8 ms·

A good reminder that Google's customers are actually advertisers, whereas Apple's customers are the end-user.

by fouc 9y ago

qeternity 9y ago
Put another way: Google's users are the product. Apple's users are the customer.
- aetherson 9y ago
  Is there any doubt that Apple loves their products more than their customers? This whole "you're the product" thing gets repeated over and over again with no thought or analysis. Being the product instead of the customer has plusses and minuses. Have you worked with a recruiter? You're definitely the product there: they're selling you to employers, who are their customers. I've dealt with recruiters both as the product (prospective employee) and the customer (employer). In general, I prefer to be the product, though neither is entirely comfortable. By far the more important dynamic is are you a valuable product/customer. That's what gets you treated well. The answer to that for any mass-market company is "no."
  - soziawa 9y ago
    > You're definitely the product there: they're selling you to employers, who are their customers. I've dealt with recruiters both as the product (prospective employee) and the customer (employer). In general, I prefer to be the product, though neither is entirely comfortable. But there is a huge difference between recruiting for a factory employing 100'000 people (or in Googles case billions) or recruiting a more important person. I guess you were the latter.
    - aetherson 9y ago
      Yes, that was in fact the last paragraph of my comment.
  - qeternity 9y ago
    It seems like you've put no thought or analysis into my comment. You assumed it was pejorative, which says more about your comment than it does mine. I love Google. I love Apple. We use loads of Google services at the startup I've founded (some of which we pay for). I am perfectly happy being the product. For the most part, I am happy to have my data monetized so that I can receive free services. Nonetheless, it changes nothing. Google needs good services so that is has products to sell (i.e. users). Apple skips a step by creating things for which their customer is the user. It's a subtle difference, but it's worth discussing.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - virgilp 9y ago
      > It seems like you've put no thought or analysis into my comment Wow, that's a strong statement. If anything, your inital comment reeks of thoughtless-soundbite-repetition - I also find that statement meaningless and annoying in most contexts. What is it supposed to prove? That Google cares less about its users than it cares about advertisers? Obviously a company needs to take care of its products, or it'll lose the customers too. In fact, most companies invest more in their products than they "invest" in their customers - arguably, as soon as they get a monopoly (or lock you into their ecosystem) they stop caring about you as a customer, at all - and start thinking how to extract more value from you (as opposed to "provide more value to you") > It's a subtle difference, but it's worth discussing. Well, discuss it, don't just state it as if it means something obvious.
  - r00fus 9y ago
    I may very well be a product in many business relationships. Some of those relationships are more equitable than others. In some cases I can extract great value in my role as "product". Another point - Apple has 100s of millions of customers, whereas Google has billions. Google literally has a 10x scaling problem, and correspondingly a far lower revenue per customer (or product as you like). I love Google services, but I interact with them knowing I'm one of billions.
    - SpikeDad 9y ago
      You can only support customers that generate revenue. The billions of customers only generate revenue by being mined for revenue whether thats analyzing their habits or their content for revenue. Or in the absence of that the billions of customers are loss leaders hoping to be upselled into a commercial product. In any event there's no way that Google can provide the level of support that any company who's revenue is directly tied to the products that are purchased. And it's obvious support is extremely expensive because companies that spend a lot on it give great support (like Apple) and companies that spend a little give very little or very limited support (like Google).
  - dragonwriter 9y ago
    > This whole "you're the product" thing gets repeated over and over again with no thought or analysis. Well, yeah, if there was any thought or analysis, people would say “supplier” not “product”.
- PricelessValue 9y ago
  If you aren't paying for it, then you are the product. Even still, apple is still collecting data on you. If their business ever suffers, they can still sell your data. Apple still owns your data even if they aren't currently selling it.
  - millstone 9y ago
    What data?
    - PricelessValue 9y ago
      iPhone, iPad or apple app data. What you listen to on itunes. What you watch. Etc. They have to in order to tailor their services better, manage their infrastructure and of course plan for their future development. Apple uses their data to make better product to sell to you. They don't sell their data to advertisers because they don't need to. What is going to happen if iphones, ipads, etc don't sell as well?
      - Mononokay 9y ago
        Then they'll only be able to share data as they agreed to with their Privacy Policy and User Agreements. So pre-change, they'll be able to do very little with your data, if any.
      - icanhackit 9y ago
        > What is going to happen if iphones, ipads, etc don't sell as well? Given their track record on privacy, particularly using it as a selling point, they'd be poisoning the well pretty badly if they did this. It's more likely they'd burn through their cash before even thinking of selling user data. I can't see it happening on Tim Cook's watch or any of the existing executive team, but maybe an external hire.
      - millstone 9y ago
        That "etc" sure has to carry a lot of implications. For example, see their Maps data collection practices: The data that Maps collects while you use the app — like search terms, navigation routing, and traffic information — is associated with random identifiers so it can’t be tied to your Apple ID. Or Apple Pay: When you use Apple Pay we don’t track what you’re buying, so we can’t build a purchase history to serve you ads. Or Siri: If you give your explicit consent, Apple can improve Siri and other intelligent features by analyzing how you use iCloud and the data from your account. Analysis happens only after the data has gone through privacy-enhancing techniques so that it cannot be associated with you or your account Note the word "can't" that appears over and over. Yes Apple necessarily records some data, e.g. for streaming services. But broadly speaking, Apple couldn't sell the data to advertisers even if they chose to, because they don't have the data.
kyrra 9y ago
(I'm a Googler, opinions are my own). I'd say it's a lot more complicated than that. If you are paying Google, you are definitely a customer. This would be anything from GSuite/cloud, Fi, Play store, Express, and many others. Google isn't just Ads, there are a lot of products and lot of teams that have different priorities and concerns. Product teams here that you don't pay still care about their users. It's good to remember that there are still engineers behind these products. Many of them have similar opinions to those expressed on HN. When an unpopular decision is made, people are vocal with their concerns.
- eridius 9y ago
  If you're Google's customer, why is it impossible to get customer support? You're not Google's customer. You're just a product that they convinced to give them money in addition to what they get by leveraging your personal information to sell ads.
  - bllguo 9y ago
    I was not aware being a customer is defined by availability of support. You're a customer of X if you pay for goods/services from X. As customers, we're just not nearly as valuable as a big advertiser.
  - eitally 9y ago
    You're wrong, and you're conflating two unlike things. 1) If you are a consumer user taking advantage of free things, information about you has value to the provider. In this case, it has value to Google as an adtech company. But it's also true that Google historically has been very happy to provide free services to users for altruistic purposes, and continues to do so. This can lead to their early demise, but c'est la vie. How things are prioritized for development, much less scheduled for launch or deprecated at Google, are some of the most misunderstood processes/lore in tech. 2) If you are paying Google for product access, that is completely different and a) your data is not mined for advertising nor are ads displayed to you, and b) you have access to paid support.
    - 9y ago
dredmorbius 9y ago
"If you're taking flack, you're over the target.
GeekyBear 9y ago
>A good reminder that Google's customers are actually advertisers, whereas Apple's customers are the end-user. A good way to see this in action is to try to get end user technical support from both companies. How does a user get assistance from a human being at Google when they have problems with their personal Gmail account, for example? Apple gives it's customers the ability to walk into it's stores and get one on one help, or to talk to actual human beings in technical support over the telephone.

A good reminder that Google's customers are actually advertisers, whereas Apple's customers are the end-user.

by fouc 9y ago

A good reminder that Google's customers are actually advertisers, whereas Apple's customers are the end-user.

qeternity 9y ago

Put another way: Google's users are the product. Apple's users are the customer.

aetherson 9y ago
Is there any doubt that Apple loves their products more than their customers? This whole "you're the product" thing gets repeated over and over again with no thought or analysis. Being the product instead of the customer has plusses and minuses. Have you worked with a recruiter? You're definitely the product there: they're selling you to employers, who are their customers. I've dealt with recruiters both as the product (prospective employee) and the customer (employer). In general, I prefer to be the product, though neither is entirely comfortable. By far the more important dynamic is are you a valuable product/customer. That's what gets you treated well. The answer to that for any mass-market company is "no."
- soziawa 9y ago
  > You're definitely the product there: they're selling you to employers, who are their customers. I've dealt with recruiters both as the product (prospective employee) and the customer (employer). In general, I prefer to be the product, though neither is entirely comfortable. But there is a huge difference between recruiting for a factory employing 100'000 people (or in Googles case billions) or recruiting a more important person. I guess you were the latter.
  - aetherson 9y ago
    Yes, that was in fact the last paragraph of my comment.
- qeternity 9y ago
  It seems like you've put no thought or analysis into my comment. You assumed it was pejorative, which says more about your comment than it does mine. I love Google. I love Apple. We use loads of Google services at the startup I've founded (some of which we pay for). I am perfectly happy being the product. For the most part, I am happy to have my data monetized so that I can receive free services. Nonetheless, it changes nothing. Google needs good services so that is has products to sell (i.e. users). Apple skips a step by creating things for which their customer is the user. It's a subtle difference, but it's worth discussing.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - virgilp 9y ago
    > It seems like you've put no thought or analysis into my comment Wow, that's a strong statement. If anything, your inital comment reeks of thoughtless-soundbite-repetition - I also find that statement meaningless and annoying in most contexts. What is it supposed to prove? That Google cares less about its users than it cares about advertisers? Obviously a company needs to take care of its products, or it'll lose the customers too. In fact, most companies invest more in their products than they "invest" in their customers - arguably, as soon as they get a monopoly (or lock you into their ecosystem) they stop caring about you as a customer, at all - and start thinking how to extract more value from you (as opposed to "provide more value to you") > It's a subtle difference, but it's worth discussing. Well, discuss it, don't just state it as if it means something obvious.
- r00fus 9y ago
  I may very well be a product in many business relationships. Some of those relationships are more equitable than others. In some cases I can extract great value in my role as "product". Another point - Apple has 100s of millions of customers, whereas Google has billions. Google literally has a 10x scaling problem, and correspondingly a far lower revenue per customer (or product as you like). I love Google services, but I interact with them knowing I'm one of billions.
  - SpikeDad 9y ago
    You can only support customers that generate revenue. The billions of customers only generate revenue by being mined for revenue whether thats analyzing their habits or their content for revenue. Or in the absence of that the billions of customers are loss leaders hoping to be upselled into a commercial product. In any event there's no way that Google can provide the level of support that any company who's revenue is directly tied to the products that are purchased. And it's obvious support is extremely expensive because companies that spend a lot on it give great support (like Apple) and companies that spend a little give very little or very limited support (like Google).
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  > This whole "you're the product" thing gets repeated over and over again with no thought or analysis. Well, yeah, if there was any thought or analysis, people would say “supplier” not “product”.
PricelessValue 9y ago
If you aren't paying for it, then you are the product. Even still, apple is still collecting data on you. If their business ever suffers, they can still sell your data. Apple still owns your data even if they aren't currently selling it.
- millstone 9y ago
  What data?
  - PricelessValue 9y ago
    iPhone, iPad or apple app data. What you listen to on itunes. What you watch. Etc. They have to in order to tailor their services better, manage their infrastructure and of course plan for their future development. Apple uses their data to make better product to sell to you. They don't sell their data to advertisers because they don't need to. What is going to happen if iphones, ipads, etc don't sell as well?
    - Mononokay 9y ago
      Then they'll only be able to share data as they agreed to with their Privacy Policy and User Agreements. So pre-change, they'll be able to do very little with your data, if any.
    - icanhackit 9y ago
      > What is going to happen if iphones, ipads, etc don't sell as well? Given their track record on privacy, particularly using it as a selling point, they'd be poisoning the well pretty badly if they did this. It's more likely they'd burn through their cash before even thinking of selling user data. I can't see it happening on Tim Cook's watch or any of the existing executive team, but maybe an external hire.
    - millstone 9y ago
      That "etc" sure has to carry a lot of implications. For example, see their Maps data collection practices: The data that Maps collects while you use the app — like search terms, navigation routing, and traffic information — is associated with random identifiers so it can’t be tied to your Apple ID. Or Apple Pay: When you use Apple Pay we don’t track what you’re buying, so we can’t build a purchase history to serve you ads. Or Siri: If you give your explicit consent, Apple can improve Siri and other intelligent features by analyzing how you use iCloud and the data from your account. Analysis happens only after the data has gone through privacy-enhancing techniques so that it cannot be associated with you or your account Note the word "can't" that appears over and over. Yes Apple necessarily records some data, e.g. for streaming services. But broadly speaking, Apple couldn't sell the data to advertisers even if they chose to, because they don't have the data.

kyrra 9y ago

(I'm a Googler, opinions are my own). I'd say it's a lot more complicated than that. If you are paying Google, you are definitely a customer. This would be anything from GSuite/cloud, Fi, Play store, Express, and many others. Google isn't just Ads, there are a lot of products and lot of teams that have different priorities and concerns. Product teams here that you don't pay still care about their users. It's good to remember that there are still engineers behind these products. Many of them have similar opinions to those expressed on HN. When an unpopular decision is made, people are vocal with their concerns.

eridius 9y ago
If you're Google's customer, why is it impossible to get customer support? You're not Google's customer. You're just a product that they convinced to give them money in addition to what they get by leveraging your personal information to sell ads.
- bllguo 9y ago
  I was not aware being a customer is defined by availability of support. You're a customer of X if you pay for goods/services from X. As customers, we're just not nearly as valuable as a big advertiser.
- eitally 9y ago
  You're wrong, and you're conflating two unlike things. 1) If you are a consumer user taking advantage of free things, information about you has value to the provider. In this case, it has value to Google as an adtech company. But it's also true that Google historically has been very happy to provide free services to users for altruistic purposes, and continues to do so. This can lead to their early demise, but c'est la vie. How things are prioritized for development, much less scheduled for launch or deprecated at Google, are some of the most misunderstood processes/lore in tech. 2) If you are paying Google for product access, that is completely different and a) your data is not mined for advertising nor are ads displayed to you, and b) you have access to paid support.
  - 9y ago

dredmorbius 9y ago

"If you're taking flack, you're over the target.

GeekyBear 9y ago

>A good reminder that Google's customers are actually advertisers, whereas Apple's customers are the end-user. A good way to see this in action is to try to get end user technical support from both companies. How does a user get assistance from a human being at Google when they have problems with their personal Gmail account, for example? Apple gives it's customers the ability to walk into it's stores and get one on one help, or to talk to actual human beings in technical support over the telephone.