Apple has long set itself in opposition to user control and autonomy. That approach runs bone-deep in their DNA; it's practically their brand! To me, that DNA m

Apple has long set itself in opposition to user control and autonomy. That approach runs bone-deep in their DNA; it's practically their brand! To me, that DNA makes a move like this entirely unsurprising. To be clear, this isn't exclusively a bad thing: a paternalistic, limiting approach to one's userbase allows for everything from better hardware/software integration to lower risk of malware to Steve Jobs' famous "freedom from porn". By contrast, their privacy messaging runs much more shallow, and those who uncritically swallowed it always struck me as rather naive. Apple's ostensible pro-privacy stance has nothing to do with their ethos as a company, but was just convenient positioning relative to Google given their respective lines of business. It's fair game to highlight this advantage, but it's a lot like Facebook saying they "prioritize" avoiding abusive manufacturing practices more than Apple...while technically true, it's a function of their market position, and is not very useful for understanding the org's future behavior.