Hey there, this is the author of Fast Company's story. Thanks for the note.
While I appreciate your perspective, during the course of reporting, you have to understand that you're going to hear an endless amount of varying perspectives, especially when it comes to emotional finger-pointing and Monday morning quarterbacking. It sounds like you worked on the project for about a year, of a product with roots that can be traced as far back as 2009. It's also not clear to me what "team" you're referring to, since so many teams were involved over this long time period, not just in Seattle but in Cupertino/Sunnyvale/Cambridge/etc, as you know. So I just hope people can keep that in mind when reading about "inaccuracies," which, on the whole, I certainly would disagree with.
As for your complaints, it sounds like many of them are aimed at the hardware teams; during my reporting, I certainly heard just as many complaints leveled at the software teams (e.g. at former VP Howard Look before his departure).
I totally understand that current/former employees get defensive about these kinds of topics, especially when it comes to their work being under the eye of criticism (early Dynamic Perspective team members were especially defensive during my reporting). But it's important to separate fact from emotion, and present a narrative that is clear, accurate, and balanced.
At this point, I've talked to nearly four-dozen sources for this story -- current and former employees at all levels of the company -- and this is the story that's emerged. The feedback I've since received privately from insiders has been incredibly reassuring.
With that said, I'm not dismissing your comments. But if you'd like to provide more insight, feel free to reach out. I'm accessible online, and happy to connect on background, if that's most comfortable for you.
While I appreciate your perspective, during the course of reporting, you have to understand that you're going to hear an endless amount of varying perspectives, especially when it comes to emotional finger-pointing and Monday morning quarterbacking. It sounds like you worked on the project for about a year, of a product with roots that can be traced as far back as 2009. It's also not clear to me what "team" you're referring to, since so many teams were involved over this long time period, not just in Seattle but in Cupertino/Sunnyvale/Cambridge/etc, as you know. So I just hope people can keep that in mind when reading about "inaccuracies," which, on the whole, I certainly would disagree with.
As for your complaints, it sounds like many of them are aimed at the hardware teams; during my reporting, I certainly heard just as many complaints leveled at the software teams (e.g. at former VP Howard Look before his departure).
I totally understand that current/former employees get defensive about these kinds of topics, especially when it comes to their work being under the eye of criticism (early Dynamic Perspective team members were especially defensive during my reporting). But it's important to separate fact from emotion, and present a narrative that is clear, accurate, and balanced.
At this point, I've talked to nearly four-dozen sources for this story -- current and former employees at all levels of the company -- and this is the story that's emerged. The feedback I've since received privately from insiders has been incredibly reassuring.
With that said, I'm not dismissing your comments. But if you'd like to provide more insight, feel free to reach out. I'm accessible online, and happy to connect on background, if that's most comfortable for you.
Best, Austin