Re: Shameful apple
It's good to be indignant about bad developing nation supplier chain employment practice. It's not good to give inaccurate and misleading information that obscures the reality of the situation and obscures the reality of what is being done by which companies and when (and in turn obscures who should be supported and who should be criticised)
If you actually read Apple's supplier responsibility reports you would realise they are making a huge effort to ensure suppliers are acting responsibly. Their effort leads the industry by some distance and indeed other companies, which have not been hit by the "irresponsible suppliers" meme (but should be - such as Samsung) are doing little but ride on Apple's coat tails on this one. Indeed if users applied the same standard of audit they expect of companies like Apple, they would quickly realise that based on real action, if they are to purchase a mobile device, the responsible choice is now to buy either Apple or a Freedom phone or a phone not assembled in a developing nation (though employment practices by parts suppliers still remains a problem), or, most responsible of all, buy nothing at all.
Your point about not paying corporate taxes is also misleading. When dealing with International business, there are always choices to be made and no sane business will make legal choices which increase the tax burden. If you have an inheritance due from an Auntie Pru who has just died in some country, you become executor of her estate and due to her living arrangements you have a perfectly legal choice as to which overseas country/jurisdiction death duty should be paid, you would not choose to pay the duty in the country with the higher rate out of a sense of responsibility to one country as over another. Businesses face such choices on tax and where they base their operations all the time. Ireland provide a low tax regime precisely so they would get businesses like Apple to locate there (they don't as you inaccurately state, just have bank accounts there).
Given international business necessarily involves these quite legal choices, the real yardstick for unethical behaviour is if a company uses or creates financial instruments that exist solely for the purpose of reducing or eliminating tax. Examples are loans that serve no sensible funding purpose and exist solely to defer costs and reduce tax, or as you so inaccurately implied of Apple, bank accounts in jurisdictions where no business is conducted, purely because loopholes allow the reclassification of some form of income channelled through the bank accounts in question, that reduces tax.
Tim Cook is on public record stating Apple run no such instruments.
BTW, if you want to know the name of a tech company who do run such instruments, extensively, look no further than Google.