7 ms·

It's amazing the amount of crap people put up with in exchange for some comforts and conveniences these days (google, apple, amazon). Sad that so very few peopl

It's amazing the amount of crap people put up with in exchange for some comforts and conveniences these days (google, apple, amazon). Sad that so very few people put values first

red_admiral 6y ago
Apple seems to me, if not perfect, at least a couple of levels up from google or amazon.
- _dibly 6y ago
  Apple is the one looking to expand into health and wellness. The data Apple can harvest is going to become more and more valuable. They're rolling out home speakers and the Apple Watch is increasingly becoming a DYI diagnostic tool. I think it's a bit naive to think that Apple is somehow more altruistic than any other big tech company.
  - jtbayly 6y ago
    > DYI diagnostic tool I'm not familiar with that term. Does it mean a "Do Yourself In" diagnostic tool?
    - faitswulff 6y ago
      Ah yes, the notorious Do Yourself In category of diagnostic tools.
    - jskdvsksnb 6y ago
      What are personal health metrics but the inverse of personal mortality metrics?
  - ocdtrekkie 6y ago
    It's not altruism, it's just their business model happens to be more compatible with people's rights: Apple sells hardware at a premium price. Google monetizes data to push ads. Ads aren't a big part of premium experiences, Apple recognizes nobody likes them. Which is why Apple devices generally only have ads in third party experiences, and Google shoves ads right in the default mail app.
    - solarkraft 6y ago
      I don't use Apple devices often, but last time I did I saw insanely annoying ads in the default apps you can't replace. For Apple services, of course, which raises some pretty intense anti-trust concerns.
      - dijit 6y ago
        This is just completely untrue. There have never been third party ads in any default application on MacOS or iOS and I feel completely confident saying that. You could make an argument of upselling, the music app prods your for a subscription to Apple Music or to buy songs on itunes- you could argue Apple TV shows content from providers you’re not subscribed to (next to ones which you are)- but those are first and second party ads.
        solarkraft 6y ago
        > the music app prods your for a subscription to Apple Music or to buy songs on itunes- you could argue Apple TV shows content from providers you’re not subscribed to (next to ones which you are) That's what I mean. > but those are first and second party ads. But ads are ads.
        dijit 6y ago
        I guess I see a difference because the BBC does not show ads except for itself. So ads are not sold.
      - devenblake 6y ago
        On what apps? I've never gotten any advertisements like that.
    - hnlmorg 6y ago
      Exactly. Which is why I buy iPhones rather than Android handsets. I'll support Apple as long as their business model is privacy orientated but once they pivot (and I'm sure they will at some point in the future) then I'll switch to the next platform that supports my privacy -- assuming by that point that there are any such platforms left...
  - simonh 6y ago
    They don’t have to be altruistic as long as their interests align with those of their customers. So far on privacy they’ve spent billions of dollars building a reputation for protecting user privacy, fought court cases and probably given up billions more in potential revenue from user data monetisation. I’m not about to give up using a smartphone or online apps, so given I need to make a choice, I’m happy with the one I’ve made so far. All you have given is possible reasons Apple might compromise, but those have applied for many years. If they do start compromising then sure, let’s re-evaluate.
    - politelemon 6y ago
      They have spent on _marketing_ privacy. Their court cases were a great exercise in PR. They still have the highest compliance rate with US government for turning over user data, which they hold the keys to, and the Chinese government. User data monetisation is not the only danger to be wary of, it just happens to be the one that gets trotted out most often. The time to re-evaluate is already here, it's just hard to do so when you're already locked into their ecosystem.
      - Xylakant 6y ago
        It’s not as simple as taking the compliance rate. The question is, how much data do they hold that they can tune over. How much of it is client-side encrypted. Twitter handing over the DMs for a user: very much problematic- they’re plaintext. Apple handing over the iMessage history for a user: much less problematic, it’s E2E encrypted. (though still an issue - metadata may still be plain) Fundamentally it boils down to some trust level - how much of what apple says about their data storage is true?
        hu3 6y ago
        For starters, Apple can turn in all iCloud backup data since they ditched strong encryption plans after FBI complained. > The question is, how much data do they hold that they can tune over. https://www.androidcentral.com/apple-may-have-ditched-encrypted-backups-google-hasnt https://www.androidcentral.com/apple-may-have-ditched-encryp...
  - m463 6y ago
    they invented iBeacon for instance
- ec664 6y ago
  No thanks. I'm steering clear of their increasingly closed ecosystem
- mabbo 6y ago
  The difference is their business model. Google offers you free things, in exchange for showing you ads. Same with Facebook. This incentivizes them to find more ways to get more data about everyone. Apple mostly makes money by selling you goods. Privacy can become a feature of those goods, increasing its value. They are incentivized to protect privacy. This doesn't make Apple better. It's just that they're in a different market.
  - smichel17 6y ago
    The different market is (mostly) better. (My opinion)
    - vbezhenar 6y ago
      If you have enough money to pay. For many people watching ads is preferable payment method.
      - b3kart 6y ago
        Funny that people who can afford to pay to not see any ads are the same people that advertisers would like to get to.
- ksec 6y ago
  Except in the name of privacy they are now using it to expand its services to other sector. Payment, Cards, TV, Music, Wellness, what's next? (Especially true when you see people continue to think their business model is still to sell you iPhone, Apple is no longer just an iPhone company anymore ) Many of these makes me uneasy. Especially when we have caught Tim Cook lying multiple times.
tupputuppu 6y ago
Could it be it's just peoples values are like that? That regular consumers are ignirant and short-sighted and care more about funny games and easy apps instead of privacy or quality?
- madeofpalk 6y ago
  It’s just exceptionally difficult to quantify what “privacy” is. The trade off is between something very tangible vs the intangible
  - Razengan 6y ago
    No. > It’s just exceptionally difficult to quantify what “privacy” is. No, it’s really not difficult: Don’t try to learn more about me than what I explicitly choose to tell you myself.
    - klyrs 6y ago
      ... and don't go blabbing about what I've said, unless I asked you to.
    - izacus 6y ago
      That's _your_ definition which may have pretty much nothing to do with how other people see it. We won't be able to have a clear conversation about privacy until every person is on the game page about that. Until you understand that, you'll continue to be "surprised" when people say they care about privacy but not the pet peeve you have.
      - Razengan 6y ago
        How about this then: ___Consent___ Is that exceptionally difficult for you to quantify as well? As someone else said: It isn't that hard at all. Unless, of course, your paycheck is reliant on you not understanding it.
  - salawat 6y ago
rvba 6y ago
Add steam to that too. So many people are angry that there are alternatives...
- Scene_Cast2 6y ago
  Well, depends on how you define "alternative". If they were browsers, then perhaps NYTimes would only work in Firefox and WSJ would only work with Chrome. Technically, you can treat either as a replaceable commodity good as well...
mahkoh 6y ago
Is it amazing? Even on here you have people saying that they have to use Windows or Apple instead of Linux because of some minor issues.
m463 6y ago
Personally, I think there's a market opportunity for someone who actually treats people with respect and decency.
- Nextgrid 6y ago
  From my experience the majority of non-tech people do not value software or online services and will balk at paying even a couple bucks for an app. The other problem is that every service out there will pretend to treat you with respect and it's only when things go wrong that you learn the truth, by that point it's too late. So you need to 1) look beyond the price and 2) know which companies lie and which don't when it comes to their marketing (or have a previous experience with them), otherwise they all pretend to treat their customers with respect.
- eitland 6y ago
  There's a huge, billion dollar niche where Google used to be : 1. A box on a web page 2. Customers write words 3. Your software return a list of web pages that contain said words plus relevant ads. Since sometime 2007 - 2009 and Google has dropped the requirement that results actually contains the word and it is extremely annoying. I use DDG these days. They are just as bad, not better or worse but it is faster to add !g to a DDG search than to retype the query in DDG aftee first trying Google. First other search engine to recreate the Google experience from before 2007 can charge me $10 a month and show ads on top of it and still get me as a happy customer.

It's amazing the amount of crap people put up with in exchange for some comforts and conveniences these days (google, apple, amazon). Sad that so very few people put values first

red_admiral 6y ago

Apple seems to me, if not perfect, at least a couple of levels up from google or amazon.

_dibly 6y ago
Apple is the one looking to expand into health and wellness. The data Apple can harvest is going to become more and more valuable. They're rolling out home speakers and the Apple Watch is increasingly becoming a DYI diagnostic tool. I think it's a bit naive to think that Apple is somehow more altruistic than any other big tech company.
- jtbayly 6y ago
  > DYI diagnostic tool I'm not familiar with that term. Does it mean a "Do Yourself In" diagnostic tool?
  - faitswulff 6y ago
    Ah yes, the notorious Do Yourself In category of diagnostic tools.
  - jskdvsksnb 6y ago
    What are personal health metrics but the inverse of personal mortality metrics?
- ocdtrekkie 6y ago
  It's not altruism, it's just their business model happens to be more compatible with people's rights: Apple sells hardware at a premium price. Google monetizes data to push ads. Ads aren't a big part of premium experiences, Apple recognizes nobody likes them. Which is why Apple devices generally only have ads in third party experiences, and Google shoves ads right in the default mail app.
  - solarkraft 6y ago
    I don't use Apple devices often, but last time I did I saw insanely annoying ads in the default apps you can't replace. For Apple services, of course, which raises some pretty intense anti-trust concerns.
    - dijit 6y ago
      This is just completely untrue. There have never been third party ads in any default application on MacOS or iOS and I feel completely confident saying that. You could make an argument of upselling, the music app prods your for a subscription to Apple Music or to buy songs on itunes- you could argue Apple TV shows content from providers you’re not subscribed to (next to ones which you are)- but those are first and second party ads.
      - solarkraft 6y ago
        > the music app prods your for a subscription to Apple Music or to buy songs on itunes- you could argue Apple TV shows content from providers you’re not subscribed to (next to ones which you are) That's what I mean. > but those are first and second party ads. But ads are ads.
        dijit 6y ago
        I guess I see a difference because the BBC does not show ads except for itself. So ads are not sold.
    - devenblake 6y ago
      On what apps? I've never gotten any advertisements like that.
  - hnlmorg 6y ago
    Exactly. Which is why I buy iPhones rather than Android handsets. I'll support Apple as long as their business model is privacy orientated but once they pivot (and I'm sure they will at some point in the future) then I'll switch to the next platform that supports my privacy -- assuming by that point that there are any such platforms left...
- simonh 6y ago
  They don’t have to be altruistic as long as their interests align with those of their customers. So far on privacy they’ve spent billions of dollars building a reputation for protecting user privacy, fought court cases and probably given up billions more in potential revenue from user data monetisation. I’m not about to give up using a smartphone or online apps, so given I need to make a choice, I’m happy with the one I’ve made so far. All you have given is possible reasons Apple might compromise, but those have applied for many years. If they do start compromising then sure, let’s re-evaluate.
  - politelemon 6y ago
    They have spent on _marketing_ privacy. Their court cases were a great exercise in PR. They still have the highest compliance rate with US government for turning over user data, which they hold the keys to, and the Chinese government. User data monetisation is not the only danger to be wary of, it just happens to be the one that gets trotted out most often. The time to re-evaluate is already here, it's just hard to do so when you're already locked into their ecosystem.
    - Xylakant 6y ago
      It’s not as simple as taking the compliance rate. The question is, how much data do they hold that they can tune over. How much of it is client-side encrypted. Twitter handing over the DMs for a user: very much problematic- they’re plaintext. Apple handing over the iMessage history for a user: much less problematic, it’s E2E encrypted. (though still an issue - metadata may still be plain) Fundamentally it boils down to some trust level - how much of what apple says about their data storage is true?
      - hu3 6y ago
        For starters, Apple can turn in all iCloud backup data since they ditched strong encryption plans after FBI complained. > The question is, how much data do they hold that they can tune over. https://www.androidcentral.com/apple-may-have-ditched-encrypted-backups-google-hasnt https://www.androidcentral.com/apple-may-have-ditched-encryp...
- m463 6y ago
  they invented iBeacon for instance
ec664 6y ago
No thanks. I'm steering clear of their increasingly closed ecosystem
mabbo 6y ago
The difference is their business model. Google offers you free things, in exchange for showing you ads. Same with Facebook. This incentivizes them to find more ways to get more data about everyone. Apple mostly makes money by selling you goods. Privacy can become a feature of those goods, increasing its value. They are incentivized to protect privacy. This doesn't make Apple better. It's just that they're in a different market.
- smichel17 6y ago
  The different market is (mostly) better. (My opinion)
  - vbezhenar 6y ago
    If you have enough money to pay. For many people watching ads is preferable payment method.
    - b3kart 6y ago
      Funny that people who can afford to pay to not see any ads are the same people that advertisers would like to get to.
ksec 6y ago
Except in the name of privacy they are now using it to expand its services to other sector. Payment, Cards, TV, Music, Wellness, what's next? (Especially true when you see people continue to think their business model is still to sell you iPhone, Apple is no longer just an iPhone company anymore ) Many of these makes me uneasy. Especially when we have caught Tim Cook lying multiple times.

tupputuppu 6y ago

Could it be it's just peoples values are like that? That regular consumers are ignirant and short-sighted and care more about funny games and easy apps instead of privacy or quality?

madeofpalk 6y ago
It’s just exceptionally difficult to quantify what “privacy” is. The trade off is between something very tangible vs the intangible
- Razengan 6y ago
  No. > It’s just exceptionally difficult to quantify what “privacy” is. No, it’s really not difficult: Don’t try to learn more about me than what I explicitly choose to tell you myself.
  - klyrs 6y ago
    ... and don't go blabbing about what I've said, unless I asked you to.
  - izacus 6y ago
    That's _your_ definition which may have pretty much nothing to do with how other people see it. We won't be able to have a clear conversation about privacy until every person is on the game page about that. Until you understand that, you'll continue to be "surprised" when people say they care about privacy but not the pet peeve you have.
    - Razengan 6y ago
      How about this then: ___Consent___ Is that exceptionally difficult for you to quantify as well? As someone else said: It isn't that hard at all. Unless, of course, your paycheck is reliant on you not understanding it.
- salawat 6y ago

rvba 6y ago

Add steam to that too. So many people are angry that there are alternatives...

Scene_Cast2 6y ago
Well, depends on how you define "alternative". If they were browsers, then perhaps NYTimes would only work in Firefox and WSJ would only work with Chrome. Technically, you can treat either as a replaceable commodity good as well...

mahkoh 6y ago

Is it amazing? Even on here you have people saying that they have to use Windows or Apple instead of Linux because of some minor issues.

m463 6y ago

Personally, I think there's a market opportunity for someone who actually treats people with respect and decency.

Nextgrid 6y ago
From my experience the majority of non-tech people do not value software or online services and will balk at paying even a couple bucks for an app. The other problem is that every service out there will pretend to treat you with respect and it's only when things go wrong that you learn the truth, by that point it's too late. So you need to 1) look beyond the price and 2) know which companies lie and which don't when it comes to their marketing (or have a previous experience with them), otherwise they all pretend to treat their customers with respect.
eitland 6y ago
There's a huge, billion dollar niche where Google used to be : 1. A box on a web page 2. Customers write words 3. Your software return a list of web pages that contain said words plus relevant ads. Since sometime 2007 - 2009 and Google has dropped the requirement that results actually contains the word and it is extremely annoying. I use DDG these days. They are just as bad, not better or worse but it is faster to add !g to a DDG search than to retype the query in DDG aftee first trying Google. First other search engine to recreate the Google experience from before 2007 can charge me $10 a month and show ads on top of it and still get me as a happy customer.