Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

1) Because they _can_. They have the manufacturing connections to quickly connect the needed pieces

2) Because they have the spare cash to spin this up very quickly.

3) Because they want to help (or at a minimum, look like they're helping).

Are there any reasons why they _shouldn't_ be making this kind of stuff? Other companies also meet all 3 of those conditions, and I think we should be glad (note: I'm saying 'glad' and not 'grateful') that any of them are doing this.



What other American company has the logistic and design know how that Apple has to make hundreds of millions devices?


GM, Ford, GE, Johnson & Johnson, Nike, 3M, Eli Lilly, Cummins, ... I could keep going. Maybe not all have it to the same degree as Apple, but are sufficient to make a face shield.

Lot's of companies could do this. I'm glad Apple is giving it a go.



GM and Ford also support massive networks of suppliers and contractors that have this capability as well. The list of capable companies is enormous.


I can’t speak for the rest of the companies, but GE is a pitiful shell of its former self and I am not sure that they could do anything well.

I caught a small glimpse of GE fading away when I worked there.


The US is an extremely massive manufacturing nation. There are dozens of companies in the US that could mass produce these face shields. It's great that Apple moved quickly to do it, it's certainly in their wheelhouse to make happen.

These shields are easy to manufacture. They're ideal to rapidly produce, cheaply and at scale. Compared to normal shields in the industry they're no-frills, which is perfectly fine, as right now we just need volume.


3M


They are already doing it but can't do it all alone.


> or at a minimum, look like they're helping

They're going to make a million face shields this week, and one million per week thereafter, with the intention to produce them above US demand levels to help other nations. I'd say it qualifies as a lot more than looking like they're helping.


Why not grateful as well?


I think you _can_ be grateful, but I understand why people are hesitant to be 'grateful' when companies do things that are clearly in the company's best interest anyway, setting aside any social benefits.

Be 'glad' when a company does something that helps society even if there are selfish motives. Be 'grateful' when a company does something that helps society when there's no obvious selfish motive.

Hope that makes sense.


I mean, companies shouldn't be doing anything out of the goodness of their hearts, since they have a duty to shareholders to maximize the long-term value of the business. Of course, helping people and helping yourself are often aligned.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: