I think there is only one person in this thread who is tepidly defending Nike, and they have made their point clear again and again. As I read it; they like the shoes, they think money that Nike put into the sport has been good for skateboarding (and that Nike spent money locally which improved their access to skating), and that they think there isn't a marked difference between Nike and a company operated by an international investment firm who bought into skateboarding when a shoe company went into receivership.
I don't think that Nike is inherently extremely different than numerous other corporations that operate in skateboarding, aside from being significantly more successful. Does anyone really think that Lakai wouldn't trade places with Nike if they could? Vans? New Balance? When this line of reasoning breaks down, we can see people start claiming these companies are "skater-operated", which is as far as I can tell, no different than Nike hiring people from the skate world to run their SB division.
As for the differences, if there's a difference for you, that's enough. You don't have to buy Nike, no one is making you. We all have our individual, discrete buying preferences, and maybe we rationalize them or maybe we don't.