jSnively

It is amazing how many times we have to re-run this article in response to some new thing that pops up, lol 

bsd228 said:

What's the point of a non exclusive license?   Asus didn't need permission to make small computers, just to use the NUC name, and if others can have it too, what's the value?

They did it all for the NUC-y. I will see myself out.

chasm said:

This sounds very cool, but threatens trolls — who generally prefer to ply their worthless trade in darkness.

My Hue lights have power even if they're not illuminated 🙂

22july2013 said:

Is her responsibility for "racial equity" and "climate" only in the USA, or also in the other countries that Apple does business with? Does her responsibility include putting pressure on China, where her company does business, to stop committing genocide? In most matters I'm a big supporter of Apple, but on this point I am not. I have no idea how Lisa can go to sleep at night knowing that she's working hard to stop racial inequity in America but not lifting a finger to stop the genocide that's occurring where her company does most of its manufacturing. If Samsung or Google had an anti-genocide policy I could see myself switching to their products.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uyghur_genocide 

Who says they're not doing anything? 

https://appleinsider.com/articles/23/04/13/apple-is-in-talks-to-make-macbooks-in-thailand
https://appleinsider.com/articles/23/04/13/apple-has-moved-7-of-all-iphone-production-to-india-well-ahead-of-schedule
https://appleinsider.com/articles/22/12/03/apple-tells-suppliers-to-plan-for-shift-of-manufacturing-out-of-china
https://appleinsider.com/articles/22/09/30/apple-will-take-a-decade-to-move-just-some-production-out-of-china
https://appleinsider.com/articles/22/05/21/apple-talks-to-suppliers-to-increase-manufacturing-efforts-outside-of-china

jdw said:

Stabitha_Christie said:

On the contrary, I haven't complained about you at all. I have poked fun of your lack of self-awareness.

Not "at all"???
"On the contrary" indicates you disagree with me.  So let's ponder what you wrote earlier in response to me...

[...]

We run negative stories about Apple all the time, whether that be bad keyboards, overheating laptops, workers rights, etc. We are not a PR arm of Apple. The main focus of our job here is to report accurate and up-to-date information on the largest company in the world. When we veer off that focus slightly, it's because the content is Apple adjacent and it affects our user base. We are also (as far as I know) the only Apple focused publication willing to stamp rumors with a score to help keep people informed. We like talking about crazy Apple rumors too, but the context of "this is real fun to talk about" vs "hey, this is probably real" is important. 

We wrote that article, in large part, to capture search traffic because it surfaced as something people are looking for... a lot. As Mike said earlier, it has been on our list for a while. The Twitter saga itself has been ongoing for a while now. I do not see that as us pushing an agenda so much as responding to an existing demand. I understand you take issue with the tone of the piece, but I guess the question I have for you would be what you think our responsibility is to Twitter? Should we be sanitizing our content for an external company? That kinda spits in the face of a lot of journalistic ethics. Personally, I would rather run with the author's original intent and text intact than tell them to "clean it up" so as not to upset some people. Will we always get that balance right? no, we're human after all. If we whiffed on this one, we will take the lumps.

All that said, I do not see anything that is factually incorrect inside this article. If you think there is something please let us know and we will address it.