4 ms·
> as a local device with iCloud disabled, they provide the most usably private device that is widely available This! The very fact that you perceive Apple to b
by mankash666 8y ago
> as a local device with iCloud disabled, they provide the most usably private device that is widely available
This! The very fact that you perceive Apple to be more private than the competition is the exact point I'm harping on.
That's a perception, not the truth. A Google pixel, or Samsung Galaxy (with encrypted storeage enabled) offers as much, or as little in the way of "usable privacy" that protects dissidents as Apple. Not to mention, dissidents are a lot more common in politically turbulent developing countries where an iPhone X costs as much as 6 months in wages. So, let's not pretend like the iPhone is a gift to dissidents
- LamaOfRuin 8y agoI hate Apple's software design, so I'm not a user, but this is a perception based on security researchers and actual activists being targeted by their (or other) governments, not Apple's assertions. Google has made positive moves, and there is hope with Treble that they can match Apple (they absolutely have the security personnel to do it) but as yet they are not there. Apple provides this with affordable several year old devices that are cheaper than any remotely secure android device. Those devices will generally continue to get software updates as long as brand new flagship Android devices.