Being super pedantic, Apple doesn't care about anything, just like a company can't care... but I think it's safe to say that it's not last on the list of things they prioritize.
Except the human cost and resulting PR nightmare if a terrorist attack happened that they could have in principle prevented (e.g. if the terrorist had collaborators, and information on the phone helped find them).
> I don't think this was a particularly difficult thing to do.
Very easy to say when you're not the one responsible for that $800bn company ... if you're a decent human being, you're probably not worried about your own wealth in that situation, but the livelihoods of all your employees and other entities that rely on you. Every decision carries weight. The value of your company is not always empowering; the higher its value, the larger the consequences if you're wrong.
Apple is not made of decent human beings and do not care for employees that much. Just look at how their devices are manufactured.
Apple cares about profits and money, just look at their tax evasion schemes and how they store their cash overseas waiting for a tax break to bring it back to the US.
This just isn’t true. Most people are decent human beings. Employees of Apple are no different. Don’t box them in as “the other.” They’re just people.
> Just look at how their devices are manufactured.
This is a valid criticism. Also an industry wide problem. Apple is very transparent with problems in their supply chain, even when it reflects badly on them. This is a problem we have to confront, but it’s far larger than Apple alone.
> tax evasion
There’s a difference between tax evasion and tax avoidance. It’s not good practice for a company to pay more tax than they need to. The appropriate remedy to this is legislation.
> Sorry if I bust your little bubble of joy
You didn’t, so it’s okay :)
This doesn't reflect well on anyone involved, but it is pretty much the way things are.
Apple does, in fact, do better than most of the rest on (for want of a better term) progressive issues like this. They were leaders on environmental issues and is willing to fight with shareholders over them[1] (ditto accessibility, presumably as an example of other efforts not directly-ROI impacting).
Manufacturing is tough to change. Even with Apple-style money, creating the sort of hub of interlocking businesses that are needed to fuel large-scale manufacturing businesses takes decades and some secret-sauce we don't understand - Shenzhen wasn't built overnight. And if Apple did somehow build a shiny new manufacturing hub somewhere in Kansas, the products it built would be likely be substantially more expensive.
That said, Apple is building a US factory. See what happens. It might not change anything. Perhaps you believe they should put more money in to the effort. But assuming they aren't doing anything is incorrect.
[1] http://www.businessinsider.com/tim-cook-versus-a-conservativ...
[0] "Apple had asked the F.B.I. to issue its application for the tool under seal. But the government made it public, prompting Mr. Cook to go into bunker mode to draft a response" : https://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/19/technology/how-tim-cook-b...
[1] : https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2016-03-20/the-behin...
Also the PR boost from this is far from free. Aside from the huge cost of engineering all this security into the system, to the point of delaying major new features by years in order to get the security architecture into place, its also costing them a chunk of the Chinese market. The Chinese government is absolutely not happy with this sort of consumer privacy stance and has been cracking down on security services and features on the iOS platform. They’ve banned VPN software and features, banned communications apps, even screwing with Apple by barring the iTunes media business, and stalling Apple Pay.
Going up against the US government arguably does Apple no harm, but setting themselves directly at odds with core Chinese government political goals such as pervasive monitoring and censorship of all forms of communications is going to be a real battle.
If they just wanted a marketing advantage, they’d just build in some anti add-tracking features and be done. Security and privacy is so appallingly bad on Android even a perfunctory effort there would put them miles ahead at little cost. The extreme lengths they’re going to goes way beyond anything remotely necessary for a marketing advantage.
Finally, Apples stance on accessibility shows just how serious they are about serving their users. The cost of their accessibility efforts must be dramatically higher than any possible financial or marketing benefit and they’ve been doing it for decades across platforms to little or no fanfare.
Also I don't see a direct relation between their accessibility efforts and efforts on privacy. That way, we can link anything with anything else.
The link with accessibility is just evidence that when Apple says they do something to benefit their users because it’s their right thing to do and not for financial gain, that they have history on that to back them up.
They were probably just defending their business model, as a hardware seller the minute it is known worldwide that the US government has a backdoor in their flagship device, apple is over.
I've never used an iPhone, but I'm glad Apple put their foot down. The government is a terrible custodian of slippery slopes, don't give them any more.