4 ms·

This isn’t an Apple vs Google thing. This is an Apple vs web standards thing. It’s actually and Apple vs. APIs and technologies that allow fingerprinting on th

This isn’t an Apple vs Google thing. This is an Apple vs web standards thing. It’s actually and Apple vs. APIs and technologies that allow fingerprinting on the web thing. Nobody mentions that Mozilla has sided with Apple much of the time to not implement some of these same APIs and technologies.

oaiey 5y ago
Then apple should focus on improving the APIs to be privacy safe (how they successfully do in their own APIs). But they are not. It is not about privacy. It is about revenue.
- alwillis 5y ago
  hen apple should focus on improving the APIs to be privacy safe (how they successfully do in their own APIs). If you follow some of the conversations on GitHub when a proposal comes up from Google, which I sometimes do, there’s no simple way to make some of these APIs private. And when Apple proposes ways to do so, Google balks at them because… their revenue is based on advertising that tracks users across the web. It’s not rocket science. Remember, Google is the only company that ships a mainstream browser that doesn’t come with privacy settings by default. There’s no features in Chrome to block trackers or limit how 3rd party cookies are used unlike Safari, Firefox and Edge. Apple’s market cap is around 2.5 trillion dollars; while they make revenue from apps, it’s a rounding error compared to their overall market cap or their iPhone revenue.
  - jsnell 5y ago
    I don't know why you think the market cap is relevant here. But Apple's net income in 2020 was about $60B. The total App Store revenue was about $64B, out of which Apple extracted $20B in rent. Not all of that $20B was profit, but based on what we know about the economics of running such stores, it was about $15B of profit. That is 25% of all of Apple's profit in 2020. Apple will do anything to protect that income stream. If the way to protect it is to cripple the web, well, you can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs.
Vinnl 5y ago
And yet nobody is writing such articles about Firefox. There's plenty that's not privacy-invasive and that Firefox thus does implement, that Safari does not or does buggily.
- yourad_io 5y ago
  Perhaps it has to do with Firefox not being the only browser(/browser backend) available on an entire class of Mobile devices.
afavour 5y ago
> It’s actually and Apple vs. APIs and technologies that allow fingerprinting on the web thing. Of course it isn’t. Apple had longstanding (years long) bugs with IndexedDB. Their PWA implementation has been buggy from day one. They don’t implement push because it threatens their native app ecosystem, not because of privacy concerns. Yes, there are some APIs with privacy concerns. But that’s a small part of the story of Apple’s neglect.
camgunz 5y ago
> It’s actually and Apple vs. APIs and technologies that allow fingerprinting on the web thing. A sibling comment says: > The article mentions explicitely: WebRTC, VP9, WebP, notifications, home screen icon shortcut, Local data storage, camera, microphone, USB port, and some more. Some of these things enable (more) fingerprinting, but VP9 and WebP? Nah. I have all kinds of Apple stuff--phones, laptops, accessories--but a lot of what they do is strategic in service of enlarging their profit margins (look at right to repair, for example). I don't necessarily blame them; capitalism is a race to the bottom here. But let's not cast Apple in this light of noble privacy defenders. They're doing that to make money too.

oaiey 5y ago

Then apple should focus on improving the APIs to be privacy safe (how they successfully do in their own APIs). But they are not. It is not about privacy. It is about revenue.

alwillis 5y ago
hen apple should focus on improving the APIs to be privacy safe (how they successfully do in their own APIs). If you follow some of the conversations on GitHub when a proposal comes up from Google, which I sometimes do, there’s no simple way to make some of these APIs private. And when Apple proposes ways to do so, Google balks at them because… their revenue is based on advertising that tracks users across the web. It’s not rocket science. Remember, Google is the only company that ships a mainstream browser that doesn’t come with privacy settings by default. There’s no features in Chrome to block trackers or limit how 3rd party cookies are used unlike Safari, Firefox and Edge. Apple’s market cap is around 2.5 trillion dollars; while they make revenue from apps, it’s a rounding error compared to their overall market cap or their iPhone revenue.
- jsnell 5y ago
  I don't know why you think the market cap is relevant here. But Apple's net income in 2020 was about $60B. The total App Store revenue was about $64B, out of which Apple extracted $20B in rent. Not all of that $20B was profit, but based on what we know about the economics of running such stores, it was about $15B of profit. That is 25% of all of Apple's profit in 2020. Apple will do anything to protect that income stream. If the way to protect it is to cripple the web, well, you can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs.

Vinnl 5y ago

And yet nobody is writing such articles about Firefox. There's plenty that's not privacy-invasive and that Firefox thus does implement, that Safari does not or does buggily.

yourad_io 5y ago
Perhaps it has to do with Firefox not being the only browser(/browser backend) available on an entire class of Mobile devices.

afavour 5y ago

> It’s actually and Apple vs. APIs and technologies that allow fingerprinting on the web thing. Of course it isn’t. Apple had longstanding (years long) bugs with IndexedDB. Their PWA implementation has been buggy from day one. They don’t implement push because it threatens their native app ecosystem, not because of privacy concerns. Yes, there are some APIs with privacy concerns. But that’s a small part of the story of Apple’s neglect.

camgunz 5y ago

> It’s actually and Apple vs. APIs and technologies that allow fingerprinting on the web thing. A sibling comment says: > The article mentions explicitely: WebRTC, VP9, WebP, notifications, home screen icon shortcut, Local data storage, camera, microphone, USB port, and some more. Some of these things enable (more) fingerprinting, but VP9 and WebP? Nah. I have all kinds of Apple stuff--phones, laptops, accessories--but a lot of what they do is strategic in service of enlarging their profit margins (look at right to repair, for example). I don't necessarily blame them; capitalism is a race to the bottom here. But let's not cast Apple in this light of noble privacy defenders. They're doing that to make money too.