Cr*p products. All style and no substance. Never had one work properly.
Customer service non-existant. Would anyone here consider a screen with 134 hot and 118 dead pixels "fit for purpose"? I didn't and complained Apple disagreed and said is was within "manufacturing parameters". Fortunately I was buying for work and the company I worked for could have bought Crapple with its Christmas party fund. When they found out, the thought of loosing our business sent them so far up my a**e I could taste Job's hair lotion!
But that's beside the point. Crapple's logo is a long way from being unique (one of the mainstays of copywright infringment). Virtually every Apple (real) I've ever bought in the last 35 years had some kind of stylised apple as its logo. Wooly's logo looks to me as much a pumpkin or a melon as it does an apple. People are hardly likely to walk into Woolworths expecting to find a computer mega-store based on a logo rather than a name (another mainstay of copywrite law).
I largely support most IP and copywright legislation as the product of someone's mind and the right to be recognised and paid for it is pretty important to a free society.
Apple's just being ridiculous and petty. I'd love them to go toe-to-toe with the Scientologists over something. Now lawyers could retire on that one!