3 ms·

The difference is I feel Apple's walls protect me as well as their profits. I do not feel the same about Amazon/Microsoft/Meta/Google.

by HWR_14 3y ago

kccqzy 3y ago
[flagged]
- LargeTomato 3y ago
  I'm in the Google ecosystem but I agree with the sentiment. Apple has no financial incentive to collect my data. Since they've begun differentiating themselves through their emphasis on privacy I think they have a financial incentive to protect my privacy.
  - jacooper 3y ago
    They do, apple sells ads too.
  - drdaeman 3y ago
    > Apple has no financial incentive to collect my data They simply understand most of your data isn't worth anything, it's a liability rather than an asset. They know it'd be a waste of energy and customer relations to peek into most of it, so they don't bother. They collect what they can readily use (such as your purchase history - they're pretty open about it), and don't care about the rest (spying on your conversations or photos in hope to build a marketing profile is still a cyberpunk fantasy). And because they don't do this, there's no reason not to capitalize it by advertising themselves as some privacy guardians. Not doing so would be a waste. Google and Facebook are failing, because they bought this "big data big brother big money" meme which they rode cheerfully while the hype was high, and now it's time for a realization. When contenders who say "we don't track you" perform no worse (or even better) than all those data hoards that were supposed to predict future, it's a sign that immense worth of personal data was overhyped.
    - katbyte 3y ago
      They also make money on hardware not advertising - that data is useless to their core revenue streams (and might actually hurt them) where Facebook and google sell ads
  - gamblor956 3y ago
    Apple has tried and failed several times to launch advertising services based on user data. Their current lack of motivation is due to those failures, not to the lack of a desire to make more money from exploiting user data.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- HWR_14 3y ago
  If you had any reason it was bad for me, feel free to present it.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- ygjb 3y ago
  It's less an issue of the reality distortion field, and more the issue that Apple hasn't been co-opted by the allure of advertising dollars. That's going to change, with projections of revenue growth just from advertising expected to go from $5.3B to ~$20B (industry expectations), and regulations like the Digital Markets Act explicitly going after their walled garden.
- tnel77 3y ago
  Are you going to provide an actual counterpoint or just be snarky?
tristan957 3y ago
How does Apple keeping you sideloading apps protect you?
- jon_adler 3y ago
  It removes an attack vector and thereby increases device security?
- HWR_14 3y ago
  If Apple allows sideloading apps in any way that is easily accessible to the average user, then (a) Meta will insist their apps are sideloaded to enable privacy violations. Right now, they cannot say goodbye to iOS users. They could say goodbye to the small percentage that refuse to sideload (or even just put a worse version in the store to those people with enough new features to push most people to sideload.). (b) Chrome will be sideloadable. Which means web developers will be convinced "sideload Chrome" is a reasonable fix. Reinforcing spiral and soon Google owns the browser in a way that is the envy of 1990's Microsoft. Keep in mind they managed to turn MS's Edge from a third browser to a Chrome skin. That's bad (see Manifest v3, WEI, etc.). The list goes on, we could talk about Epic and games and store exclusives. To say nothing about having to debug malware on my family's devices.
fennecfoxy 3y ago
I suppose there's some truth to that as long as you recognise that for Apple, profits come first. This whole new "private & secure" thing on their end is pure marketing/business. They didn't give two shits about it until they realised that it was a major issue of their competitors, now it's become their core features/marketing. But don't think for one second that the protective wall won't spring a leak or two if it can make Apple a profit. Apple's dominance also comes from them cornering every possible market they can, they want to do everything themselves and monopolise as much as possible, their recent step was designing their own processors, the debacle with them trying to make their own cellular modems etc. Maybe they'll go for displays next but Samsung et al are so far ahead on that game.

The difference is I feel Apple's walls protect me as well as their profits. I do not feel the same about Amazon/Microsoft/Meta/Google.

by HWR_14 3y ago

The difference is I feel Apple's walls protect me as well as their profits. I do not feel the same about Amazon/Microsoft/Meta/Google.

kccqzy 3y ago

[flagged]

LargeTomato 3y ago
I'm in the Google ecosystem but I agree with the sentiment. Apple has no financial incentive to collect my data. Since they've begun differentiating themselves through their emphasis on privacy I think they have a financial incentive to protect my privacy.
- jacooper 3y ago
  They do, apple sells ads too.
- drdaeman 3y ago
  > Apple has no financial incentive to collect my data They simply understand most of your data isn't worth anything, it's a liability rather than an asset. They know it'd be a waste of energy and customer relations to peek into most of it, so they don't bother. They collect what they can readily use (such as your purchase history - they're pretty open about it), and don't care about the rest (spying on your conversations or photos in hope to build a marketing profile is still a cyberpunk fantasy). And because they don't do this, there's no reason not to capitalize it by advertising themselves as some privacy guardians. Not doing so would be a waste. Google and Facebook are failing, because they bought this "big data big brother big money" meme which they rode cheerfully while the hype was high, and now it's time for a realization. When contenders who say "we don't track you" perform no worse (or even better) than all those data hoards that were supposed to predict future, it's a sign that immense worth of personal data was overhyped.
  - katbyte 3y ago
    They also make money on hardware not advertising - that data is useless to their core revenue streams (and might actually hurt them) where Facebook and google sell ads
- gamblor956 3y ago
  Apple has tried and failed several times to launch advertising services based on user data. Their current lack of motivation is due to those failures, not to the lack of a desire to make more money from exploiting user data.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
HWR_14 3y ago
If you had any reason it was bad for me, feel free to present it.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
ygjb 3y ago
It's less an issue of the reality distortion field, and more the issue that Apple hasn't been co-opted by the allure of advertising dollars. That's going to change, with projections of revenue growth just from advertising expected to go from $5.3B to ~$20B (industry expectations), and regulations like the Digital Markets Act explicitly going after their walled garden.
tnel77 3y ago
Are you going to provide an actual counterpoint or just be snarky?

tristan957 3y ago

How does Apple keeping you sideloading apps protect you?

jon_adler 3y ago
It removes an attack vector and thereby increases device security?
HWR_14 3y ago
If Apple allows sideloading apps in any way that is easily accessible to the average user, then (a) Meta will insist their apps are sideloaded to enable privacy violations. Right now, they cannot say goodbye to iOS users. They could say goodbye to the small percentage that refuse to sideload (or even just put a worse version in the store to those people with enough new features to push most people to sideload.). (b) Chrome will be sideloadable. Which means web developers will be convinced "sideload Chrome" is a reasonable fix. Reinforcing spiral and soon Google owns the browser in a way that is the envy of 1990's Microsoft. Keep in mind they managed to turn MS's Edge from a third browser to a Chrome skin. That's bad (see Manifest v3, WEI, etc.). The list goes on, we could talk about Epic and games and store exclusives. To say nothing about having to debug malware on my family's devices.

fennecfoxy 3y ago

I suppose there's some truth to that as long as you recognise that for Apple, profits come first. This whole new "private & secure" thing on their end is pure marketing/business. They didn't give two shits about it until they realised that it was a major issue of their competitors, now it's become their core features/marketing. But don't think for one second that the protective wall won't spring a leak or two if it can make Apple a profit. Apple's dominance also comes from them cornering every possible market they can, they want to do everything themselves and monopolise as much as possible, their recent step was designing their own processors, the debacle with them trying to make their own cellular modems etc. Maybe they'll go for displays next but Samsung et al are so far ahead on that game.