6 ms·

I don’t want to be mean, but why would you entertain such a “deep belief” about a corporation? I’ve heard similar things from many Apple users. What leads peopl

I don’t want to be mean, but why would you entertain such a “deep belief” about a corporation? I’ve heard similar things from many Apple users. What leads people to have this kind of faith in particular corporations? It’s really alien to me.

post_break 5y ago
When you have two options it's pretty easy to have faith in the one that tries to drum up it's privacy first stance.
bodo11 5y ago
While also seeing deep belief in corporations sceptically myself, I don't think it should be the root cause of scepticism toward apple. The maximisation of proprietariness paired with this "deep belief" breads a really hard possibility to switch vendor (of whatever product), locking people in so much that the perceived cost of privacy-breaching software is lower than the cost of switching.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
dm1011 5y ago
>What leads people to have this kind of faith in particular corporations? Marketing and groupthink makes them join and buyers remorse makes them stay
blacktriangle 5y ago
Cynically, I would say I also had a deep belief that Apple would respect user privacy because Apple and Google are in a fight over control over the internet and your whole life. Google goes at it by giving away free shit then making billions off your data, Apple goes at this by making billions off hardware and software. From that point of view respecting user privacy is Apple's most powerful weapon in their fight against Google since its a place that Google simply cannot go.
- ncmncm 5y ago
  Generating the impression that they respect your privacy works exactly equally as well, and is much cheaper.
danuker 5y ago
My guess is the advertising worked. https://medium.com/seedx-digital-marketing-guru/why-apple-spends-1-8-billion-on-advertising-38d3940270bf https://medium.com/seedx-digital-marketing-guru/why-apple-sp...
D13Fd 5y ago
I wouldn't say I have a "deep belief" in Apple, but I trust Apple more than the other available options, because Apple's financial incentives are basically the opposite of Google or Facebook's. Instead of being motivated to use and/or sell user data, it's in Apple's best interest to keep that data secure and play to its competitive advantage as the company who is not trying to pry into its users' lives. That said, I really don't understand why Apple would do this, and it is very disconcerting. Obviously child pornography is absolutely horrible, but this move seems to throw out everyone's privacy in exchange for catching what I have to imagine is a tiny minority of users who are involved with that.
- handrous 5y ago
  > I wouldn't say I have a "deep belief" in Apple, but I trust Apple more than the other available options That, for me too. From my perspective they basically don't have competition. The only viable alternative to Apple is "do everything yourself with open software, and just accept everything being buggier, jankier, and less helpful, while eating way more of your time". Obviously I'm not in love with that option, but what else? MS? Google? Ha. If Apple stops being Apple it'll be the elimination of a whole category of products and services, essentially. Just won't exist anymore. This is all less a product of Apple being wonderful than of user-facing computing everywhere else being an embarrassing shit-show.
AshamedCaptain 5y ago
I don't know how Apple has managed to get the image of a "privacy friendly" company while painting Google as "privacy unfriendly" at the same time. Apple is better than Google, but mostly because they can't gather as much data about you as Google does (this is not related to iOS vs Android; it's about how pervasive Google is on the WWW), and that's about all the practical differences between the two. And on iOS, Apple is also just one silent App Store update away from being able to exploit your data, not very different from Android. Even if I consider Google enemy #1 right now, I also don't really see them as privacy unfriendly. They have a shitton of data, but what have they exactly done with it that warrants the moniker? Microsoft seems to me to be much more privacy unfriendly (e.g., LinkedIn)
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- handrous 5y ago
  > Even if I consider Google enemy #1 right now, I also don't really see them as privacy unfriendly. They have a shitton of data, but what have they exactly done with it that warrants the moniker? Microsoft seems to me to be much more privacy unfriendly (e.g., LinkedIn) Collecting and having that data to begin with is awful & dangerous. The behavior of collecting it is creepy and gross. The existence of the collected data is threatening.
  - AshamedCaptain 5y ago
    The reason I consider Google a public enemy is not because they collect data or have a poor privacy policy or whatever (because I don't think they are particularly bad at that). The reason is because I think they are "unavoidable". It's very hard to do anything online without it leaving a fingerprint on some Google server. Even governments seem to be ready to endorse Google services (e.g. recaptcha, Android) for fulfillment of basic services. Apple, Facebook, etc. may have (or not have) worse privacy policy, but it is much easier to avoid leaving fingerprints on their servers. Amazon & Microsoft are on the other hand particularly dangerous, though.
tomjen3 5y ago
Because privacy is an obvious goal that Apple can crediblebly target because of the nature of what they sell. Google is fundamentally an advertising agency, Amazon sells cheap stuff but steals your data in the process. Apple sells premium hardware and services, which means they have the margin to do things that neither google or amazon has. They also make money the old fashioned way: when you pay them. Therefore Apple could focus on privacy in a credible manor, because it didn't threaten their business model and it was an argument they could use, but their competition couldn't.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
wnscooke 5y ago
It probably stems from the well-known history of the start of the company. Who knows who started Dell, McDs, any number of SSD manufacturers, Lenovo, BlackBerry, etc.? I guess we all know about Microsoft and Bill Gates, but their story trajectory went the other way (more corporate). So, I imagine people say that because something Steve Jobs or Ives said or was recorded as saying resonated with them, and thus they share that deep belief.
ksec 5y ago
>I’ve heard similar things from many Apple users. What leads people to have this kind of faith in particular corporations? It is all part of their PR and marketing. And they are very good at it. This happened in Tim Cook's era, not Steve Jobs. May be too good it backfired. If you pay close attention to all the Apple news, ( not some, but ALL ). Pick the top 10 Apple news site and read through it for a few years and it will surely get to most people. And Apple news are the most sort after, highest paid Ads revenue in tech sector. So it is sort of a feedback loop. Worth remembering there are relatively little journalist left, only reporters. No one bother to fact check anything any more. That is why we have so much crap that anyone has some domain knowledge on the subject will immediately smells BS. And their PR tactics are.... dull or should I say predictable? Controlled Leaks ( I mean come on from the same press again? ) on the same subject or using same allies in testimony ( SnapChat again? )? Unfortunately most people dont do any analysis like this. ( Although I guess that is borderline forensic ).

post_break 5y ago

When you have two options it's pretty easy to have faith in the one that tries to drum up it's privacy first stance.

bodo11 5y ago

While also seeing deep belief in corporations sceptically myself, I don't think it should be the root cause of scepticism toward apple. The maximisation of proprietariness paired with this "deep belief" breads a really hard possibility to switch vendor (of whatever product), locking people in so much that the perceived cost of privacy-breaching software is lower than the cost of switching.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

dm1011 5y ago

>What leads people to have this kind of faith in particular corporations? Marketing and groupthink makes them join and buyers remorse makes them stay

blacktriangle 5y ago

Cynically, I would say I also had a deep belief that Apple would respect user privacy because Apple and Google are in a fight over control over the internet and your whole life. Google goes at it by giving away free shit then making billions off your data, Apple goes at this by making billions off hardware and software. From that point of view respecting user privacy is Apple's most powerful weapon in their fight against Google since its a place that Google simply cannot go.

ncmncm 5y ago
Generating the impression that they respect your privacy works exactly equally as well, and is much cheaper.

danuker 5y ago

My guess is the advertising worked. https://medium.com/seedx-digital-marketing-guru/why-apple-spends-1-8-billion-on-advertising-38d3940270bf https://medium.com/seedx-digital-marketing-guru/why-apple-sp...

D13Fd 5y ago

I wouldn't say I have a "deep belief" in Apple, but I trust Apple more than the other available options, because Apple's financial incentives are basically the opposite of Google or Facebook's. Instead of being motivated to use and/or sell user data, it's in Apple's best interest to keep that data secure and play to its competitive advantage as the company who is not trying to pry into its users' lives. That said, I really don't understand why Apple would do this, and it is very disconcerting. Obviously child pornography is absolutely horrible, but this move seems to throw out everyone's privacy in exchange for catching what I have to imagine is a tiny minority of users who are involved with that.

handrous 5y ago
> I wouldn't say I have a "deep belief" in Apple, but I trust Apple more than the other available options That, for me too. From my perspective they basically don't have competition. The only viable alternative to Apple is "do everything yourself with open software, and just accept everything being buggier, jankier, and less helpful, while eating way more of your time". Obviously I'm not in love with that option, but what else? MS? Google? Ha. If Apple stops being Apple it'll be the elimination of a whole category of products and services, essentially. Just won't exist anymore. This is all less a product of Apple being wonderful than of user-facing computing everywhere else being an embarrassing shit-show.

AshamedCaptain 5y ago

I don't know how Apple has managed to get the image of a "privacy friendly" company while painting Google as "privacy unfriendly" at the same time. Apple is better than Google, but mostly because they can't gather as much data about you as Google does (this is not related to iOS vs Android; it's about how pervasive Google is on the WWW), and that's about all the practical differences between the two. And on iOS, Apple is also just one silent App Store update away from being able to exploit your data, not very different from Android. Even if I consider Google enemy #1 right now, I also don't really see them as privacy unfriendly. They have a shitton of data, but what have they exactly done with it that warrants the moniker? Microsoft seems to me to be much more privacy unfriendly (e.g., LinkedIn)

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
handrous 5y ago
> Even if I consider Google enemy #1 right now, I also don't really see them as privacy unfriendly. They have a shitton of data, but what have they exactly done with it that warrants the moniker? Microsoft seems to me to be much more privacy unfriendly (e.g., LinkedIn) Collecting and having that data to begin with is awful & dangerous. The behavior of collecting it is creepy and gross. The existence of the collected data is threatening.
- AshamedCaptain 5y ago
  The reason I consider Google a public enemy is not because they collect data or have a poor privacy policy or whatever (because I don't think they are particularly bad at that). The reason is because I think they are "unavoidable". It's very hard to do anything online without it leaving a fingerprint on some Google server. Even governments seem to be ready to endorse Google services (e.g. recaptcha, Android) for fulfillment of basic services. Apple, Facebook, etc. may have (or not have) worse privacy policy, but it is much easier to avoid leaving fingerprints on their servers. Amazon & Microsoft are on the other hand particularly dangerous, though.

tomjen3 5y ago

Because privacy is an obvious goal that Apple can crediblebly target because of the nature of what they sell. Google is fundamentally an advertising agency, Amazon sells cheap stuff but steals your data in the process. Apple sells premium hardware and services, which means they have the margin to do things that neither google or amazon has. They also make money the old fashioned way: when you pay them. Therefore Apple could focus on privacy in a credible manor, because it didn't threaten their business model and it was an argument they could use, but their competition couldn't.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

wnscooke 5y ago

It probably stems from the well-known history of the start of the company. Who knows who started Dell, McDs, any number of SSD manufacturers, Lenovo, BlackBerry, etc.? I guess we all know about Microsoft and Bill Gates, but their story trajectory went the other way (more corporate). So, I imagine people say that because something Steve Jobs or Ives said or was recorded as saying resonated with them, and thus they share that deep belief.

ksec 5y ago

>I’ve heard similar things from many Apple users. What leads people to have this kind of faith in particular corporations? It is all part of their PR and marketing. And they are very good at it. This happened in Tim Cook's era, not Steve Jobs. May be too good it backfired. If you pay close attention to all the Apple news, ( not some, but ALL ). Pick the top 10 Apple news site and read through it for a few years and it will surely get to most people. And Apple news are the most sort after, highest paid Ads revenue in tech sector. So it is sort of a feedback loop. Worth remembering there are relatively little journalist left, only reporters. No one bother to fact check anything any more. That is why we have so much crap that anyone has some domain knowledge on the subject will immediately smells BS. And their PR tactics are.... dull or should I say predictable? Controlled Leaks ( I mean come on from the same press again? ) on the same subject or using same allies in testimony ( SnapChat again? )? Unfortunately most people dont do any analysis like this. ( Although I guess that is borderline forensic ).