[OT] Apple at it again

Richmond richmondmathewson at gmail.com
Wed Feb 16 13:45:10 EST 2011

On 02/16/2011 08:10 PM, Bob Sneidar wrote:
> Yes, not directed at you in particular Richmond. But I should make the point that you paid Apple money for those things didn't you? And in return you got a product, right? Isn't your contract with Apple now ended? (Once the Warranty expires I mean.) Certainly, it doesn't entitle you to any direct influence on future Apple corporate policy, does it? Now if you were a stock holder, well that is an entirely different story.

Well; I suppose it is up to the individual or the company. But RunRev 
appears to solicit feedback
exactly aimed at the future direction their product will take; of 
course, whether they take that
advice is up to them.

> I guess what I am on the soap box

Ha, ha; that seems to make 2 of us . . .  :)

> about is the notion so many people have these days that we are owed some say in what amounts to the private affairs of other people or corporations and even countries.

We are not owed some say in other people's private affairs. But we are 
entitled to voice an opinion;
and where the confusion seems to lie is that if I write "Steve Jobs 
should take a flying leap" it is
misunderstood to be my feeling that I am allowed to boss Steve Jobs 
around, rather than my voicing
an opinion.

Now what I wrote about Apple's current behaviour pattern was not a 
DIRECTIVE telling them what to do
(and I am perfectly entitled to write something in the tone of a 
directive should I choose), but an attempt
at interpreting Apple's corporate motivation (if any) behind their 
current behaviour pattern. I also
compared their corporate behaviour to the behaviour of various children; 
again, a comparison I have
no problem making.

>   If demanding that Hollywood Stars give up the privacy of their own lives when not in the "limelight" simply because of the jobs they chose, seems "not entirely fair" to anyone, certainly the proposition that a corporation answers to a general public or to specific individuals not invested in their stocks must also seem a bit "unfair"?

I believe that "fair" and "unfair" are words, that with a bit of digging 
appear to be
almost semantically empty; or, alternatively, so poly-semantic that they 
are almost valueless.

> I am reminded of the words of a great man, who was telling a story about a landowner who had hired some day laborers, some early, some the middle of the day, some late afternoon, and some towards the evening. The deal he struck with each was that he would pay them one shekel for their labors.
> Upon paying the last ones first, and then the first ones last, they began to complain about the unfairness, because the first ones had borne the heat of the day, and so they should be paid more then the last. But the landowner countered that the amount paid was what was agreed to, and also that while the money was in his hand, it was his own to do what he pleased with.

Funnily enough, the man who is supposed to have told that story is also 
supposed to have been
some sort of proto-socialist.

> Therein lies the rub, as they say.

Some people seemed to think so; they certainly gave that chap a rough time.

> Bob
> On Feb 16, 2011, at 9:47 AM, Richmond wrote:
>> On 02/16/2011 07:37 PM, Bob Sneidar wrote:
>>> If vendors do not like the deal, they don't have to sign the contract. If users do not like Apple practices, they can avoid buying the product. Isn't free enterprise grand? We can vote with our wallets! What will NOT by ANY means change one daggum thing however, is bashing Apple on a list no one outside of us reads. And frankly, the assumption that a corporation owes any consideration to anyone who buys nothing from them seems rather totalitarian in it's own right. Don't you think?
>>> Just my 2¢.
>>> The Devil's (erm I mean Steve Jobs') Advocate
>> Well; as I am the owner of 3 Macs in regular use; another 6 in my attic in Scotland, another 3 under
>> the stairs in my house in Scotland, and have "blown up" another 3, I feel I have some sort of
>> say as somebody who DOES buy their products! [Ooh; almost forgot, the grey trackball, greyscale laptop
>> I take with me to fool around with Hypercard on long train and plane journeys].
>> Now; come the summer, I will have to find the money for at least 2 more computers, and in all
>> probability they will be Macs. However, probability is a fickle thing . . .
>> Now, in the great scheme of things my opinion is probably not worth all that much; but, just as Apple
>> is entitled to "strut their funky stuff", so am I.
>>> On Feb 16, 2011, at 9:27 AM, Richmond wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

More information about the Use-livecode mailing list