Not only that, by you want to talk to some on the other side of the office. You can't walk directly across the office to th like a normal building.
You need to walk round the circle.
Who ever is in charge doesn't know efficiency.
More likely more people get worn out, feel like groundhog Day walking round and round a long corridor in endless circles. People will end up ignore others walking
Reminds me of the "thin" laptops with power bricks the size of, well, bricks.
Wikipedia says it is! 17 MW from having a PV roof.
@f4grx @midide @jplebreton
Zooming around on google earth it does look like they do have the same covering as the main circle.
This is one thing they seem to have actually committed to fully.
@jplebreton To the left, there are some apartment buildings. Guess how it looks in the streets between the buildings.
@jplebreton
A circular office building in a green space.
I'd say it's a very 1960s design. Not futuristic at all.
I'd have done it radically differently, but then I'm an urbanist. Rectangular perimeter block in the north corner of the site, shaped by how the surrounding street grid could be extended across the site. At least 8 floors.
And get real transit access by (part)paying for a VTA LRT via the site. etc.
All the obvious stuff.
You would prefer acres of ground level parking lots like Google?
psst: the photo is at an angle so it distorts the relative sizes of the buildings.
I'm not sure a nation's transportation preference is in the scope of a company's architectural choices.
Certainly it would be great if the Cupertino area was more bike-centric. But I think that was settled in favor of cars long before Apple built their new HQ.
"Not cars"?
I'd much rather live and work in Chicago than Silicon Valley.
I think making Silicon Valley less car-centric is well beyond the scope of a company's architectural plans for the HQ.
@jonhendry @jplebreton OK then here is above view but I dunno I still think it looks like a lot. The longer of the 2 parkades is the same length as the diameter of the office building and both are thicker.
There are also no high capacity public transit options and no dedicated bike paths to and from the campus, and Apple has pretty strict work-in-office mandates so all that combined means this parking infrastructure is pretty well used.
Seems like an awful waste. That space could house a lot of people and other businesses, and would definitely generate a lot more tax revenue per km^2 for the city to support the infrastructure there (which would only be slightly higher to support residential and mixed use compared to the significantly higher tax base vs basically zero taxes from the parking garages)
This sort of urban development isn't sustainable any more really.
It looks like the parking lot across 280 is about 1/4-1/5 as big, for far far less than 1/4 as many cars, and no solar.
Public transit and bike paths would be great, don't get me wrong. I'd much rather live and work in Chicago.
@jplebreton interesting.
https://www.businessinsider.com/apple-park-new-campus-more-parking-than-offices-2017-4
I hate to defend Apple, but some of it seems to be because of the minimum parking requirements.
Funny how those parking garages never seem to be included in Apple's advertising photos. 🙂↔️
Here's another architectural vision from #Apple in circular (or tubular) #architecture 🫣🤭🕳️
Why even get out of your car at all? Just merge the two buildings! Work from your car at the office. Drive right into your cubicle. Install a keyboard in the dashboard, and turn the windshield into a 4K heads-up display. Drive-in meetings. Drive-thru lunch counter.
@jplebreton Zip lines, both ways?
Imagine the fun getting into work every day! ("Hey! Don't spill coffee on everyone, OK?")
Also a good drop test for new iPhones.
I can't see that HQ without thinking, "now, how do I make that into a particle accelerator?"
Oh, I've never seen this view.
Good infrastructure would be if people could cycle there and part their bikes 3 floors underneath their office. But this is... not that.