gross was ready to get back to his entrepreneurial roots. It's possible that agreement during that acquisition Gross has a 3 year vesting period and it's not very surprising that some founders leave after certain stock vesting events. This is purely my speculation but it's possible. And the timing of it might just be a coincidence.
- bunchspoiler 10y agoLattner was indeed THE lead programmer of Swift, but Gross was A Director working on Machine Learning not THE guy in charge of company wide machine learning efforts ("Director" at Apple basically means second level manager).
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- haberman 10y agoSorry this is off-topic, but I really dislike the overuse of the word "disingenuous" in tech discussions. It means you think the person is being insincere or duplicitous in what they are saying. It's much more likely that they just have a different opinion than you. Questioning a person's sincerity is unproductive and usually unnecessary. It makes discussions needlessly personal and unpleasant.
- elastic_church 10y agoyeah but it was used correctly though I sometimes say 'cognitively negligent' as a synonym, but for retarded.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- baldfat 10y ago> It means you think the person is being insincere or duplicitous in what they are saying. That was exactly what I meant to say. I felt that he was making presenting a positive spin on a tech company he likes. Anyone that spins a story that they know they are spinning are being "disingenuous" to themselves.
- haberman 10y agoSomeone could just as easily say you are presenting a negative spin on a tech company you dislike. It doesn't make for very interesting or productive discussion.
- baldfat 10y ago> It doesn't make for very interesting or productive discussion. So what your saying is Hacker News isn't interesting when two biggish names leave a company for other companies? Some of us think it is significant. The reply was someone talking about my disuse of an english word. I replied that was exactly what I intended to use. I can't seem to figure out if your defending another person or attacking me or both/neither.
- gigatexal 10y agoI agree. When is this exodus at Apple going to end? Maybe they saw the next set of products and said "meh".
- to3m 10y ago"Naive" might be the word you're looking for. And indeed, whenever important people leave, it is always significant. In fact, it can be significant even when they're not important at all. But you do need to wait a year to find out whether it makes a difference! You might be surprised at who can leave without ultimately causing a problem.
- KKKKkkkk1 10y agoBased on Apple's performance in machine learning, I would say some change in management has long been warranted.
- ianai 10y agoYou really can't say losing top engineers is like losing a file clerk. Granted, engineers aren't EVERYTHING and there is more talent than a handful of people. I wouldn't call losing these people company emergencies, but they're different dimensions from losing an employee in a commodity position.
- enraged_camel 10y agoSo? Let's say Apple has 500 "top engineers". What will losing two mean? Probably nothing.
- ianai 10y agoTrue true, but I'll spout off this: I hope it works out to some key decision makers realizing they need to rethink somethings - purely as a thing I wish would happen.
- josh2600 10y agoLosing two publicly is signaling. The very fact people are talking loudly about leaving apple is a sign of apple's weakness.
- mikeash 10y agoLattner isn't talking loudly. He's barely talking about it at all. His only announcement about it was a brief aside in an email about a change in the Swift open source leadership.
- onion2k 10y agoEngineers are not simply interchangeable. Their expertise and experience are a very important part of who they are. A lead engineer can have a significant impact on the direction of a company, even one the size of Apple.
- JSDave 10y agoWhen a important engineer leaves, sometimes a lot more end up following. Or at least their team members more open to looking at other offers.
- bthornbury 10y agoIt makes a difference. Probably a big one. Individuals with experience in specialized areas and in leading in those areas can make a large impact in any company (their own or otherwise). How can you assume that losing individuals making a large impact wouldn't have an impact itself?
- frandroid 10y agoConsidering that he's becoming a partner at YC, you'd think he was a high-value employee, or could have become one should have they retained him. Seems like a big loss to me.
- tsunamifury 10y agoQuotes a number that is 87% retail employees: Calls parent post "Disingenuous"
- tptacek 10y agoGreplin was neat, but Gross had only been an employee for a couple years, and he arrived at Apple after a low-dollar acquisition. This is probably just the end of his earn-out. I'd be surprised to learn that this was a strategic blow to Apple.
- nodesocket 10y agoAs an Apple shareholder, there have been multiple red flags in the last 6 months, this is yet just another. - Missing deadlines of product realeases. - Seriously getting product design wrong and missing what users want. See Apple Watch, See iPhone 7, See MacBook Pro. - Tim Cook being passive and an operations guy with no founder vision or drive. - Failure to acquire new and innovate companies, instead doubling down on "strange" investments such as Didi Chuxing, and Softbank (both 1 billion). I've been a huge Apple supporter and "fanboy", but the signs are starting to really add up. Soon enough the finance guys will start to see the patterns as well and there may be a significant correction.
- mathattack 10y agoMost good points. One I'd object to: "Failure to acquire new and innovate companies" Acquiring innovative companies can be a good sign for innovative buyers. (Cisco was a machine at adding to it's product lines) For non-innovative companies, it's a death knell.
- nodesocket 10y agoI'd rather see them acquire small and scrapy 10-100 people companies, though those people and founders would probably leave once their options fully vest after acquisition.
- spike021 10y agoMissing what Apple Watch users want? It seems for the most part that these are the most common issues: it isn't a phone replacement (no cellular connectivity) and the battery life is terrible. For me as a Watch owner the battery life could be better but I don't want or have a need for it to have a cellular connection. Just curious about how the product design of the watch is seriously wrong (same with the iPhone 7 other than it lacking a headphone jack).
- snowwrestler 10y agoAs an Apple shareholder, this seems like a bunch of vague gripes. - Apple has missed plenty of ship dates in the past; I refer you to the Saga Of The White iPhone. - The Watch is selling well (dominating its category), iPhone 7 selling well (same), new MacBook is too early to tell. - No drive? I wonder how well-informed you are if you think Tim Cook has no drive. He's not a product guy but contrary to popular belief, a CEO does not necessarily need to be. - FoundationDB? Tuplejump? Turi?
- skittleson 10y agoBased on fanboys complaining, a lot.