Does Apple's latest hire signal more chip making in future?

Think how much better off the world would be with IBM and Apple's first choice of Motorola instead of Intel chip long ago! 68000 was way ahead of Intel's many attempts to handle more than 64K of memory. And wouldn't Moto have been better off if they simply allowed IBM to use custom version of that chip, instead of telling them NO and sending them to Intel???

If Papermaster is someone so important, then IBM has every right to protect their own IP from potentially being stolen by others.

If Apple is making chips they are certainly competing with the IBM micro electronic division. If the guy signed an agreement not to work for a competitor, he should stand by his agreement. If IBM let him go, that is a different story.

Well, these are large companies with very large legal departments. Justice for money has typically been the American way. A person will hardly have the resources to combat a full assault by IBM's lawyers, but the article didn't make it clear whether Apple will assist him. Companies may have the right to protect their IP, but patents, trademarks and other techniques are a better solution. I say this because, like many of the posters here, I have seen personally that non-comptetes are mainly used as a threat to retain every-day engineers in the face of policies that include no COL increases and deteriorating work conditions. While the employees technically have the right to move on, realistically they cannot because having a suit filed will financially ruin the employee during the job transition while hardly inconveniencing the company.

IBM knows fully well as does Apple that under California law an employee cannot be prevented from leaving and going to work for another employer. It is really what makes Silicon Valley valuable - the continuing cross pollination of ideas. Apple is more likely to want the blade expertise, as Apple has gained significant market share with its OS X servers that utilze, like IBM''''s servers, Intel processors. The ability to develop servers that better support the next generation of Intel processors and provide better support for virtualization are most likely where Apple is headed and why it wants this individual on board.

Didn't this country fight a nasty little war circa 1860 to determine the right of people to choose for whom they will work?

Most of you will not remember the internal Apple CPU development activity on Aquarious CPU chips in the pre Power PC era with Motorola and IBM. At that time Apple was going full steam ahead with a 32/64 bit CPU that would have be sourced at the old AT&T fab. Good old Jean Louis Gassee sold the company jewels to get cheaper 68030 chips sets and then future 68040 chips at a discount price by agreeing to scrap the internal CPU chip development - sold off two CRAY computers and canned the entire development team as well. The Apple development was also going to use the "Pink" SW platform that the agreements with IBM for a new joint "non-Windows" environment would up never going anywhere - thank your IBM ! So what goes aroung comes around - the Apple CPU project was always Steve's goal to be able to make superior products and not be a me too company - bye bye Intel! Those were the fun days at Apple !

Employees don't just learn from a company, they also contribute. Non-compete agreements were intended to protect investments by companies in their staff and the sharing of confidential information includings strategic plans. However, many companies are abusing non-compete agreement and this is often done by pathetic excuses for managers, often with some personal agenda influence. Furthermore, with most large coporations having such broad portfolio, the non-compete has to be specific in what is/isn't in play and not open to free interpretation by individuals within the company, lawyers, etc... Else, anybody that worked for GE, IBM, 3M or any other large, higly diversified corporation can never work anywhere else.

If the employee knew at that time he accepted employment that a non-compete was required for employment nobody forced him to take the position. Why should someone be able to go into a company learn as much about the companies confidential information and then leave and take that accumulated information to a competitor? Particularly when that engineer was compensated maybe 150K per year and the Intellectual Property that the employee bound by the NDA having access to the work product of dozens or even hundreds of engineers walks out the door to a competitor with potential millions of dollars of work product. Bottom line, if you can''t live with the non-compete, don''t take the job.

It's high time the emplyee got some leeway in their choice of employ. These non-compete clauses were put there not to punish anyone except the employee who was for what ever reasons digruntled, mishandled, or otherwise cast off in their current positions. Having been there before, I know exactly how this can keep someone from an otherwise good opportunity.

dont know which state employment law is applicable. In any case IF IBM has pre-compensated the engineer so that he 'voluntarily' signed the non-compete they DO HAVE the right to enjoin him; he will not be 'out on the street' for the year; and his knowledge about IBM strategy will ONLY be 12 months old, but still older .. so that Apple cannot benefit from that knowledge. I say IBM DOES have the right to restrain, and hope they win. (I am NOT an IBM person, and have nothing to gain from this action.)

Interesting. At first I thought it was pure speculation, but when you mention Apple is hiring CPU engineers it appears to be a possibility. They say you can see a companies future direction from the job postings on its website. I guess time will tell....

Yes. IBM has no right to law suit. IBM need to learn how to better take of its engineer. Good for Apple and goog for paper master. I think IBM will lose

One year non-compete clauses should not be allowed because it imposes unrealistic restrictions to employees that blocks the employee's choice of employer and potential ability to make a living.