knowitall

Rayz2016 said

Yes, but it takes an accountant to know if it’s legal or not. Which you’re not, so you don’t. 

Also reading the balance statement doesn’t tell you if what they’re doing is ethical or not. If they have said that billions is not taxable then that sounds a lot like a deferral for future investment. Or did you think that data centers, retail stores (new and recently robbed), car test beds, specialist manufacturing equipment, write-offs from sapphire production … all comes from the Apple fairy?

And as I said, I don’t have a problem with legal tax avoidance, because I don’t pay a penny more tax than I’m legally required to. 

I wouldn’t put too much faith in what an accountant (or an other ‘specialist’) knows especially when ethics are in play.
I also wouldn’t play down knowledge of someone who isn’t an official specialist.
In this case a complaint I read is that the EU changed the rules effectively not allowing unfair competition no matter what the specific rules are. Very expensive legal specialists are hired to find loopholes in the law to reduce taxes for the companies they work for. Anything not explicitly forbidden is ethical in their view.
Normal people and small(er) companies cannot afford this kind of service and that makes this kind of ‘tax avoidance’ unfair by definition. Also, because governments needs are a constant, other taxes will be even higher, which makes it completely amoral.

maltz said:

Roxy Balboa said:

"Open Source" is code for "Hackable"

Oh please. The vast majority of the world's websites use open source software for web services and SSL encryption, including Apple themselves. The underpinnings of macOS itself consist of an open-source fork of FreeBSD called Darwin.

Your right, except Darwin isn't a fork of FreeBSD similar to humans not being a fork of chimpanzees: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Unix_timeline.en.svg .