3 ms·

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

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...
- circularfoyers 6y ago
  Which is why I think projects including PinePhone and Librem 5 are important, as they are privacy orientated and they need community driven support now to be usable in the future. The only other projects that get close are ones that use AOSP as a base like GrapheneOS or LineageOS with MicroG. But this introduces the same issue that Chromium forks have, which is the increasing maintenance burden.
syshum 6y ago
Apple's business model is more compatible with rights YOU care about, but it is false to say it is compatible with "peoples rights" Apple is more compatible with Privacy rights, but wholly not compatible with ownership rights, portability rights, free speech rights, etc. Their draconian ecosystem policies around payment, hardware lock in, and platform lock in are IMO just as bad if not worse than Google draconian policies around data privacy It seems however you do not place any value on anything other than privacy
- Shared404 6y ago
  This is an important point. There are no good guys in cell phones right now, at least none that are large enough on the stage to really scare Apple/Google. EDIT: I feel like I should give a shout-out to Pinephone, LineageOS and GrapheneOS as some better options, although they are all obviously not mainline.
m463 6y ago
I personally think that the whole "privacy" thing started because their ecosystem is in trouble. They created the app store and made apps ubiquitous. Honestly, computers used to have so much promise. They helped us, and made us better. But nowadays how many people have you heard say "I don't WANT to install an app". (I know, lots of people don't care) And apple is trying to restore (a little) trust by saying they're for privacy. Thing is, they have to play both sides. And they really can't be for privacy (like allow a firewall or block network access for an app) because then developers won't do anything on their platform.

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...

circularfoyers 6y ago
Which is why I think projects including PinePhone and Librem 5 are important, as they are privacy orientated and they need community driven support now to be usable in the future. The only other projects that get close are ones that use AOSP as a base like GrapheneOS or LineageOS with MicroG. But this introduces the same issue that Chromium forks have, which is the increasing maintenance burden.

syshum 6y ago

Apple's business model is more compatible with rights YOU care about, but it is false to say it is compatible with "peoples rights" Apple is more compatible with Privacy rights, but wholly not compatible with ownership rights, portability rights, free speech rights, etc. Their draconian ecosystem policies around payment, hardware lock in, and platform lock in are IMO just as bad if not worse than Google draconian policies around data privacy It seems however you do not place any value on anything other than privacy

Shared404 6y ago
This is an important point. There are no good guys in cell phones right now, at least none that are large enough on the stage to really scare Apple/Google. EDIT: I feel like I should give a shout-out to Pinephone, LineageOS and GrapheneOS as some better options, although they are all obviously not mainline.

m463 6y ago

I personally think that the whole "privacy" thing started because their ecosystem is in trouble. They created the app store and made apps ubiquitous. Honestly, computers used to have so much promise. They helped us, and made us better. But nowadays how many people have you heard say "I don't WANT to install an app". (I know, lots of people don't care) And apple is trying to restore (a little) trust by saying they're for privacy. Thing is, they have to play both sides. And they really can't be for privacy (like allow a firewall or block network access for an app) because then developers won't do anything on their platform.