If you're able to share, I'm curious what you mean by "Apple RTO policy has only gotten stupider"? Isn't it still 3 days in-office (or 4 days for some teams)?
One possible reason is that Apple wants to build more fintech products that they still need a banking partner for, and don't want to launch anything new with Goldman since they know the partnership hasn't worked out. So it may just be easier to start the process to find a new partner so you don't slow down product launches.
IANAL so I don't fully understand the legal merits of this case. That said between Nuvia and Rivos it seems like the pattern is pretty clear: if you want to eventually try to do your own chip design startup, don't work at Apple.
It's not grandstanding, I only brought up social life because someone mentioned social isolation from remote work. That is a real problem and I can empathize with it, but the solution isn't forcing RTO on co-workers to force them to hang out with you.
Not everyone is a single tech employee who lives alone. Some (in fact, many) people have a social life outside the office where not going to an office doesn't result in eternal solitude.
My point is that there are many other, more fulfilling ways to get human company than forcing your co-workers to commute to the office everyday. Besides, for the many people who live with a family/kids/partner, WFH lets them spend even more time with them. The solution for people whose only source of social interaction is the office is to develop a social life outside of the office, not to force everyone else into RTO.
> But some people need to be around other people more or less all the time to be happy.
That's fine, but no one is obligated to spend time with them. They need to be more convincing or charismatic then to get people to spend more time with them. "If you don't endure a commute to spend time with me, I won't be happy" won't cut it.
There are too many companies offering fully remote for it to be even worth interviewing for a non-remote job. At this point I'll happily accept 10-15% lower total compensation if it means fully remote.
I was also skeptical but I'm increasingly becoming convinced it may be worth $3,500 as well.
One thing I'd note is I think people are over-estimating how quickly the price will come down, especially if the initial demand is strong. I don't think there will be a version of Vision Pro (or Vision Air?) that is $2k or less for at least another few years. Maybe the 2nd gen of Vision Pro will come down in price by a few hundred dollars, but again maybe not if the demand is strong even at $3,500.
Yup I agree, there's always the possibility of things turning south. I guess I just have more subjective confidence in the American economy than it sounds like you do.
Do you mind clarifying - do you mean 4 incomes for the same number of people? i.e. are you or people you know taking multiple jobs, is that what "4 incomes" means?
The original post was about the US stock market, but I guess should have still clarified that I was talking about a US recession. I don't follow the Europe economy as closely