Describing Apple's situation as its "vision" or "strategy" is misleading. Apple required significant prodding to get to the point described in the article. A pu

Describing Apple's situation as its "vision" or "strategy" is misleading. Apple required significant prodding to get to the point described in the article. A public company without a dual ​voting ​structure can only resist shareholders so much. ​It's hard to imagine that if Apple were incorporated today that the founders wouldn't have wanted to retain significant control. ​In any case, even with a dual structure, founders owe fiduciary duties to other shareholders​; they ​can't do whatever they want. Also, these are not ​"​alternative models of capitalism​". These are alternative models of public company corporate finance - a much narrower discussion.