GimmeShockTreatment t1_jdno545 wrote on March 25, 2023 at 7:32 PM

Reply to comment by Cariboudjan in Apple employees face reprisals, possible termination over return to office policy by OutlandishnessOk2452

But these are all future theoretical applications right? Are any of these possible without spending huge amounts of money? My whole point is that current WFH applications work well enough. A company could spend tons of money to get an extra tiny bit of production but I’m not sure there’s evidence that it’s worth it. Making economical decisions doesn’t make someone a dinosaur lol. I work in tech btw so I’m not completely behind the times.

Cariboudjan t1_jdnw7uu wrote on March 25, 2023 at 8:31 PM

Uh. These applications would save millions of dollars each year by not having to provide office space, purchase monitors or monitor mounting hardware, desks, chairs, coffee, bathrooms, toilet paper, parking space, heat, electricity... The list goes on and on.

The thing is a lot of these ESTABLISHED businesses have already invested in the office space and are inclined to use it. New businesses that are not yet established would prefer not to invest in office space as a cost-saving measure. All of this futuristic hardware is cheaper than the cost of property taxes on office space for a single year. Do you think a start-up is going to invest millions of dollars in downtown office space when they can accomplish the same productivity by investing thousands in hardware?

GimmeShockTreatment t1_jdo4egs wrote on March 25, 2023 at 9:32 PM

No but the cheapest option is to work from home with zoom. It works fairly well. The type of technology you’re suggesting might make sense in niche scenarios but ultimately seems like it has a low cost to benefit ratio.

I can’t speak specifically to the security guard angle of your point. Maybe you’re correct but again that’s niche in the grand scale of jobs that can be WFH.