3 ms·

"Apple doesn't have any responsibility to the people who buy them" I beg to differ; I believe any company providing a service or a good has an obligation to it

by avner 17y ago

"Apple doesn't have any responsibility to the people who buy them" I beg to differ; I believe any company providing a service or a good has an obligation to its customers. Granted that Apple can afford to ride the high horse at the moment because of its refinement and early adoption of multi-touch, but a draconian control over something like the iPhone will not fare well for Apple in the long term. Sooner or later litigators will compare this amount of control on an ever increasing popular device with the Microsoft-IE case and anti-competitive suits are likely to follow. Competition will catch on in the iPhone's case, and people will look for alternatives when multi-touch based devices with similar UX and more liberal standards become available.

codyrobbins 17y ago
Again, I would ask, who exactly are you to be speaking in absolutes like that about what will and will not happen? Apple is a massive company with tons of brilliant people — do you really think they aren't considering every conceivable angle, never mind the obvious ones that you, sitting there in your armchair, can toss out off the top of your head? Do you honestly think that they're just completely oblivious to the trade-offs and the possibility of antitrust litigation is somehow going to blindside them? They're taking calculated risks. Also, there is a difference between a company acting as though they have a responsibility to the consumer, or choosing to have a responsibility as a voluntary matter of principal, for public relations purposes; and whether a company actually does have a responsibility in fact or not. There is also a difference between whether you think they should have a responsibility or not and whether they actually do. You obviously think they should have a responsibility, but I still think that they don't as an objective matter of fact. I'm not trying to be belligerent, although it probably seems that way — it's just that exactly what I'm saying is that I think too many people wishfully demand the recognition of rights they don't have from companies like Apple, and similarly impose responsibilities that don't exist onto them.
- plinkplonk 17y ago
  "I'm not trying to be belligerent, although it probably seems that way " If you know you "seem belligerent" why don't you change your writing to tone it down? Unless you want to write "belligerently" but then disclaim it with "I'm not trying to be belligerent".? Perhaps someone who writes for public consumption,especially when talking to peers, should control the tone of his writing? Your writing comes across as that of an immature teenager who can't control his thoughts or emotions.( I am not saying you are immature, just making a subjective comment on the tone of your writing). You make interesting points. Doing so without angsty aggression would help people follow along. "Apple is a massive company with tons of brilliant people — do you really think they aren't considering every conceivable angle," "EVERY" conceivable angle? Let me quote you, "Who exactly are you to be speaking in absolutes "? ;-) Besides, this is patent nonsense. Companies "full of brilliant people" makes strategic mistakes all the time. Microsoft, IBM , HP, Yahoo even Apple in the old days, before the comeback. Unless Apple is filled with omniscient gods, they are as prone to human fallibility as everyone else. "a voluntary matter of principal" you meant "principle"?
- brandon272 17y ago
  I find it amusing that you consider Apple to be such a wonderful, brilliant, flawless company that it is seemingly immune to things like antitrust litigation. There are many companies out there that have or have had "tons of brilliant people" who have collectively made mistakes or strategic errors in their lifetimes, Apple included.
  - codyrobbins 17y ago
    Oh, I certainly don't think they're immune to things like antitrust litigation. It's a whole different question whether the antitrust legislation that enables the litigation is itself a good idea. And I definitely don't think Apple won't make mistakes. But my money would certainly be on Apple to know what they're doing over the guy who's criticizing them. Actually, my money literally is on Apple — I'm a stockholder.

by avner 17y ago

codyrobbins 17y ago

Again, I would ask, who exactly are you to be speaking in absolutes like that about what will and will not happen? Apple is a massive company with tons of brilliant people — do you really think they aren't considering every conceivable angle, never mind the obvious ones that you, sitting there in your armchair, can toss out off the top of your head? Do you honestly think that they're just completely oblivious to the trade-offs and the possibility of antitrust litigation is somehow going to blindside them? They're taking calculated risks. Also, there is a difference between a company acting as though they have a responsibility to the consumer, or choosing to have a responsibility as a voluntary matter of principal, for public relations purposes; and whether a company actually does have a responsibility in fact or not. There is also a difference between whether you think they should have a responsibility or not and whether they actually do. You obviously think they should have a responsibility, but I still think that they don't as an objective matter of fact. I'm not trying to be belligerent, although it probably seems that way — it's just that exactly what I'm saying is that I think too many people wishfully demand the recognition of rights they don't have from companies like Apple, and similarly impose responsibilities that don't exist onto them.

plinkplonk 17y ago
"I'm not trying to be belligerent, although it probably seems that way " If you know you "seem belligerent" why don't you change your writing to tone it down? Unless you want to write "belligerently" but then disclaim it with "I'm not trying to be belligerent".? Perhaps someone who writes for public consumption,especially when talking to peers, should control the tone of his writing? Your writing comes across as that of an immature teenager who can't control his thoughts or emotions.( I am not saying you are immature, just making a subjective comment on the tone of your writing). You make interesting points. Doing so without angsty aggression would help people follow along. "Apple is a massive company with tons of brilliant people — do you really think they aren't considering every conceivable angle," "EVERY" conceivable angle? Let me quote you, "Who exactly are you to be speaking in absolutes "? ;-) Besides, this is patent nonsense. Companies "full of brilliant people" makes strategic mistakes all the time. Microsoft, IBM , HP, Yahoo even Apple in the old days, before the comeback. Unless Apple is filled with omniscient gods, they are as prone to human fallibility as everyone else. "a voluntary matter of principal" you meant "principle"?
brandon272 17y ago
I find it amusing that you consider Apple to be such a wonderful, brilliant, flawless company that it is seemingly immune to things like antitrust litigation. There are many companies out there that have or have had "tons of brilliant people" who have collectively made mistakes or strategic errors in their lifetimes, Apple included.
- codyrobbins 17y ago
  Oh, I certainly don't think they're immune to things like antitrust litigation. It's a whole different question whether the antitrust legislation that enables the litigation is itself a good idea. And I definitely don't think Apple won't make mistakes. But my money would certainly be on Apple to know what they're doing over the guy who's criticizing them. Actually, my money literally is on Apple — I'm a stockholder.