What is interesting in this debate on trust is the ability of...

What is interesting in this debate on trust is the ability of some posters to place implicit trust in one company and not the other. Yet the company they are suggesting is worthy of that implicit trust appears to have made some very serious errors of judgement.

I agree with other posters in that trust is something that is earned over time through both words and actions often resulting in two steps forward and one step back view in the level of trust one has of another. It is also very clear that relying on others interpretations of the actions that deserve or do not deserve trust is inherently flawed and will not serve people very well in the longer term, best to weigh up all information and not just singular actions and make up ones own mind IMHO.