1. “Reportedly, an Apple retail or office installation has been circulating” - but they then include a tweet as their apparent source that explicitly says it’s the 5th Ave store. So why say it might be an Apple office instead?
2. Maybe they are so wishy-washy about it because they aren’t confident it’s real, but if that’s the case, then writing a lengthy article calling something “stupidity” that you can’t even confidently state occurred…
3. “Reportedly, an Apple retail or office installation has been circulating” has a hyperlink across multiple words so you’d think it would be their source, but no it’s to the Apple homepage.
The "Steve Jobs" movie features a made-up subplot about Jobs insisting that the Fire Exit Safety signs be turned off to achieve "absolute blackout" in a theater. They very reasonably point out that no fire Marshall would approve it. I'm surprised for that reason, especially in midtown Manhattan. I've seen a fire marshall do a full inspection of a Broadway show and they were very thorough. This store is just a few blocks from there.
It doesn't even have to be transparent! (I think.) Big red "FIRE" letters and either a visible handle to open or very obvious instructions would probably be acceptable.
Usually luxury stores have sprinkler protection, availability of fire hose reels, etc.
In Australia this would not comply with our fire code. Putting it behind a cabinet is fine; but it must have visible signs that can be seen from 20m away with a 20/20 eyesight (assuming no obstruction etc).
This applies to all portable extinguishers; even if it’s additional ones you’ve added beyond what’s required. The idea and intent is simple: train people and first responders to locate portable fire extinguishers by the sign.
I wonder if fire safety code (either in NYC, NY State, or nationally) has caught up with some sort of specific regulation for additional fire safety when you have N amount of watt-hours of lithium ion battery storage contained in X amount of square feet of retail space with Y type of fire suppression/detection systems. The same general concept as why you can't take above a 99Wh battery on an airplane as an individual unit, but extended to something like the Apple Store or the laptop display section in a Best Buy.
The closest thing I've seen is a big push from the NYC government to get people to stop charging their sketchy ebike/scooter battery packs indoors in hallways and apartments, which has caused more than a few fires.
They don't use fire extinguishers for lithium battery fires though (as the article mentioned: submerging it in special sand). It would possibly be a negative if a member of the public grabbed a visible extinguisher during a battery fire?
And I'm surprised that the only reports seem to be from eight years ago, given the amount of old electronics that go through the stores.
Passive-voice "reportedly" accusations; as the article itself admits, there's no evidence at all that Apple did this. So this would appear to be completely unsupported clickbait.
This is a shitty AI slop article that even admits it has no evidence this is even real:
No official Apple statement, architectural document, or verified primary image has surfaced to confirm the specifics. No such source was identified in the research reviewed for this article.
What the circulating example does clarify, regardless of its origin, is a pattern worth examining. Brand loyalty can short-circuit critical thinking fast enough to make observers praise a design choice before asking whether it actually works under pressure.
I think this is everything right about Apple. There is zero chance the building is not up to code, at least within the context of some exception granted to them by the city. Their extremely numerous number of employees are likely well trained on what to do during a fire, including where the extinguishers are. I can think of no stores I'd rather be in, if there's a fire, than that Apple Store. But, it makes nerds angry; they're more interested in the process than the outcomes.
I agree there’s zero chance of written documentation that the building isn’t up to code.
That’s very different to it actually complying with code however. And to your second example, if I was physically attending WWDC back when they did they keynotes, I’d much rather seeing illuminated exit signs than having them (illegally) turn them off in case of a fire.
Much of building codes is either outdated, no longer the most effective way to achieve something, etc. But these building codes are written in blood. It’s why we have them.
Do that all you want in your personal house, but public spaces and even private workplaces with employees other than yourself rightfully should adhere to standards that apply the same everywhere so that any person has a reasonable chance to succeed at the crucial task in an unplanned emergency.
"My emergency response plan is there will always be a trained employee." is exactly as stupid as "My emergency response plan is there will never be an emergency."
This is correct. I actually visit Apple stores because the conduct of their employees reinforces the culture of voluntary safety that I've come to expect from society. Exposing these gaudy red extinguishers only causes customers to feel unsafe and resent safety instead of accepting it. Anyone that wants to display even a single extinguisher is obsessing over their own insecurities and tearing down the safety ecosystem we trust our lives with. Blatant nerd quackery.
When I can see the extinguishers in the store, that's when I'll know Apple has finally gone downhill. If you're reading this Ternus, don't stop fighting.
1. “Reportedly, an Apple retail or office installation has been circulating” - but they then include a tweet as their apparent source that explicitly says it’s the 5th Ave store. So why say it might be an Apple office instead?
2. Maybe they are so wishy-washy about it because they aren’t confident it’s real, but if that’s the case, then writing a lengthy article calling something “stupidity” that you can’t even confidently state occurred…
3. “Reportedly, an Apple retail or office installation has been circulating” has a hyperlink across multiple words so you’d think it would be their source, but no it’s to the Apple homepage.
Just about all of gadgetreview.com is LLM writing these days.
For all we know even the original video from the tweet is ai generated.
Yeah, uh, I totally agree with you and won't be reading the rest.
https://www.nngroup.com/articles/flat-design/
In Australia this would not comply with our fire code. Putting it behind a cabinet is fine; but it must have visible signs that can be seen from 20m away with a 20/20 eyesight (assuming no obstruction etc).
This applies to all portable extinguishers; even if it’s additional ones you’ve added beyond what’s required. The idea and intent is simple: train people and first responders to locate portable fire extinguishers by the sign.
[1]: https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/01/09/iphone-battery-fi...
The closest thing I've seen is a big push from the NYC government to get people to stop charging their sketchy ebike/scooter battery packs indoors in hallways and apartments, which has caused more than a few fires.
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=nyc+ebike...
And I'm surprised that the only reports seem to be from eight years ago, given the amount of old electronics that go through the stores.
No official Apple statement, architectural document, or verified primary image has surfaced to confirm the specifics. No such source was identified in the research reviewed for this article.
What the circulating example does clarify, regardless of its origin, is a pattern worth examining. Brand loyalty can short-circuit critical thinking fast enough to make observers praise a design choice before asking whether it actually works under pressure.
So, let’s not blame Apple here. Let’s blame the mall for doing something really stupid.
In case you disagree compare https://www.apple.com/cf/newsroom/2019/09/apple-fifth-avenue...
How about a fire extinguisher store?
That’s very different to it actually complying with code however. And to your second example, if I was physically attending WWDC back when they did they keynotes, I’d much rather seeing illuminated exit signs than having them (illegally) turn them off in case of a fire.
Much of building codes is either outdated, no longer the most effective way to achieve something, etc. But these building codes are written in blood. It’s why we have them.
"My emergency response plan is there will always be a trained employee." is exactly as stupid as "My emergency response plan is there will never be an emergency."
When I can see the extinguishers in the store, that's when I'll know Apple has finally gone downhill. If you're reading this Ternus, don't stop fighting.