5 ms·

Apple's New Privacy Policy Updates: What You Need to Know

49 points by gardaani 8y ago

benologist 8y ago
One thing I don't understand with Apple's approach to privacy and their claims of customers not being the product, is why they then sell their customers in bulk to Google to monetize all that private data. https://www.phonearena.com/news/Google-Apple-default-search-engine-iOS-deal_id109385 https://www.phonearena.com/news/Google-Apple-default-search-...
- dspillett 8y ago
  Their customers are not their only product, nor presumably their primary one, given that they sell software and hardware. The customer is not the one and only product if other things are sold. So while weaselly, their wording is not incorrect: the customer is not the product. Though their customer's data may be a product, in certain business areas.
- lambada 8y ago
  I think it's quite a leap to turn "Google is the customisable, but admittedly default, search provider when performing searches in safari when not in private browsing mode" into "Apple is selling data that Apples customers gave Apple". The latter to me would imply that Apple were giving Google access to my photos, icloud documents etc.
  - benologist 8y ago
    I'm sure that other data you mention is worth a lot, but the data Google is able to appropriate from this is worth billions a year too. Mozilla is engaged in the same double-standard, you simply can't be pro-privacy while you are default bulk-selling deeply privileged insight to Google.
- bilbo0s 8y ago
  >why they then sell their customers in bulk to Google to monetize all that private data... That's easy. Because if Apple were to disallow the use of the google search engine on their phones and web browser they'd find themselves slapped with an anti-trust monopolistic practices suit faster than you can say "Google Lobbyist". I mean, if they wanted to, they could try using the whole, "customer privacy" excuse in open court. But like the famous meme says: "Oohhh that's a bold strategy Cotton. Let's see how it works out for 'em?" I wouldn't be too sanguine about their chances of surviving such an openly hostile action to a clear competitor. Apple does the next best thing, it gives you the option not to use Google. But it doesn't make that choice for you.
  - dwighttk 8y ago
    Not making Google the default search engine would not lead to an antitrust suit. Even if Apple were a monopoly, setting some other search engine to the default wouldn't be a problem. GP seems to be overstating what Apple is selling, which is just the default internet search function, not the private data that is stored on the phone. Sure, I'd love it if Apple went with a different search engine as the default, and Google is most definitely getting access to information through that partnership when Apple's customers search on Google, but it is not from Apple giving Google access to anything on the phone that you'd assume was being kept from them.
    - yoz-y 8y ago
      Had Apple had a monopoly I can imagine that iOS would have to be a bit different though. At least in Europe it's quite possible that the default search engine would have to become a "first run option" in a similar fashion to the browser selection in Windows.
  - RileyJames 8y ago
    Increasing the price, and eventually having google decline to pay for the default might also be a strategy they’re utilising. 2014: $1B 2017: $3B 2018: $9B
- user812 8y ago
  Valid question. Their definition of privacy doesn't go so far, and I assume if they would really want to create an ecosystem where this kind of data is protected they would need to create their own search enginge. Because google is still what the majority of people expect.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
kennywinker 8y ago
Article has section about “why they are enforcing this now” but doesn’t mention gdpr. eye-roll.gif
- markovbot 8y ago
  It's not Apple's job to enforce the GDPR on apps in it's app store

49 points by gardaani 8y ago

One thing I don't understand with Apple's approach to privacy and their claims of customers not being the product, is why they then sell their customers in bulk to Google to monetize all that private data. https://www.phonearena.com/news/Google-Apple-default-search-engine-iOS-deal_id109385 https://www.phonearena.com/news/Google-Apple-default-search-...

dspillett 8y ago
Their customers are not their only product, nor presumably their primary one, given that they sell software and hardware. The customer is not the one and only product if other things are sold. So while weaselly, their wording is not incorrect: the customer is not the product. Though their customer's data may be a product, in certain business areas.
lambada 8y ago
I think it's quite a leap to turn "Google is the customisable, but admittedly default, search provider when performing searches in safari when not in private browsing mode" into "Apple is selling data that Apples customers gave Apple". The latter to me would imply that Apple were giving Google access to my photos, icloud documents etc.
- benologist 8y ago
  I'm sure that other data you mention is worth a lot, but the data Google is able to appropriate from this is worth billions a year too. Mozilla is engaged in the same double-standard, you simply can't be pro-privacy while you are default bulk-selling deeply privileged insight to Google.
bilbo0s 8y ago
>why they then sell their customers in bulk to Google to monetize all that private data... That's easy. Because if Apple were to disallow the use of the google search engine on their phones and web browser they'd find themselves slapped with an anti-trust monopolistic practices suit faster than you can say "Google Lobbyist". I mean, if they wanted to, they could try using the whole, "customer privacy" excuse in open court. But like the famous meme says: "Oohhh that's a bold strategy Cotton. Let's see how it works out for 'em?" I wouldn't be too sanguine about their chances of surviving such an openly hostile action to a clear competitor. Apple does the next best thing, it gives you the option not to use Google. But it doesn't make that choice for you.
- dwighttk 8y ago
  Not making Google the default search engine would not lead to an antitrust suit. Even if Apple were a monopoly, setting some other search engine to the default wouldn't be a problem. GP seems to be overstating what Apple is selling, which is just the default internet search function, not the private data that is stored on the phone. Sure, I'd love it if Apple went with a different search engine as the default, and Google is most definitely getting access to information through that partnership when Apple's customers search on Google, but it is not from Apple giving Google access to anything on the phone that you'd assume was being kept from them.
  - yoz-y 8y ago
    Had Apple had a monopoly I can imagine that iOS would have to be a bit different though. At least in Europe it's quite possible that the default search engine would have to become a "first run option" in a similar fashion to the browser selection in Windows.
- RileyJames 8y ago
  Increasing the price, and eventually having google decline to pay for the default might also be a strategy they’re utilising. 2014: $1B 2017: $3B 2018: $9B
user812 8y ago
Valid question. Their definition of privacy doesn't go so far, and I assume if they would really want to create an ecosystem where this kind of data is protected they would need to create their own search enginge. Because google is still what the majority of people expect.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

kennywinker 8y ago

Article has section about “why they are enforcing this now” but doesn’t mention gdpr. eye-roll.gif

markovbot 8y ago
It's not Apple's job to enforce the GDPR on apps in it's app store