Shared publicly  - 
Boycott Apple
Beyond the simple kneejerk reaction of the #BoycottApple  trend in response to the banning of the Galaxy Nexus, there are seven eight nine good reasons why Apple should be on the receiving end of some hard questions:

1. Control-freakery - it all started with Steve Jobs and his internal culture of fear. It continues, to a lesser extent, today.
2. Dubious production methods. From virtual slave labor conditions to a totally unempathic approach to doing business abroad. Apple's changing the world in terms of style but not substance.
3. Overpriced. It is no accident that the company is so profitable. Their profit-margin is the sort which any business would die for.
4. Anti-competitive. They lock consumers into their ecosystem and developers out of it. They make it hard for you to port your data. Once the Apple shackles go on, boy they ain't coming off.
5. Data hogs. They take your data, lock it into their verticals and never allow you to even see what they do with it.
6. Haters. Their approach to banning products until patent issues have been resolved has never endeared them to me. Particularly since Steve Jobs himself said that Apple was one of the greatest thieves of ideas.
7. Anti-social. They truly fail to 'get' social both as an enterprise and as a community. They think generating a wave of bad will against them is OK as long as they still make money. 
8. No conscience. At a time when most companies work hard to integrate themselves in their communities and develop a social conscience, Apple remains conscience-free. h/t +Kershaw Rustomji 
9. Environmentally unfriendly. Apple has repeatedly come under fire for its environmentally unfriendly production methods. I admit that here I do not know how they stack up against the competition but Google at least has become a trailblazer in its Green Data Canters. h/t +Chuck Fresh 
Ian Shei's profile photoDavid Amerland's profile photoErik Huntoon's profile photoZephyr López Cervilla's profile photo
I thought it was the Galaxy Nexus that was temporarily banned?
+David Amerland I would probably add that with all those millions I have never once heard of one single philanthropic act done by Apple ...if a company cannot spend a dollar on making mankind better ...then its products should be banned too...I have never used a Apple product and do not need one ...even Kids need to add a credit card number to iTiunes to download FREE programs ...
Judge Keo banned the US sales of the Nexus this week... 
Last week the same judge banned the US sales of the Galaxy 10.1 Tablet
I wonder if the Judge is a "fanboi" and uses Apple products
+Scott Davies Yes you are right. I will change it. I was researching the SIII and the association crept into my mind when I was typing. Thank you for spotting it! 
being an apple fan boy, i agreed to every point you mention.
+chetan bhagat Respect for honesty. It takes even more intellectual courage to admit that than most people appreciate. 
All of this together with the fact the Apple's total value is greater than the GDP of some countries is worrisome 
+David Amerland, I hope you've finished recording your video because, once my brother, +Arthur LeCuyer, gets wind of this, he'll singe your eyebrows off.

As I've said before, Apple's pursuit of legal injunctions to prohibit competitors from selling their products harms Apple far more than Samsung or Google. As the single most profitable corporation in the world, Apple no longer has the luxury nor the right to try to block competition by any means necessary.

Tim Cook has one of the toughest jobs in the world, namely, to disentangle those elements of Apple that reflect Steve Jobs's genius from those elements which perpetuate his narcissistic psychopathy. Is Apple's legendary secrecy inspired by genius or the callous disregard of other people? It's a bit of both, I suspect, but this much I'm fairly comfortable to assert: secrecy has been a crucial ingredient in Apple's success thus far. Whether it will remain so in the future, or whether it will sour, remains to be seen.

I can understand this impulse to urge a boycott of Apple. Indeed, Apple's ill-advised legal strategy makes me less inclined to buy more kit from them — and I've been a loyal Apple enthusiast since 1983 — but I haven't ruled them out as a company largely because of some critical, if tentative, first steps taken by Cook. His very first initiative as CEO in the weeks after Jobs died was to inaugurate the first matching grant program for employee donations to charity in the history of the company. It's a tiny step, one without risk, and one which may be dismissed as cosmetic rather than sincere, but I took it as telling. A new regime is in place, and the singular preoccupation with me, me, me is coming to an end.

As the New York Times has broke each successive element of its story about Apple manufacturing, finance and pay for its staff, Cook and Apple have responded swiftly. The question is, can they do the same thing proactively when not provoked under the glare of publicity? Can they invent their most insanely great product yet: a socially responsible company.

As your eight points indicate, Apple has a long, long way to go. This knee-jerk cry for a boycott can only spur them to become a more engaged citizen of the world or retrench further into isolation and inevitable decline. I haven't given up on Apple. The real question is, have they given up on themselves?
No. 4 is especially TRUE
+kalender shihab Thank you for making this very important point. That's not really true though. Android phones and tablets are almost as expensive, though never quite so expensive. Each of the points made here is actually based on facts and figures. So the question is not one of envy of a company whose products are out of reach, as one of outrage at a company whose practices are out of synch with the expectations of the online community. 
Same problem as with Oracle. They will continue as is as long as people buy it... No matter how badly Apple behave, their kit and operating systems are very good. Pair that with good design and sprinkle marketing fairydust on top and it sells...
+Peter Haban It's the marketing fairy dust that has made the difference. Apple is doing the same thing it always did except for the marketing!!
"2. Dubious production methods. From virtual slave labor conditions to a totally unempathic approach to doing business abroad. Apple's changing the world in terms of style but not substance."
They use Foxxconn. The same company as Microsoft, Nintendo, HP and Sony. If you are are going to complain about them for it you must include the others..
3. Overpriced. It is no accident that the company is so profitable. Their profit-margin is the sort which any business would die for.
The iPhone and iPad are same price as Android phones and Tablets of the same specs.,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.r_qf.,cf.osb&biw=1286&bih=754&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=shop&cid=5367084545909152653&sa=X&ei=_DbwT7KBBZSc8QSmlYW3DQ&ved=0CIkBEPMCMAA
is $555 more or less the same as the iPhone. 
BTW I do not own an iPhone or iPad. I have a first gen iPod Touch. I own a Kindle fire and Galaxy Nexus and have a Nexus 7 on order so I am no mindless Apple fanboi. Thing is that this post pretty much is nothing but name calling and extremely silly. It will generate some rage but overall accomplish nothing of real value. SImple don't boycott just change your values when making a purchase.
+Mark Lim , you said my bashing of Apple is illogical.  Would this list be something of logic to you? :)
+David Amerland you might want to add that in order to write a app for the ithingys you have to have a apple system.
the sdk last time i looked only works on os x systems aka apple computers.
Pathetic whiners. Such sad sour grapes. 
If you choose to own a cell phone/tablet/just about any electronic device anymore, it's most likely made by a giant corporation who's only concern is money. They all charge as much as they can possibly for it, they are all made in sweatshops, they all use shady tactics to get a leg up on the competition. It doesn't matter if it's apple or google or whoever.
+David Siebert Excellent points and if I may: on your answer to point 2. Yes, it's true Foxxconn is also used by Mircosoft but it is at the Apple factory that there were suicides (to which the initial reply was to install safety nest around the factory to catch falling bodies). Point 3: according to iSupply, the material cost for the 32gb iPad 2 WiFi + 3g - which sells for $729 - is about $325, or $335 including labor, which puts Apple's gross margin (ex shipping/handling) at 54%.Please note that the iPad has the smallest profit margin of any Apple product. 

By changing our values when we make a purchase we effectively boycott one or the other manufacturer. As consumers the only power we have is our wallets.
Don't say you weren't warned - think different - think apple - this ad is now starting to look rather dictatorship (?!) now replaced with Applespeak...I boycotted Apple in the mid-nineties and got over the designer fetishism that drives this companies ethics...never looked back...
1984 Apple's Macintosh Commercial
Totally agree with you +Leland LeCuyer. And speaking of blocking competition, how is it Microsoft got hauled over the coals for shipping IE with Windows, but Apple forcing everyone to use Safari web kit on iOS is uncontested?
Don't get me wrong, I love Apple's products. I'm writing this on an iPhone with +Guy Kawasaki's ebook on my iPad sitting in my lap, but something has to be done about this company that may operate like a startup, but is getting away with more than its fair share. 
Currently using my last iPhone. Next one will be android. 
While I completely agree with some of your points, some of them are not valid reasons to complain (or at least not reasons specific to Apple)
2. Dubious Production Methods: I'm pretty sure everyone else is doing the same, maybe even worse. We know about problems with Apple production methods only because Apple is a easy, visible target. I'd be really, really suprised (e.g.) if Samsung's factories were significantly better and I expect them to be worse.
3. Overpriced: Well... as long as we pay that, they'd be stupid to not charge that. So this one goes half to apple, half to us.
4. Anti-competetive: This is partially true, however, bear in mind that the closeness of the iOS system has some benefits for end users too. For example, the complete control over hardware and OS makes the system more stable and easier use. Also, compare number of malware on iOS and Android: the main reason here is the tight control Apple has over app submission to the App Store.
8. Conscience: not quite sure what that means, esp. compared to Samsung, LG.

Unfortunately, the remaining points are correct and especially number six  makes me, a long time Apple fan, very sad 8(
Example, look at Google, look at Samsung. Both trying to beat Apple at its own game after Apple beat Microsoft. I remember similar posts about Microsoft when they were the dominant force in the tech world.
Apple are proving to be good at what they do. If it was that bad other companies wouldn't be copying their model. Numerous company's such as Microsoft use Foxcom but Apple get the headlines for slave labour etc.
Yes ALL company's could do more to make the world a better place but at the end of the day they are in the business of making innovative products to make money.
The bans and lawsuits are silly but they are all as bad as each other. However, you can't deny that Apple launched the iPad and most of the competitors look very similar. IOS and Android are they really that different apart from slight tweaks to avoid lawsuits etc or to add a capability and claim to be better than the other?
Am I an Apple "Fanboy"? maybe. To be honest I don't care what I am labelled as, I love Apple products and the company have consistently treated me well as one of their customers, however, I also love Samsung and HTC products.
Let's just enjoy the products that come from all this competition and innovation without unrealistic expectations or turning it into battles of good vs evil because realistically all of the companies want the same thing, at the end of the day they are businesses with no obligation other than to be successful and make more money, they are not charities that we donate money to.

+Dan Hall Excellent contribution to the conversation. This is not so much intended to stop Apple from being in the market. We just want to humanise them a little.
I don't see why apple is suing over the siri patent. It was natural that the advances in technology would allow us to use our voices to search and control our phones.

Lets not forget that it was Google who introduced voice search on Android, but we don't see them suing Apple.
You know what I find funny about this post? There are cars that are way overpriced but people who own them are looked up to as though they have a higher status. Not only that, but some car makers make it so there are no aftermarket parts available for their vehicles. This is considered smart business. But because essentially Apple is doing those same things, they are ridiculed. Doesn't make sense to me...
James M. Saylor Two wrongs don't make a right...
Methinks you may have missed one very critical point:

9. Apple is not environmentally friendly. Their products are largely and purposefully not upgradable and not serviceable, adding to an already toxic and overflowing landfill.
I think Apple products are good products, but their "banning" of other products over petty patent issues and thus limiting our choices is reason enough for me to never even consider their products - ever.
+James M. Saylor It's not exactly the same thing but your example is a good one so let's look at it in terms of Apple. Although BMW and Mercedes have BMW-approved spare parts and Mercedes-approved spare parts (which costs a fortune) you could also choose to pay less and use a generic  spare part (it is your choice and responsibility as a consumer) and pay less. Apple does not give you that option. Everything from hardware to software is rigidly controlled by them. So, to go to your cars analogy - you buy an Apple car only Apple can service it, put car seats in it, place Apple mats in it and even give you an Apple-approved cup holder and ashtray. Given the fact that you cannot even get generic batteries, I'd say that petrol you put in your Apple car is Apple-petrol. That does not really make sense in terms of offering customer service and flexibility though it serves the company's profits well enough. 
No but it's certainly ok for the public to boycott one and ignore the other. We pick and choose what virtues we want, when they are suitable for use. Seems like the public is the one who has the bigger problem. Wouldn't you agree?
+Chuck Fresh Crucial! I am not sure how they compare to most of the other manufacturers but Google at least has led the way with Green Data Centers. Thank you for making the point.
+Wilfrid Wong Not every whining out there on the Internet should be taken as a valid reason to bash Apple, nor any company or person for that matter. Every one has a right to form his own opinions, but a lot of this noise generated contains an agenda of its own.
So basically, because Apple is pretty much the one company that constantly revolutionizes this particular market with every product they release, they are on your hit list.

Examples like "Haters" "overpriced" and "control freakery" aren't even good examples regardless of any point you were trying to make.

Hey, its not overpriced if their products are selling.
Apple is a company of geniuses. First to integrate touch tech, first to come out with a tablet type of a device..... That works, (iPad) and if we go way back, Steve jobs inspired Gates to steal his idea which made Gates rich. Why hammer on Apple?
I agree with Luke .... I mean android is still trying to get over issue of touch with every new release (butter) .... Because they blindly followed apple ... And this is just one example .... 
+Kershaw Rustomji Then you didn't look very far.

The other points have variations on FUD or misrepresentation.

1. While there is control freakery, that could also be called "perfectionism", and when that synonym is bandied about, it doesn't sound so negative, right?
2. I take it you missed all the reviews over Foxconn, then, or the environmental ratings for their products. Of course, only Apple uses Foxconn, right? And it sure wasn't Microsoft's factory that had suicide threats, hmm?

3. Really? So why are the equivalent phones, tablets and notebooks unable to significantly undercut Apple with the same specs? The highest range Android phones are typically no different in price to the iPhone. The iPad has yet to really have any dent in sales by the cheaper Android tablets, and ultrabooks that deliver the same experience as an Air are no cheaper and, in some cases, can be more expensive.
4. So then don't use them. They still have a more than happy user base and developer base. For other issues about competition, such as iOS forcing the use of Safari as default web browser, this is all within the terms of the system you buy into and is not analogous to the practices Microsoft was done for in the '90s
5. Google or Facebook sure never do that.
6. The Samsung debacle is within reason, but I can agree that all these patent disputes now are evidence of a broken system that is being exploited by Apple, Motorola, Microsoft and various other tech firms for their own self-interest.
7. This is debatable. The numbers of users and their growth tend to indicate otherwise. 
8. Already debunked. But if you think corporations have to have a conscience to be used, I sure hope you didn't type this on a Dell powered by Microsoft software and using energy from ExxonMobil. That might be construed as hypocritical

These are all basic pointers, as I don't have the time (nor do I really care) to go into an essay with multiple citations when I can see the majority of the boycottapple trend group are basically nerd raging fanboys from another large, questionably moral corporation. Basically, "My brand is better than yours because I use it" or some such.

Next up: why the car I drive is better/why the religion I follow is better/why I judge you on what printer you use.
+David Amerland The cost of raw materials or even parts has little to do with the actual cost of manufacture. If you took the cost of parts for just about anything you will see the same profit margins unless it is a loss leader product. If a large profit margin is reason to boycott then every video game maker on the planet should be much higher on your list. Cost of a dvd 50 cents cost of a game 50 dollars is a 10,000% margin. Much higher than apples.
As to the sucides happening at the factory where the Apple products are made. Well is that just because that is the time we heard about them? Do you really think that HP, Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo are more responsible in their out sourcing? Even the walled garden and lock in points hold for Windows Phone and will hold for Windows RT when they ship. Google is a little more open but we have locked boot loaders from some of the vendors to deal with. I still vote for silly shows of outrage with not real change. Sure it will make everyone feel all I did something because I got mad online but it is pretty useless and frankly hypocritical to lump in the other complaints which other large companies are just as if not more guilty of.
The real solution is to ban software patents like the EU has. Apple has the patients so they are in their legal rights. If anyone is to blame for this mess it is the idiot judge. I am guessing that Apple was as shocked as anyone when the injunction was granted. 
I have to agree. I bought stereo/phone Bluetooth headphones for a friend to use with his iPhone, but he couldn't use them in phone mode because Apple disabled it.

I bought an iPad for my father-in-law because he lives with family members who have iPads and could teach him - and was astonished that I couldn't copy photos and music files onto it the way I can with my Galaxy Tab, you have to submit to an Apple-sanctioned file transfer method. And my wife informed me that she couldn't use her iTunes library to transfer music to it either, because it needed a new iTunes identity, or something like that.

We need a stiff antitrust penalty against them for this control freakishness. But I don't expect it to come anytime soon ...
It's business... Samsung or Apple, consumers lose...
Google is not only evil, but even a multinational monopoly. Think about it.
+Bert Rubaszkin You're gonna love this post... Especially the comments! Success is bad! I remember jazz musicians in Sweden griping over ABBA's phenomenal success, calling it "commercial crap music"... I guess, when these guys make a recording, they want no one to buy it...
+William Poi No! You must find your kind of rampant consumerism more moral than my kind! Geez, you're not very good at this outrage and holier-than-thou thing.
That is true to some extent. VW makes some of their parts only available if you buy them directly from them. Now that being said, Apple computers don't have half the problems PC's do when it comes to viruses and things of that nature. Why? Because they don't let just anyway make programs for their computers. Now I don't know everything, nor do I claim to, but I've had droids, windows phones, and now the iPhone and I will never go back. And any time I've had a problem, I go to an Apple store and they fix it. I don't agree with everything they do, but as far as business goes they have always been fair and treated me well. Frankly I don't care what they do otherwise, I judge them based on how they treat me.
Samsung is even worse with regards to labour conditions 
"constantly revolutionize" ????  Only once and the rest is the marketing.  

Apple/SJobs made techology sexy for the non-techy and that is it.  I mean he was a genius at marketing not tecnology.

SO please!!!!

BTW: I'm not a M$ lover either... just plain facts.
Google store your searches (for you!), you driving (for you!), your emails (for you!), you social interaction (for you!) and you keep don't understand the trouble, and keep call Apple "control freak". Android have THE SAME control freak things that have iOS. The same. 
Cars are meant to last for years. Computers are outdated after a few months. If that's not enough difference, you can replace car parts for a price relative to the labor. An excellent example are some of Apples recent laptops... A battery glued in to the back, seriously? They charge $300 to replace it. As for all the companies being equally bad.. I don't see Apples products being banned. :) If you think Apple had the first rectangular touch screen and portable OS you're too young, or you're outdated and naive. The lawsuits have to stop, all other points aside. Nobody wants Apple out of business, most of us merely want the products from the manufacturers we enjoy. In fact, Apple is currently suing Samsung over a slide to lock switch on a tablet.. Seriously? I have a tape player with one of those from 20 years ago. Apple had 0 support from me. :)
I agree. I've never bought an Apple product which is a shame because they've been making a large amount of the world's best tech for years. I'm just uncomfortable with some of their business practices, your questions sum up my issues with Apple Inc. very well.

I find the sudden outcry after the Galaxy Nexus banning slightly odd though. This is nothing new from Apple, it's just part of the ongoing aggressive litigious behaviour. Its the the US patent system and the Judge who are are at fault here.
Openness was just a a trick google used to trick the young-ins and they were backed a It was in the interest of the rest of the CORPORATE world ( Samsung lg moto Sony ) when all other attempts had failed .. 
+Russell Brown It has just become a convenient focal point for unrest amongst tech consumers which has been brewing for years. Few, if any companies, become 'good' willingly. They all, usually, have to be led down the path of social responsiveness through consumer outcry. 
Ah yes. Let's put all our eggs in the Google basket instead. They are just a small harmless startup that we should trust all our data and info with. No company out there solely has our best interest in mind. Buy whatever you like people.

All shiny gadgets are manufactured in the same Chinese factories. Actually, Foxconn pays their employees better than most in that area. There's a reason people line up everyday there looking for work.

Apple is far from perfect, but until they start making products that I don't enjoy using, I will continue to buy from them. You'd think they sacrifice puppies and small children at Cupertino from articles like this. 
+Isaiah Solomon Interesting and thank you for posting this here. As it happens I totally missed it (I am a PS3 guy). Should Google succeed this is equally wrong. The patent system is not working the way it was intended when it results in bans like this.  
Another Google Fanboy ranting for attention. This is another idiotic post. No one said anything when apple was about to be banded in Germany for infringing on a patent. 

Someone made a stupid analogy about creating the wheel and stealing the idea. No, there is no patent on creating the circle of the wheel but there is patents on the threading and the type of material that is used. Pirelli has tons of patents on wheel design. 
+TJ Riddle I don't know about you, but my computers last me "years" too (whatever that figure means). I know people who've had the same PC, be it HP, Apple or what have you, for more than five years in some cases. I intend to have this laptop for a fair bit, because contrary to what people seem to be telling me here and which apparently is only bad if Apple do it, you don't need a new computer every other year even unless you really need every percentage point increase in performance or the are an early adopter for new tech not abundant yet.
+Adam Buchen On the point of data tracking I do a lot of research so here I will take issue with you. Google has been transparent in what it tracks and why and has always allowed you to take your data, if you wish, out of its ecosystem entirely. It is the only large web company to date which actually says that you own your data in its Ts & Cs. So using the analogy of a service intended to create personalisation (which incidentally you can opt out of) with Apple's grab-all approach to data is simply wrong.
+Kershaw Rustomji the reason you never heard of any philanthropic act from apple is because Steve jobs banned such activities. He got rid of all apple charities. To be fair cook reinstated some when he took over but nothing compares to the many charities Google has. They seem to really take it seriously and care about giving back
+Isaiah Solomon no. The co pant Google bought 2 weeks ago is trying to get it banned. In fact, they are only doing that in an attempt to protect themselves from Microsoft's onslaught against android OEMs.
Tack Henry,
det är alltid skönt att få en bekräftelse på att man inte är ensam om
en kontroversiell åsikt!
Hoppas allt är bra hos er!
+Nick Pagels I'm referring to technology doubling itself every 8 months. Besides which, hard drives fail all of the time, as do laptop batteries. You can not upgrade your newest Apple laptops, and for someone in the tech world it's a huge deal if you can't replace, upgrade, or even maintain parts for your own computer. My laptops last me about 3 years before I replace them, but I also maintain and upgrade them regularly during that time. To be unable to do this and be charged hundreds of dollars for what would be $50 (maybe) to order, have it shipped, and then replace yourself in seconds is ridiculous. Comparing irreplaceable parts in a computer to irreplaceable parts in a car is a very poor analogy was my main point. My cars last me 10 years, if your computer isn't dead by then and you still use it, you're definitely not using it for any software released within 5 years or so, games included.
I am a huge fan of both Apple and Google their innovations have been crucial in my life as in millions of others.....but all this quipling over patents is just stiffuling....Patents were mean to protect intelectual property not stiful innovation and technology....companies should be working together to make their products work together instead of making efforts to differentiate themselves from one another to the point of in-usability .........licence your stuff, pay your dues or royalties and lets work together for the good of technology and people
I was actually planning on purchasing a nexus next week. (I currently have the iphon). The maps are better, it is faster, I like the implantation of multi tasking, and it plays well with google services(which i use extensively) The look and feel is decidedly different between the two devices.

Apple's anticompetitive tactics have gone too far. I have decided to never purchase another apple product. Thanks for the great post. 
it makes me sad when people seem more concerned with their next "fix" than they do with any of the valid points above. i just hope that samsung will do to the ipod/phone/pad that pc did to mac computers years ago. only thing worse than the religious is product worshippers
+Rich Court is under the same umbrella company, Motorola going after XBOX. A law sue is a law sue...
Typed from My Samsung Galaxy Note
I completely agree with this post. To be fair, I think Apple, from a hardware perspective, builds great products. From a software perspective though, they have failed to really innovate and are now resorting to shady business practices to protect their market share.
+Isaiah Solomon like I said, only since 2 weeks ago - give Google a chance! They've always taken a strong stance against patent litigation - just read back through their company blog. Also, I think you mean law suit for future reference. :-)
I actually don't mind Apple having so much control over their products. I have the choice to buy their products or not to knowing that they openly admit that they control all aspects of their system. This makes my experience as a user of apple products safer from viruses and generally means that I can expect a certain degree of quality from apps and accessories etc. although a few dodgy ones slip through the net. 
+TJ Riddle I'm going to presume you meant to reply to me, even though you got my name wrong.

Technology "doubl[ing] every 8 months"? What? Last I checked, I didn't see the latest Intel Cores double over the 2011 counterparts. RAM is not now at 16 GB average over 8 (even 8 is still not common) and so on.

As for upgrading, the first thing I did with my MacBook last year was upgrade the RAM. Myself. For peanuts. I can also go for an SSD sometime, if I so wish, but frankly the storage limits don't win me over vs. the performed improvements just yet.

Either way, one need not have a computer a decade. Five years is a good run and is still "years" and you'll Apple users upgrade things just like everyone else.

Now, the move to ultrabooks is changing that, but the pursuit of thinness over versatility for future proofing is not Apple exclusive, though Apple did pioneer the concept. 
What everyone seems to be missing in the Xbox suit is that Microsoft is trying to ban Motorola and all phones that use one of their patents and Microsoft rejected an agreement that was presented to them. Both parties have products they are trying to ban for patents.
Microsoft is no better than apple when it comes to destroying competition and they obviously are trying to push people to their phones and soon their tablet
First Slide to unlock:

First Tablet concept:

The point here is that Apple has no right to pursue any company based on how a tablet looks nor if a device has a slide-to-unlock feature. Apple did NOT originate any of these ideas. Apple makes good products, but their lawsuits aren't even legitimate.

As for the Microsoft v Motorola thing. I feel it's perfectly justified after Microsoft strong armed nearly every Android manufacturer into paying licensing fees.
Tired of reading going to make some points.

First of all the galaxy nexus is equal or better then the iphone you can buy it gsm unlocked for less then 300 from google. The nexus 7 is far superior to the ipad you can buy it for 200. The alien ware m11x is an 11 inch netbook it can run circles around the Mac book air only 700 dollars which is still cheaper then an outdated Mac book air.

Apple products are expensive because consumers are stupid.
Most of above point are weak:
1. Whatever. Nobody is forced to work there. You do not like culture of fear, do something else.
2. That is pretty much BS. Companies will always go to wherever they  can get their stuff done cheap. Even stuff made in USA will have most of it's components made in whatever country they come from. People will be exploited as long as they allow themselves to be exploited. As soon as the unemployment drops to the point where employers must compete for employee, work conditions and salaries will increase. 
3. While I find them overpriced, market does not, and market is smarter than me. My personal opinion does not matter at all, and neither does yours. Price is set by the demand.
4. Again, if customer is fine with it, I do not see a problem, and it's non of my business. As for developers, they will do whatever is required to make money.
5. So is Google, FB and everyone else.
6. The patent issue is whatever the law says it is. Apple does not make the law, it functions within it. Blame your politicians. Apple does what apple needs to do, and that is, it is using all available means to position itself ahead of competition. If putting sticks in wheels is legit, they'll do it. Patents, thanks to politicians, are part of doing business. They're not the first, nor last to sue over it. 
7. I think you do not get "social". "Social" is just the way to make you feel better about stuff. It's an umbrella term that describes everything from carbon footprint, tree hugging, equitable coffee to work conditions in china. These companies do not do "social" because they feel something, they do "social" because you feel something. They're still focused on bottom lines, and it just happens so that being "social" helps the bottom line. Apple does the amount of social it needs, and their bottom line proves it. 
8. Similar to point 7. Companies do not have "conscience" because they like to feel warm inside about stuff. They show "conscience" so you feel better about spending your money with them. It's like a fake smile of a stripper. 
9. Whatever. This falls under the same stuff as 7 and 8. What, their carbon footprint is too big? How about not including flash is environmentally friendly, because it's a resource hog, draining  your battery, cpu power etc. ? Wonder if anyone crunched number on Green Data Centers vs No Flash. It's all a marketing ploy to which you seem to respond as designed.

Briefly, companies are profit driven, and everything they do or do not do, are designed to improve bottom lines. Their choices are reflection of population/customers, and they currently tell Apple: You are doing great.
re: "And they currently tell Apple: You are doing great."

So, the only thing that matters is bottom line, +Tomasz Rakowski ?  This is only viable measuring stick?
+Jeff Jockisch Yes, the only feedback loop in business is profit. If you make profits you do a mix of right choices, in your customer's opinion. And that's how it should be. Now, if people demand iPad to be made out of bamboo, and it becomes so important that it's a deal breaker, apple will have to adapt or die. That's free market - 101. You can raise the issue of work conditions in china, or whatever else you wish, and if enough people care about it, Apple will care about it. What people care about it now, is that it is shiny, pretty and "facebook compatible". And that's why Apple stock is where it is.
You need to influence peoples' set of values, in order to influence companies way of doing business. If made in USA is such an important aspect, and most people will be ready to fork extra 200$ for that, then Apple will make "Made in USA" iPad. (the overhead of producing in USA will be 100$, and the other 100$ is profit due for pleasing you ;) ). 
Markets only work perfectly when there is competition and perfect information. Your arguments assume both, while one doesn't exist and Apple assaults the other, +Tomasz Rakowski.
+Josh Teague "Apple products are expensive because consumers are stupid." Close. They continue to be expensive because most consumers, which in general ARE stupid, wrongly think that the more you pay for something the better it is and that's not always true. It's why I don't fall sucker to designer clothes. I worked at Macy's when times were tough and know for a fact that designer clothes has well over a 75% profit margin. It's marked up because someone famous has their name on it and people are stupid enough to pay for it because they figure if someone popular is behind it and it costs a lot it must be good. And of course it's also a status symbol. Its not really any different with Apple products.
Yes +Leland LeCuyer you are right! I'd thought that in +David Amerland's world, thought was a prevailing mode of operation, but alas NO, it's just the same uninformed drivel found all over here regarding Google and Android on G+.

I'll now dissect your various points one by one until all you have left is well...well, nothing.

1) What culture of 'FEAR' +David Amerland, your fear that Apple is right and Google stole major portions of UI/UX design  for Android. Apple controls so that they can optimize the user experience or more precisely the 'Ease of Use'. Something Andriod simply hasn't caught up to yet. Google may have created a great GEEKfest tool, but that's hardly the same.
2) You've been watching that Lard-Arsed Mike Daisy, haven't you. It's simply a lie that Apple uses slave labor. If it's so, well then so is everybody else, so why would you care to single out only THE ONE. The ONE who is providing the only real innovation on the planet, with everyone else being at best fast followers. Let me break it down for you - Mac (generally speaking) iPod, iPhone, MB Air, iPad. retina screens, etc, etc, Hows that for production methods. The same ones that everybody else now uses. Hmmm...I wonder why that is?
3) Overpriced my arse, no one has been able to match the price of the iPad while coming close to the level of features, performance or usability. The same holds true for the iPhone - where any android phone that matches or exceeds - does so on price also. Ditto for the Air, as those ultra books cannot compete either on price or performance.
4) Huh? what's this anti competitiveness, with which you speak? Have they restrained or prevented any competitor from doing business. All the other bullish*t you've mentioned has nothing to do with competition. Now, with regards to those thoughts expressed; they provide the tools to their dev. and cust. which work seamlessly with their products. End of story, unless you think that, Ford should have to allow you to install Chevy engines in their vehicles. Porting Data, well it's called many names, but DRM is it's most famous, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 2000 practically demands it's use to ensure Copyright protection for distributers. Look at how much is baked into Windows 7 and there's even more to come in Windows 8. This is not an Apple problem but rather an industry problem.
5) HaHaHaa...stop it David, you're making my sides hurt from ROTFLMAO. Taking Data is Googles specialty and while you're pointing your finger at Apple there are 3 others pointing directly at Google. Apple has never sold my data nor have they ever attempted to Steal it under the guise of FREE. See here for my thoughts on this problem.

I won't bother to answer the rest now as I believe that I've made my point with actual Fact. I'm very surprised that you +David Amerland, one of my must trusted sources of information would not analyze this further than the simple regurgitation of proven liars such as Mike Daisy or the simple hit pieces that echo around here on G+. I'm sure you've gotten a lot of positive responses - i simply haven't the desire to read the 100+ erroneous comments contained here - but you must realize that this echo chamber, is a place where Google can do no wrong, at least not when it comes to Android. Nor worse APPLE.

I'd never expected you of all people would show such contempt prior to doing a comprehensive and thorough investigation. I say this as a friend...well at least I hope you know that I consider you my friend. As such, I feel duty bound to offset your bias, which you've worn on you sleeve, with my own bias in the attempt to help you see that the B&W that you see is actually 256bit color.

I've said all this, not because I believe in Apples litigation strategy, but because they have every right to pursue this method. Remember, SJ said in 2007 at the iPhone announcement that "Boy we've Patented it". It was explicitly stated then, that they were not going to allow the 1980s and the Microsoft ripoff to happen again.

Whether you disagree, or not,with this ban; Surely you must understand that without Apple those Galaxies wouldn't exist. I had only seen one tablet in the wild prior to the iPad announcement. At that showing, even I along with many of the Apple enthusiast, were disappointed in the use of iOS instead of the Mac. And what was up with that bezel. That ugly black border all around the screen. Well no tablet prior ever had that bezel while very single one since has. Now you might think that this is obvious, but I assure you it was not for those of us, the Apple followers, upon first seeing it, nor for anyone else. Not until you see and use it first hand, then it becomes so obvious as to become ridiculous. But again, it simply isn't/wasn't so prior. So based on that one element alone every other tablet in the world should be banned.

I am in no way advocating an outright ban on any competitive products, but am trying to help you see that without Apple - even if those 9 reasons were accurate (they are not) - we'd never have the sort of technology that we posses today.

I'll close by reiterating something I pointed out to my brother +Leland LeCuyer only last week. Even without SJ, Apple was the most innovative company in the universe. Consider these 3 things and the way they foreshadowed and indeed inspired ALL of that, which was to follow 1) Hypercard 2) Quicktime 3) Newton.

Your friendly Apple Loving Friend, Arthur
+Jeff Jockisch Competition is required, yes. I do not see a competition problem in this market. You have apple products, and then you have all different flavors of android. There is tons of devices out there. No competition issue as far as I'm concerned. Maybe you're going at Apple closing their market:  it's just a business decision. Apple chose closed approach, Google open. It's a technicality. It's up to customers to make choices.
As for you second point, there is no such thing is perfect information. In Free market information is important. Possessing information always results in an edge, both for customers and businesses. However, there is no "perfect information".  You work with the level of information you have.  That is it. Free market worked fine 2-3 thousand years ago when level of information/knowledge was much lower. It works now, and it will work in the future as well, when the wealth and accuracy of information will be much higher. 
+Arthur LeCuyer I admire passion and would have thought that it would really serve Apple best if it translated into the kind of action which would enable others to also feel as passionately about the company as you do. Alas, this is not quite so, yet. 
Ah, +David Amerland I agree while also disagreeing. Apple is not perfect (not even close IMO) but here's the rub, it is you who've called for a boycott. You've done so unwittingly under the pretense that these 9 items mentioned are correct. They are not (at least not entirely) within the context of the entire technology landscape. Each item is in its most basic form is a RED HARING, or in tech terms a series of Strawman arguments. There is no real viability (life) to any of your arguments. Not if you know what I know about this company.

I have spent 20 years following and analyzing the way in which this company operates. Does that leave me with the occasional blind spot? Yes. But it enables me to see that which others simply do not. It allows me to know Fact from Fiction. These arguments put forth as a rational explanation to boycott are simply fictitious fallacies based on other companies' desires to restrain Apples' growth.

Have you ever heard the term 'Economic Hitman'. They are people whose sole responsibility is to spread rumor, innuendo and disinformation to cause some form of economic distress to their competitors. It is also done within the Stock Market (known as fermenting) where rumors are strategically placed to cause the stock to lose value. Each of these points has undoubtedly originated with these Hitmen. Microsoft was/is one of the best at this game, spreading what is known as FUD (fear,uncertainty and doubt). Adobe tried this with Apples refusal to allow Flash, claiming all manner of bull sh*t. The simple fact is Apple refused because Flash simply did not work properly on touchscreen devices. As proof I cite Adobes own discontinuation of Flash on Mobile devices.

I tell you all this not so much as an Apple fan, but to encourage you to further your understanding of this dynamic company and the processes used to distort and undermine their success. The things you've posted are all without merit, as you will come to see, if only you dig a little deeper.

One friend to another, sincerely Arthur
Well, +Bert Rubaszkin , I do not possess the inside scoop as does Mr. +Arthur LeCuyer (or so he says, anyway), but do you agree or disagree (to some degree) with the points made here? Makes sense to me... Remember in them "good ol' days" when IBM was the master of FUD?
I love how +Arthur LeCuyer spends all that time typing up a response but leaves zero facts to his reasoning other than some conspiracy theory crap. If you're going to accuse someone of being incorrect, back it with facts or sit down and shut up. #boycottapple  
To speak to some of your points. I would like to say first I prefer apple product but also use products from Google, Motorola, Microsoft, Samsung etc etc as well.

1) Apple believes in their close system because they want to control the user experience from start to finish. They tried licensing their software and the company almost went under until they went back to controlling everything from start to finish again. This wasn't a problem until they became popular again. Are we just hating them because they are big and powerful now? 

2) Many companies use Foxconn. If you think it is slave labor you should not buy products from anyone that use them. Also I would like to point out that based percentages, more people in American companies commit suicide over work than Foxconn employees do. If you want to look and point fingers you need to point fingers everywhere that it is happening. One company is not the end all and be all of evil. Workplace reform is needed everywhere.

3) The full prices of Apple products is very similar to the full prices of it's competitors products. Although I would like to point out a difference that no one seems to bring up. When Apple upgrades OSX they have been charging $29.99 for upgrades. Does anyone jump down Microsoft's throat for charging nearly 10 times that for an OS upgrade? On the hardware side Apple charges way more but I feel you get what you pay for. If I want a top of the line Windows machine I will pay similar prices. If I want a cheap computer I can find one. Apple just doesn't sell cheap computers. Again flashback to when they almost went out of business. They had too many products. Now they focus on a few.

4) If you are going to point fingers about anti competitive products then you can point them everywhere. Google, Apple, Facebook, Microsoft, etc etc. People have problems with all of them. What data are you so concerned they won't let you port? 

5) Facebook. Google. Your ISP. Yahoo. Everyone uses your data and you may not know what for. Cisco got into trouble recently over data tracking recently. You have a choice not to use the product if you do not trust the company. Google's privacy policy changes caused quite an uproar to. Should I boycott them too? 

6) I agree the patent thing is stupid but our laws allow them to do this. It is a broken system that needs to be fixed. I don't care who created slide to unlock. It is one of those "duh" features. Don't allow companies to sue over stupid things. Although we do live in a world where not putting HOT on the lid of your coffee cup can cause a major financial windfall.

7. I don't think any company things bad press is good at all. Why have PR at all if you don't care what people think? If bad press makes them anti-social then the bad press of all of the other companies I have listed before makes them anti-social as well. 

8. Apple seems big into education and always have been. They also seem to be into making things easy and hassle free for their customers. Companies don't have consciences. People do and the right people at the head of your company steers them in the direction they think is right. Do you really thing the heads of Apple don't think about their customers? It doesn't make sense to me because they design their products with consumers in mind. If they didn't we wouldn't buy their stuff and we wouldn't be debating this right now.

9. Most tech these days are pretty unfriendly to the environment. I do want to point out that I have had 4 computers in the last 10 years because of changes in technology and specs etc etc. I still have my iPod I got 8 years ago which my daughter now uses as her own (and it still works with itunes even today) and when I got my new iPhone I sold the other one to someone who I am sure was glad to get a used one for far cheaper than the full price and bought it used because they know the products last. Can the same be said about the Microsoft Zune players. Or the Sony mini disk players? Also quickly to talk about music in general. In a time where record companies were fighting piracy and napster, I feel Apple did help the consumers greatly by creating an iTunes store where we can buy music and get it legally. They led the way for other services like Amazon, Walmart etc etc.

I find most of your argument to be like a mad-libs story in many ways. If you changed the names from Apple and Apple products to something else I am sure many of these points can describe many companies. I respect your opinion because you are free to have it but I do not agree.

apple is so much like sony... its "my way or the high way"
First and foremost, most electronic companies use FoxComm in China for production. That is not just an Apple problem. Point two, I think their marketing ideas are brilliant. They are still the only company to make both hardware and software for their machines.
I agree with Mr. Amerland. Apple are to much of control freaks and also I would add to that, that they seed a certain narrow mindedness into their user base. Apple user tend to have an outlook that theres is nothing better or nothing easier to use than their products, and we all know this is just not the case. I have used Apple's pro line of workstations and computers for the past 4 years and grew up on PC's and windows. Like the Mac OS hate the hardware. Both Win7 and  Leopard/Snow Leopard have their pluses and minuses, its to close to call on that one.

The whole industry runs on by looking at something that the competitor is doing, and by mimicking it and improving it, it's quite simply evolution of thing. To be trying to ban products just because they are as good or better than your own is simply disgusting. Suck it up and make something new, after all things in these markets are like wild fire, they come and go in the blink of an eye. Lets face it the average new gadget or hardware has a new "wow" factor of about 3 months, and a life expectancy of maybe a year if that.

As far as overpricing, it's absolutely true. I recently finished working for one of the largest Media Companies in Canada, these guys just 3 years ago set up an office with 54 Apple Pro computers ($3,500+ each) and spent over $200,000 doing so. Today those machines are garbage, and can not handle Adobe's CS5 in a production environment. Meanwhile my 3-year old comp at home outperforms them by a factor of more than 2 for nearly half the money. As an example, in the first year of the Ad center operation, 12 of the machines had graphic card failures, 21 hard drive failures and 4 died completely. An appalling attrition rate. Never have I seen anything like that in my 15+ years of using and building hardware. Even over-clocking I have never killed a single component.

Apple also tends to annoyingly restrict their hardware essentially putting a choke collar on the users. Apples iPhone & iPad are a perfect example of that, while clever and useful, the connectivity and expansion on these devices is crippled even compared to some of the mediocre hardware opposing them.

Some have said to me I'm a Windows lover, in fact I hate windowsOS as much as MacOS. I liked only one OS ever, the BeOS, but it was run into the ground by those who were afraid of it.

The only nice thing is, that theres always something better just around the corner to look forward to. And todays hardware heros may become tomorrows nobodies. You not need to look much further, just look at what's going on at RIM right now..
one should come up with an alternative way, not only suing. If not apple, then who? No company even if comes from the Aminghty may satisfy all, although some may do to many
Well, I just don't understand what the fuss is all about. +David Amerland every company, be it +Apple Computers or +Google  produces intellectual property which it wants to protect to ensure competitiveness in a fast-moving world. Apple like any innovative company has worked hard at incorporating aesthetics into their products and spend more attention to little things like user-interfaces and design than anyone else that I know of. We need a company like Apple to be out there providing those who care about art and beauty (albeit at the cost of not having as many options). is a great talk on the paradox of choice. Well, I'd say Apple does a great job of "focussing" on what they feel matters and putting out a product which does those few things really well in a simple, easy-to-use way. It isn't perfect, but neither am I (and I daresay you!)...

Every company is trying to make a profit for their share-holders.... Protecting what they think is their IP is one way they do this. If there is a problem here, it isn't that Apple is taking advantage of this to stiffle their competition - it is that patents should not be granted for things which are too vague or broad to be patented in the first place. But if they're really worth patenting, then +Apple Inc., +Google, +Microsoft, +Samsung Electronics  etc.. have every right to try to protect what they've spent millions in R&D to give them a competitive edge!
Apples are yummy. I will destroy is boycott! RAWRRRRRR!!!!!!!!
First and foremost this post is such BULLSHIT! 

On Point One - It's called FOCUS. Devil in the details. Passion for a product to make it the best experience imaginable. It must have triggered a ripple effect because the entire world is trying to emulate it. 

Point Two - Do you realize Foxconn probably made your PC? At least Apple is addressing the working conditions and have publicly posted their audits for all to see. Where are DELLS', or HP's reports?  Give me a break!

Point Three - Overpriced?  Seriously?! Why are comparable products actually more than Apple's?  Oh that's right Apple doesn't make SHIT products. Yeah I guess it comes from their HIGH STANDARDS to produce great stuff. Let's not even go there for their OS and App suite.You want a sticker shock? Go and replicate that experience on the Windows side.  

Point Four - Let's see ecosystem....yeah that's what people want. It makes the experience richer.  Locked in?  Not really. If you wanna use Google stuff, use it. You wanna use Apple's stuff, you can do that too. Locked in! Come on! Such a nonstarter!

Point Five - Where did you come up with this conspiracy theory?!  Really! If anything look at Facebook or Google because they need to collect your data.  Remember Google is a Ad company surrounded by products that track and know your online behavior better than anyone. Geez!

Point Six - Android Copied. When you have an Apple board member who happened to be CEO of Google at the time, and getting a sneak peak of the iPhone in 2005-2006 during development, thus taking that knowledge and running over to Google's R&D to say we are doing the exact thing is pretty shitty. Do you like getting back stabled by your friends?

Point Seven - Anti-Social WTF?! If anything the iPhone excelled social graphs. Seriously do you not see the many companies blowing up because of this? WOW! If anything Apple empowered SOCIAL!  

Point Eight - Yeah Apple happens to be a bunch of BOTS not thinking about how their products will interact with human beings in a profound and meaningful way. Yeah Right!

Point Nine -  Really?! Apple has been pushing their green efforts in greater measure than ANY other tech company or hardware company.  They also have a great recycling program that is beyond what these other me too companies don't really do either.

Again this post is total B.S.
You know what +Kershaw Rustomji, the ones that don't broadcast their philanthropic endeavors are the most authentic and genuine givers of them all.  
This is hilarious!! I dont think any of these points are valid or can't be said about every other tech company. You've obviously got an unjustified personal vendetta against apple and their products (along with hundreds of others) 
For the record, I just moved from the apple ecosystem (iphone) to the google ecosystem (S3) and transferring all my data & contacts was one of the easiest things I've ever done. 
After reading all these comments, there's 1 thing that I simply can't change my mind of it. Apple's products is "overpriced". Unlocked iPhone is US$999 in my country (could be more with all the tax and other). With all it's amazing features, still, it is overpriced.
If it was the slide to unlock which Samsung got sued's neither apples or samsungs it was created by a small company who lost a law suit to sue apple over it
+Steven Wright If you notice I have stressed that Mike Daisey has been found to be less than reliable. The article is replete with sources which have nothing to do with him. Full version here:
Wealth is every man's right. If everyday people were in their positions I'm not too sure they would genuinely dedicate a portion of their profits to charities and noble causes without pressure from the public or even do it were they in Jobs' position. Not if they didn't have too. (The few that have are rarities and should be cherished.)
I dislike Apple as much as the next guy, but you have to admit they are excellent business men, only displaying Machiavellian morality at it's finest.
Apple uses the same manufacturer (Foxconn) as HP, Dell, Nintendo, Samsung, and Microsoft. Any manufacturing practices that are "unethical" are not the fault of Apple, but the fault of the licensed manufacturer, which controls all of its factories and its employees.
Point number 4, "Anti-competitive," is not valid; Apple doesn't lock people into contracts, the cell carriers do. The same can be said for the carriers that sell Android devices.

Saying Apple locks consumers into an ecosystem is unreasonable. My PC has me locked in; all my files, programs, and accessories ONLY work with a Microsoft Windows computer.

People can imagine things that don't exist when it best serves their purposes.
Apple is not "banning" products; they cannot restrict customers from walking into a Microsoft store to buy a PC.
Are you kidding me??? All Apple products to date are ENERGY STAR CERTIFIED, and their data centers are built to be ECO-FRIENDLY.
Apple has a program matching employee's donations to charity. If that isn't helping the community, I don't know what is.
Anti-social??? Apple has numerous ways for both the company and product's users to connect with the world. Mac OS X and iOS already have Twitter integration, and both OSes will be receiving Facebook integration in the Summer and fall, respectively. This adds Facebook integrations to Mail, Messaging, and Twitter ALREADY enabled for sharing.
Apple's concept of creating a closed user environment, where they produce everything from the hardware to the software, has benefited Apple and its customers. I don't have to worry about a 3rd-party piece of hardware on a Mac malfunctioning because it wasn't designed or manufactured correctly, and I don't have to worry about a certain program becoming unusable because it wasn't designed specifically for my device. Mac sales are gaining on PC sales; the percentage of new adoptions to the Mac is rising while that of a PC is falling.
+Ian Shei You went into a lot of trouble to address each point, which I truly appreciate. The #boycottapple call was based upon facts - you will find a full article here: The reason behind it is not so much a call to bring Apple down, on the contrary, they do a lot of good things and the world would be a poorer place without them. That however does not mean that they get a free pass when it comes to lacking a social conscience. The fact that the call has had some impact is detailed here:

Apple has many devoted, passionate fans and so it should. It just needs to be a little more worthy of that passion. It seems to be happening. 
+Ian Shei Mac sales gaining on PC sales is a bit deceptive to be honest.  I read late last week how currently 20 PCs are sold for every 1 Mac.  As of about 6-7 years ago, that ratio had been as high as 60-1.  That looks terrible for Microsoft and the PC industry of course.  But I think the numbers make more sense when you realize that in the past few years, more people have adopted a tablet instead of replacing an aging desktop or laptop.  That's why you're seeing these sales get a bit closer.  PC sales have dropped much more than Mac sales have risen.

I would say the worry for Apple and Google both are if Microsoft somehow manages to really impress with Windows 8.  Get enough people wanting it, and subsequently wanting the Surface tablets and Windows 8 phones all with a cohesive user experience, and you have a legitimate threat to both Apple and Android.  (My opinion, that's a longshot..)
OK, you the lefties, socially committed and environmentalists, stop buying Apple. As for the rest of us, we will continue buying whatever we please.
Add a comment...