They have pointed out in the article that Beats really isn't as "high quality" as other superior headphone sets.
So, I don't understand the knock towards them. Its a product. A product that has done extremely well. There are many products out there that sell because of a celebrity endorsed it. In fact the article stated that Dr. Dre was thinking of marketing fashion before he spoke with Iovine on what he should do. Dre would have had sold some product one way or another to make money. Why not Beats?
All in all, it all just worked out for Dre. Beats is a good headset made cheap and sold high. It found its star in Dr. Dre to be the face.
Beats is the George Forman Grill on headphones!
No reason to knock it. There are many products out there that isn't the greatest, but it works fine for most of us. Look at Windows.
Now, should getting rich be the end goal of every business venture? No, but well you'd definitely want it to do fairly well.
-- I think its a cool idea that they are trying to disrupt college. Especially in the fields of the Arts, why not try? More choices means more people (especially young people) get to see what's out out there, what's possible.
How many articles do we need to post on Hacker News about the "youth not able to find a job even with a bachelors degree at Stanford" before some change to how we "educate" them occurs?
All in all, I cannot criticize someone's business practices who's able generate $3 billion for a company let alone $1. Someone was going to do that, why not him?