3 ms·
I said: "This feels to me like Apple creating a convenient Orwellian enemy. They're not even competitors" In other words, Apple is creating an enemy for themse
by _qulr 6y ago
I said: "This feels to me like Apple creating a convenient Orwellian enemy. They're not even competitors"
In other words, Apple is creating an enemy for themselves, an enemy of Apple. When in fact the two companies are not enemies in the business sense of having competing products, and indeed Apple profits directly from the In App Purchases in the Facebook app — IAP which do exist, contrary to several other false claims in these comments — and profits indirectly by having Facebook in their App Store. Facebook too has profited and become more popular by being on iPhone and the App Store.
But now Apple's App Store is under serious scrutiny, not to mention lawsuits, so Apple is looking to justify its lockdown, and "privacy" fits the bill there, despite the fact that Facebook has always been "creepy", since the beginning of the App Store and before.
The purpose of an "Orwellian" enemy is to justify the heavy-handed control of the rulers and to distract the populace from that situation. "Good thing we have Apple's strict App Store rules to protect us from evildoers like Facebook!"
- ogre_codes 6y agoThis whole idea is convoluted. We're talking about adding a permission the user can select. This is increasing the amount of control users have over their device. Yet you want to use this bizarre Machiavellian scheme to try and make it look like some sinister Apple Plot. Guess what. Adding a dialog that warns me people are trying to spy on me isn't bad. Ever.