Nobody said its products are inferior. The argument _is_ against its business strategies, which is quite absurd, to say the least.
I think the reason why ars advocated a boycott was as a 'protest' to show Apple that it must not partake in such activities.
And please please don't give me the argument that Apple is a corporation that exists only for its profits etcetc. There are ways to maximize your profit without being so paranoid
I was replying to someone who said: "Are your products so terrible that you have to force people to buy them by preventing any other competition.”
I accept that you don’t say that their products are terrible. I certainly like their products while disliking the innovation-killing patent-circus. The eventual end-game is an oligopoly, and I think this is a net loss for humankind.
I took the less literal meaning of the statement, as more of a "do you have so little faith in your product's ability to compete in the open market" though perhaps I'm being too generous.
I took it the same way, although as you can see from my response, my assertion is that Apple do have faith they can compete in the open market against their competitor’s original designs and products.
The open question concerns any company "competing in the open market" against companies that simply clone successful products without limitation or restriction. Essentially, the question asks Apple how much faith it has that its products can compete against its products.
