Half of the planet are indian programmers; Google, MS, Oracle etc. have many principals who are indian. I only know Apple employees by the keynotes/presentations they do, and they're mighty WHITE and MALE. Last keynote was the first time I recall seeing females. As a corporate entity, they SEEM not to have many minorities, based on their public face. As for women in tech in general, girls will enter comp sci courses if they find them interesting. In the workplace, women have to deal with the quota of asinine dufuses that inhabit most tech startups like anyone else.
actually no group who willing and legally immigrated to the US are on the list.
So all blacks are here unwillingly, and every single Latino is here illegally?
The problem here is that whenever there is discussion of hiring more women or minorities, the knee jerk reactions by those who oppose racial diversity in the workplace is to point to qualifications. I doubt highly any company hires anyone who is not qualified.
There is a presumption that minorities and women aren't being hired because they aren't qualified, because why else bring up qualifications.
There is something in the process that leads to the imbalance. Many have researched and determined that unconscious bias contributes to people selecting candidates with Euro sounding names and upon interviewing, who may resemble their own social, work or familial circles. They do this not on purpose. They also let subconscious stereotypes they may have against certain groups influence their decision. Or they may assign a bad work or personal experience they had with another minority of the same race as the candidate and let those perceptions and that history guide their ultimate decision to hire or not.
White males and Asian males walk into interview rooms with an automatic subconscious check mark of being qualified and of "fitting in." It's up to them to erase that unearned benefit based solely on their race and gender. Everyone else do not get that benefit of the doubt and have additional hurdles to climb that a white or Asian male do not have.
Some would say that is a form of Affirmative Action itself, that unconcious bias that benefits those that share the same race and gender as the dominant race and gender in that workplace.
Finally, it is not Political Correctness when the research shows that groups that are more balanced are more successful. That's a business decision to aim to get to that more successful place.
Also, it is not the race or gender alone that is the reason for the success.
Rather, it is the background, experiences, awareness of cultural differences that can be used to enhance product development, for example.
There is no way that a workplace that only has one race and people from the same culture will be able to serve markets that include many other races and cultures. There will be a lot of missed opportunities (and money left on the table) based on that weakness of a monolithic work force.
If you think that white men know what's best for all other races and for both genders in the world then.... *sigh*
Yup and Apple owns no stores in predominantly black or Hispanic neighborhoods.
The price point of Apple's products are substantially higher then PC & Android market this why the majority of people on the world own Android products and PCs.
Apple's core and main market is affluent whites. It does not serve those markets and demographic because it falsely believes they will not buy their products and they do not try, and do not care to try. It is wasting opportunities and it shows in their hiring that they do not care for that demo at all.
If I walk into an Apple store, I don't give a crap about what color the salesperson is, I don't give a crap about what sex they are, all I care about is that they are knowledgeable, polite and can quickly assist me with whatever it is that I am there for. I don't want some clueless person who has less than 1/10 the knowledge that I have about Apple and their products, and they're there because of their sex or race for example.
It should be about qualifications and skill 100%, not any BS sex, or any BS race factoring into the picture.
I don't want the ratio to eventually be 50 male/50 female. That shouldn't be the goal, and I hope that it's not. I want it to be whatever it is, based solely on the skills and qualifications. If it were 80/20, I'd be totally fine with that. If it were 99/1, I'd be fine with that too. May the job go to the most qualified.
It wasn't long ago women wanted to be hired for their brain, not their body or whatever. Quotas pass over more qualified individuals along the way if filling the quota is the main reason to hire someone.
I don't know why you people keep assuming that everyone who works at majority white companies are qualified and some didn't get in bc they looked "physically" the part or because they best matched (ergo have the same race and gender of the interviewer) the culture by looking like all who are in the tech culture already.
That in of -itself is an example of white and Asian benefitting on their race and gender outside of qualifications.
You all assume a minority will be less qualified by brining up qualifications. You are incapable of believing, it seems, that superficial factors that have Nothing to do with qualifications also go into hiring decisions in almost-all white companies.
If the point is to get the benefit of the value of those who don't fit in the current monolithic looking culture, then they have to change whatever they determined previously is the best so it is only inclusive of people they are already comfortable working with...you see there is thing called "disruption" that innovative brands and companies strive to achieve.
It is the opposite of pattern-matching Which is "go with what you know" and be like everyone else.
Yup and Apple owns no stores in predominantly black or Hispanic neighborhoods.
The price point of Apple's products are substantially higher then PC & Android market this why the majority of people on the world own Android products and PCs.
Apple's core and main market is affluent whites
Apple locates stores where the money is, not where the 'skin color' is.
Yet, Apple is perfectly find conceding that market and those communities to Google, Microsoft and the Android market. I'm certain its shareholders and perfectly fine with relinquishing profits.
African Americans own mobile devices at a disproportionate rate to their population in the U.S. PEW research states that 92% own smartphones
And there you have the problem with an all White staff. They presume that the minority market has no money and aren't worth building or marketing to.
Magic Johnson partnered up with Starbucks in 1998 in a joint venture to take it to communities where minorities live and by the end of the 12-year venture, Starbucks saw its revenues rise and those stores strive and it eventually opened up 100 more and continue today. When Johnson divested, he earned 60% of his investment.
Now had Starbucks stuck with the mentality like you have and assume that communities of color are not worth building their stores in, its shareholders would have been less all of the dividends they were able to reap over the course of those 12-years.
Again, your comment exemplifies the limited thinking of an All white staff, one that refuses to open its mind and consider the possibilities beyond presumptions and stereotypes.
'
And also, I think you need reminding that the majority of the people in the world are people of Color and most of those millions of consumers are have Android phones.
Apple locates stores where the money is, not where the 'skin color' is.
When I signed up my kids for Apple's Free Summer Camp for Kids and I typed in my state, Maryland, the only locations to populate were in the majority white county, Montgomery. The county with the richest and most affluent African Americans in the entire United States, which includes many that live in homes valued at a half a million dollars or more has ZERO Apple Stores.
So they must leave their expensive homes, hop in their expensive BMWs and take their equally valuable dollars across the Beltway and drive 40 minutes to an hour to shop in another county that has the store.
An equally affluent White co-worker, who also drives a BMW, needs only take a short trip and a few blocks to shop, or in the case of the camp to drop off their kids.
The Affluent black family will have to expend more gas costs to get their kids to camp. See where I am going with this....????
Yup. This is true, yet, he has managed to leave millions of dollars on the table by ignoring certain demos and not hiring a diverse staff of people who are cognizant of the needs of the communities from which they come and can bring forth innovative and industry disruptive ideas.
Notice the impending failure of the iWatch eh? Notice the scramble to stay on top and the struggle to compete with companies shaking the big Apple tree from the bottom. Earnings are flat and increasing at an incremental pace.
Tim Cook cannot and has not innovated for the world and will not get out from under Steve Jobs' shadow until he introduces something different and new. He needs to inject ideas from all different types of thinkers and problem solvers.
Or he can continue to use the same old monochromatic labor force to produce the same ideas that target the same market: tech gadget loving affluent whites. ... and continue to be flat and have flat earnings.
There are more people in the world that would buy Apple products if the company came up with more innovative offerings and products that solved their unique problems.
Get some fresh ideas in there. I know its painful to hear that, but it is true and Apple recognizes it and thus why it is moving to do just that!
and sometimes, they do not even bother going into some areas because they make presumptions about the demo based on race. FACT! (See my example in this thread about Starbucks)
That is quite naive of you to assume companies do not also take into account the ethnicity of the neighborhood. It is untrue that it is all about where the money is.
A halal and kosher foods grocery market may not open up in an affluent predominantly Hispanic Catholic community in Arizona but it would go to an area with a large ethnic Jewish population.
An African Hair Braiding salon would more likely go where there are more blacks who wear their hair in that style is. They wouldn't go to an Asian neighborhood just because the people there have money.
A Soul Vegan Food restaurant may not make it in a predominantly white rural meat and potatoes town where the median household income was high. .
Business owners do not make a decision of where to locate based on the affluence of region alone.
Racial and ethnic make up of the residents in the community or market is INDEED among several factors considered.
All of these oversimplified responses to why there is no need for diversity are based on a 1950s version of the world.
We are more complex and multi-dimensional but you wouldn't know that if everyone around you is the same and think just like you.
…leave millions of dollars on the table by ignoring certain demos and not hiring a diverse staff of people…
I’m 100% certain that this is nonsense.
Tim Cook cannot and has not innovated for the world and will not get out from under Steve Jobs' shadow until he introduces something different and new.
Been in a coma for the last three years?
tech gadget loving affluent whites. ... and continue to be flat and have flat earnings.
So you’re fully blind and… whatever the antithesis of the comprehension of numbers is.
products that solved their unique problems.
Apple doesn’t do that. Go buy from someone else.
Apple recognizes it and thus why it is moving to do just that!
First they’re not, then they are. Make up your mind when you’re trolling.
Originally Posted by JJGhatt
You all assume a minority will be less qualified by brining up qualifications.
Nah, you’d be the one assuming that less-qualified are hired by whining about the “lack” of diversity.
If the point is to get the benefit of the value of those who don't fit in the current monolithic looking culture
You have to ask yourself when and why that would be the point, though.
…you see there is thing called “disruption” that innovative brands and companies strive to achieve.
Diversity ? disruption.
Originally Posted by JJGhatt
A halal and kosher foods grocery market may not open up in an affluent predominantly Hispanic Catholic community in Arizona but it would go to an area with a large ethnic Jewish population.
Because that’s where the money is.
An African Hair Braiding salon would more likely go where there are more blacks who wear their hair in that style is. They wouldn't go to an Asian neighborhood just because the people there have money.
Because that’s where the money is.
A Soul Vegan Food restaurant may not make it in a predominantly white rural meat and potatoes town where the median household income was high. .
Because that’s where the money is.
We are more complex and multi-dimensional but you wouldn't know that if everyone around you is the same and think just like you.
You’d just be safer, happier, more likely to spend, and trust your surroundings more.
"Shares of Apple fell nearly 6 percent after the results were first revealed Monday afternoon. Market expectations called for Apple to post $58 billion in revenues on sales of around 56.5 million iPhones and 24.5 million iPads."
First they’re not, then they are. Make up your mind when you’re trolling.
Reading is fundamental. This article does say Apple has recognized that it has not been very diverse but that it wants to be. That's what I am referencing; its awareness that a diverse workplace is better. You differ and do not agree, so be it,but alas you are not running Apple, are you?
And if trolling is hopping in on a medium to explain my perspective and point of view, offering stats, facts, research, articles to back up my position, then I'll be that.
Also, your emotional, knee-jerk, name-calling response makes me feel happy as a "troll" as you call me that I have elicited so much anger over my writing that you felt compelled to come put me in my place with your huffery.
Quote:
Diversity ? disruption.
On that, I already shared the Michael Johnson Starbucks example, but here is another example from another sector: TV Broadcast
Traditionally, the American TV industry does not greenlight shows with all or mainly black casts, neither do they hire black, Hispanic, Asian or women producers much. They also did not think whites would watch a show with an African American lead, partially based on historic records, but also on low expectations they had of white audiences.
However, ABC has learned after the Black Woman produced show Scandal had them beating all these records. Not only did the show bring in Black women from Twitter helping promo the show among their friends and social media following, but it became a hit with all audiences and the ratings proved it. Industry leaders revealed that the network wanted to cast a white woman in the lead, in keeping with tradition, but it feared the backlash it would receive given that character is based on the real life of a Black woman. Good it took that risk, huh?
Shonda, who also produces Grey's Anatomy, executive produces How to Get Away With Murder which has a black female lead as well after ABC learned it doesn't have to be scared or relegated to the past and its fear. That show is also ratings gold.
Here is an example where Diversity does equal disruption as the network went from flailing in the ratings to dominating on Thursday nights.
ABC's BlackIsh is loved and watched by all races in America and the ratings proves it. Had the networks thought like you, they'd be stuck still trying to figure out how to shake things up.
Also, it is no coincidence that you have shows like Blackish, HTGAWM, and Empire and others being greenlit at the same time the head of Drama Programming at ABC, NBC and FOX currently are black. Without that diversity, these shows wouldn't see the light of day, possibly.
And FOX wouldn't have been able to BREAK all these amazing TV records with an All-Black cast (which traditionally is not what they produce)
I think you are confused. All of the examples I shared are of affluent areas. Note I said affluent Hispanic, American, Asian areas for all examples.
The difference and the POINT is that the money ALONE does not drive decisions. They also consider the racial and ethnic make up of the area.
Maybe you need to re-read it again when you calm down.
Quote:
You’d just be safer, happier, more likely to spend, and trust your surroundings more.
First, you are responding to me mentioning that the knee-jerk response of you and others who oppose diversity are quite over simplified and based on archaic notions about people.
Your thinking would have Starbucks not earning as much as it does in the 100 stores they built in urban neighborhoods AFTER Magic Johnson (a black man) had to show them to step out of their comfort zones and that they would succeed in those markets.
Your type of thinking would have ABC still flailing rather than taking the risk with a black female lead and realizing all the success it had with Scandal.
Your type of thinking would have FOX not put an all-black cast on TV and miss out on all the records it broke.
But since you bring up comfort anyway, you then prove why it is indeed wrong for companies like Apple to redline and not open stores in wealthy black areas. They have the money, they may feel safer, happier and more likely to spend if they trust their surroundings and would burn less gas traveling to the white areas.
Also, I hope you are not insinuating that people would not feel safe if they have to shop in a neighborhood that is not all white? Because if you are....
Apple should be hiring the best person for the job period. Skin color, race and sexual orientation shouldn't matter. I hate when people trot out the "Steve wouldn't have" line but in this case I'm 100% certain he never would have released diversity statistics.
A lot of discrimination is unconscious. And it happens in ethnically diverse areas. My own experimence with wife and stepchild. Or myself being the great satan white person. Happens all over.
Comments
So all blacks are here unwillingly, and every single Latino is here illegally?
Tim Cook is a white man.
The price point of Apple's products are substantially higher then PC & Android market this why the majority of people on the world own Android products and PCs.
Apple's core and main market is affluent whites. It does not serve those markets and demographic because it falsely believes they will not buy their products and they do not try, and do not care to try. It is wasting opportunities and it shows in their hiring that they do not care for that demo at all.
If I walk into an Apple store, I don't give a crap about what color the salesperson is, I don't give a crap about what sex they are, all I care about is that they are knowledgeable, polite and can quickly assist me with whatever it is that I am there for. I don't want some clueless person who has less than 1/10 the knowledge that I have about Apple and their products, and they're there because of their sex or race for example.
It should be about qualifications and skill 100%, not any BS sex, or any BS race factoring into the picture.
I don't want the ratio to eventually be 50 male/50 female. That shouldn't be the goal, and I hope that it's not. I want it to be whatever it is, based solely on the skills and qualifications. If it were 80/20, I'd be totally fine with that. If it were 99/1, I'd be fine with that too. May the job go to the most qualified.
It wasn't long ago women wanted to be hired for their brain, not their body or whatever. Quotas pass over more qualified individuals along the way if filling the quota is the main reason to hire someone.
That in of -itself is an example of white and Asian benefitting on their race and gender outside of qualifications.
You all assume a minority will be less qualified by brining up qualifications. You are incapable of believing, it seems, that superficial factors that have Nothing to do with qualifications also go into hiring decisions in almost-all white companies.
If the point is to get the benefit of the value of those who don't fit in the current monolithic looking culture, then they have to change whatever they determined previously is the best so it is only inclusive of people they are already comfortable working with...you see there is thing called "disruption" that innovative brands and companies strive to achieve.
It is the opposite of pattern-matching Which is "go with what you know" and be like everyone else.
Yup and Apple owns no stores in predominantly black or Hispanic neighborhoods.
The price point of Apple's products are substantially higher then PC & Android market this why the majority of people on the world own Android products and PCs.
Apple's core and main market is affluent whites
Apple locates stores where the money is, not where the 'skin color' is.
Realize that the African American buying power was $1.1 Trillion dollars last year.
(http://www.blackenterprise.com/small-business/african-american-buying-power-projected-trillions/).
Yet, Apple is perfectly find conceding that market and those communities to Google, Microsoft and the Android market. I'm certain its shareholders and perfectly fine with relinquishing profits.
African Americans own mobile devices at a disproportionate rate to their population in the U.S. PEW research states that 92% own smartphones
(http://www.pewinternet.org/2014/01/06/african-americans-and-technology-use/)
And there you have the problem with an all White staff. They presume that the minority market has no money and aren't worth building or marketing to.
Magic Johnson partnered up with Starbucks in 1998 in a joint venture to take it to communities where minorities live and by the end of the 12-year venture, Starbucks saw its revenues rise and those stores strive and it eventually opened up 100 more and continue today. When Johnson divested, he earned 60% of his investment.
Now had Starbucks stuck with the mentality like you have and assume that communities of color are not worth building their stores in, its shareholders would have been less all of the dividends they were able to reap over the course of those 12-years.
Again, your comment exemplifies the limited thinking of an All white staff, one that refuses to open its mind and consider the possibilities beyond presumptions and stereotypes.
'
And also, I think you need reminding that the majority of the people in the world are people of Color and most of those millions of consumers are have Android phones.
Apple locates stores where the money is, not where the 'skin color' is.
When I signed up my kids for Apple's Free Summer Camp for Kids and I typed in my state, Maryland, the only locations to populate were in the majority white county, Montgomery. The county with the richest and most affluent African Americans in the entire United States, which includes many that live in homes valued at a half a million dollars or more has ZERO Apple Stores.
So they must leave their expensive homes, hop in their expensive BMWs and take their equally valuable dollars across the Beltway and drive 40 minutes to an hour to shop in another county that has the store.
An equally affluent White co-worker, who also drives a BMW, needs only take a short trip and a few blocks to shop, or in the case of the camp to drop off their kids.
The Affluent black family will have to expend more gas costs to get their kids to camp. See where I am going with this....????
Tim Cook is a white man.
Yup. This is true, yet, he has managed to leave millions of dollars on the table by ignoring certain demos and not hiring a diverse staff of people who are cognizant of the needs of the communities from which they come and can bring forth innovative and industry disruptive ideas.
Notice the impending failure of the iWatch eh? Notice the scramble to stay on top and the struggle to compete with companies shaking the big Apple tree from the bottom. Earnings are flat and increasing at an incremental pace.
Tim Cook cannot and has not innovated for the world and will not get out from under Steve Jobs' shadow until he introduces something different and new. He needs to inject ideas from all different types of thinkers and problem solvers.
Or he can continue to use the same old monochromatic labor force to produce the same ideas that target the same market: tech gadget loving affluent whites. ... and continue to be flat and have flat earnings.
There are more people in the world that would buy Apple products if the company came up with more innovative offerings and products that solved their unique problems.
Get some fresh ideas in there. I know its painful to hear that, but it is true and Apple recognizes it and thus why it is moving to do just that!
Apple locates stores where the money is, not where the 'skin color' is.
So does any store of any companies.
So does any store of any companies.
That is quite naive of you to assume companies do not also take into account the ethnicity of the neighborhood. It is untrue that it is all about where the money is.
A halal and kosher foods grocery market may not open up in an affluent predominantly Hispanic Catholic community in Arizona but it would go to an area with a large ethnic Jewish population.
An African Hair Braiding salon would more likely go where there are more blacks who wear their hair in that style is. They wouldn't go to an Asian neighborhood just because the people there have money.
A Soul Vegan Food restaurant may not make it in a predominantly white rural meat and potatoes town where the median household income was high. .
Business owners do not make a decision of where to locate based on the affluence of region alone.
Racial and ethnic make up of the residents in the community or market is INDEED among several factors considered.
All of these oversimplified responses to why there is no need for diversity are based on a 1950s version of the world.
We are more complex and multi-dimensional but you wouldn't know that if everyone around you is the same and think just like you.
I’m 100% certain that this is nonsense.
Tim Cook cannot and has not innovated for the world and will not get out from under Steve Jobs' shadow until he introduces something different and new.
Been in a coma for the last three years?
So you’re fully blind and… whatever the antithesis of the comprehension of numbers is.
Apple doesn’t do that. Go buy from someone else.
First they’re not, then they are. Make up your mind when you’re trolling.
Nah, you’d be the one assuming that less-qualified are hired by whining about the “lack” of diversity.
You have to ask yourself when and why that would be the point, though.
Diversity ? disruption.
Because that’s where the money is.
Because that’s where the money is.
Because that’s where the money is.
We are more complex and multi-dimensional but you wouldn't know that if everyone around you is the same and think just like you.
You’d just be safer, happier, more likely to spend, and trust your surroundings more.
I’m 100% certain that this is nonsense.
Great well reasoned, fully researched and stats documented reply to something you disagree with and do not want to read. Bravo.
Nope. Have you?
http://www.thestreet.com/story/12640762/1/an-iwatch-failure-could-get-tim-cook-fired-at-apple.html
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/feb/27/apple-tim-cook-angry-investors-dont-like-it-either
http://www.forbes.com/sites/connieguglielmo/2013/10/28/apple-earnings-top-estimates-forecast-misses-shares-fall-live/
http://blogs.ft.com/tech-blog/liveblogs/2014-07-22-2/
"Shares of Apple fell nearly 6 percent after the results were first revealed Monday afternoon. Market expectations called for Apple to post $58 billion in revenues on sales of around 56.5 million iPhones and 24.5 million iPads."
http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/01/27/apple-reports-131b-in-q1-2014-profit-on-record-sales-of-51m-iphones-26m-ipads
Another well-researched and fact-based response. I offer this:
https://gigaom.com/2014/02/20/npd-confirms-it-apples-iphone-is-the-affluent-consumers-device-in-the-us/
http://www.businessinsider.com/android-is-for-poor-people-maps-2014-4
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jul/25/business/la-fi-tn-apple-brand-wealthy-investors-20120724
Are you fully blind?
Reading is fundamental. This article does say Apple has recognized that it has not been very diverse but that it wants to be. That's what I am referencing; its awareness that a diverse workplace is better. You differ and do not agree, so be it,but alas you are not running Apple, are you?
And if trolling is hopping in on a medium to explain my perspective and point of view, offering stats, facts, research, articles to back up my position, then I'll be that.
Also, your emotional, knee-jerk, name-calling response makes me feel happy as a "troll" as you call me that I have elicited so much anger over my writing that you felt compelled to come put me in my place with your huffery.
On that, I already shared the Michael Johnson Starbucks example, but here is another example from another sector: TV Broadcast
Traditionally, the American TV industry does not greenlight shows with all or mainly black casts, neither do they hire black, Hispanic, Asian or women producers much. They also did not think whites would watch a show with an African American lead, partially based on historic records, but also on low expectations they had of white audiences.
However, ABC has learned after the Black Woman produced show Scandal had them beating all these records. Not only did the show bring in Black women from Twitter helping promo the show among their friends and social media following, but it became a hit with all audiences and the ratings proved it. Industry leaders revealed that the network wanted to cast a white woman in the lead, in keeping with tradition, but it feared the backlash it would receive given that character is based on the real life of a Black woman. Good it took that risk, huh?
Shonda, who also produces Grey's Anatomy, executive produces How to Get Away With Murder which has a black female lead as well after ABC learned it doesn't have to be scared or relegated to the past and its fear. That show is also ratings gold.
Here is an example where Diversity does equal disruption as the network went from flailing in the ratings to dominating on Thursday nights.
ABC's BlackIsh is loved and watched by all races in America and the ratings proves it. Had the networks thought like you, they'd be stuck still trying to figure out how to shake things up.
Also, it is no coincidence that you have shows like Blackish, HTGAWM, and Empire and others being greenlit at the same time the head of Drama Programming at ABC, NBC and FOX currently are black. Without that diversity, these shows wouldn't see the light of day, possibly.
And FOX wouldn't have been able to BREAK all these amazing TV records with an All-Black cast (which traditionally is not what they produce)
http://www.ew.com/article/2015/02/06/foxs-empire-breaks-23-year-record
http://www.cinemablend.com/television/Empire-Just-Won-t-Stop-Breaking-Ratings-Records-70150.html
http://variety.com/2015/tv/news/empire-cast-twitter-finale-terrence-howard-1201459341/
That is Disruption, my friend.
I think you are confused. All of the examples I shared are of affluent areas. Note I said affluent Hispanic, American, Asian areas for all examples.
The difference and the POINT is that the money ALONE does not drive decisions. They also consider the racial and ethnic make up of the area.
Maybe you need to re-read it again when you calm down.
First, you are responding to me mentioning that the knee-jerk response of you and others who oppose diversity are quite over simplified and based on archaic notions about people.
Your thinking would have Starbucks not earning as much as it does in the 100 stores they built in urban neighborhoods AFTER Magic Johnson (a black man) had to show them to step out of their comfort zones and that they would succeed in those markets.
Your type of thinking would have ABC still flailing rather than taking the risk with a black female lead and realizing all the success it had with Scandal.
Your type of thinking would have FOX not put an all-black cast on TV and miss out on all the records it broke.
But since you bring up comfort anyway, you then prove why it is indeed wrong for companies like Apple to redline and not open stores in wealthy black areas. They have the money, they may feel safer, happier and more likely to spend if they trust their surroundings and would burn less gas traveling to the white areas.
Also, I hope you are not insinuating that people would not feel safe if they have to shop in a neighborhood that is not all white? Because if you are....
Apple should be hiring the best person for the job period. Skin color, race and sexual orientation shouldn't matter. I hate when people trot out the "Steve wouldn't have" line but in this case I'm 100% certain he never would have released diversity statistics.
http://www.urbanfaith.com/2011/10/steve-jobs-passion-for-diversity.html/