| General > General Technical Chat |
| Apple to have asked its suppliers in Taiwan to avoid using "Made in Taiwan!? |
| << < (6/10) > >> |
| tooki:
--- Quote from: dunkemhigh on August 09, 2022, 03:00:39 pm --- --- Quote from: tooki on August 09, 2022, 11:39:28 am ---But as a publicly traded company, making money is their primary goal, as is literally required by law. --- End quote --- This is a myth and wrong. You shouldn't be propagating such an untruth. --- Quote from: https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/13-354.html ---Modern corporate law does not require for-profit corporations to pursue profit at the expense of everything else, and many do not. --- End quote --- --- End quote --- Soooo close but no cigar: your quote is true. So is my claim. How can both be true? Because not all corporations are publicly traded. The case you linked to was one regarding a privately-held company, which has much more freedom to manage itself how it wants. But once you have publicly traded shares, the doctrine of maximizing shareholder value comes into play, and there have been many court decisions supporting this. I specifically said “publicly traded” because this is the key condition. From https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/04/16/what-are-corporations-obligations-to-shareholders/a-duty-to-shareholder-value --- Quote ---The leading statement of the law's view on corporate social responsibility goes back to Dodge v. Ford Motor Co, a 1919 decision that held that "a business corporation is organized and carried on primarily for the profit of the stockholders." That case — in which Henry Ford was challenged by shareholders when he tried to reduce car prices at their expense — also established that "it is not within the lawful powers of a board of directors to shape and conduct the affairs of a corporation for the merely incidental benefit of shareholders and for the primary purpose of benefiting others." Despite contrary claims by some academics and Occupy Wall Street-type partisans, this remains the law today. A 2010 decision, for example, eBay Domestic Holdings Inc. v. Newmark, held that corporate directors are bound by "fiduciary duties and standards" which include "acting to promote the value of the corporation for the benefit of its stockholders." --- End quote --- (Emphasis mine.) |
| AndyBeez:
Maybe Apple is going to standardize it's own small print into 'one nation' small print? This from a pamphlet in the 'Hello' sleeve that no-one ever reads because everyone is just too excited to plug in the box and get it linked to their Apple ID: |
| tooki:
--- Quote from: Kasper on August 09, 2022, 02:05:30 pm --- --- Quote from: tooki on August 09, 2022, 11:39:28 am --- --- Quote from: danielmeyers on August 09, 2022, 08:53:31 am ---Apple has always been unprincipled, never interested in anything but money.[...] --- End quote --- I’ve worked for Apple, and can say with confidence that they do have goals beyond just making money. (And in some areas, like supplier responsibility and environmental impact, Apple is far ahead of any competitor.) [...] --- End quote --- "Far ahead of any competitor" is a bold statement. I bet you meant 'I worked at apple and it seemed like they cared.' Or have you also worked in multiple departments at every single one of their competitors? --- End quote --- From personal experience, I can vouch for Apple having a true sense of customer-centricity, elegance, and design. (One could, of course, argue that that is Apple’s approach to increasing sales.) Meanwhile, Apple’s commitment to supplier responsibility, reducing environmental impact, and making their products accessible to special-needs users are all well documented and externally audited. Apple remains the only big tech company to rigorously audit its suppliers — supplier employees frequently report that no other customers ever audit them. (And Apple has followed through and terminated contracts with suppliers that violate its rules.) And let’s not forget the way the media often twists the truth regarding Apple, because beating on Apple gets clicks. A perfect example is about working conditions: some years ago, it hit the news of a supposed epidemic of worker suicides at Foxconn, a major supplier. And it’s true, there had been some worker suicides, and the number looked bad— until you looked at the sheer number of Foxconn employees. Turns out, the rate of Foxconn worker suicides was very significantly lower than that of the Chinese population at large! Or how Greenpeace ranked environmental responsibility solely by what companies promised to do, not whether they actually did it! |O So companies that made huge pie-in-the-sky promises got top marks, while Apple, which actually did what it said it was doing (and often didn’t say anything until after the fact) got ranked poorly, despite actually doing more. |
| tooki:
--- Quote from: Kasper on August 09, 2022, 02:25:34 pm ---They must be doing some amazing stuff then, to make up for the fact that they have more versions of charge cables than average --- End quote --- They have USB A to Lightning, USB-C to Lightning, USB-C to USB-C, USB-C to MagSafe 3, USB A to Apple Watch, and USB-C to Apple Watch. Of these, devices with Lightning or USB-C inputs form the overwhelming majority. The Watch is literally the sole product they sell that cannot charge using either Lightning or USB-C. How is that any more complex than what other brands have, between micro USB, mini USB, USB-C, and various specialty plugs on the device end, and USB A, USB-C, or micro USB OTG on the charger end? It’s a comparable matrix of combinations, if not bigger. --- Quote from: Kasper on August 09, 2022, 02:25:34 pm ---they don't make it easy to replace batteries --- End quote --- Nor do most competitors, and unlike the competitors, Apple has a large network of its own stores, resellers, and a mail-in program, all of which replace the battery quickly and at reasonable cost. --- Quote from: Kasper on August 09, 2022, 02:25:34 pm ---and they purposefully slow down older devices. --- End quote --- This isn’t true, and it never was. Some versions of the OSes (most notably iOS 11 in my experience) did slow down old devices, but it’s because the newer software simply exceeded the hardware resources. (So yes, slowdown, but not “purposefully”.) With iOS 12, Apple made huge optimizations, such that iOS 12 ran faster on old devices than iOS 10 did, bringing it back to iOS 9 speeds. Ever since then, every iOS update has maintained performance really well. |
| deadlylover:
Here is an environmental report on the latest iPhone. It’s hard to find any equivalent from their competitors, you’d think they’d jump on any opportunity to one up Apple, no? https://www.apple.com/environment/pdf/products/iphone/iPhone_13_Pro_PER_Sept2021.pdf 256GB of flash is 12kg of CO2 emissions, that’s a fun fact. The sheer economic output of a 2+ trillion dollar company is a net good for the world IMO. But they use Lightning cables so they’re the most evil company on earth… :-DD Well at least we can all agree the best thing Apple makes is their stock, we probably all owe a decent chunk of our retirements to them. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |