3 ms·

Vote with your wallet? Anti consumer companies shouldn't get your money.

Nextgrid 7y ago
What's the alternative? Buy an Android device so that not only is Google stalking you but you also pay for it? I agree that what Apple is doing here is wrong, but the alternative is worse on other fronts like privacy which is much more problematic (to me at least) than App Store restrictions.
- allenskd 7y ago
  Sadly.... this was my conclusion as well. I'd rather have an iPhone(which I do, an iPhone X) than actually get a Android device. This is the case of going with the lesser evil.... and there's no way in my mind that Apple would be the greater evil than Google when it comes to tracking users and learning all their habits while using Android. Apple is not perfect and I hate it for being so anti-consumer when it comes to repairing... and I'd love they would fully commit to a privacy-minded iOS if they have the guts to do it.
  - Nextgrid 7y ago
    The real solution is regulation for privacy, so that stalking and tracking becomes illegal no matter who does it. Then, Android would become a viable choice for many. Anti-trust regulations on Apple would also be very welcome, but irrelevant to the privacy problem.
- Krasnol 7y ago
  Buy an Android device, block the spy traffic or install a different OS on it. You know...stuff you can do with a device that actually belongs to you.
- jshevek 7y ago
  It is very easy to install a ROM and have full control over your relationship with Google.
rimliu 7y ago
Maybe you have a bit different idea of consumers from the real consumers Apple has.
terminaljunkid 7y ago
Sadly, fanboys don't realize patents and lock-in are more evil than mere, avoidable advertising.
- Razengan 7y ago
  Do you realize that you are also being a "fanboy?"
  - jshevek 7y ago
    I don't support the parent's use of name calling, but it is not necessarily the case that criticism of another's enthusiasm for a vender implies the critic also has enthusiasm for a vendor. Some of us dislike all of the dominant venders. (Edit: And having the position that 'mere avoidable advertising' can be avoided is also not necessarily evidence of fanboyism)
    - Razengan 7y ago
      The connotation is a thinly-veiled promotion of Google with skewed reasoning; that tracking you so they can advertise to you is benign, and we should submit to constantly being tracked, because that harms us less than patents and lock-in, without giving any reason why patents and lock-in are bad. Tracking me and spamming me immediately makes my experience worse, with almost no exceptions (I've never seen an ad that was relevant or made me buy anything, but I often experience uncomfortable breaches of privacy), but patents and lock-in are often used to provide me with tangible benefits, with the only downside being that other companies are prevented from easily providing those same benefits.
      - jshevek 7y ago
        No, that 'connotation' isn't present in the parent's actual words.
        Razengan 7y ago
        Click on 'parent' until the context of the thread becomes apparent.

What's the alternative? Buy an Android device so that not only is Google stalking you but you also pay for it? I agree that what Apple is doing here is wrong, but the alternative is worse on other fronts like privacy which is much more problematic (to me at least) than App Store restrictions.

allenskd 7y ago
Sadly.... this was my conclusion as well. I'd rather have an iPhone(which I do, an iPhone X) than actually get a Android device. This is the case of going with the lesser evil.... and there's no way in my mind that Apple would be the greater evil than Google when it comes to tracking users and learning all their habits while using Android. Apple is not perfect and I hate it for being so anti-consumer when it comes to repairing... and I'd love they would fully commit to a privacy-minded iOS if they have the guts to do it.
- Nextgrid 7y ago
  The real solution is regulation for privacy, so that stalking and tracking becomes illegal no matter who does it. Then, Android would become a viable choice for many. Anti-trust regulations on Apple would also be very welcome, but irrelevant to the privacy problem.
Krasnol 7y ago
Buy an Android device, block the spy traffic or install a different OS on it. You know...stuff you can do with a device that actually belongs to you.
jshevek 7y ago
It is very easy to install a ROM and have full control over your relationship with Google.

rimliu 7y ago

Maybe you have a bit different idea of consumers from the real consumers Apple has.

terminaljunkid 7y ago

Sadly, fanboys don't realize patents and lock-in are more evil than mere, avoidable advertising.

Razengan 7y ago
Do you realize that you are also being a "fanboy?"
- jshevek 7y ago
  I don't support the parent's use of name calling, but it is not necessarily the case that criticism of another's enthusiasm for a vender implies the critic also has enthusiasm for a vendor. Some of us dislike all of the dominant venders. (Edit: And having the position that 'mere avoidable advertising' can be avoided is also not necessarily evidence of fanboyism)
  - Razengan 7y ago
    The connotation is a thinly-veiled promotion of Google with skewed reasoning; that tracking you so they can advertise to you is benign, and we should submit to constantly being tracked, because that harms us less than patents and lock-in, without giving any reason why patents and lock-in are bad. Tracking me and spamming me immediately makes my experience worse, with almost no exceptions (I've never seen an ad that was relevant or made me buy anything, but I often experience uncomfortable breaches of privacy), but patents and lock-in are often used to provide me with tangible benefits, with the only downside being that other companies are prevented from easily providing those same benefits.
    - jshevek 7y ago
      No, that 'connotation' isn't present in the parent's actual words.
      - Razengan 7y ago
        Click on 'parent' until the context of the thread becomes apparent.