3 ms·
It's so refreshing to hear the attitude in this article, and MCRed's above. It's completely reasonable, this understanding that Apple has a right to decide what
by digitailor 12y ago
It's so refreshing to hear the attitude in this article, and MCRed's above. It's completely reasonable, this understanding that Apple has a right to decide what it sells in its own store. Unfortunately, other comments here often reflect the opposite attitude: "fAscIsm cLoseD anDroid aRRgh."
Imagine this:
A designer walks into corporate headquarters of Macy's with his sample garments that he wishes to sell there. He is given the opportunity to talk to a Macy's buyer (the person who selects garments to sell).
The shirt the man shows says "So sO seKsy" on the right sleeve, there is what looks like a mustard stain on the collar (he defends that it is "the beautiful sun", and the construction is terrible- a button falls off while the buyer is looking at it.
Buyer: "I'm sorry sir, this shirt is grotesque in my view. Best of luck to you."
Designer: "Screw you! I'm going to sell it to Target! I'll never shop here again!!"
Apple has no responsibility to sell shirts that it believes are ugly. And the OP recognized this and took his own responsibility. Kudos!
Note: Not an Apple fanboy, see previous comments, but i do use some of their products
- jimmaswell 12y agoYes but at least a Macy's shopper doesn't have to resort to hacks to even be allowed to wear that shirt. (Installing third-party APKs on an Android without the app store, not possible without jailbreak on iOS) Could they just go to the other store? In this instance that would have an upfront cost (getting a new phone)