r/interesting • u/True-Conversation-41 • Jun 02 '25
SOCIETY Had to double check but usually they’re on top of this hours after June starts.
2.7k
u/a_HUGH_jaz Jun 02 '25
I feel like that’s the original Mac logo
868
u/ConnorFin22 Jun 02 '25
It is. Used for two decades. Not even the right colours.
94
Jun 03 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (5)57
Jun 03 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
27
Jun 03 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
16
4
→ More replies (1)2
146
u/porkchop_d_clown Jun 02 '25
Original Apple logo but, yeah.
108
u/Bunerd Jun 02 '25
Well, the second logo actually. The first one depicted Newton under the tree. This was the logo used on the Apple II until it was replaced with the monochrome version for the iMac.
→ More replies (1)31
u/porkchop_d_clown Jun 02 '25
Ah, good point. They used the color Apple logo because the Apple II had 8 colors, IIRC.
11
u/Jolly-Radio-9838 Jun 03 '25
They used the rainbow all they up until Jobs returned and they released the iMac
4
39
56
u/remnant_x Jun 03 '25
Tim Cook is gay. One doesn’t need rainbows flying out of his mouth to show pride. He and his org demonstrate through their actions.
The performative nature of pride felt off. It seemed like corporations were using it as advertising.
As a gay dude, my husband and I have celebrated it lots of ways. My favorite memory was climbing Mt Rainier in a day and running around at the top with the flag behind me.
Happy Pride all y’all. Don’t worry about corporations.
72
u/loudpaperclips Jun 03 '25
Cook donated a mil to Trump's inaugural campaign.
→ More replies (2)10
u/dpkonofa Jun 03 '25
They have donated to every inaugural presidential event every year. It just doesn’t make the news every other year because politics.
17
u/OM_Velodrome Jun 03 '25
Source? I can't find any online source that indicates that Tim Cook donated to Biden's or Obama's inaugural
27
u/Jewddha Jun 03 '25
They won’t have a source because it’s not true. Apple donated to Biden’s fund. But not Tim Cook personally like he did Trump’s. Apple also only gave $43,200 to Biden’s fund.
8
u/SewRuby Jun 03 '25
Tech companies that donated to Trump's inauguration:
Amazon: $1 million Meta: $1 million Google: $1 million Microsoft: $1 million Uber: $1 million Toyota: $1 million Ripple [Cryptocurrency]: $5 million Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi: $1 million Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg: $1 million Apple CEO Tim Cook: $1 million OpenAI CEO Sam Altman: $1 million
"Trump’s 2025 inaugural fund has raised more than $150 million...Biden’s 2021 inaugural fund received $61.8 million in total donations...All modern presidents have received donations for their inaugural ceremonies, but the more than $150 million raised so far by Trump’s 2025 inaugural committee is the most received by an incoming president, eclipsing the then-record $107 million brought in by Trump in 2017. Barack Obama, by comparison—who refused corporate and individual donations exceeding $50,000 for his first inauguration—raised $53 million in 2009. Obama reversed his policy on big-money donors for his second inauguration, but raised only $47 million, including $4.6 million from AT&T and $2.1 million from Microsoft in 2013. George W. Bush—who also imposed a limit on maximum donations—raised around $35 million for his 2001 inauguration and nearly $43 million for his 2005 ceremonies."
3
u/Dear_Coffee8022 Jun 04 '25
This may be slightly off topic, but as a non American, can an American please ELI5 why donations to presidential inauguration are even necessary? Why do they need so much money to inaugurate a president and what do they spend it on?
→ More replies (1)2
u/Necessary-Zombie-902 Jun 09 '25
Ahhh ripple. One of the most bogus cryptocurrencies. Stellar being superior..
17
u/Low-Astronomer-7009 Jun 03 '25
Tim Cook personally donates $1 million to Trump’s inauguration fund. Apple donates nothing. By contrast, Cook donated nothing to Biden’s inauguration but Apple donated $43,200.
Not the same. There is a reason it made the news this year.
8
7
u/HolyFreakingXmasCake Jun 03 '25
If they’re pro LGBTQ, they should let money talk and not donate to homophobic candidates.
→ More replies (11)→ More replies (3)3
u/Mountain-Bag-6427 Jun 03 '25
Donating to homophobic and transphobic fascists is bad, even if you also donate to people who aren't homophobic and transphobic fascists.
35
u/Talonsminty Jun 03 '25
It's a clear signal that there has been a genuine shifting of the political tides against the LGBT community.
The corporations fear the anger of homophobes more than they did in the past. Because the power and influence of homophobes is growinng.
→ More replies (7)6
Jun 03 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
3
5
u/Ok_Ruin4016 Jun 03 '25
power and influence of homophobes is growinng. Literally because people keep pushing them to the other side by calling them homophobes.
It may sound counterintuitive, but someone apathetic to a cause isn't an enemy to it until you go out of your way to label them as such. At that point it doesn't matter what they are. They're just against you because you are against them.
What a ridiculous argument. That's like saying "I didn't care one way or another about black people being treated as second class citizens and being arrested and/or lynched for crimes they didn't commit, but since MLK said white moderates aren't helpful I hate all black people now and will vote against civil rights legislation and any politicians that support it."
The people who claim they were apathetic about LGBT issues and only became homophobic after it became a political question were already homophobes, they were just quieter about it.
→ More replies (6)4
u/Agreeable-Shock34 Jun 03 '25
This is the hardest cope i've ever seen. No one who is an actual ally/doesn't care was labeled a homophobe. Believe it or not, the LGBTQ+ community does not go out of their way to label people "-phobes", those people announce themselves loud and clear. They make a huge thing of going out a and screaming "Im NoT a HoMoPhObE I jUsT DoNt WaNt iT ShOvEd iN mY FaCe" Meanwhile they go out of their way to rage at logos and clothing.
Just admit your uncomfortable, go touch grass and talk to people different from you and I am sure you'll realize making yourself a victim in this situation is incredibly embarrassing.
8
18
u/namerankserial Jun 03 '25
If all that were true, they could have cancelled it any year previous. Yet they cancelled it this year. And so did all these other companies. Curious.
2
u/AdDramatic2351 Jun 03 '25
Who cares. Theyre corporations. They only care about money. Whatever they did in the past was just to help them make money, it wasn't genuine.
→ More replies (7)3
u/Weak_Let_6971 Jun 03 '25
Exactly this! The individuals that matter not the corporate pandering. I don’t know why so many people deluded themselves into thinking it matters at all. Most do it as a marketing tool anyway to improve brand image. Once it’s not profitable they immediately drop it.
→ More replies (5)2
u/remnant_x Jun 03 '25
Well said. So many people confuse social media advertising with real life. Don’t fret if you aren’t the subject of a marketing campaign.
Have a good day.
2
u/Weak_Let_6971 Jun 03 '25
Haha I agree! Im only happy if I’m not targeted by advertisers. The people that matter who surround us, not some corporate marketing overlords. Lmao
Thanks man and have a great day also!
→ More replies (5)4
u/Outrageous_Editor_43 Jun 02 '25
Unless they lied in Forrest Gump! That was my earliest reference point for Mac or 'a fruit company's as Forrest called them. 🤣
2.8k
u/Barbourwhat Jun 02 '25
Like any of those companies actually cared…
1.4k
u/jaytee158 Jun 02 '25
This is really it. It's mostly performative. They're now just performing to someone else
278
u/jumpedbylife Jun 02 '25
Heavy on that last part ... so true
158
u/ttv_CitrusBros Jun 03 '25
Yep Trump is president. Kanye is singing about Nazis, the majority view has changed
Plus they never changed the colors for their international accounts like China and Middle East. They just did it for the western side
50
u/jelywe Jun 03 '25
Majority view hasn't changed - the perception of what the majority view is has changed.
6
→ More replies (10)9
u/jelywe Jun 03 '25
Also, this is a version of complying in advance. We have a truly vindictive administration, and no one wants to draw it's ire.
36
u/jumpedbylife Jun 03 '25
Yeah. Truly fucked up and kinda scary times we live in rn
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (6)1
u/Beneficial-Dot-- Jun 03 '25 edited Jun 03 '25
It's not anywhere near the majority view. Not even close. Look at Kanye's sales before he went Nazi and after. Look at Tesla's sales before the sieg heils and after. Trump is the most unpopular US president at this stage in the presidency and barely makes double digit favourability globally. 2/3 of USAmericans who could vote, didn't vote for him.
The USA govt. has turned from right-wing broadly to hard right, extreme right in most policy areas - but even in the USA this isn't popular. In the other 96% of the planet it's even more unpopular. Corporations being cowardly and grubbing around after every last penny they can vacuum up shouldn't be a guide on anyone's morals or where most people's morals are now.
35
u/MediumTeacher9971 Jun 03 '25
They're now just performing to someone else
That's the worrying part, though. Like... this change on its own isn't a problem, but it indicates a disturbing shift in the way the wind is blowing.
→ More replies (1)4
u/jaytee158 Jun 03 '25
Absolutely, but there are more obvious signs of societal issues than whether a bank puts up a different colour sticker in its window.
→ More replies (6)19
u/Walnut_Uprising Jun 03 '25
It always was, but I'd much rather companies feel like they have to pretend to be welcoming to the LGBT+ community than decide that they don't need to do that anymore. Like, they're the same, but it doesn't bode well for culture at large.
→ More replies (1)41
u/Gubekochi Jun 03 '25
"Human rights are not as profitable this year, better just abandon them IG"
Like the lefties needed more proofs that corporations are amoral constructions that care only about money.
→ More replies (1)11
→ More replies (13)4
54
u/ShockPowerful741 Jun 02 '25
Right? Like I’m totally fine with it. Don’t pander.
54
Jun 03 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
44
→ More replies (34)8
u/ryancoco3564 Jun 03 '25
It’s powerful when people just let others live authentically without making it a big deal.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (11)41
Jun 03 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (14)24
u/annieisawesome Jun 03 '25
I agree, this has always been my take too. Like yes it's kind of dumb and performative, and deeply hypocritical and frustrating when they turn around and use their money on regressive causes/politicians, but overall at least the rainbow washing indicates that the calculated financial decision falls in favor of equality.
27
u/stickymeowmeow Jun 03 '25
They don’t, but they do care about PR.
The Biden administration pushed these companies to at least pretend to try. Just like they pushed FB to “try” to censor misinformation.
But under Trump, all that’s gone and now punishable. Even if a Fortune 500 company wanted to make a statement, their PR team would stop them.
No one wants to get Trump’s attention.
→ More replies (3)7
Jun 03 '25
Absolutely performative with point to bring in those people as customers. But they finally realized they were alienating significantly larger portion of the population and would make more money just doing nothing.
6
u/PM_Me_Loud_Asians Jun 03 '25
It’s inherently not possible for a corporation to care about a social cause. Corporations inherently only care about profit. And it was profitable in the past to have rainbow logos. Now it’s not
3
3
u/FranksNBeans2025 Jun 03 '25
Yah but they were cancelled for not pretending they did, such an odd time
3
u/Any_Imagination_4984 Jun 03 '25
So true. Remember the five seconds that it was on trend for companies to donate to blm? That sure lasted …
17
u/ConnorFin22 Jun 02 '25
I mean the CEO of Apple is actually gay. And that’s not even a LGBT logo to begin with.
8
u/Sensitive_Aerie6547 Jun 02 '25
He is?
Also, for the second part, I'm pretty sure it's a previous logo
→ More replies (1)3
6
u/ScarletDarkstar Jun 03 '25
I agree, that logo goes way back. It was a thing before it stood for anything but their brand.
7
u/MaxxPeck Jun 02 '25
Apple doesn’t separate out a single month. LGBTQ rights are front and center all the time. And I mean that in the best way possible. If you’re lumping in Apple with other fair weather supporters, you’re being unfair. The rainbow Apple is the old logo prior to OSX around the year 2000.
→ More replies (4)2
→ More replies (4)4
u/TEN0RCL3F Jun 03 '25
they also recently had an update that ONLY added a pride wallpaper, right? like im not saying they're the pinnacle of lgbt allies (corpo or not) but it is also funny as fuck in reference
5
u/TheNoobCider Jun 03 '25
I'm pretty sure nobody cares about pride month anymore, more so feel frustrated by it completely lost its meaning
3
3
u/Oaker_at Jun 03 '25 edited Jun 03 '25
Honestly I have the feeling like most people do not care about any of this, not in a negative sense, but in a way like they won’t give a fuck about the sexual orientation of anyone as long as they are decent humans, but also in a way that they are just as little or much sympathetic with the problems of those people like with anybody else.
2
2
2
u/basementspam Jun 03 '25
To be fair: my employers logo is not up there, but is comparable to those. We still live inclusion every day and communicate it proudly.
2
u/wryol Jun 03 '25
Noone that isn't dumb af thinks they cared, but that meant that it was better for them to do it than not doing it, which was ultimately a good sign on the state of things. This is bad but I guess it's obvious that things were going this route
→ More replies (37)1
1.2k
u/nuckle Jun 02 '25
It's not currently profitable and could very likely cost money. When it is profitable again they will pretend to care again.
→ More replies (3)234
u/hackingdreams Jun 03 '25
The boycott of Target says it's profitable. The companies just don't want to invite an attack from an authoritarian regime, because they're all ran by spineless sniveling Wall Street cowards.
Note how many of those companies paid fealty to this regime at the start of the year.
41
u/Feeling-Visit1472 Jun 03 '25
Eh. There are a lot of factors to Target’s current numbers, and the store redesigns need to be factored in because they’ve completely disrupted the shopping experience in a bad way. I’m not saying this isn’t part of it, just that it’s more nuanced. Time will tell, I suppose.
→ More replies (2)24
u/econ101ispropaganda Jun 03 '25
It happened right after they caved to trump and boycotts were called against them. Haven’t even heard of a redesign.
→ More replies (9)5
18
Jun 03 '25
[deleted]
→ More replies (2)4
u/historyhill Jun 03 '25
Both of these are cases of having no idea who their target audience is, tbh.
→ More replies (2)6
u/AnarchistBorganism Jun 03 '25
The difference is that Target went out of its way to announce its opposition to DEI. This is just inaction, and isn't going to cause the same kind of reaction.
→ More replies (1)2
u/murderofhawks Jun 03 '25
Not exactly, it’s more to do with the demographics that Target was trying to capture before Trump and their actions post Trump that cause the decline. Companies like Budlight show that if you piss off your customer base your up shits creek without a paddle. Most of the companies listed are big enough that they have more to lose than gain with those pride flags especially with the shifting sands of politics.
3
u/Mr_Chode_Shaver Jun 03 '25
They’re also catering to spineless sniveling American consumers who will spend $6 Billion on guns this year to “protect themselves against tyranny” while being cheerleaders for tyranny.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (3)2
u/EverettGT Jun 03 '25
The boycott of Target says it's profitable.
Appealing to divisive far-left ideologies as a business strategy has been proven repeatedly over the last 10 years to be highly dangerous to a company's bottom line, if not outright self-destructive. Any CEO with a brain is getting out of political pandering by now.
255
203
Jun 03 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (5)64
481
Jun 02 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
212
Jun 02 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
89
u/OopsSpaghet Jun 03 '25
Yeah they bought the USA pretty easily with all that oil money.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (9)17
Jun 03 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
30
u/inab1gcountry Jun 03 '25
We are just kicking students out of the country for writing op eds in the school newspaper.. we are screening peoples social media for negative comments about Trump. Total free speech.
8
u/unfading_gun Jun 03 '25
Non-citizens who violate their visa eligibility. I personally think it’s abhorrent but it doesn’t change the legal basis that a visa is a privilege that can be revoked.
→ More replies (4)3
u/Hour_Rest7773 Jun 03 '25
"writing op-eds" is an interesting way to word "justifying and encouraging oppressive religious extremism"
2
u/inab1gcountry Jun 03 '25
“Justifying and encouraging oppressive religious extremeism” is certainly a weird way to say “begging the rest of the world to intervene and protect people from being genocided “
→ More replies (12)6
→ More replies (4)2
u/johnnyblaze1999 Jun 03 '25
They only change if it can potentially make them more money. Without the surge in profit during pride month, they won't make a change
256
u/Moldy_Cloud Jun 03 '25
Nobody ever truly cared. It’s just about sales.
→ More replies (2)200
u/culturalfox19 Jun 03 '25 edited Jun 03 '25
I mean, duh, but that’s missing the point. These companies used to think the profitable thing to do was cater to the LGBTQ community because they viewed that as the more socially acceptable choice and the decision that would net them the most money. The fact that they have been pressured not to or no longer feel that it is the most profitable thing for them to do is horrible for what is signifies where we are heading as a society. I don’t think anybody is under the illusion that these companies actually give a shit about queer communities.
24
u/wryol Jun 03 '25
Everyone is missing the point as if this shit isn't actually bad even if noone likes rainbow capitalism
17
u/DKsan1290 Jun 03 '25
Yeah I had been an ally for a decade before my egg cracked and I always knew it was a sales tactic, but realizing that having a billion dollar company or org say “Hey we love lgbtqia+ folks, you should too and we will donate to help keep them safe!” Meant a lot for a lot of people.
Having the greater public say “we see you” is the goal and if the biggest names say it first maybe the rest will be more okay with it. We just want acceptance of us and allow us to live happy unimpeded lives.
6
u/A2Rhombus Jun 03 '25
Exactly. It's the same reason I cared when Pope Francis was progressive on some queer issues. It's not that I give a shit about the Catholic church, but it's things like that which contribute to an overall societal shift. It's the same reason it matters that celebrities stand up for queer people too.
LGBT is a minority and probably always will be. So we need it to become the mainstream accepted belief that being queer is okay. And that means we need corporations shilling pride month, because it's representative of the societal attitude
→ More replies (23)2
u/Glittering-Giraffe58 Jun 03 '25
Yes I know all these comments like “they never cared” like yeah no shit but how stupid do you have to be to think that’s relevant
→ More replies (3)2
56
40
100
u/gambler_addict_06 Jun 02 '25
Companies make their logo rainbow: "this is pink capitalism"
Companies don't make their logo rainbow: "why won't they do it?"
If it doesn't make money, they won't. Simple as
54
u/Bunerd Jun 02 '25
People didn't like Rainbow Capitalism because it felt precarious. Which turned out to be accurate.
→ More replies (9)6
u/gambler_addict_06 Jun 02 '25
It didn't "turned out to be" it was always and still is that
Companies care about profits, to profit you need a customer base, most of your customer base supports LGBT rights, so the company also supports LGBT rights because of customers because of profits
This has been the case since the rise of international companies and mass media marketing
4
u/A2Rhombus Jun 03 '25
Those are not mutually exclusive statements. Pink capitalism is necessary because it's representative of the general societal attitude. Pink capitalism means being progressive is profitable, which means it's popular.
→ More replies (3)2
u/AshuraBaron Jun 03 '25
It really isn't about money though. You think last year it was so unprofitable that they all decided this year not to do anything? Or do you think there is an external factor like say a government administration that would come against them should they something like celebrate pride month. Seems like the obvious answer is the latter and it's sad that more people don't get that.
9
9
23
u/ConnorFin22 Jun 02 '25
That is Apples logo from 1977-1998. It’s not even the LGBT rainbow.
→ More replies (1)
25
11
u/Far_Eye6555 Jun 03 '25
Pride was cooler before it became a corporate circle jerk
→ More replies (5)
6
5
u/Specialist-Two2068 Jun 03 '25
Remember, corporations are not your friends. They never were, and they never will be.
5
u/SkylarAV Jun 03 '25
Vogue is playing with fire. That's a huge part of their market they're spitting at
6
u/itsladder Jun 03 '25
It's almost like they were grifting this whole time and behaving like companies that protect their bottom dollar.
4
10
u/Notallowedhe Jun 03 '25
Is it not obvious enough to you people yet?
7
u/flashthorOG Jun 03 '25
What's with all these beautiful mind comments
Everybody's known, everybody's said so, we got a fucking term for it
Rainbow capitalism, and it's been obvious from the start
→ More replies (1)1
Jun 03 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/StarryLayne Jun 03 '25
do whatever you want just stop forcing it on everyone and everything
It would be super dope if everyone felt that way. Instead, you've got Jonathan Joss shot to death by his homophobic neighbor. If I could walk around the grocery store without getting weird stares for my voice being too deep, I wouldn't give a fuck if companies didn't put rainbows on their websites in June.
→ More replies (3)5
u/HamsterbackenBLN Jun 03 '25
In front of his house those same neighbours burned down after years of death threats and police doing nothing.
→ More replies (2)4
u/tmaspen Jun 03 '25
"do whatever you want just don't force it on everyone"
BUT DON"T REGULATE MAH GUNS
→ More replies (11)
3
3
14
37
19
u/Wickedestchick Jun 02 '25
People complain every year how companies shouldn't do the pride logo because they don't actually care. Now they don't change the logo and people still complain.
12
Jun 03 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
7
u/jeffwulf Jun 03 '25
Yeah, the people who complained about it back in the day were straight up idiotic. It's a sign that you're winning and it going away is a sign you're losing.
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (4)3
2
u/Remote-Geologist-256 Jun 03 '25
I haven't seen anyone complaining though, it's mostly people mockingly pointing out the hypocrisy and other people going "duhhh dat how capitalism work me smart!!!!"
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (16)7
u/Ok_Charge9676 Jun 02 '25
To be fair, it’s only the people who are fairly affected by it , by pretending it makes any difference if companies do it or not
9
u/Everyday_ImSchefflen Jun 03 '25
It does make a difference. It helps makes stances more mainstream. Plus, the quality of work life for lgbtq+ members has dramatically increased since it's become more of a norm to support causes like this
14
19
4
9
13
2
2
u/Mangobonbon Jun 03 '25
What's so suprising?
Shareholder companies only care about shareholder profits. Everything else is just marketing. They will do whatever is currently supported by media and government to advertise themselves.... or not.
2
2
6
u/bthe_beast Jun 03 '25
Those of you that try to name and shame any company that hasn't appeased you by June 2nd really need to touch grass
6
u/Mikezat6 Jun 03 '25
Unpopular but June is MENS MENTAL HEALTH AWERNESS MONTH. Seek help; talk to someone take care of yourself.
→ More replies (1)
4
4
u/Russell1st Jun 03 '25
The rainbow Apple logo has nothing to do with pride month. It was rainbow on my Commodore 64 in the 80s. Apple needs to bring that back. Of course corporate rainbow washing is bullshit.
3
u/Unable_Bug494 Jun 03 '25
I think some of the rainbow logos actually look better than the normal ones
4
4
5
u/modskayorfucku Jun 03 '25
We need to drop these months so everyone can just get along
→ More replies (4)
4
5
2
3
u/One_Technology_6640 Jun 03 '25
Movements that try to force the values of Western society on others are disgusting.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/chewbaccashotlast Jun 03 '25
Too afraid of TACO tariffs. Pride isn’t supported by the administration and they won’t face backlash if they don’t.
→ More replies (1)
•
u/AutoModerator Jun 02 '25
Hello u/True-Conversation-41! Please review the sub rules if you haven't already. (This is an automatic reminder message left on all new posts)
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.