It's a shame Apple can't cut former employees tongues out.

(though Steve probably wouldn't have made quite as great a comeback had he been rendered tongueless ).

The guy was actually the Director of Silly Projects but the sign on his door was faded.

Seriously though, what does this say about Google's confidence that they can innovate? They got a leg up on ripping off iOS from inside information now they need some ideas about what on earth the next big things will be. Surely this hire won't be good for them in future law suits.

If this super secret thingy is a competitive product with Apple, e.g., iTV or iTunes or Siri, then this could be really interesting in a few years. It will be interesting to know if there is a non-compete clause in the contract and if it will be invoked.

Regarding good people leaving Apple for other jobs, in a deep sense this is good. Apple has developed a remarkable set of business practices and values that are 180 degrees out of synch with standard MBA-babble [look at the CALPERS wanting the change Apple Governance to align with mediocre industry performance best practices].

Getting truly novel and innovative practices out there [back to the future] on user experience, value, and quality cannot be all bad. Driving real innovation vs me-too-ism or copying [SAMSUNG and Google anyone?] will also be great for industry, practice, economy, and customers.

Lol. He didn't take a blood oath for Apple. As long as what he does doesn't violate anything he signed all is well.

You lot are acting pathetic as if no one is allowed to go anywhere once they get to Apple. If he felt this was the right move and he has been part of Apple's rise to dominance then obviously Apple felt he was a worthy man and it goes without saying that others see it too.

The description about hiring each others employees is somewhat inaccurate. The 2007 & 9 discussion and agreement was about one firm cold calling employees at the other firm and pitching them about job offers, not about simply taking the employees from the other firm. So if someone at Apple applied for a position at Google that was ok, it was the cold calling that the 2007 & 9 agreements centred on.

It's very likely that this chap has a non-dislosure/non-competition clause in his contract. Since Apple hasn't put up a fuss its probable that the job at Google is unrelated to his work at Apple and all this has been talked through at both firms. Otherwise there's be a Papermaster like scene over the hire.

"'...Regarding good people leaving Apple for other jobs, in a deep sense this is good. Apple has developed a remarkable set of business practices and values ...


So Apple works for years to develop a unique business paradigm, risks the farm more than once, becomes the world leader in its' field...therefore...in your opinion.......they should share their experience with competitors who aren't able to achieve it on their own.

"...Getting truly novel and innovative practices out there [back to the future] on user experience, value, and quality cannot be all bad. Driving real innovation vs me-too-ism or copying..."

And, in your opinion, hiring someone who brings Apple's mindset, techniques, experience ISN'T "me-too-ism"?

As liberal as I am in most thinking, this approach is the basis for "spreading the wealth" in a way that says everybody will benefit, we must share among ourselves, even if we cannot innovate, we are entitled to being successful too.

Those are NOT words from the mind and soul of an entrepreneur. Perhaps from the mind and needs to other categories of thinkers.