Talk:Apple Inc./Archive 9

Archive 5

←

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Mac Mini picture not current

Ok the picture for the mac mini is not current... http://images.apple.com/macmini/images/overview_hero1_20100615.png this is the current one --AntsmaPantsma454545 (talk) 05:04, 16 July 2010 (UTC) OMG THIS IS THE FIRST TIME ONE OF MY EDITS WASNT DELETED...anyways now im gonna be constructive how do u post a picture on wikipedia?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by AntsmaPantsma454545 (talk • contribs) 06:58, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Assests under management (AuM) in infobox

Shouldn't this be removed? Generally this is only for financial companies. Does Apple run some hedge fund somewhere? Ryan Norton 23:28, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

I don't know all the specifics of this, but I know a large part of Apple's cash pile is managed by its subsidiary Braeburn Capital. Apple created it in 2006. GoldRenet ^{have a chat in my café} 11:47, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Braeburn_Capital - interesting tax haven. Still, AuM generally refers to assets a company handles for other companies/individuals - since Braeburn is a subsidiary they are still technically managing their own money, which isn't AuM; at least as far as I understand, although now it is sort of a grey area. Thanks for the response - I still have no idea where the number in this article comes from though, the source is just a basic partial annual report and seems to conflict with the braeburn article. Ryan Norton 12:09, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

No worries. I agree. I think it can be left out, as it isn't very notable and it is rather a part of Apple. And as you point out, I think it would be hard to always update this number correctly. GoldRenet ^{have a chat in my café} 15:51, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Criticism section

Uh, reverting without discussion isn't a good approach. Let me put it this way, we've come to a consensus multiple times on Microsoft that a criticism section is a really bad idea - it just existed there for a long time because it took us a while to figure out how to put it summarize it properly in the ariticle. Especially in the way these articles (company overviews) are structured, it also makes it insanely difficult to make the section NPOV, which it has to be; having a section "loaded with POV" just to balance the article is not an option, and is the reason {{NPOV-section}} exists. Ryan Norton 01:21, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. I recently served as GA reviewer for both Google and Playstation and I'd determined that per WP:CRITICISM, the easiest way for the articles to have a NPOV is if the controversy section was removed and the info placed elsewhere. I'm of the opinion that decision should apply here as well. That doesn't mean that article has to be completely sanitized, though; there's already criticism in other sections which I haven't touched, and I added a clearly-specified link to the lead with a brief overview of the overarching concerns. What's wrong with this? elektrikSHOOS 01:32, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Actually, if you read WP:CRITICISM, Criticism of Apple shouldn't really exist and that info should be well-integrated here, unless I'm reading it wrong. elektrikSHOOS 01:36, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, those articles generally shouldn't exist, but they exist because doing it properly - i.e. branching out and making articles for each topic so both sides can be included - is a rather difficult task to tackle for 7-year-old article groups like these. Ryan Norton 01:43, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

That article (as well as most tech-related criticism articles) are absolute troll magnets. Have you seen some of the edit wars/arguments on those pages? Absolutely pathetic, almost making the WP:LAME list. elektrikSHOOS 01:46, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Hmm... so if general consensus is to diffuse the section into the rest of the article, I'm all for it. I've learned my lesson :). Airplaneman ✈ 01:49, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

We got the MS one to good article status at one point, but it took forever and didn't last long. They basically are troll magnets unfortunately. Part of the problem is that our ratio of active content editors (at least for tech articles) went way down after various wikipedia controversies years ago, despite how viewed it is right now, but that's not something we can solve. Ryan Norton 01:54, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Collaboration opinions

Since this is the current collaboration for Wikipedia:WikiProject Apple Inc. in an attempt to get it to GA status, some random opinions:

1. The lead shouldn't need to have any reference notes - it's not supposed to have _any_ new information that's not in the article text.
2. History needs to summarized more, its huge and goes into too much detail that the daughter articles should handle.
3. "Current Products" May need a rethink - maybe as simple as "2010 Products" (this would be bad for linking though since it would change often) or something but it's kind of the reverse of WP:CRYSTAL in that it will become instantly outdated. On Microsoft it was decided to simply describe the products using the internals of the company - however, there are several possible approaches.
4. CEOs, directors etc. - can't this be more of a narrative then a simple list? Not sure what to do here at the moment.
5. Criticism (the section) should be removed; it's always been bad form in articles to have one. It should be summarized throughout the article itself.
6. Obvious other points including the TODO and references and such.

Ryan Norton 02:20, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Additionally,

• Avoid including galleries in articles, as per Wikipedia:Galleries. Common solutions to this problem include moving the gallery to wikicommons or integrating images with the text.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 7 pounds, use 7 pounds, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 7 pounds.^[?]
• Per WP:WIAFA, this article's table of contents (ToC) may be too long – consider shrinking it down by merging short sections or using a proper system of daughter pages as per Wikipedia:Summary style.^[?]
• There are a few occurrences of weasel words in this article- please observe WP:AWT. Certain phrases should specify exactly who supports, considers, believes, etc., such a view.
  • it has been
  • arguably
  • might be weasel words, and should be provided with proper citations (if they already do, or are not weasel terms, please strike this comment).^[?]
• The script has spotted the following contractions: isn't, Doesn't, don't, if these are outside of quotations, they should be expanded.
• Please provide citations for all of the {{fact}}s.^[?]7
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas.

 ℳono  19:23, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

• Out of all of the pictures in the article, I think that File:Ad apple 1984.jpg should be removed. It doesn't really need to be on this page. GamerPro64 (talk) 18:07, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
• I also think that [[:File:Ad apple 1984.jpg] should be removed from the article. I just don't see how terribly important an exact image of their old ad is. Usb10 ^Connected? 02:11, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, it's been a while, I'm set to start hacking away soon unless anyone else wants to get the ball rolling, per se. Ryan Norton 12:38, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

You might want to start by fixing some {{cn}}'s in the 1976-1980 subsection of the History section; I found two. -Usb10 ^Connected? 02:11, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Yeah.... what makes this article really difficult to modify is that unlike Microsoft the areas it has dominated in has changed drastically over the years so even wording the lead correctly requires some very careful work to avoid saying stuff like "currently", and keeping "as of" to a minimum. I have a userfied version here that is my template, but there is a lot of work to be done... for one the lead is deceiving, it doesn't even properly summarize the article ;p. The actual article is pretty good, just need to summarize as mentioned. Ryan Norton 06:49, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Your userfied version looks good, however I found a cite error in the references section. Could that be fixed? Also on the actual article I found three dead links that should be fixed. Usb10 ^Connected? 23:58, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

There is also a big {{update}} tag on the page so I guess we need to see what needs updating. Usb10 ^Connected? 23:34, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Apparently a new version of the iPod has just come out. Could someone get some info about that and add that to the article? Thanks. Usb10 ^Connected? 22:49, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

New lead

Apple Inc. is a public multinational corporation headquartered in Cupertino, California that designs, markets, and produces consumer electronics, computer software, and personal computers. Established on April 1, 1976 and incorporated January 3, 1977 as "Apple Computer, Inc.", the company rose to prominance in the late 1980s with its Macintosh line of personal computers and associated Mac OS operating system. Later, Apple would dominate the digital music player market with the iPod as well as establish footholds in other related markets with the iPhone and iPad, although it would come under fire for its labor practices when reports of possible child labor and poor working conditions in its outsourced manufacturing surfaced.

The company also produces various types of software such as the iTunes media browser, the iWork suite of productivity software, the Aperture professional photography package, and the Final Cut Studio suite of professional audio and film-industry software products. A chain of retail stores and corresponding online store is also ran by the company, under the Apple Store brand. It is known for being one of the companies bucking the traditional corporate culture of the 1970s, such as formal attire. Over the years Apple has received criticism for the vertical integration of its products, having limited compatability in general with non-Apple products.

For reasons as various as its philosophy of comprehensive aesthetic industrial design to its distinctive advertising campaigns, Apple has established a unique reputation in the consumer electronics industry, including a customer base that is unusually devoted to the company and its brand. The advertising compaigns launched various musicians into stardom; some of more well-known campaigns include the 1984 Super Bowl commercial and the 'Get a Mac' campaign, the latter of which drew criticism for potentially misleading statements. Apple has a mixed environmental record, especially in comparison with other electronics companies.

---

Going to move some variation of this into the main article when it is ready, so feel free comments or adjust the above. Some parts, such as the vertical integration in particular are still a bit awkward. With this out of the way, I can now work the massive text that is history. Ryan Norton 16:47, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm critical of the criticism. The child labor issue seems out of place, and should be moved to the third paragraph. It and the other criticism (Get a Mac, environment) needs a citation. (Removing citations from a draft makes it a pain to re-add them.) Better yet, go with the last sentence of the current lead. I also think that history, employees, and finances are important. This version splits up the products when they need to be trimmed (Aperture, Final Cut). I can support putting a sentence on vertical integration into the third paragraph of the existing lead. --A complete rewrite like this makes it hard to compare the two options, so why don't we discuss what problems you see in the existing lead, then make small improvements rather than wholesale replacements? HereToHelp ^{(talk to me)} 17:34, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Can we remove the stuff about child labour? In the context of Apple as a company as a whole its a total non-issue. Given that it was at a subcontractor and the practice had stopped when Apple's ethical report was done. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 17:37, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

The problem is that we basically can't have citations in the lead anymore (it can't mention ANYTHING that's not mentioned in the article), that's the new standard, and a big problem with the current one; the other big problem with the current lead as I raised above is that it actually only summarizes half the article. After looking it, I agree the child labor thing is out of place, should be more general. Also, the splitting was an attempt to lace the criticism throughout the lead rather then shoving it into one paragraph. It is still a bit of a rough draft. BTW, what did you want mentioned ragarding employees, history, and finances? I know it would be nice be nice to get an IPO mention in there. It wasn't really meant to be a complete rewrite, just kind of ended up that way. Anyway, feel free to adjust it, this is a collaboration after all. Thanks for the comments so far, keep them coming! Ryan Norton 18:11, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Reading through it does look much better and cleaner than the existing lead. Maybe some mention that Apple is the largest technology company by stockholder value and possibly that its retail stores are the world's most profitable (e.g. this for London). -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 20:59, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Ryan, I looked through the FAR and linked discussion, but the appropriate policy is LEADCITE, and it says that leads are not exempt from verifiability, and that and any questionable material (minor interpretation: critical material) must be cited. Critical material should be arranged by topic. For example, the vertical integration model is part of its design philosophy, so they should be grouped together. I'm going to create Talk:Apple Inc./sandbox so we can create an evolving draft collaboratively, since we can't change the version at the top of this post and shouldn't post a dozen variations. Please keep discussion here. HereToHelp ^{(talk to me)} 13:02, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Eraserhead, that's a good idea. HereToHelp, the jury has already decided on the cite issue, you're taking certain parts of the guideline too literally and really misunderstanding it. The guideline itself is written the way it is mostly for BLPs citing really contentious facts for legal reasons, and is not up to date and really written for the non-current-FAC writer at all; long story short - stuff written properly as an overview does _not_ need to be cited (yes, this wasn't the case 3 years ago, things change around here rather drastically over time in some areas). As I said though since there isn't many of us and there is disagreement I'll cite everything, but I can guarantee they will demand we remove 95% of them at FAC time.

On the real issue, I put as much of the old lead in as I could; in order words, I already did merge my ideas with the old lead. The stuff I took out of the old lead either violated the guideline (a good example is the employees figure - that's not in the article [the infobox doesn't count ;p], so it can't be in the lead, simple as that; and generally statistics like that aren't in leads as they are overviews) or was just extra stuff like the numerous software mentions. Also, we can't really talk about financial stuff until - yes again - we actually have that info in the article first in the proper place. We need some stock performance in corporate affairs, i.e. stuff more along of the lines Eraserhead mentioned. The real problem is we have everything smashed into history. As for the criticism, we'll never get anywhere if we just make one sentence and call it a day. Per undue weight we don't want too much, but we need to summarize each section adequately, and especially since this is a 3 paragraph lead we'll need a couple sentences here and there about the criticism.

I think I can sum this all up as, especially for company articles, standards are much higher even just for good article status, and the article actually needs to be tightly written, not merely pretty good. Anyway, thanks for the comments so far, I have a pretty good idea of what everyone wants now, thanks again :). Sorry it took so long for the comment, been busy myself... Ryan Norton 05:30, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

General references w/o inline cites

• Rob Price (1987). "So Far: The First Ten Years of a Vision". Apple Computer. ISBN 1-55693-974-4.
• Ken Polsson. "Chronology of Events in the History of Microcomputers". Retrieved August 18, 2008.
• "Apple II history". Retrieved August 18, 2008.
• "Apple III history". Retrieved August 5, 2006.

None of these are inline cited, and there's no indication where they are used, I'm assuming history? Ryan Norton 17:14, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, try and add citations to them and add them in somewhere if you can. Chevymontecarlo - alt 12:29, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Updates

I think the most recent history section needs to be updated. If anyone wants to have a go at doing this, I'll provide some pointers:

• 1 September 2010 - Apple launches new iPod Touch, iPod Nano, and iPod Shuffle models. Various news articles can be used as references for this, together with Apple's own page perhaps.
• Magic Trackpad/Battery charger - both of these articles exist already, but I don't know if they are mentioned here in the history part.
• Rumours leading up to the 1 September event - should they be included, or are they omitted usually from articles like these?
• iPhone 4 antenna issues - Apple's videos of competing phones, etc. - again, if they are in the article already, apologies, but I can't seem to find them in the history section.

What do you guys think? At the moment the history section only seems to go up to the iPad launch in May. Chevymontecarlo - alt 12:34, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

I think that the emphasis of these items should be placed in the following order (chronologically in the article, of course):

1. iPhone 4 ( Added by  ℳono  20:54, 7 September 2010 (UTC))
2. September 1 (mention it; FaceTime, Ping, and stuff)
3. New desktop computers, mention of Magic Trackpad
4. Anything else relevant.

 ℳono  20:11, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Great idea! I will try and maybe write something up if I get the chance. Chevymontecarlo - alt 15:27, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Just added information about the new Apple TV. Need to replace picture with new device.Baseball-bob (talk) 01:03, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Just done it. It's already been uploaded as it's in use for the Apple TV article. Thanks for helping :) Chevymontecarlo - alt 06:12, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

deleting of notable, well documented, multiply sourced facts

is against wikipedia policy. it also harms the objectivity of wikipedia. Decora (talk) 00:09, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

What are these your specifically considering? -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 23:22, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

apple sell more that 2,0000 product a yr —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.48.207.23 (talk) 18:20, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Apple-logo.svg

I was wondering if there are any good SVG drawers out there who could render the Apple-logo.svg file better —Preceding unsigned comment added by Colejohnson66 (talk • contribs) 01:49, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

This is about as good as it gets. THENEWMONO 02:18, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Apple TV image

Hey, An updated Apple TV image is needed, the main image is still the first gen. Yes, the big expensive one. If anyone has the time to upload a new one, then please do! Thanks!--Nathanl1192 (talk) 18:58, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done THENEWMONO 04:36, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you looks a lot better! Nathanl1192 (talk) 19:13, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Actual financial data

Would someone please put in the right financial data (revenue etc.) for the finished (30.9.) financial year 2010 of Apple. It's quite a difference to the 2009 numbers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.3.227.24 (talk) 15:03, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Update of Apple's financial data for fiscal year 2010

It seems that there is no one willing or able to change Apple's financial data for fiscal year 2010. Since the 2010 10-K Annual Report (filed October 25, 2010) is out now, it really would be appropriate to update the data. There is a big difference between 42.91 billion (for 2009) and 65,225 billion (for 2010) revenue. It means that Apple's revenue grew 52% in just 1 year. This is another company than before! And its revenue has become even bigger than that of Microsoft for the fiscal year 2010 (62.48b)! Here are the important figures: Revenue: 65,225 billion; Operating income: 22,971 billion; Profit: 14,013 billion (70% higher than 2009!); Total assets: 75,183 billion; Total equity: 47,791 billion; Employees: 46,600 full-time equivalent employees and an additional 2,800 full-time equivalent temporary employees and contractors. Source: http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External.File?item=UGFyZW50SUQ9Njc1MzN8Q2hpbGRJRD0tMXxUeXBlPTM=&t=1 83.79.50.8 (talk) 22:23, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

I think I got them all. Let me know if there's any refs still hanging. nneonneo ^talk 05:53, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Accuracy

The Apple TV 2 only has 256 MB of RAM, not 512 MB. Since the article is locked, I cannot change it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.100.41.99 (talk) 19:37, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 23:50, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Events section

I removed the entire Events section, because I felt it was not worth saving (too little content and too much speculation). If someone wants to rewrite the section, they are free to do so, as long as it is properly cited.

This also achieves the goal of eliminating all {{cn}} tags from the article. nneonneo ^talk 05:15, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

i agree 188.202.146.57 (talk) 16:10, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Requesting edit for Mac and accessories section

> MacBook Pro, professional portable computer alternative to the MacBook,

I think the 'alternative' description is not appropriate, as the Macbook Pro did come five months before the white Macbook was launched. Perhaps just note that the Macbook Pro is aimed at the professional segment, while the Macbook is for consumers? 112.203.94.194 (talk) 14:01, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

The context for that quote is a section talking about which new hardware is available now, so the "alternative" wording is fine, as it currently is an alternative. If it instead said that it launched as an alternative to the MacBook, that would be incorrect. --Mepolypse (talk) 14:35, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

If that's the cause, then we should be calling the Macbook Air an 'ultra-thin, ultra-portable alternative to the MacBook, available in 11 and 13-inch variants'. While correct as well, that would be a long and awkward description much like what is written for the Macbook Pro now. That's why I'm thinking we should skip the 'alternative to the Macbook' part and instead focus on how they could be described on their own segment in the Apple notebook lineup, and not relative to the other models. 112.203.94.194 (talk) 00:27, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

I was just responding to your specific artument that the "alternative" word was inappropriate. I've made an effort to simplify the descriptions. I've removed some details to focus more on the core info. --Mepolypse (talk) 00:48, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Culture/Users Section

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc.#Users

The last paragraph is highly misleading and I believe opinionated. While research may have been done, the comparison being made here is in a way like comparing one genius to the rest of the people in the World. While the genius may be more intelligent on average it's a very unfair and biased assumption. I'd like to request the removal or at the very least the rewording of this paragraph. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.97.139.174 (talk) 18:39, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't understand your objection. Exactly which assumption is unfair and biased? --Mepolypse (talk) 19:46, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry as well then because I don't know how to further explain myself. The research unfairly states that a small section of people (Apple users) are more intelligent on average than a very large group of individuals. So it implants the idea for the reader that Apple users are smarter than PC users. Which is just plain untrue bias. I would submit that as many intelligent people that use Apple products, there are an equal amount of intelligent PC users, but because the PC group is so much larger, on a whole it encompasses many more intelligence ranges. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.97.139.174 (talk) (UTC)

I get that you feel this is unfair and untrue. That by itself is however not enough to remove the information, as Wikipedia relies on reliable sources. If there are reliable sources with contrary findings they should be added to the article, to ensure a neutral point-of-view. At the moment there is only one reliable source on the matter, as your (possibly valid) position that this is untrue is original research and thus not encyclopedic. --Mepolypse (talk) 12:15, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

I didn't read anything about Apple users being more intelligent than PC users. All I read that they are more educated. The two usually but not always correspond. We cannot really measure intelligence. Besides the higher incomes, it could also be that more educated people tend to be less conformist and less prone to buy what's the most popular. In other words, it might well be a cultural thing. I do wonder what portion of Mac users switched to Mac, because it's now Unix-based. Bostoner (talk) 01:14, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Results like that have been reported in several studies, usually correlating Apple users with higher income and higher educational achievement. The references bear this out, so that section is here to stay. nneonneo ^talk 06:40, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm concerned with the citation on the first paragraph of corporate culture. It offers the appearance of being fact-checked yet is clearly sourced from another wiki. More appropriately the information contained in the paragraph should be sourced back to the citations then found on that wiki, should they back up the data. Jarland (talk) 23:15, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

I have replaced the reference to a piece from Salon.com (an excerpt from The Second Coming of Steve Jobs). nneonneo ^talk 03:21, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

I suggest this section should be removed. The sources are only about Mac computers which have its own article (Macintosh). Objections? If no, someone can delete it and if they bother add it to the Mac article. Otherwise I'll do it as soon as I got permission to edit the article (it's semi-protected). --78.70.163.165 (talk) 03:02, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Apple becoming the largest tech company.

Hey people, a Wiki newbie here. Made a change on Apple becoming the largest tech company. Please have a look at my references. Is it fine or do we need more evidence? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gaurav21r (talk • contribs) 14:10, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Looks fine to me. The bold was inappropriate though. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 16:52, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Goals for GA

1. Update completely, expanding upon what we have. The product data may need rewriting, along with other paragraphs.
2. Add images, but not too many. Add images relevant only to the article's main topic/goal; we don't need an image gallery. For example, the "culture" section could use an image.
3. Merge content in and out of other articles—the stronger all of our articles are, the better.
4. Add references, esp for all tags.
5. Copyedit.
6. Figure out what else to do.

ǝɥʇM0N0 03:38, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Added image in culture section from MacWorld. Allmightyduck  What did I do wrong? 14:54, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

I felt like it wasn't a very good image, in that it was a lot of empty space and you couldn't really see what was going on, or how it was implicitly Apple. I replaced it with a crowd around a retail store in anticipation of the iPhone (something the section talks about), but it could be cropped or replaced by something even better. HereToHelp ^{(talk to me)} 15:07, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Alright, I really like the new one I added, since the section talks about the NYC cube store and its very long lines. Allmightyduck  What did I do wrong? 21:38, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

I like your image, but we already have a picture of the 5th Avenue store. I search the Commons and found a picture showing the inside of a store, which I think captures the "anyone can walk in and play with the new shiny gizmo" idea. HereToHelp ^{(talk to me)} 22:34, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Hmm... but isn't that more suited for Apple Store? The section talks about the culture of Mac users, versus the function of Apple Stores. Just my $0.02 though. Allmightyduck  What did I do wrong? 03:06, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

All the {{cn}} tags are gone now, except the ones in the Events section. That section might need to go; I can't find reliable refs for the claimed dates. All of the tagged dead links are gone, too, but several references might still be dead (but not detected by bots). To get GA, we'll probably have to review all the refs...nneonneo ^talk 05:56, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Ref auditing is done. All the 170+ web refs are now valid links. The article still needs cleanup, and we should consider trimming down the article (maybe moving or deleting incidental/trivial material). Article text itself seems reasonably well-written (enough for GA, anyway), so I don't think copyediting is really necessary. So, the todo list is now 1) update out-of-date passages and expand, 2) add images, 3) content trimming and merging. nneonneo ^talk 06:38, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

I've read over the article. Grammar and style seem reasonably good throughout, so I think copyedit requirements are minimal. Two passages need to be reworked: first, the last passage of the 1981-1985 section needs citations, and needs to be toned down (right now it makes it sound as if educational customers were the only thing that mattered at all to Apple). Second, the recent history of Apple (from June 2010 onwards) needs to be significantly cut. The History section is not the place to talk about the changes in the most recent hardware revision (such talk belongs on the device's page, or History of Apple Inc.), but rather to offer a broad overview of the company's history. I'd recommend significant revision of those last three paragraphs ("In June 2010...", "In September 2010...", "In October 2010..."). Those sections could probably even be deleted without significantly affecting the article. With those revisions, I think we've got a pretty good shot at GA. nneonneo ^talk 05:44, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

The following passage has been moved here for refactoring and citation-finding, since it really shouldn't be on the main article in this state. It's from the 1981-1985 section.

Apple's sustained growth during the early 1980s was in great part due to its leadership in the education sector, attributed to an implementation of the LOGO Programming Language by Logo Computer Systems Inc., (LCSI), for the Apple II platform. The success of Apple and LOGO in the education environment provided Apple with a broad base of loyal users around the world. The drive into education was accentuated in California by a momentous agreement concluded between Steve Jobs and Jim Baroux of LCSI, agreeing with the donation of one Apple II and one Apple LOGO software package to each public school in the State. The intention was that if one package was donated to a school, this would result in the purchase of thirty more to fill at least one classroom, and additional purchases would also come from parents supporting the technological familiarity and advancement of their children. This successful strategy and arrangement between Apple and LCSI, was eventually replicated in Texas, establishing a strong and pervasive presence for Apple in all schools throughout California, which ignited the acquisition of Apple IIs in schools right across the country. The conquest of education became critical to Apple's acceptance in the home, as parents supported continued learning experience for children after school. Dominance of the education market around the world sustained Apple through the most critical period from the early to mid ‘80s.

nneonneo ^talk 05:56, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

@ nneonneo talk , Robert, re: ". . . right now it makes it sound as if educational customers were the only thing that mattered at all to Apple."

I strongly disagree. You will find that '80-'81 was a seriously challenging period for Apple. It had succeeded in the "hacker" business and was struggling to figure how it could get at the "business" market, which wasn't happening with the Apple II. When it turned to LCSI to launch entry to the education market, this was a major turn for Apple. Its success in education/home sustained it until the the Mac found solid footing on desks of all graphic artists, but to this day the penetration of education around the world and in turn the home market, has had positive affect on Apple's presence. The earliest computers in schools from Australia to Moscow to Beijing were Apple IIs with Apple LOGO.

You will also discover that LCSI (Apple LOGO) was the only company that Apple ever allowed to use its actual logo (the apple with the bite out of it) on the packaging of Apple LOGO software. Additionally, Apple LOGO was distributed and promoted by Apple Computer, . . . another anomaly for Apple. Apple even paid for the full page ads for Apple LOGO that went into such publications as "Bite" or "Personal Computing."

Further emphasizing Apple's dependence on Education and its "partnership" with LCSI, Steve Jobs hired Barbara Bowen from Apple LOGO - LCSI, to run the Apple Education Foundation.

It isn't so much that education was all that mattered, it was that Apple didn't have a real answer for "Business" so Education became a critical strategy for sustaining its initial success. James Raider (talk) 21:23, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Do you have references for these claims? If you do, you may add that content with the appropriate citations. Otherwise, it feels like original research, and its claims sound like undue weight given to the education issue. nneonneo ^talk 03:41, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

@ nneonneo,

For anyone who closely observed the evolution of personal computer market in the very early 80s, Apple's move into education was major turning point for the company and for its long term success as a company. It had little to offer the "business" community, and products such as the Apple III failed miserably.

Below is an example of a full page advertisement by Apple for a single piece of software. There is no other software for which Apple ever did this. Apple also distributed this software product itself. In Apple's history, this has been a anomaly.

It is also an anomaly that Apple Computer gave a software distributer the right to use the APPLE name in its product, as well as use the APPLE with a bite out of it from its corporate logo, for LCSI's packaging and documentation of APPLE LOGO.

Check around Waterloo, ask anyone who might have been in school in those days, engineer or otherwise, you'll find a rather consistent story on Apple Computer's placement of Apple LOGO in schools.

Example of unusual Ad by Apple: http://www.aresluna.org/attached/computerhistory/ads/international/apple/pics/byte8303

A significant boost was provided to Apple's drive into education when the Minnesota state government decided in favour of Apple II computers, which were placed in Minnesota schools. This decision was driven by the fact that initially, LOGO was only available for the Apple II, and only later was available on the Atari and IBM PCs.

It was through the "Kids Can't Wait" program that Apple II computers, along with a package of the Apple LOGO software, were given to 10,000 California K-12 schools, tax exempt schools private schools with 100 or more students, or schools with special ed.

James Raider (talk) 22:43, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Keeping the status of Apple's products and Apple itself up to date.........

I see that the article about the iPad states that ""AT&T is the sole provider of the iPad's 3G service"". As of Q4 2010, AT&T is not the only company holding the iPad's 3G service. Verizon recently started service for the iPad. Speaking of Verizon, rumors state that Verizon is due to start service for the iPhone 4 in Q1 2011. Upload those rumors too, because although they ARE rumors, they are still greatly proven as of Q4 2010. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.97.49.141 (talk) 04:11, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Rumors are what they are: rumors. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia; leave the rumors to other sites, that do a fantastic job in that by the way. And as far as I know, the iPad's internal 3G only works with AT&T in the US. I know Verizon sells iPads with MiFi devices, but strictly speaking the iPad does not connect to these devices via 3G but via WiFi. So I think it's correct to say that AT&T is the sole provider of the 3G service of the iPad in the US. GoldRenet 11:46, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

It's a moot point now :) nneonneo ^talk 03:37, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Safari Missing from Apple Software Summary

I just noticed that Safari is missing from the "Apple Software includes line", right here: "Apple software includes the Mac OS X operating system; the iTunes media browser; the iLife suite of multimedia and creativity software; the iWork suite of productivity software; Aperture, a professional photography package; Final Cut Studio, a suite of professional audio and film-industry software products; Logic Studio, a suite of music production tools; and iOS, a mobile operating system." I just added Safari to this excerpt. --Evancg1411 (talk) 04:52, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

The bite in the Apple logo.

Hello everyone. I am new here, but I needed to explain a mistake. I have read over the Logos section under Corporate Affairs and I noticed a mistake. It states that "The Apple logo was designed with a bite so that it would be recognized as an apple rather than a cherry." This is only partially correct. The Apple logo originally consisted of the name "Apple Computer Inc" in lowercase letters to the right of what we know as the Apple logo today. But at first, the apple was just an apple. The bite was merely the space taken up by the overlapping "a" in "apple." I think we need to include this explanation as well as the red and white logo on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_font. Please, correct me if I am wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.185.8.42 (talk) 06:46, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Ready, Set, Go!

I think the software package "Ready, Set, Go!" deserves some mention. Though it was soon eclipsed by pagemaker and quarkXpress it was the first Mac desktop publishing program, per se. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.32.157.242 (talk) 02:00, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Designer Who Made Apple

That's odd, there seems to be absolutely no mention of the designer who made Apple into the company it is today, why is that? Twobells (talk)

If you talking the inventor of the Macintosh, iMac, iPod and iPhone, most people know that's steve jobs the chairman and CEO, he's the "bill gates of apple" --Charles E. Keisler (talk), A+ Network+ and Security+ Certified 04:51, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

No, I am talking about Jonathan Ive, the designer behind all the devices you've just listed as being credited to Steve Jobs, so far he hasn't been mentioned in any one of the articles associated with the Apple devices he created, you could argue that Ive is the reason Apple is so famous today.Twobells (talk)

who presented you jonathan ive? do you have a published paper or a journal on your statement? If you do please let know, thsnks

Non-neutral Performa/Centris Section

The section describing these computers calls the offerings "confusing" and "disastrous" without a sufficient source. Perhaps it was confusing (I believe Steve Jobs noted the confusion around all the models at a later date post-return), but I do not believe there was any disaster at the time. This should be verified or rephrased to unload the language.--Schalliol (talk) 23:17, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

remove Xserve from list of Apple products

It's been discontinued, isn't it? --112.203.53.96 (talk) 00:34, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

ARM Holdings- Founding with Acorn and VLSI in 1990, and later sale

The article could do with a few words on Apples role in the creation or ARM, it's use of the Architecture in the Newton through to the iPad2, and the late 90's stock sale to bank role the main operation e.g. http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1602331/apple-arm

213.123.48.163 (talk) 08:57, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Numberjak, 23 March 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} Please add the product iPad 2 under the current heading of iPad, with its release date etc, as it is a remarkable new step in Apple's manufacturing and design Sorry I am new to Wikipedia, I hope this request was as it should be.

Wikipedia is an openresource for public interest and it is not a forum.Read wikipedia general info at Wikipedia and if you cannot,please allow me to put it straight:wikipedia isn`t accepting requests from public to improve contents.Please let us know on the ipad2 item you know,if you are kinsd.Secondly you may review "'www.wikipedia.org" website is relating to external links&refference sites like "www.wikipediareview.com".Www.wikipediareview.org is not www.wikipedia.org,which has rules for different public

Math cat`ing (talk) 22:13, 14 May 2011 (UTC) Numberjak (talk) 19:33, 23 March 2011 (UTC) Not done for now: What is its release date? Crazymonkey1123 (Jacob) ^(Shout!) 19:41, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

The section's out of date anyway. Here's an article courtesy of the New York Times that can serve both as a reference and provide any other needed information. I'll update it myself right now. elektrikSHOOS^{(editing from a public terminal)} 19:47, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

And...  Done elektrikSHOOS^{(editing from a public terminal)} 19:51, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Amolviper, 10 May 2011

please change "as of may 2010 apple is one of the most valuable brands surpassing microsoft"TO "as of may 2011 apple has become the world's most valuable brand surpassing google" Amolviper (talk) 08:19, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

 Not done reliable source? CTJF83 12:17, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Here HereToHelp ^{(talk to me)} 13:34, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

This looks to be in the article - if not there are a lot of sources at WP:ITNC. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 16:49, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

But they're all secondary sources quoting the one I listed above. HereToHelp ^{(talk to me)} 16:54, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Secondary sources are better. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 20:40, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Policy certainly agrees with you, but I can't help but think that there's no interpretation to be done here (i.e. nowhere to go wrong). We cite Apple's press releases, which are primary sources, as a matter of course. I doesn't feel right to me to cite yahoo! news or something, one of a dozen such sources that simply quote the people who actually did the research. HereToHelp ^{(talk to me)} 04:22, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Tcrayford, 23 May 2011

There is a typo/grammatical error: "continue gather" in the section entitled "Users". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tcrayford (talk • contribs) 21:31, 2011 May 23

 Fixed – Thanks! Acps110 ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:47, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

URL Display

The Apple URL on the Infobox was changed from "Apple.com" to "www.apple.com". I thought it looked better the way it was and also, typing apple.com still works in the address bar. What do we think? AnimatedZebra (talk) 15:18, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Apple store in possession of stolen good, refuses to return to owner

An Apple store in Canada has appeared in local news because it allowed a thief to replace a stolen iPhone4 without verifying their identity, and when the legal owner found out the store is in possession of the stolen phone, the store refused to release the phone despite police involvement.[1][2] The following appeared as part of an editorial in the news: "Why would they do this, you might ask? Setting up a transfer-of-ownership system would cost Apple millions of dollars, and take up thousands of hours of time from support staff and sales clerks at stores. Time that could be spent resolving technical issues, or selling Apple's pricey fare. And guess what an iPhone4 owner will do when his/heriPhone is stolen? That's right, they'll buy a new one."

Is this worthy of inclusion in one of the articles? Shawnc (talk) 02:44, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

No. See WP:POINT. The rule of thumb is start with an article and find information, but not the other way around. HereToHelp ^{(talk to me)} 02:58, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Seems utterly trivial... -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 12:18, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

"200 Million iPods, iPhones, iPads" until Year 2011

Bloomberg Businuessweek (13.06.2011) 62.200.73.57 (talk) 15:16, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Stores

There are 327 stores worldwide as of the 1st July [3]--RusGameTactics (talk) 08:38, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

iPad

I can't make the change because I'm not logged in. The iPad2 graf talks about the devastating tsunami and ensuing earthquake. This is backward. Also, might be a good idea to link to the actual page related to the event in question rather than the generic definition of tsunami and earthquake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.10.193.23 (talk) 19:30, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Is this relevant?

Apple is now THE MOST valuable company in the world.

http://www.tuaw.com/2011/08/10/apple-is-now-the-worlds-most-valuable-company/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/scottdecarlo/2011/08/11/the-worlds-25-most-valuable-companies-apple-is-now-on-top/ http://osxdaily.com/2011/08/09/apple-is-now-the-worlds-most-valuable-company/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.140.172.12 (talk) 20:33, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Environmental Concerns

I just want to throw it out there that I feel the environmental section is overly focused on greenpeace and has subtly bias language like "confronted", which implies guilt and wrong-doing. The section is written from Greenpeace's perspective, taking time to quote them, talk about their campaigns, etc.

I believe this section could be written more neutrally and succinctly if it was primarily made up of two sets of bullets; one for their various scores from different organizations and another for specific chemicals/policies/practices that they have either implemented or been criticized for using neutral language.

Thoughts?

King4057 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:16, 31 August 2011 (UTC).

Concur to a certain extent. Made a wp:bold edit. Darrell_Greenwood (talk) 16:19, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Ok, wasn't sure if I was just crazy. I usually work on Wikis that don't have a large engaged editorial community. I made a couple more minor edits as well.

King4057 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 01:06, 1 September 2011 (UTC).

Apple slogan

What about the slogan introduced a few months after the launch of the mac in the 1980s: "The Power To Be Your Best". There's a whole big story to it. 122.161.82.84 (talk) 17:56, 1 September 2011 (UTC)niyam bhushan, 1 sep 2011.

Where? HereToHelp ^{(talk to me)} 19:42, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Danzanfran, 3 September 2011

This article misstates Tim Cook and Steve Jobs' positions. It says Cook is COO and Jobs is CEO, while Cook is actually CEO and Jobs is Chairman.

Danzanfran (talk) 14:36, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Partly done: I have located one spot where the position of Cook should be clarified, and fixed it, but I was unable to locate any more places where their positions were not clear. If there is still a problem with the article, please be specific as to where the change needs to be made, and reopen the edit request. Monty₈₄₅ 16:49, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Proposal to change headquarters image

File:Applecomputerheadquarters.jpg is the current image for the headquarters. I propose to replace this image with File:Apple Headquarters in Cupertino.jpg. --Jovian Eye _storm 23:08, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Seconded. The proposed replacement is a more symmetrical shot, and shows parts of the building previously obscured by trees. HereToHelp ^{(talk to me)} 23:17, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Since the proposed image is clearly superior, I dont think a big consensus is required. --Jovian Eye _storm 22:52, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Problem in the lead

The lead says:

As of September 2011, Apple is the largest publicly traded company in the world by market capitalization and the largest technology company in the world by revenue and profit.

The source provided (#6 in the reflist) is this article http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/27/technology/27apple.html, which was published in 2010. How can an article from May 2010 be an "as of" reference for September 2011? Further, the article doesn't say that apple has the biggest revenue or profit. It says that Microsoft does. If the lead's statement is true, it needs to be sourced by something that actually confirms it! Does anyone know of one? --Grapplequip (formerly LAR) (talk) 23:31, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

And just to clarify, we all know it is the largest publicly traded company (according to recent estimates), but this is again not what the article cited says. It says Apple is the largest tech company. The sources are sorely in need of updates.--Grapplequip (formerly LAR) (talk) 23:37, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

File:Mac mini.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Mac mini.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests September 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 08:00, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

maybe someone can use this

http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/2011/0917/The-Apple-effect-How-Steve-Jobs-Co.-won-over-the-world 141.218.36.50 (talk) 20:31, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Market Cap

Is this really necessary/relevant to the article? Maybe stating they are one of the largest or at times have been the largest but as of today they are not and due to the fact the market fluctuates daily they likely will move up and down making a static statement about them beeing the largest incorrect on many days. 207.216.253.134 (talk) 19:48, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Section Breaks Please ! ! !

The entire article has been written without any section breaks, making it horrendously difficult to edit or add to.

Please would someone more skilful and knowledgeable than myself be so kind as to break it up ? Darkman101 (talk) 18:59, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from , 6 October 2011

Sir/Ma'am, In the 2007-present:Iphone and Ipad section, the last paragraph, 5th line ( " It has been argued that Apple has achieved such efficiency in its supply chain[102] that the company has operates..." ) needs to be grammatically rectified with the last section of the line changed to: " ... efficiency in its supply chain that the company operates...") the 'has' is not needed.

59.93.83.31 (talk) 15:58, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

 Done Acps110 ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:04, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

iPhone section

Does this really belong on a page that's supposed to be listing facts?

"Most recently, on the October 4, Apple unveiled the iPhone 4S, which is planned to be released to the general public on the October 14. However it is thought that the 4S will only sell due to brand loyalty, as it displayed no drastic changes, and just a few new features. The iPhone 4S failed to impress critics and fans, as the expectation of many was the considerably upgraded "iPhone 5", of which many disappointed fans were expecting a thinner profile, bigger screen and many new features."

Who thought that the 4S will only sell due to brand loyalty? Anti-Apple sites don't count as fact.

Who says it displays no drastic changes? That's a matter of opinion. In my opinion, being twice as fast, adding a 1080p camera, Siri, and the dual antenna design are vast improvements and would definitely fall under the category of "drastic change". If the person writing this meant an outer shell redesign, the article should say that. Also, there is only anecdotal evidence (read: mostly from the anti-Apple crowd) that this is a huge disappointment.

There is no sourcing for "the iPhone 4S failed to impress critics and fans" and even if a source is found, that blanket statement should be changed to reflect that it failed to impress "some" critics and fans.

The mention of fans wanting a "considerably upgraded iPhone 5" is opinion again, as many fans (myself included) always knew it would be a 4S phone, and consider the updates to be considerable. This also means that the comment that fans were expecting "many new features" rings hollow since myself and many fans believe that there are many new features to this phone. Apple's website lists them: http://www.apple.com/iphone/#

As far as expecting a thinner profile, it should be noted that the iPhone 4 (and by extension, the iPhone 4S since they share the same dimensions) is still the world's thinnest smartphone. Legally-ruled proof here: http://uk.ibtimes.com/articles/214236/20110915/apple-iphone-wins-key-legal-battle-against-samsung-galaxy-s2-price-thickness-release-news-5.htm

Also, if this stuff is going to fly, maybe it should be added that "despite some doubts, the iPhone 4S received a record one million preorders in the first 24 hours alone." Source: http://www.electronista.com/articles/11/10/10/apple.ends.doubt.on.iphone.4s.demand/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.205.240.21 (talk) 17:15, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

That, and the entire section needs serious grammar work to look professional.

Deleted unsourced opinion. Thanks for the heads up. Darrell_Greenwood (talk) 17:35, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

It looks like it's still there. At least it is on the Apple Inc. page under the iPhone heading. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.208.224.38 (talk) 18:33, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Wayne's Share

In this article, it states Wayne sold his share back to Wozniak and Jobs for $800. In the article on Wayne himself, it states he sold it back for $2300. Which is it? PatienceGoodlove (talk) 14:33, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Rewrite Last Paragraph of History Section

The last paragraph of the history section of the article reads:

"On October 4, 2011, Apple announced the iPhone 4S, which includes an improved camera with 1080p video recording, a dual core A5 chip capable of 7 times faster graphics than the A4, a voice recognition system named Siri, and cloud-sourced data with iCloud.[106][107] It was released on October 14, 2011. On the day after, Apple announced that Jobs had died, marking the end of an era for Apple Inc.[108][109]"

This makes it seem like Steve Jobs died on October 15, when he actually died on the 5th. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.174.196.140 (talk) 10:24, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Give Credit to Ronald Wayne

The "Logo" section reads:

"Apple's first logo, Wayne, depicts Sir Isaac Newton sitting under an apple tree."

That should probably say "drawn by Ronald Wayne", and should probably have a link to his Wikipedia article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.174.196.140 (talk) 10:26, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Are we allowed to mention the silly patents?

these include,

bool use_camera() {
if(gps.lat() > gig.lower_lat && gps.lat() < gig.upper_lat && gps.long() > gig.lower_long && gps.long() < gig.upper_long) {
   return false;
}
return true;
}

and lately: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-15461732 these seem to be mentioned no-where.

NO!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc._litigation is where that's all at. HOWEVER a section that at least points to that article may be good (Start at talk of merger and work down?)

Context? Acroterion (talk) 15:46, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Probably the BBC articles on it, (going from the edit war) you don't see the joke above, Apple patented (or at least applied) for the ability to turn the camera off when in select locations, latitude and longitude (lat/long) are ways of telling one's position in a system that uses spherical co-ordinates (2 angles and a radius) he/she is playing on this, by the what is essentially just an if-statement line of code.

any more explanation is patronising, but while started with a "BANG" and a poor joke, there is some talking to be done. 193.35.132.40 (talk) 15:55, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

I eventually got the general point: dumping code on a talkpage isn't a good way to go about making a point though. My impression is that it's undue weight in a general article on Apple. Acroterion (talk) 16:00, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Why would that even matter? It's an article on Apple, not a poster, thank for the unblocking btw, I was most, pissed at that, and evidently contacted a friend immediately. The litigation page is a better option though, I think we can all agree there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.148.93.156 (talk) 16:08, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from , 29 October 2011

Change: "As of October 2010, the company operates 317 retail stores" To: "As of July 2011, the company operates 357 retail stores." Reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Store#cite_note-0 124.176.45.105 (talk) 02:48, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Not done: Sorry but current information is better than outdated one. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ ^{Talk Email} 14:42, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

DoneThe information from July 2011 is better then October 2010. --Jnorton7558 (talk) 14:51, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Redundant

Can't edit the article; it seems to be locked. The following gramattical awkwardness needs to be fixed:

"Established on April 1, 1976 in Cupertino, California, and incorporated January 3, 1977,[7] the company was previously named Apple Computer, Inc., for its first 30 years, but removed the word "Computer" on January 9, 2007 ... "

Should be changed to either, "Established on April 1, 1976 in Cupertino, California, and incorporated January 3, 1977,[7] the company was previously named Apple Computer, Inc., but removed the word "Computer" on January 9, 2007 ... "

Or to, "Established on April 1, 1976 in Cupertino, California, and incorporated January 3, 1977,[7] the company was named Apple Computer, Inc. for its first 30 years, but removed the word "Computer" on January 9, 2007 ... "

As it stands now the statement is redundant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.92.174.105 (talk) 18:25, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Criticism of Apple

there is an entire article for this, yet besides a link in the last sentence of the article opening, there is not a single mention of its existence anywhere in here; not very npov. i suggest making a section called "criticism" (so it shows up on the contents table) that only links to the article (ive seen a lot of articles on here with sections that contained nothing but "see: *link*", so lack of content would not be a valid argument against this proposal)

objections? --none.of.your.business (talk) 12:33, 5 November 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by still.none.of.your.business (talk)

I agree. I was actually going to suggest the same thing, and wasn't even aware of the separate criticism page until I saw your post here. — al-Shimoni (talk) 05:43, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Siri

Regarding this sentence:

"On October 4, 2011, Apple announced the iPhone 4S, which includes an improved camera with 1080p video recording, a dual core A5 chip capable of 7 times faster graphics than the A4, a voice recognition system named Siri, and cloud-sourced data with iCloud."

Siri is not a voice recognition software, it is instead an "Intelligent software assistant", as stated in the first sentence of the Siri article and another sentence in this article, in the iPhone section: "Another notable feature of the iPhone 4S was Siri voice assistant technology, which Apple had acquired in 2010" 178.148.246.169 (talk) 20:19, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Fixed. Sanpitch (talk) 03:46, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Motorola wins patent suit, Europe-wide sales ban on iPhone/iPad

• 9 December 2011, In Germany, Motorola prevails in Apple patent suit, wins Europe-wide sales ban on iOS devices, 9to5Mac

Would this belong in the Apple Inc. article, the iOS article, or the iPhone and iPad articles? -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 13:47, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Article refers to vague terms & itself

For example. "On October 4, 2011, Apple announced the iPhone 4S, which includes an improved camera with 1080p video recording, a dual core A5 chip capable of 7 times faster graphics than the A4, an 'intelligent software assistant' named Siri, and cloud-sourced data with iCloud." How about: "On the 4th of October 2011, Apple announced the next release in the acclaimed "iPhone" series of smartphones called the "iPhone 4S", touting "Siri", an application that integrates client-side hardware with an Apple-hosted server(s), utilizing Nuance's "Dragon Dictation", resulting in both reasonably swift & comparatively accurate interactions between "Siri" & the consumer. Other notable changes in software & design include: a newly-implemented 8Mp camera capable of recording digital videos in 1080p, Apple-backed "iCloud" integration, which offers specific data & storage synchronization, as well as implementing an Apple-branded, dual-core processor dubbed the "A5" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tcalight (talk • contribs) 04:09, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Current patent dispute(s) legal stuff

Could we expand a section, to include the current issues regarding Apple, and other companies; namely Google and Samsung, and their patent disputes and outcomes. As this is quite important in regards to technological advancements in the future. Not to mention that a concise list of events would be quite easy to categorise and display.

Or on reflection perhaps create a new page entitled, 'List of legal disputes involving Apple' with a link to this under the 'Culture' section.

--XyZAn (talk) 16:31, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

No mention of unique design focus in the intro??

If i had a conversation with an alien, the first thing i would tell them is how Apple concentrates on the user experience and consumer vs crap companies like HP,Dell. Nowhere is this talked about. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.141.104.94 (talk) 07:02, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not take a stand on this. The focus of a company usually does not deserve much weight, because often it's unnecessary flattery. I could easily apply this argument to Microsoft as well. It just doesn't work that way on Wikipedia.Jasper Deng (talk) 07:06, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Profit

Why is profit listed as profit instead of net income? If other articles use net income shouldn't it be uniform?--67.81.143.26 (talk) 19:39, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Official Twitter

Apple Inc¨s Offical Twitter Account has been created: http://twitter.com/#!/AppIe_Computer — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.242.169.198 (talk) 05:33, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Twitter shouldn't be added to articles per WP:ELNO. Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 05:36, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

steve jobs died of panceratic cancer !!!!!!!!!!!!!

Criticism of Apple.

Can we add a criticism of apple section. This whole article does not cover any of the criticisms and it would be far more balanced if it did. we can add only a link to the criticism of apple article for the initial content as for the initial article. The criticism section was there in the previous versions pf the article and I do not know why it has been removed. any objections? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.191.220.71 (talk) 09:42, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

I like having a criticism section. Sanpitch (talk) 21:32, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 24 February 2012

apple is taking off the markets all scroll wheel ipods such as Ipod classic.

Apple is not discontinuing the iPod Classic. And it's not stylized as "Ipod", it's stylized as iPod. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.180.101.2 (talk) 14:11, 24 February 2012 (UTC) Topias231 (talk) 08:43, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

purchase of companies

I recommend deleting the category "purchase of companies" and its subcategory "Buy Domains." It seems to have been added recently and is unnecessary. A link leading to a list of mergers and acquisitions can be found under "Corporate affairs" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.217.93.194 (talk) 15:44, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Why is this page semi-protected?

This page doesn't seen to be a likely target for vandalism. Why was it semi-protected? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iwtw10ot (talk • contribs) 18:44, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

You have no idea. There are a LOT of anti-Apple people out there. Jobs made a lot of enemies with his "reality distortion field." --Coolcaesar (talk) 00:30, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Earthquakes and tsunamis

"the devastating tsunami and ensuing earthquake"

It's an earthquake and THEN a tsunami, not the other way round. Nomad (talk) 15:35, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

 Done – Thanks, Acps110 ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:43, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. Nomad (talk) 08:22, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Apple and wigear

Apple did not buy Wi-gear, it was just a rumour,if someone has more knowledge about it, make appropriate corrections in purchase of companies section, visit cnet news Murughendra talk 08:04, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

retracted "This American Life" story

I removed a link to a story that has now been retracted by the program. See the link here.--JOJ ^Hutton 19:11, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

fortunately, Mike Daisy only lied about his personally meeting victims. The stuff he describes (hexane poisoning) has been well documented by other sources, which are listed in the citation. you can even find a discussion of hexane in Apple's own supplier analysis documents. thank you for fixing this. (now there is of course the argument from Mr Daisy saying that his one-man show was entertainment, and somehow it got mixed up and presented as facts... but im not sure i buy that) Decora (talk) 01:22, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Thats why there was no reason to remove the entire section or paragraph. But it would have been irresponsible and unethical for the article to continue to use the citation as a source, given the websites retraction.--JOJ ^Hutton 18:44, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Revenue and profits don't match Fortune 500

Apple is at Number 35 on Fortune 500, and their revenue and profit estimations are only HALF that of those that are listed here. http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2011/full_list/index.html

Statement in second paragraph "as well as the largest technology company in the world by revenue and profit" is at best misleading, or most likely simply incorrect. Without some clarification of what a tech company is and what time period this statement applies to, this is a meaningless statement. For example (and without citing anything - sorry!) by more "normal" definitions (per year, per last released quarter, etc.) HP (definitely a tech company) has higher revenue, or Samsung would be much higher (though is Samsung a tech company? They do non-tech as well). Point being that the statement is misleading. N7n (talk) 02:36, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Revenue of fourth Quarter is not included

108 billon in 2011?i guess its time to update

revenues, profits

yes, there seems to be some kind of error in the profit statements: i believe those kinds of numbers are closer to collective of top food manufacturer/distributor-- and tho apple is a profitable company i think to claim 108 billion in a year (even a decade) is a bit high. does anyone know of an accurate/dependable source for earnings reports? -rasko99 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rasko99 (talk • contribs) 19:30, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Brand value typos

At the end of the History section, the article states "Apple Inc. has also become the most valuable consumer-facing brand in the world with a 246 percent increased to $19.1 billion.[100]"

Actually, if you go to the source, that refers to Facebook. The sentence should read "84 percent increase to $153.3 billion". (Note that "increased" should be "increase." hello — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.20.242.118 (talk) 05:20, 6 June 2011 (UTC)  Fixed Dbrodbeck (talk) 14:09, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

The typo hasn't fully been fixed. The typo now stands as "84 percent increase to $19.1 billion", which confuses the 84% jump of Apple with the $19.1 billion brand value of Facebook, according to the source mentioned above. The source gives Apple's brand value at $153.3 billion. Thus the numbers should be: 84% increase to $153.3 billion.

 Done ^Jguy_Talk^Done 14:42, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Bias?

There's only a small line that says Microsoft invested $150 million in Apple, where the agreement actually saved the company.

http://www.wired.com/thisdayintech/2009/08/dayintech_0806/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.246.115.136 (talk) 16:31, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

more bias?

"However, the company has received widespread criticism for its contractors' labor, and for its environmental and business practices.[16][17]" This omits news articles and opinion pieces which gave credit to Apple stating that many electronics devices are manufactured at Foxconn in China (e.g., Sony Playstation, Amazon Kindle, Nokia phones and Nintendo Wii) however only Apple has taken steps at improving conditions, i.e., Apple's CEO made a trip to the Foxconn manufacturing plant in China for that purpose and Apple hiring the Fair Labor Association to conduct an outside audit of its China-based suppliers. Source: http://www.csmonitor.com/Innovation/Horizons/2012/0329/Apple-CEO-s-visit-to-Foxconn-plant-dredges-up-controversial-history. Source: http://www.npr.org/2012/03/30/149668775/apple-foxconn-to-improve-factory-conditions

It also omits the news reports of a retraction by a major critic. "Chicago Public Radio's This American Life Friday retracted a January broadcast about working conditions at Apple outsourcers that was based on monologist Mike Daisey's account of his visit to an iPhone factory in China." source: http://www.informationweek.com/news/global-cio/outsourcing/232602776

If reports of criticism are mentioned they need to be balanced with opposing views and a significant retraction that was widely reported in news reports. Tomandzeke (talk) 22:12, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

"Steve Jobs Leaves Forever"

In the timeline, Jobs' death is described as "Steve Jobs leaves forever." I do not beleieve this is appropriate for an encyclopedia. I think this incident can be far better described without poetic euphemisms.69.46.127.6 (talk) 17:00, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

I agree. That is a quite silly way to say that someone has died. iNic (talk) 14:13, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

I agree also, it should just use the word "death" or "died", this isn't a children's story book.Rangoon11 (talk) 14:27, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

I agree also. I just saw it and I was pretty disgusted at the wording, considering that he passed away of cancer less than a year ago and the way it's written implies that he's still alive. I hope someone can fix this error. (JRGregory (talk) 00:43, 3 May 2012 (UTC))

Needs symbol where traded on other exchanges, e.g., in Germany it is traded_as APC.DE

| traded_as = APC.DE

How about Niekki, OSA, asx, etc.? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ocdnctx (talk • contribs) 17:35, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

This is non-encyclopedic trivia, and belongs in a corporate directory, but not here. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:36, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

I apologize

Hey guys. Sorry I did those disruptive edits on this article, I won't do it again and I actually won't. I hope all of you guys forgive me. Interlude 65 22:45, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Key people

Authur Levinson should not be on the key people, what has he done for the company? If we stick him in there we might as well put the whole board of directors in there. He needs off, in my opinion. Jony I've is good, in my opinion, becuase he is an amazing engineer and without him we wouldn't have our great products, but Steve should also be at top, too. Steve, then Tim, then Jony. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SocialHu (talk • contribs) 05:33, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

No sales with Iranians

This article [4] in the Huff. Post mentions a Policy of the company that "prohibits the sale of their products to countries with which trade is prohibited by U.S. embargo." Apparently this also applies to citizens of those countries and their nationalities. It is not mentioned in the main article and should be.--Auric (talk) 12:36, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

I read those article amy self as well. In fact, I read a few much more detailed article altogether. These seem to be isolated incidents and don't appear to reflect the companies policy as a whole, but was an interpretation of policy by a store. Although in this article, the customer admitted that the product was going to be sent to Iran. That may have made a difference in the store's decision.--JOJ ^Hutton 12:54, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Auric raises two separate issues: one is Apple's policy prohibiting the sale of products to Iran, the other is this incident in Georgia where someone speaking Farsi was denied service. The first issue does not belong on Wikipedia on its own - Apple is following American law, just like any reputable American company, it just isn't notable. The incident in Georgia is different because they appear to be applying the policy in a way that some consider unnecessary and discriminatory. The question here is whether or not this incident, which is really the actions of one or two very low level people, rises to the level where it should be covered in an encyclopedia article on the world's largest company (by market value). We would probably need a paragraph to explain the relevant issues: that if a sales clerk knew that someone was intending to ship the product to Iran than they would be obligated to deny service, but if they stopped the person just for speaking Farsi that would be discriminatory. Given that this is such a small story about such a large company it really doesn't seem worth it to cover it in this article unless there's something more substantial that comes out, such as a decision by Apple to actively question customers who might be from an embargoed country. GabrielF (talk) 02:06, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Steve Jobs

Just a minor edit possibly could all the mentions of his name become linked to his page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.16.29.134 (talk) 13:23, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 29 June 2012

The infobox is wrong. There is no such thing as an iPhone 3 or an iPhone 3S. Please change both to iPhone 3G and iPhone 3GS. 198.228.200.157 (talk) 13:14, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

DoneJOJ ^Hutton 13:22, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 17 July 2012

Need to add the following under 'Environmental record' at the end.

In July 2012 Apple Inc. returned its products to the Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool (EPEAT) certification system.

Sources; BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18837492 MacRumors: http://www.macrumors.com/2012/07/13/apple-backpedals-puts-all-eligible-products-back-on-epeat-environmental-registry/

Tardegrade (talk) 23:18, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

 Done I tried to get the result to flow a bit better, but that information needed to be included. --j⚛e decker^talk 23:28, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Add SSL Support

Please check the URLs present in this article to add SSL support where available. 64.128.27.82 (talk) 18:56, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Market Capitalization "Record'

The article currently reflects the contents of several news articles published today that Apple passed the highest market cap ever in history. However, the market cap of PetroChina had topped $1 trillion in 2007, at least based on the valuation in the Shanghai exchange. I think the article needs to be modified to include this. Aurorion (talk) 11:02, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Environmental record

Is it necessary to mention that all PVC and BFRs have been removed from the products 3 times in this section? Especially given this paragraph: Since 2003 Greenpeace has campaigned against Apple's use of particular chemicals in its products, more specifically, the inclusion of PVC and BFRs in their products.[219] On May 2, 2007, Steve Jobs released a report announcing plans to eliminate PVC and BFRs by the end of 2008.[221][222] Apple has since eliminated PVC and BFRs across its product range,[223] becoming the first laptop maker to do so.[224] which I would think makes it clear that they have been removed from all their products?

Also, could this sentence have some context to make it understandable? "In the first edition, released in August 2006, Apple scored 2.7/10.[225]" It does not mention which edition it is referring to. After checking the source it mentions the "Green Electronics Guide" by greenpeace, perhaps this information could be added? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.82.255.190 (talk) 15:03, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

can we add in market capitalisation figure to company details box (top right of page)

here is a list of market capitalisation figures for 2011 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_corporations_by_market_capitalization http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_corporations_by_market_capitalization#2011

best to reference List_of_corporations_by_market_capitalization wiki page rather than the ref that List_of_corporations_by_market_capitalization page references!

here is the page for 'market capitalisation' it is basically the value/size of the company (number of shares inssued * current share price) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_capitalization

so i'd like to see

Market Capitalization 321.072 billion (2011)

Market capitalization changes every time the stock goes up or down a penny. I'd say this is not really encyclopedic content. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:30, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Kodak divisions and patents buyout

Just thought I'd park this here to notify people, so in case the deal goes legit (as seems to be decided pretty soon) it can be put into the article. The whole hubbub is about the fact that today, Kodak has announced selling off its film divisions: http://www.bjp-online.com/british-journal-of-photography/news/2200811/kodak-to-sell-off-film-division , and Apple is one out of the four companies making a joint bid: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444233104577593681054808606.html Gee, I wonder if any of the seven currently available Super8 Kodak stocks will soon bear the Apple logo... --79.193.39.165 (talk) 18:46, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Apple Inc. Assets need an update?

Hi, I was writing a paper and I think the Apple Inc. assets if way off the chart. Can someone help to update it.

Thanks, Karma — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karmagj (talk • contribs) 23:04, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

I agree. The comment about Apple Inc. having more revenue than Microsft and Google combined seems incorrect and comes from an unreliable source... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.193.230.115 (talk) 00:50, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

The infobox figures are correct for 2011. The references were still pointing to the 2010 reference. I have deleted the 2010 reference and renamed the references to 10-K-2011. The 2011 reference is the SEC 10-K filing. It is a reliable source. Misstatements on a 10-K are subject to criminal prosecution. Apple does have more revenue than MS and Google:

(revenue: Apple Inc.: US$108.249 billion (2011), Google:US$37.905 billion (2011), Microsoft: US$ 69.94 billion (2011)). Darrell_Greenwood (talk) 18:07, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Products

I wonder if its really necessary to have a summary of Apple products, given that this information is easily accessible from their website etc. -wikipedia isn't supposed to be advertising and there are plenty of tech forums to discuss any issues with their prodcuts. Having said that I don't have a huge objection to the small summaries on the page at present but I do think it should at least be put at the bottom of the page, below the information which wouldn't immediately come up in a search and may be more difficult to compile. Thoughts?? Politicalpat (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:52, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 7 October 2012

heartbank (talk) 15:23, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

 Not done No actionable request. Please include specific suggestions for changes to the text and then use the {{edit semi-protected}} template again. Sailsbystars (talk) 15:47, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

In Putin's Russia, apple bites you

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/10/11/apple_logo_russian_christians/ Russian Orthodox Christians have defaced the logos on Apple products because they consider the bitten Apple to be anti-Christian, says Russian news agency Interfax (in Russian).

Worth a mention yet? Hcobb (talk) 12:30, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Interesting piece of info but unless it develops into a major problem for Apple don't think it should really be mentioned. Politicalpat (talk) 09:08, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Hardly notable, not even remotely. Dbrodbeck (talk) 11:29, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

It'd only be usable in the article if it was over a line long, and there's not any way you'd be able to do that, I don't think. In it's current state, it's not more than unlisted trivia, which wouldn't go anywhere in the article. drewmunn (talk) 11:32, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Spelling Correction to Headquarter of Apple Inc

The headquarter for Apple Inc is Cupertino and not Curpertino as on the website.

Thanks for catching this. TimidGuy (talk) 17:02, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Charity/"Causes" section

The Causes section mentions product RED, if the purpose is to highlight charitable endeavors by the company then perhaps a mention of their donation matching program is in order.

Employees donations to charities would be matched by Apple. Steve Jobs ended the charity matching program upon his return in 1998 as part of a larger program to immediately end all excess spending and get their finances in order. Some time in 2011 I think it was, Tim Cook announced the return of their charity matching program.

Obviously citations are needed for all of this. Figured I'd mention it if anyone's interested. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.134.73.128 (talk) 01:06, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Customer support workaround

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/23/tech_support_magic_word/

Should we note this invocation, er innovation in customer support technology? Hcobb (talk) 16:54, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Believe it or not, this is a fairly common part of many automated response systems. It's not worth noting on Apple's page, as it is not limited to them; many systems will transfer you to a human if you become unresponsive or non-cooperative. drewmunn (talk) 08:08, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

now has 401 retail stores

Apple now has 401 retail stores in the world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elauermann (talk • contribs) 02:38, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Do you have a source for the increase? Jnorton7558 (talk) 03:17, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

I believe Apple has 399 stores worldwide. I got 399 when I counted the stores at http://www.apple.com/retail/storelist/ Can anyone confirm this? The article currently says 394 in November 2012. --Brainhelljr (talk) 20:54, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Sueing

The phrase "and for the fact that they sue everyone" in the introduction strikes me as very colloquial and inappropriate for the article? I agree with the underlying statement but it could be worded in a more appropriate manner — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.114.109.205 (talk) 17:09, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

It seems this was vandalism that had slipped our net! I've got rid of it entirely. drewmunn (talk) 18:27, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 7 February 2013

At the beginning of the second paragraph of this article, it states:

"Apple has been the world's second-largest information technology companies..."

As you can see, it mentions company in a plural form when it should be singular since we are talking about one company.

It is a minor error, but i think it should be corrected.

Thank you. Juangb92 (talk) 15:15, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

 Done TimidGuy (talk) 16:10, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Environmental section

"The Environmental Protection Agency rates Apple highest amongst producers of notebook computers, and fairly well compared to producers of desktop computers and LCD displays.[247][248]" <---This info is 6 years out of date (That's from 2007). 184.38.35.68 (talk) 18:56, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

If you can provide a new source for updating the information, then it can be changed. drewmunn talk 19:08, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Antitrust complaint

The US DOJ is currently prosecuting an Antitrust case against Apple regarding collusion between it and several large publishing houses vis a vis ebook sales on the ITunes store. Shouldn't this be mentioned? Quodfui (talk) 13:42, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Maybe not here, as this covers everything Apple do. If we mentioned one legal battle, we'd open the floodgates to every single patent dispute or otherwise trivial undertaking. It may, however, be worth a mention on the iBooks page or, by a stretch, the iTunes Store page. In fact, a similar EU case regarding song sales is mentioned on the latter of these pages, so that provide a precedent for inclusion there. drewmunn (talk) 14:13, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

I suggest you to put this on the Apple Inc. litigation page. Xzaviur (talk) 19:15, 27 March 2013 (UTC)Xzaviur

Edit request on 10 March 2013

Please add this page in the "See Also" section: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Apple_Inc.

70.45.194.150 (talk) 19:26, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Not done:. That is already in the lead section of the article. RudolfRed (talk) 22:20, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Corporate Culture Section

"Numerous employees of Apple have cited that projects without Jobs' involvement often take longer than projects with his involvement."

"take" Should be replaced with "took", showing past tense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.128.110.115 (talk) 18:50, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

 Done. Thank you. Darrell_Greenwood (talk) 21:47, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Finance

In the article, it discusses that the "effective tax rate to the UK Treasury is only 3 percent"; actually it's globally only 1.9%. Perhaps it can be mentioned that Apple uses the double Irish with a Dutch sandwich method to attain this low percentage.109.130.150.229 (talk) 08:09, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

The Unknown mind behind the iPhone

On June 2005, Sir William McKelly had a dream inwhich his apple computer shrunk down to the size of his hand. This dream provided Sir William with the idea that would later become the iPhone, a device that revolutionized the cell phone industry. Although few know of his brilliance, Sir William lives on a private estate in Hawaii collecting royalties off of iPhone sales. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.40.151.66 (talk) 00:54, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I can't find any citable evidence of this fact, or even of Mckelly's existence. He is not listed on the (incomplete, but fairly comprehensive) list of those to have received British Honours. Also, it contradicts known, cited knowledge of Apple development. For him to receive royalties would suggest he was an integral part of the design process, but not paid wages in the manner of the chief designer, Sir Jony Ive. There is no record of any such person's involvement in the iPhone project, or its predecessor, the iPod Touch. drewmunn talk 06:06, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 31 May 2013

Please change the traded as field in the infobox from just NASDAQ to NASDAQ:AAPL. Ticker is not available which is misleading. Harykris (talk) 00:59, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

 Done

Revision

This page isn't fluent in certain places. There is repetitive information that doesn't make sense in the 'Environmental record' paragraph of this page. Xzaviur (talk) 19:39, 27 March 2013 (UTC)Xzaviur

The "Microsoft" article includes a section on criticism ,as do the pages of most businesses, but the "Apple Inc." article has no such section. There is certainly some documented criticism of Apple; see the "Criticism of Apple Inc." article. To keep the "Apple Inc." article free from bias, a summary of the "Criticism of Apple Inc." article should be added as a section of the "Apple Inc." article, and the section should have a link to the "Criticism of Apple Inc." article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.113.2.65 (talk) 09:45, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Criticism sections in general are bad - the criticism (or summary thereof) should be in the article itself. Microsoft isn't the greatest example either - I worked with others to restructure the page to put the criticism in the rest of the article to flow better. But, Wikipedia being what it is, a year (or more) later or so when I and the others were gone some one just put the thing back and due to the decreased activity it just stayed. Besides, a criticism section or lack thereof has nothing to do with POV - generally one part of the article can't be biased and then justify it with a section that is biased in the opposite direction. Ryan Norton 15:17, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

• I agree that an outright critisism section doesn't really make much sense; we are meant to be unbiased, but there's never a section just for praise. Inline critisism is a little dodgy, but can work well if correctly implemented. We just have to make sure that we don't run wild with it and keep to a sensible level of coverage. Haters will always hate, and it's not really our job to note everything the voice their opinions over. Film articles generally work well, with their reception sections giving a fairly accurate view of the subject, and it's definitely something we could learn from in other areas.  drewmunn  talk  19:36, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Reader feedback: legal battles

204.39.82.13 posted this comment on 2013-05-22 (view all feedback).

legal battles

I added a section 'Litigation' under '4 Corporate affairs' with a link to the main article Apple Inc. litigation. It's a bit rough, but this way people should be able to find it.

2pem (talk) 09:26, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 17 July 2013

It appears that at the beginning of the page "YAD YAD YAD YAD YAD Fuck YOU ANDROID" which only shows for users who aren't registered. When I login, it shows the correct page. Ahmalj (talk) 08:45, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

It was vandalism, which was reverted last night. My guess is your Web cache was outdated, and when you logged in it purged. Thanks, NiciVampireHeart 08:56, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure if that is the reason, you know. Does Wikipedia store a cache for IP users? I've just checked on a browser with an empty cache (and set not to record any new caching) that has never before visited the page, and when logged in there is no issue, but log out again, and the text re-appears.  drewmunn  talk  08:59, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

I assumed it does, but I'll happily admit to being nowhere near an expert on the subject. I've just logged out to check on both my browsers (IE and Firefox), and I don't see anything out of the ordinary on either. NiciVampireHeart 09:16, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

I don't see anything when logging out on my normal browsers either (Safari and Chrome), but then they've got a cache of the page. My non-caching browser (Chrome Canary) still shows the removed text.  drewmunn  talk  09:26, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

 Done Scratch that, I've purged Wikipedia's cache. For reference, adding ?action=purge to the end of the page's URL opens the cache purge option. That seems to have resolved the issue in all circumstances I've tested. drewmunn  talk  09:28, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 1 August 2013

Apple is the second-largest publicly traded corporation in the world by market capitalization, with an estimated value of US$414 billion as of January 2013.

corrected: Apple is the largest publicly traded corporation in the world by market capitalization, with an estimated value of US$415 billion as of March 2013. Kristopherbd (talk) 04:34, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

 Done -- FWIW, you are one edit from being auto-confirmed and being able to edit semi-protected articles yourself, see WP:Autoconfirmed

Darrell_Greenwood (talk) 19:51, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

This actually strikes me as problematic. First, the Daily Telegraph reference is to an article from 25 Jan 2013, when Exxon passed Apple in market capitalization--that both contradicts the assertion that Apple is the largest and predates the March 2013 date given in the text. Apple was the largest publicly traded company by market capitalization on 28 March 2013, and it would be better to link to the FT table that List of corporations by market capitalization links to (http://www.ft.com/cms/67c810a4-ae5b-11e2-bdfd-00144feabdc0.pdf) and state that "As of March 2013..." Apple was the largest. Though that itself is out of date, as the hope here is to update market data quarterly, which would make a June 2013 list more current. List of corporations by market capitalization is tagged as outdated because of this.

In the meantime, AAPL received a lot of press today for passing Exxon in market cap due to Exxon's share price falling, but that is as of 1 August 2013 and could be out of date as early at 9:30 tomorrow morning. It's also not how the statement is currently cited. An alternative could be a "On 1 August 2013 Apple surpassed Exxon as the largest publicly traded company by market capitalization..." with a link to one of today's articles, such as http://stream.marketwatch.com/story/markets/SS-4-4/SS-4-34915/ or http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/08/01/apple-inc-retakes-title-as-worlds-most-valuable-company-following-strong-july. Any solution with reasonably current data that matches the reference should work, but it should also keep in mind that market capitalization changes daily and the "as of" date is crucial for such statements. -Thomas Craven (talk) 20:49, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

No disagreement with your comments. The statement was and is linked to List of corporations by market capitalization. I have deleted ref 23 (which I didn't check when I edited, my bad) as out of date. I'll leave any remaining fixes to your wishes. Darrell_Greenwood (talk) 21:56, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 25 August 2013

Please change the side banner where it shows the current CEO. Steve Jobs is not a CEO and should not be put with Tim Cook as CEO.

I believe this is knwon, but in any case, please see : http://www.apple.com/pr/bios/tim-cook.html

Thanks,

Hekurani

46.99.42.97 (talk) 18:40, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

I've moved Steve Jobs to the end of the list and added a parenthetical note clarifying that he was the founder and former CEO in order to avoid confusion. I believe this fits with the documentation at Template:Infobox company. GabrielF (talk) 18:48, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

No it should be removed, Steve Jobs is deceased. He was a key person. He is already mentioned as the founder. -Polytope4d (talk) 18:12, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Current Logo

Based on the Web Archive, this link (from August 15, 1999) makes use of the current logo. The rainbow logo was still used in 1998 and was discontinued on August 14, 1999. Again, the rainbow logo was first used on May 17, 1976 (a month after the company was founded). Can I change the dates around? Tariqmudallal (talk) 04:27, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Outdated 'New operating system'

.

Please change "~The latest version being OS X Mountain Lion (version 10.8). " to "~The latest version being OS X Mavericks (version 10.9).

Sources: www.apple.com/mavericks

 Done Darrell_Greenwood (talk) 21:34, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Buying into social media by acquiring Topsy Labs

Steps to keep up in social media:

• "Apple has confirmed that it’s purchased Topsy Labs, a social analytics firm that tracks trending topics on Twitter and other social media networks, in a deal the Wall Street Journal says is valued at more than $200 million. Topsy, one of Twitter’s biggest partners, analyzes ”the half a billion messages sent over Twitter every day and has indexed every tweet ever sent and has made them searchable, much like Google GOOG -0.59% does for the web,” adds the New York Times." [5]

— Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 05:46, 3 December 2013 (UTC) [Currently, added to the 'In development' section.]

Infobox logo date error

Please change 19983 to 1983 because it could mislead people. 50.158.36.232 (talk) 03:51, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

 Done Mlpearc (open channel) 04:35, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Typo

Under Corporate Affairs/Headquarters there is a typo in the sixth line of the third paragraph:

Job's should be changed to Jobs'

Fixed, though I used my favored convention rather than your recommended spelling. Feel free to make such corrections yourself. TimidGuy (talk) 16:31, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

In development section

The In development section may be a little NPOV. I've edited it, is it good enough or not? --Rezonansowy (talk • contribs) 15:32, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

• Looks fair. I don't see any NPOV issues in a current version. SkywalkerPL (talk) 13:30, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

I think it is fair, it is not written in a promotional way. I think we can remove the Neutrality tag.JamieBrown2011 (talk) 07:29, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

Biased?

"Microsoft continued to gain market share with Windows focusing on delivering software to cheap commodity personal computers while Apple was delivering a richly engineered, but expensive, experience."

Sounds biased. "software to cheap commodity personal computers" to "software to (low-end/affordable/inexpensive) commodity personal computers" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dc ae (talk • contribs) 06:25, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi. I am not sure I can see that bias you mention. Apple products are famous for their relative expensiveness.

I do support replacing "cheap" with "inexpensive" for its less colloquial style. But "low-end" and "affordable" are WP:OR. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 17:05, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 December 2013

Please add "Apple is the largest company in the world by market capitalization" or some closely related derivative in addition to any other claims of ascending order of hierarchy due to Apple remaining largest in market cap for at least 1 year. This is an important statistic repeatedly brought up by stock analysts when reporting about Apple and is worthy of claim on the main description of Apple's wiki article. Source: http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2013/10/19/google-apple-exxon-microsoft/ Zmachat (talk) 06:07, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Information is already included in the article. Hot Stop 06:36, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 January 2014

Please change the words "capbility" to capability and "laptopmaker" to laptop maker because they were misspelled. CyHack (talk) 12:47, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

 Done "Manufacturer" instead of "maker" though, which seems better. Chaheel Riens (talk) 13:25, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Link fix

"In 1994, Apple allied with IBM and Motorola in the AIM alliance. The goal was to create a new computing platform (the PowerPC Reference Platform), which would use IBM and Motorola hardware coupled with Apple's software. The AIM alliance hoped that PReP's performance and Apple's software would leave the PC far behind, thus countering Microsoft. The same year, Apple introduced the Power Macintosh, the first of many Apple computers to use Motorola's PowerPC processor."

Please make links to IBM's wikipedia page.

207.166.236.2 (talk) 19:40, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Y Done Thank you for the helpful request! --Andrew (User:90) (talk) 22:54, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Image addition

Hey guys, I went to a museum called 'Musée de la Civilization' and I took a picture of an original Apple 2c computer. If anyone could add it, it'd be very great. Released on April 24, 1984.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/0c6q4vdno9yp1b5/Photo%202014-02-01%2011%2057%2010.jpg

And link it to Apple 2c's wiki page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_IIc

Hi, and thanks for wanting to improve Wikipedia with this picture! Unfortunately it's not quite as easy as another editor uploading this picture and using it in the article. Under Wikipedia's Image Use Policy, as the photographer you must license the photo under a free license or release it into the public domain in order for it to be used on Wikipedia. The best way to get that done is to create an account and upload the photo to Wikimedia Commons yourself. Having another user upload your photo on your behalf tends to be far more trouble than it's worth and will probably be just as much work (if not more) than simply taking care of it yourself. If you have any questions on this, please feel free to contact me on my talk page and I'll be happy to lend a hand! --ElHef (Meep?) 05:48, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Enhancing the 'Litigation' section

Headine-1: Samsung attorneys say patents contested by Apple were developed by Google engineers

• http://www.usnews.com/news/technology/articles/2014/04/01/apple-samsung-jurors-selected

QUOTE: “ SAN JOSE, Calif. (AP) — Samsung fired back at Apple's accusations of patent theft Tuesday, saying the South Korean tech giant didn't write any of the Android software on its smartphones and tablets, Google did. "Not one of the accused features on this phone was designed, much less copied, by anyone at Samsung," Samsung attorney Peter Quinn said. "The accused features on this phone were developed independently by some of the software engineers at Google, up the road in Mountain View." The finger-pointing took place in U.S. District Court in San Jose, where Apple Inc. and Samsung Electronics Co. are accusing each other of stealing ideas from each other. At stake: more than $2 billion if Samsung loses, about $6 million if Apple loses.” [There is a WP article, as noted already.] — Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 10:04, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Headline in Wikipedia: [Comment: This will need updating also.]

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc._v._Samsung_Electronics_Co.,_Ltd.#Second_U.S._trial

— Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 10:13, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Headine-2: Samsung: Apple's case 'is an attack on Android'

• http://www.cnet.com/news/samsung-apples-case-is-an-attack-on-android/

QUOTE: “ The Korean electronics maker also says Apple has exaggerated its patent claims and is asking for much more money than is reasonable.” [Heavy hitting, it is.] — Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 10:16, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Another acquisition to watch

Headine-1: Apple in Talks to Buy Renesas Unit — Japanese Chip Maker's Stock Rises Over 10%

• http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303978304579476103589624102?mod=WSJ_hpp_sections_tech&mg=reno64-wsj&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB10001424052702303978304579476103589624102.html%3Fmod%3DWSJ_hpp_sections_tech

QUOTE: “TOKYO—Apple Inc. is in talks with Japan's Renesas Electronics Corp. over taking control of a unit that designs power-efficient smartphone display chips, ...” [Online, Wall Street Journal subscription article.] — Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 10:27, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Total Assets data

Is there a reason why the 2012 data for Total Assets is still listed below the 2013 data? No 2012 data is present for any of the other categories (e.g., Total Revenue, Operating Income, etc.). Please confirm that it is needed and explain why it is there. If not, I will be glad to remove it. --Cody.berdinis (talk) 17:50, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Confusing Sentence

The first sentence of the third paragraph about revenue is is confusing to me, so can we make that more clear? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Buscus 3 (talk • contribs) 19:26, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Overall review

We need to keep a continuous eye on articles such as this one, as matters such as the review of citations, inconsistencies (such as the repeated use of full names after the first instance of use) and the accuracy of historical information need to be monitored. As these kind of articles are well established, I think there may be a tendency to merely update them without reviewing past edits. I have completed some "cleaning" today and will return to the article in due course to undertake further refinements if they are necessary.--Soulparadox (talk) 09:12, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Financial data in the info box

Who added the financial data to the info box? Was it a bot or does somebody manually do this for every corporation? I would really like to talk to whoever does this because I would like to recruit them for my grant proposal project. The project can be found here https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/Global_Economic_Map. This project aims to upload vast amounts of economic and corporate data into Wikidata. Thank you Mcnabber091 (talk) 08:56, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 May 2014

Created by Caty Gonzalez and Obesi Ayala Lukehemmings5sos (talk) 22:56, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(t • e • c)} 02:29, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 May 2014

the number of current apple stores worldwide are 424 as of April 2014 and the source is their official website /https://www.apple.com/retail/ SlowLogo (talk) 16:23, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. PRIMARY sources aren't considered very reliable. Do you have another source? — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(t • e • c)} 17:52, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 June 2014

Anuj031 (talk) 08:44, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not requested a change.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to any article. - Arjayay (talk) 09:57, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 June 2014

Apple has been the most admired company in the world in 2013 and 2014 i.e. 7 times in a row Ijlalhassan (talk) 11:32, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not cited reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to any article. - Arjayay (talk) 11:44, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

New template

I added the Copy edit template, as I reviewed sections of the article today and discovered that the grammar, punctuation and tone of the content need to be rectified, in addition to breaches of the Wikipedia Manual of Style. In particular, past contributors used language that was promotional—not unusual given the type of following associated with the corporation—and while I was able to complete a revision of a segment of the article, the entire page needs to be checked. I also found outdated past tense content, so further updating may also be required. I will continue to review and revise the page, but added this to the Talk page to explain the template.--Soulparadox (talk) 14:01, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 October 2014

83.110.1.138 (talk) 10:19, 1 October 2014 (UTC) can i edit it please

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Cannolis (talk) 12:41, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Products section

Should the iPad and iPhone sections of the page's products section be reorganized to look like the iPod and Mac sections (i.e. a brief description of the overall device followed by links to the main articles)? I think doing so would improve the look and navigability of the section, and that the current iPad and iPhone sections have too much detail.

Secondly, if it is reorganized, should the section include a bullet point on every version of the devices (i.e. iPhone, iPhone 3G, iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4, etc.) or resemble the iPod section by describing each device type but not the individual device generations (i.e. Just "iPhone" and "iPad and iPad mini"—see the iPod Touch bullet point for an example)? kara❈talk 18:29, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 December 2014

The third paragraph of the article is currently as seen below.

On November 25, 2014, in additional to being the largest publicly traded corporation in the world by market capitalization, Apple became the first U.S. company to be valued at over $700B.[4] As of 2014, Apple employs 72,800 permanent full-time employees, maintains 425 retail stores in fourteen countries, and operates the online Apple Store and iTunes Store, the latter of which is the world's largest music retailer.

"in additional" is an incorrect use of grammar.

the correct terminology should be as follows.

On November 25, 2014, in addition to being the largest publicly traded corporation...

Mjferring (talk) 02:59, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

 Fixed: [6]. G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 03:45, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 06 December 2014

There is a slight inconsistency in the number of Apple retail stores in the article. On the right table, it states that there are "437 Apple retail stores in 15 countries (October 2014)", but in the third paragraph it says "425 retail stores in fourteen countries".

The third paragraph should instead be: "437 retail stores in fifteen countries", unless there has been an updated number since October 2014. JCJeff (talk) 13:53, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello @JCJeff: You are correct. Thank you for finding it. I have corrected the wrong figure, and I have also added a source for verifiability.--Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 18:53, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

@Crystallizedcarbon: There is a mistake on the word "fiveteen". It should instead be "fifteen". JCJeff (talk) 20:58, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks again JCJeff, I fixed the typo.--Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 23:02, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 September 2014

Apple was started in a small garage. Steve Jobs and his school friend Steve Wozniak 1976 laid the foundation of Apple. If we are the soul of Apple, but Apple's naming of how it happened, but there is an interesting phenomenon. Apple's Steve Jobs had an apple farm work than keep. But it did not realize that Apple revolutionized the world of electronics and computer create the two words in the world.

Kunalshah007 (talk) 19:02, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Chaheel Riens (talk) 19:16, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Also, the referenced article is written in such horrible English, that it can't be taken seriously. PizzaMan (♨♨) 11:29, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 January 2015

Please change "Macintosh Performa". Vectronics Apple World. to "Macintosh Performa". Vectronics Apple World. because link is dead. Merphy88 (talk) 10:37, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Partly done: I fixed the original to use the Wayback Machine's archived version instead of change it to a new version. Happy editing! — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 13:17, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Please change

Please change'On February 5, 2008, it was updated to have 16 GB of memory, in addition to the 8 GB and 4 GB models.[180]'

to it was updated to have 16 GB of storage,

memory in computing refers to RAM. (of it had 16 GB of RAM I'd be impressed) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.6.15.116 (talk) 18:04, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

---

New NEWS yesterday, for future editing

Can you even imagine seven-hundred-BILLION-dollars ???????

Headline-1: Apple becomes first $700 billion company

• http://www.marketwatch.com/story/apple-become-first-700-billion-company-2015-02-10

QUOTE: "... pushing the iPhone maker's market capitalization above $700 billion for the first time. As of Tuesday's close, the Cupertino-based company was valued at $710.8 billion, making Apple the first U.S. company to surpass the $800 billion mark. Apple first traded above $700 billion in intraday trade on Nov. 25, 2014, but this is the first time the stock has closed above it. Since Apple's IPO in December 1980, the company's market value has risen more than 50,600%, with half of that occurring since January 2012, according to Dow Jones Factoids. ..." -- Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 13:05, 11 February 2015 (UTC) -- PS: FYI for future editing.

Headline-2: Apple Becomes First U.S. Company to Close Above $700B In Value

• http://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/2015/02/10/apple-becomes-first-us-company-to-close-above-700b-in-value/

QUOTE: "Market value is a commonly used term among investors to measure how much a company is worth. It is determined by multiplying the company's shares outstanding by its stock price. Apple's market value--or market capitalization, as it is also known as--is based on the company's 5.82 billion shares outstanding." -- Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 13:08, 11 February 2015 (UTC) -- PS: FYI for additional future editing.

---

Apple personal computer security

Moving forward in the current world environment, security will be big. What will Apple do?

Headline-1: Google gives Apple and Microsoft an ultimatum: 'Patch your software vulnerabilities, or we'll make them public'

• http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2950785/Google-gives-Apple-Microsoft-ultimatum-Patch-software-vulnerabilities-ll-make-public.html

QUOTE: "Google claims its move is designed to protect consumers from criminals; But software providers are not happy with the threat to expose problems; Opponents say strategy could damage online security and help crooks; Tomorrow, President Obama will visit Google to call on companies to work together and share information to thwart cyber crooks."

Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 12:53, 13 February 2015 (UTC) -- PS: FYI for future editing.

---

Merger proposal

I propose that Criticism of Apple Inc. be merged with Apple Inc. to restore a NPOV and eliminate the POV fork created. Not all "Criticism" articles are POV forks but Criticism of Apple is. You can make a living as a Film Critic, you can't make a living as a Apple Critic, Criticism of apple is a article to seperate a POV. I propose we merge the two articles ( some content may need to go to sub pages of apple for example iPhone,iPad,etc ) but in the name of NPOV we can do it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bryce Carmony (talk • contribs) 19:50, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

From the POV that the main Apple page is already quite long I would say no merger. If this criticism page is not NPOV then that needs to be corrected. 220 of ^Borg 03:05, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

how can the main apple page be POV when any "criticism" is banned? Apple is a big company , we already have lots of articles on it there isn't any problem making more. We might have to make an article "Apple Inc. Labor Relations" or "Apple Inc. Litigation" to create new topics to hold all the information we have. but we can't consider 2 articles for 1 topic a solution. Bryce Carmony (talk) 03:17, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

• Strongly oppose - Merging would create a serious neutrality issue; best kept separate. -- Somedifferentstuff (talk) 08:33, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

How does writing an article with postiive and negative fairly portraying both sides create a neutrality issue? creating an article where we set out and say "only 'good' stuff goes in this article, we have a seperate article for the 'bad'stuff, don't worry we'll think of a way to classify it" that's how we get into NPOV issues.Bryce Carmony (talk) 08:59, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

• Strongly oppose per Somedifferentstuff. If you think the article is not neutral then you can correct it by editing, checking the references etc - you'd have to do this anyway when merging. The solution to problems in an article (if they exist) is not to delete it. And anyway, in what way is the article not neutral? Can you provide examples from within the article - things that could not easily be fixed by editing? Or are you saying that it is fundamentally, irretrievably not neutral simply because it exists (is that what you mean by "Criticism of apple is a article to seperate a POV."?), and for that reason it cannot be allowed to continue in wikipedia? That's not an opinion that I can agree with. andy (talk) 13:09, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

if both articles are NPOV then a merger will not be a problem. We can split up the content other ways besides " Criticism" and "non criticism" Apple Controversies, would be a way better article than "Criticism of Apple". Bryce Carmony (talk) 14:14, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 July 2015

Add Apple Music to the list of services. And then link it to the article about "Apple Music".Ahmedmgad65 (talk) 01:23, 1 July 2015 (UTC) Ahmedmgad65 (talk) 01:23, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Done I've added Apple Music to the list of services in the infobox. Mz7 (talk) 22:56, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 24 external links on Apple Inc.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140318144236/http://www.wired.com:80/gadgets/mac/multimedia/2002/11/56426 to http://www.wired.com/gadgets/mac/multimedia/2002/11/56426
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120606003537/http://www.jeremyreimer.com:80/total_share.html to http://www.jeremyreimer.com/total_share.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121014051705/http://www.duke.edu/~tlove/mac.htm to http://www.duke.edu/~tlove/mac.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081206061012/http://www.fcw.com:80/print/3_1/news/64412-1.html?type=pf to http://www.fcw.com/print/3_1/news/64412-1.html?type=pf
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20081113132409/http://www.accessmylibrary.com:80/coms2/summary_0286-5564882_ITM to http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-5564882_ITM
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110927210608/http://www.ifoapplestore.com/stores/chronology_2001-2003.html to http://www.ifoapplestore.com/stores/chronology_2001-2003.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090101074211/http://www.accessmylibrary.com:80/coms2/summary_0286-10738727_ITM to http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-10738727_ITM
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20101011223304/http://www.apple.com:80/hotnews/articles/2007/01/mwsf/ to http://www.apple.com/hotnews/articles/2007/01/mwsf/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100725032518/http://www.crn.com:80/software/210002313 to http://www.crn.com/software/210002313
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120928000035/http://www.ethiopianreview.com/index/20113/?p=25598 to http://www.ethiopianreview.com/index/20113/?p=25598
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120111030348/http://technolog.msnbc.msn.com:80/_news/2012/01/04/9949966-ipad-users-download-3-billion-apps to http://technolog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/01/04/9949966-ipad-users-download-3-billion-apps
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20111016084743/http://www.zdnet.com/blog/semantic-web/siri-acquired-by-apple-iphone-becomes-the-virtual-personal-assistant/371 to http://www.zdnet.com/blog/semantic-web/siri-acquired-by-apple-iphone-becomes-the-virtual-personal-assistant/371
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140304092046/http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2002/01/49652 to http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2002/01/49652
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130116035727/http://www.creatingcustomerevangelists.com/resources/evangelists/guy_kawasaki.asp to http://www.creatingcustomerevangelists.com/resources/evangelists/guy_kawasaki.asp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100730095254/http://www.wired.com:80/gadgets/mac/news/2003/12/61513 to http://www.wired.com/gadgets/mac/news/2003/12/61513
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20141113074638/http://archive.wired.com/gadgets/mac/commentary/cultofmac/2002/12/56677 to http://archive.wired.com/gadgets/mac/commentary/cultofmac/2002/12/56677
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070901082502/http://www.apple.com:80/de/jobs/cork/cust_service.html to http://www.apple.com/de/jobs/cork/cust_service.html
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120421010453/http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2012/0420/breaking6.html?via=mr to http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2012/0420/breaking6.html?via=mr
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140404152533/http://www.1394ta.org/consumers/WhatIsFireWire.html to http://www.1394ta.org/consumers/WhatIsFireWire.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140304092052/http://www.wired.com/gadgets/mac/commentary/cultofmac/2006/06/71138 to http://www.wired.com/gadgets/mac/commentary/cultofmac/2006/06/71138
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130504125822/http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/healthguidelines/n-hexane/recognition.html to http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/healthguidelines/n-hexane/recognition.html
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20131202223855/http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-03-21/apple-says-data-centers-now-use-100-percent-renewable-energy to http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-03-21/apple-says-data-centers-now-use-100-percent-renewable-energy
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20101110055341/http://www.greenpeace.org:80/international/en/campaigns/toxics/electronics/Guide-to-Greener-Electronics/which-companies-really-sell-gr/ to http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/campaigns/toxics/electronics/Guide-to-Greener-Electronics/which-companies-really-sell-gr/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20111112022636/http://www.greenpeace.org:80/international/en/campaigns/climate-change/cool-it/Guide-to-Greener-Electronics/? to http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/campaigns/climate-change/cool-it/Guide-to-Greener-Electronics/

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 18:02, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

---

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 6 external links on Apple Inc.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120822164535/http://hosted.ap.org:80/dynamic/stories/U/US_TEC_APPLE_BIGGEST_COMPANY?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT to http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_TEC_APPLE_BIGGEST_COMPANY?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20131212101331/http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_TEC_APPLE_IN_STORE_LOCATION?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT to http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_TEC_APPLE_IN_STORE_LOCATION?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.unisourcedesign.ca/en/archive_design_technology.html_1.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130117033406/http://www.devproconnections.com/article/apple/bbb-tells-apple-to-halt-misleading-ads.aspx to http://www.devproconnections.com/article/apple/bbb-tells-apple-to-halt-misleading-ads.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140429161903/http://www.france24.com/en/20120420-apple-create-500-jobs-ireland to http://www.france24.com/en/20120420-apple-create-500-jobs-ireland
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140304092052/http://www.wired.com/gadgets/mac/commentary/cultofmac/2006/06/71138 to http://www.wired.com/gadgets/mac/commentary/cultofmac/2006/06/71138

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:51, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Jony Ive Reduced To A Few Words?

Why has Ives, who has contributed so much to modern Apple devices and re-invigorated the company been reduced to barely a mention on this article? Twobells^t@lk 18:34, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Edit for citation 181

Citation 181 says "Techinacal Specifications," should be "Technical Specficiations"

Anand Patel (talk) 16:58, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

 Done —zziccardi (talk) 03:55, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Apple Inc.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080616163344/http://www.wired.com:80/gadgets/mac/commentary/cultofmac/2006/06/71138 to http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-07-26/strategy/32868313_1_india-apple-ceo-tim-cook-smartphone-market
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080616163344/http://www.wired.com:80/gadgets/mac/commentary/cultofmac/2006/06/71138 to http://archive.wired.com/gadgets/mac/news/2003/09/60597
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080616163344/http://www.wired.com:80/gadgets/mac/commentary/cultofmac/2006/06/71138 to http://www.wired.com/gadgets/mac/commentary/cultofmac/2006/06/71138

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 19:57, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

I undid Cyberbot II's edit in this diff, as the bot appears to be malfunctioning. I'll inform its operator of the issues as soon as I get the chance. —zziccardi (talk) 04:08, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Number of employees now 115,000

QUOTE: "Apple has added more than 9,000 employees in the past year, bringing its worldwide headcount to about 115,000. The company currently is building a new corporate campus in Cupertino."

• http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-07-20/apple-said-to-lease-office-space-in-seattle-tower

---

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.153.185.255 (talk) 19:00, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

 Done —zziccardi (talk) 16:41, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

templates and categories needed?

Because Apple is now getting into the automotive manufacturing business, should automotive template and categories be added to the article? Seqqis (talk) 18:52, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

I don't think so. At this point, any statements that Apple will enter the automotive industry—even from reliable sources—are purely speculative, so WP:CRYSTAL applies. The section on potential electric vehicles is fine, but including car-related categories or templates would be inappropriate unless the company announces it's begun production on a vehicle that will hit the market. —zziccardi (talk) 23:53, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Apple Steals — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.81.54.94 (talk) 13:49, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Opening line: Apple selling software

Apple software is licensed, not sold. The opening line "Apple Inc. is an American multinational technology company headquartered in Cupertino, California, that designs, develops, and sells consumer electronics, computer software, and online services." is not true (source: Apple Mac Book Pro end user license). Please change to "designs consumer electronics, develops computer software, and sells online services" or any other combination that be truth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.45.236.47 (talk) 16:51, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Well, Apple also sells software, such as Logic or Final Cut. #!/bin/DokReggar -talk 06:46, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Can you prove that statement please (hyperlink reference to license of Logic, Final Cut, or other package specifically stating that the software is being sold). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.137.181.164 (talk) 21:00, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

At least any package whose's licensing does not specifically state that the software is being licensed instead of sold. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.137.181.164 (talk) 04:57, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Okay, I understand your point. Apple sells software licenses, not software; is that what you meant? #!/bin/DokReggar -talk 05:40, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Dunno, what does to "sell software licenses" mean? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.137.150.233 (talk) 16:21, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

iPhone 4 release date and source

Please change

Apple also released the iPhone 4,

to

In June 2010, Apple released the iPhone 4,

to avoid the ambiguous time period.

Squalou (talk) 17:03, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Done. Do you know how rare it is for an edit request include an appropriate source AND resolve a maintenance tag? This made my day. Thanks, Adrian J. Hunter^{(talk•contribs)} 05:12, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

References

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Apple Inc.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150327005907/http://robjanoff.com/applelogo/ to http://robjanoff.com/applelogo/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110927210715/http://www.ifoapplestore.com/stores/fifth_avenue/index.html to http://www.ifoapplestore.com/stores/fifth_avenue/index.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140913204209/http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS24645514 to http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS24645514

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:07, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

The April 1st founding date is urban legend and has no credible sources.

There are no valid first hand sources that cite that apple was founded April 1st 1976. In fact, the reference that is cited on the wikipedia page (http://www.loc.gov/rr/business/businesshistory/April/apple.html#1), cites the date as being in another book (https://books.google.ca/books?id=XUf-KtNv8IgC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false) that doesn't actually reference this date at all.

As the ONLY source for this April 1st date is not valid, this date should be removed from the wikipedia page. This date is just urban legend.

There is also an interview with Steve Wozniak where he states that he doesn't even know where this date came from.

Nabeel_co (talk) 23:57, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

"i" means

Can you put this infromation in the article: http://mashable.com/2016/02/19/what-does-the-i-stand-for-iphone/#6tM94J0bTOqq — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.146.42.151 (talk) 20:52, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Apple I photo

Steve Headley, former math teacher at Homestead High (where Apple founders Steve Wozniak and Steve Jobs attended), built the wood box for the Apple I pictured on the Apple Inc wiki page. He traded it for new Apple (IIc's i believe) when Wozniak asked him for it. It ended up on display at the Smithsonian American History Museum before it was remodeled. We believe it is in their storage archives. Siliconvalleykid (talk) 17:54, 26 February 2016 (UTC) Silicon Valley Kid

Request to add Market Capitalization to all public companies including Apple Inc.

This edit request is not just for Apple Inc. but for public companies in general. In the information box to the right, we could add Market Capitalization information in USD auto-updated on an end of day basis. Pkwikis (talk) 06:24, 1 March 2016 (UTC)  Not done - we are an encyclopedia, not a ticker of the NYSE, such information is available elsewhere, (and why USD?) - Arjayay (talk) 19:39, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 6 external links on Apple Inc.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120606003537/http://www.jeremyreimer.com/total_share.html to http://www.jeremyreimer.com/total_share.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081206061012/http://www.fcw.com/print/3_1/news/64412-1.html?type=pf to http://www.fcw.com/print/3_1/news/64412-1.html?type=pf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100725032518/http://www.crn.com/software/210002313 to http://www.crn.com/software/210002313
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131212101331/http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_TEC_APPLE_IN_STORE_LOCATION?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT to http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_TEC_APPLE_IN_STORE_LOCATION?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140304092046/http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2002/01/49652 to http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2002/01/49652
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130504125822/https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/healthguidelines/n-hexane/recognition.html to https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/healthguidelines/n-hexane/recognition.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:06, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Please revert vandalism

Please revert this vandalism. 32.218.36.236 (talk) 03:46, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Already done EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 05:59, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 March 2016

please change the link on ref 72 to because its 404ing to https://nexusconsultancy.co.uk/about-nexus/blog/exclusive-look-mac-os-9/

Danturner88 (talk) 18:27, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

Not done: The link you give looks very WP:SOAPy, aimed at selling a service. Also concerned that the URL you provide is a copyright violation; it has the exact same text as the original reference but does not give attribution or mention the author. I'll put in an archived version of the reference instead. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 18:53, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Apple Inc.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150327005907/http://robjanoff.com/applelogo/ to http://robjanoff.com/applelogo/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110927210715/http://www.ifoapplestore.com/stores/fifth_avenue/index.html to http://www.ifoapplestore.com/stores/fifth_avenue/index.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140913204209/http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS24645514 to http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS24645514

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:58, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Number of retail locations

According to Apple's own retail store page at http://www.apple.com/retail/storelist/, there are 479 retail stores, 268 of which are in the United States and 211 are outside the U.S. I have updated the number on the Apple Store page, but this article is protected and a much more important one, so I don't want to mess anything up by editing myself until I get more experience. Could someone please update the number here? :) LocalNet (talk) 20:11, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

New NEWS today, for future editing

The UK article includes diagrams, pictures, and descriptions.

Headline-1: Is Apple set to kill off the keyboard? Patent shows laptop design with giant touchpad that senses movement

• http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3528632/Is-Apple-set-kill-keyboard-Patent-shows-laptop-design-giant-touchpad-senses-movement.html

QUOTE: "Apple's keyboards may be getting thinner, but someday, the technology could be scrapped entirely. A patent filed by Apple today shows a laptop similar to a MacBook that features a flat touch surface where a keyboard would normally be. The invention, dubbed a 'configurable, force-sensitive input structure for an electronic device,' looks similar to its 'Force Touch' trackpads."

• Patent awarded to Apple details plans for new 'force-sensitive input'
• Looks similar to 'Force Touch' and may work using haptic technology
• Tiny holes in casing could light up to give users an outline of the keys

-- AstroU (talk) 22:58, 7 April 2016 (UTC) -- PS: FYI for future editing.

To Do List discussion

• the To Do list contains Discuss why the average length of employment at Apple is rapidly decreasing but there is no such section in the article. Delete this to do? --E bailey (talk) 00:54, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 April 2016

103.62.234.10 (talk) 05:14, 27 April 2016 (UTC)52063.3++33.6520+3

Not done: as you have not requested a change.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 09:22, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Current Apple Logo was already in use by Apple itself in 1983 (Article says: "since 1998")

The Wikipedia article says that today Apple logo/color combination is in use since 1998 but it was obviously used in 1983, so already 15 years before.

Prove: see the video below with Steve Jobs standing at a desk showing exact the logo used today. Same shape but also same color.

Link to the exact time of the video: here I cannot post a screenshot due to Wikipedia Media rules. (I am not the creator of the video)...

I propose to change the Corporate identity section accordingly.

--Hausbrock (talk) 19:57, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Hausbrock (talk • contribs) 20:15, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

I am declining your request because YouTube videos are not a reliable source on Wikipedia, plus many videos can be a copyright violation. If you want to prove your statement, then add a reliable source (such as a legitimate website, news, or book). For further information, see WP:VER. Redolta📱 ^Contribs 15:34, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

on the aspect of apples world energy usage

altho it has been made clear that apple has 100% renewable energy operations it is not clear on the point of wether their extensive legal arm or considerable tax haven beneficiaries will also adopt this lean engergy consumption principal. it should be fairly noted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.93.112.179 (talk) 20:02, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 September 2016

86.47.35.187 (talk) 12:19, 2 September 2016 (UTC) add that they are tax dodging pricks who have the cheek to defend their blatently wrong actions

Not done:, non-neutral, non-sourced request. #!/bin/DokReggar -talk 12:41, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

"To put this into perspective" Please remove

Why does it say "To put this into perspective" in the lead? This is an encyclopedia not a book for children — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.140.44.14 (talk) 02:33, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Apple Inc.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://ca.encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761552652/apple_inc_.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://investor.apple.com/faq.cfm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141108080250/https://www.soundonsound.com/sos/sep02/articles/emagic.asp to http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/sep02/articles/emagic.asp
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.businessweek.com/printer/magazine/apples-supplychain-secret-hoard-lasers-11032011.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.theverge.com/2013/6/10/4414762/apple-announces-iradio-streaming-music-service
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120618205051/https://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/04/20/us-apple-ireland-idUKBRE83J0PI20120420 to http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/04/20/us-apple-ireland-idUKBRE83J0PI20120420
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.idsa.org/idea/idea2002/G7001.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:03, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Reports about sexist, toxic work environment Suggestion

Today some reports of toxic work environment and sexism at Apple came out, and these have been picked up by several media outlets. Not sure if this is significant enough to be added to the main Apple Inc. article in Corporate culture or Criticism of Apple Inc. Marjoleinkl (talk) 08:37, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 28 September 2016

i would like to add some stuff about iphone 7 and wach os2

50.244.159.101 (talk) 21:48, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 23:38, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

1. I think that it would be better when referring to what Steve Jobs said at his press conferences,to put his words in quotations, seeing that he is a huge icon in the world of technology.

2. When talking about increase in sales or percentages, a notable stock market tracker should be referenced.

```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jordanne Brown (talk • contribs) 04:42, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Brand loyalty

Currently the Brand loyalty section begins "Apple's high level of brand loyalty is considered unusual for any product." Please insert a template after the word considered, or else provide clarification and a citation. Thank you. 83.104.249.240 (talk) 04:39, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Done. LocalNet (talk) 06:32, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

New products

I think that IMac counts as a mac but it is still a different product ATW0004 (talk) 00:19, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 October 2016

Please add citation at the end of this section (where it says citation needed): "Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak were Beatles fans,[256][257] but Apple Inc. had name and logo trademark issues with Apple Corps Ltd., a multimedia company started by the Beatles in 1967. This resulted in a series of lawsuits and tension between the two companies. These issues ended with settling of their most recent lawsuit in 2007.[citation needed]"

Citation: A NYT article from 2007 http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/06/business/06apple.html

Aelgass (talk) 21:37, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

 Done —MRD2014 (talk • contribs) 13:39, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Profits number is not correct

I just checked the link that goes along with the profit posted of 60 Billion and it is not included in the link. I have tried a few other links and can't find any numbers that correlate to 60billion annual profits.

I don't want to change it without finding a verified number - anyone else have some ideas? A.solgaard (talk) 17:02, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

inaccurate article as Reference

please consider changing the penlite caption to more accurate. I was the product manager.

The Penlite was Apple's first attempt at a tablet computer. Began in 1989, pilot release in 1992, the product was designed to bring the Mac OS to a table computer - but was shelved in favor of the Newton. The Penlite was presented in Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. lawsuit

Picostar (talk) 01:01, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I know that this isn't true because I was in fact the product manager during that time period. The sentence I started this with is untrue, of course, I was not the product manager, but that shows how useless that statement is. Anyone can claim to be anything, that doesn't give any authority for any statements or suffice as a reference, even if being the product manager is proven . Believe me, being a product manager doesn't make one completely knowledgable or trustworthy. Wikipedia articles are not written on the authority of editors, but rather the authority of sources. It doesn't matter if you, or anyone else was the product manager. Even if you were, we cannot take your word for it, and a user submitted youtube video is insufficient as a reference, because there's no way to verify its authenticity. Anyone can upload nearly anything to youtube and doctor it to say pretty much anything. It'd be one thing if it were a newspaper's official youtube channel, for example, but this is not the case. - Aoidh (talk) 05:14, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

I don't recall who the PM was, but I was in ATG, managing a team working on a handwriting recognition system for Penlite. Around the middle of '92 some marketing wonks said that if we couldn't have the Penlite on the market by Jan. '93 we would miss the window on pen computing. That couldn't be done; the project was cancelled. I never saw any connection to the Newton, which was a completely different part of the company. My team did then peddle our technology to Newton, and got into the 2.0 version. I don't agree with the source that the Penlite was dropped "in favor of Newton", but then I wasn't exactly an insider in such decisions, so who knows? Dicklyon (talk) 06:40, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Tax source

Good summary of tax situation: https://theintercept.com/2016/12/22/apple-ceo-tim-cook-met-with-trump-to-engage-on-gigantic-corporate-tax-cut/  czar 17:54, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 January 2017

n 86.188.208.51 (talk) 15:39, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Sir Joseph <sup>(talk)</sup> 15:47, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Infobox photograph needs a scale

I noticed that the Infobox photograph of Apple corporate headquarters resembles a ghost town. One of the first rules of photography is to incorporate a scale into the picture. This picture must have been taken on Sunday or a national holiday. A replacement photo with people in the picture would be in order. Anthony22 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 23:00, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 March 2017

210.56.127.149 (talk) 07:40, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Apple is good for health. An Apple a day, Keeps the doctor away.....!!

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 07:59, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 March 2017

Can you change these source links back from:

• https://www.wsj.com/article/SB124104666426570729.html
• https://www.wsj.com/article/SB121789232442511743.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
• https://www.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304459804577281472610072322.html
• https://www.wsj.com/public/article/SB118677584137994489.html?mod=blog
• https://www.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704026204575267603576594936.html

To:

• http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124104666426570729.html
• http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121789232442511743.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
• http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304459804577281472610072322.html
• http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB118677584137994489.html?mod=blog
• http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704026204575267603576594936.html

please? They redirect to the "sign up/subscribe" page. 103.199.137.190 (talk) 00:26, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

 Done Thanks! — IVORK <sub>Discuss</sub> 03:37, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Apple's new Headquaters known as Spaceship HQ

Hi! According to the web Apple has just begun opening its new Headquaters known as Spaceship HQ, see the following: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2804587/apples-spaceship-campus-is-almost-finished-and-these-aerial-pictures-show-how-amazing-it-looks/ & http://fortune.com/2017/01/30/apple-spaceship-drones/ & http://learningenglish.voanews.com/a/new-apple-headquarters-spaceship-building-is-almost-complete/3722949.html - could the new HQ image be uploaded to Wikipedia and instead of the old HQ image in the userbox which is currently using File:Apple Headquarters in Cupertino.jpg could it be updated showing the new campus (Headquaters) if possible.... Regards, StewartLittle 14:02, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi @Stewart Little: I'm not sure we have any images of the new Spaceship headquarters with suitable copyright licenses. I think someone needs to either personally take a photo and upload it to Wikipedia, or we need to wait for photos in the public domain. But I fully agree with you that we should have an updated image, and I hope a good photo arrives soon! LocalNet (talk) 14:47, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Computer kit vs. Computer kits

This line is not consistent, I want to change the first kit to kits:

"to sell the Apple I personal computer kit. The Apple I kits were computers" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eipviongll (talk • contribs) 16:48, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi @Eipviongll: No objections from me. I believe the reversion was accidental. It happened on the same day as April Fool's Day, in which the article was humorously nominated for deletion. When the discussion ended, the deletion template was removed in an edit that also removed your contribution. LocalNet (talk) 19:42, 2 April 2017 (UTC)