As a Canadian citizen (now living in Silicon Valley), I would not be surprised that this action was motivated by the threat of a strike from the Ville-Marie meter-maid union :)
I thought parking meters were there to promote turnover and thus make parking a little more accessible. Free parking won't do that, and a no parking zone certainly won't.
In Cambridge, for the same reason, you'll be ticketed if they catch you feeding the meter instead of moving your car. It doesn't matter that you're putting up more money.
Everybody assumes automatically Apple is in the right? I wonder, if they allowed Apple to modify the public space in exchange for money, wouldn't they have to allow every other business to do something similar, too? Maybe they were more worried about that scenario.
What bothers me the most is when any organization makes the claim that they won't change something specifically for the reason that they have never done it that way before.
Great to know. Now what bothers you second-most? The Apple PR team would like to know so they can work it into their next press hit.
Seriously, though. This article presents one side, except for an out-of-context quote from an unnamed "bureaucrat" (emotionally laden term). Maybe the town is wrong and Apple is right, but I would want to get the full story before saying for sure.
They said no because Apple didn't bribe the right folks. All they had to do is give away a couple of iPods and then the city would have agreed to their deal.
