Is that an arbitrary figure, or do you have some reasoning behind it?
I'm fairly certain you understand the gist of what he's saying.
I don’t. Is he saying that because the market value of a company is high means that “something” should be done about it? Huh? So, today, Apple is valued at over 1T. But if the stock tanks tomorrow and the value drops down to under 900B then everything is fine, I guess, even if there’s been no drastic change to Apple as a business.
I don’t see how that makes any sense.
Large multi-trillion market with access to and financial success in it controlled in large part by three companies: Apple, Microsoft, Google. Without their blessing life will be tough for a new entrant. There is truth to the old saying "in money there is power".
It concerns me a bit too, and it should yours IMO.
That easily ranks among your most irrational statements. A “concern” based on nothing.
Another highly political story, but Comments aren't banned.
And yet, we see the "Apple CEO Tim Cook calls on Senate to pass immigration act" story has all Comments banned.
I fail to see the logic. Is one story but 50% political, another 75%, and stories under which Comments are forbidden 99% political? Or is it simply a matter of internal AppleInsider politics?
It's usually pretty obvious which topics are likely to result in arguments....
I'm afraid it is not so obvious to me. I doubt I am alone. At best, it's an educated guess.
Freedom of speech is risky and sometimes contentious but worth it in the end. The upside is that the AppleInsider FaceBook links to articles allow freedom to reign in the comments section.
Comments
Freedom of speech is risky and sometimes contentious but worth it in the end. The upside is that the AppleInsider FaceBook links to articles allow freedom to reign in the comments section.