Nothing 'surprising' about it on the least. If anyone's been paying attention, that's exactly where he's coming from.
pacificfilm wrote: »
@BFrost. "...Whilst I'd love to see the Apple Watch sell a ton, I don't think it will. I think Cook realises this, due to the lack of interest that they have no doubt seen both in public and internal surveys...."
Every major country in the EU -- UK, France, Germany for starters -- has been shown to engage in similar spying (if not worse).
As to taxes, it's EU's problem, not Apple's. As to pricing, people are welcome to not buy the product if the price is too high, but it accounts for exchange rate risks, VAT, end-of-product-life costs, higher distribution costs, higher labor costs, higher retailing costs, and pricing-to-market.
And labor practices? Give me a break. No one has done more to elevate industry practices that Apple has.
Bottom line: the EU can stuff it. (The real hypocrisy would be if they bought Androids or Windows-based PCs instead thinking that they're better than Apple on any one of these counts).
Ahh. You read minds
To witch, Quote:
After reading two (imaginary?) public surveys you tired out?
As has so well been said before, Put up or shut up!
flaneur wrote: »
Appears like Apple and Tim Cook know they have a huge PR problem in Europe over NSA spying in particular, plus the usual backdraft toward Apple over pricing, profits, tax and labor practices, etc.
Cook's interview in the Telegraph last week was similar to this one, but with no Snowden and maybe more promises of privacy. This Bild interview seems to be behind a paywall, so we don't know the details, but the Telegraph story was accompanied by the worst comment thread I've ever read, almost all in complete denial of Cook and Apple's veracity.
Maybe it's general anti-American, post-Iraq, war-on-terror fallout, but Apple seems to be scorned more there than here, and Tim Cook is trying to do something about it. But suspicion is now the default position, post Snowden, so maybe that's why Tim seems to welcome the leaker-inspired scrutiny. The question is, can he or anyone defuse the paranoid view? (I think it's paranoid and irrational, at least, though understandable.)