10 ms·

Apple does not have a tracking pixel on half the popular web. Apple's main source of income is through luxury hardware and subscription services. Facebook sells

Apple does not have a tracking pixel on half the popular web. Apple's main source of income is through luxury hardware and subscription services. Facebook sells your information and attention to willing buyers.

xbmcuser 3y ago
Apple does not need a tracking pixel as it has better information on 50+% of Americans then facebook. Where they live where they eat who they hang out what they spend on all the info is with apple.
nicce 3y ago
Apple's ad business, however, is growing all the time. And in significant margins. https://www.wired.co.uk/article/apple-is-an-ad-company-now https://www.wired.co.uk/article/apple-is-an-ad-company-now https://www.statista.com/statistics/1330127/apple-ad-revenue-worldwide/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1330127/apple-ad-revenue...
- isodev 3y ago
  Apple shows ads for apps in the App Store sans behavioural targeting. If there is a kind of “ethical ads” that’s as close as it gets.
  - rchaud 3y ago
    There are ads in the Apple News app that are the same kind of garbage you'd see on Google ads.
  - goodbyesf 3y ago
    What's with the pathetic apple fanboyism? They are one of the biggest vaccuums of data. They will use that data for money just like everyone else. Apple's just late to the ad game. Years ago it was google fanboyism with 'don't be evil'. Now it's the unbearable apple privacy fanboys and the insufferable tesla/spacex cult members.
    - shuckles 3y ago
      What's the point of this name calling? I could call you a dead-end Apple cynic, of which there are plenty (and they're often wrong).
  - matthew-wegner 3y ago
    Apple advertising extends beyond the app store, both for iOS and macOS, and is personalized by default. You can disable this in Settings -> Privacy and Security -> Apple Advertising on both platforms.
    - turquoisevar 3y ago
      You’re right, it’s a bit more than the App Store. AFAIK it also includes ads in the News app and apps that load articles from the News app (e.g. Stocks app). Their fine print also mentions the TV app, but I haven’t seen ads there, so perhaps they’re referring to content suggestions. This seems to be confirmed further down the line in the fine print when it says: > We create segments to deliver personalized ads on the App Store, Apple News, and Stocks. I’d say the main difference between Meta and Apple is that the latter doesn’t combine data from different source and only relies on their own data (what Apple calls “tracking”): > Apple’s advertising platform does not track you, meaning that it does not link user or device data collected from our apps with user or device data collected from third parties for targeted advertising or advertising measurement purposes, and does not share user or device data with data brokers.
      - gandalfgreybeer 3y ago
        The ads on the TV app I think are 30s trailers when playing episodes or movies (only once per session as I’ve experienced) which can immediately be skipped like a recap. It’s the only ad on a streaming service that has never annoyed me (I also like the fact that it’s not targeted). Zero ads are better but their implementation on tv plus is the least irritating I’ve experienced.
        nicce 3y ago
        I have been getting them on every episode on specific series. But yeah, could be worse.
    - shuckles 3y ago
      It's been opt-in since at least 2021: https://appleinsider.com/articles/21/09/02/apple-pushes-pop-up-for-personalized-ads-on-apple-apps-in-ios-15 https://appleinsider.com/articles/21/09/02/apple-pushes-pop-...
  - Zambyte 3y ago
    > If there is a kind of “ethical ads” that’s as close as it gets. A news paper ad? A builtin board? I think advertisements that hijack your attention are always unethical. You should have to look for ads to see them.
    - hinkley 3y ago
      I picked up a copy of Popular Mechanics yesterday and it took me a solid 2 seconds on half a dozen pages to determine if it was an ad or an article. The styles have sort of blended together and I don't think that's an accident.
      - nicce 3y ago
        It is the same in some digital newspapers. It is also harder to block them as ads. So called ”sponsored” articles.
    - LexGray 3y ago
      Isn't looking at an Apple device just like looking at a newspaper? I seem to recall papers being chock full of ads outside the front page to a far greater extent than the Apple News app. Our society depends on advertising for promoting new services, gaining new customers, and building trust. I would call it a social necessity which makes it very ethical as long as it is truthful. The hijacking that occurs is consensual as you should not visit sites if you disagree with their advertising habits. Even with the App Store almost never open it directly. The ones that cannot be avoided are in the outside world. I would celebrate if every billboard, postal mail item, and other real world advertisement were banned completely as that is the part I have no direct control over.
      - lancesells 3y ago
        > I would call it a social necessity which makes it very ethical as long as it is truthful. Disagree on this one. Blogs, media, social, word of mouth, etc. would still exist without advertising and would serve the purpose of all of those things. PR teams would become as large as marketing teams, things would get exploited (they already are), but we wouldn't be subjected to distraction and manipulation. I don't think ads are the most evil thing there is, but society would be fine without them and you would probably see a much smaller imbalance of power in wealth and companies. I'll take 1000s of small forums compared to one big Meta.
  - r0m4n0 3y ago
    If I'm going to see an ad, I would way rather see an ad about something I care about vs not. Have you watched the evening news on broadcast TV? That is what untargeted ads look like. I don't have IBS but I know the names of every drug that would help me if I did. I've actually found furniture I'm looking for on websites I didn't know existed on Instagram. Why is targeted ads a bad thing?
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- innagadadavida 3y ago
  > In 2022, Apple generated 4.7 billion U.S. dollars with its global advertising business. > By 2022, Facebook's ad revenues had hit $135.94 billion. $4.7B is not a small number but no where close to Facebook’s.
  - glitchc 3y ago
    Velocity is often more important than the absolute amount in a business context. If velocity is 100% growth, year over year, it holds true for a couple of years, it's going to draw significant attention.
    - riversflow 3y ago
      This isn’t really a business context though, it’s an ethical one. I think most people would agree that velocity hardly matters here, what’s been actually done is generally what gets judgement, not where you will be in some time if you do everything the same. What you are describing is essentially pre-crime.
  - kaba0 3y ago
    Also, not all ads are the same from an ethical standpoint. Displaying an app ad in the appstore upon searching for a similar term is very different than displaying ads based on your whole life, collected in malicious ways.
    - 2Gkashmiri 3y ago
      I don't own an apple device now but why does app store have ads ? After paying upwards of $1000+ on a iPhone, why can't you expect an ad free experience on a first party app store?
      - tgma 3y ago
        That's kind of arbitrary though. Why if they wanted to price it at $2k if it were to be ad free? Would the consumer then prefer ads if offered with such choice? They are taking the risk of repelling their customer who paid $1k+ and still sees ads and they are entitled to the courage of their conviction to take that risk.
Timber-6539 3y ago
What the difference between Meta's tracking pixel and Apple's IDFA?
- 95014_refugee 3y ago
  Meta wants to know everything it can about you because other people will pay them for the information. Apple doesn’t. It’s really that simple.
  - Timber-6539 3y ago
    To my knowledge, Apple has not invented a new form of advertising that works without tracking users.
    - kaba0 3y ago
      I’m fairly sure there are many forms of advertisement that works without tracking.. like a billboard. Displaying an ad next to search results based on the search query for example is similarly benign.
      - Timber-6539 3y ago
        Sure. But Apple didn't invent billboards and you can be rest assured it (billboard advertising) is never coming up in an iOS update in the future! Enough with carrying water for a megacorp that makes money from selling advertising services.
        kaba0 3y ago
        I am no bootlicker for any corp, but I do value and appreciate Apple’s focus on privacy, and I think that many criticisms of it is just nitpicky and doesn’t help anyone (e.g. calling that buy icloud service label an ad..). On the other hand, I very much await sideloading to be forced out of Apple by the EU.
        3y ago
dazc 3y ago
'Apple's main source of income is through luxury hardware and subscription services.' So why not keep it that way? I understand the temptation of veering from the path of 'do no evil' but Apple are not exactly short of revenue? Apple, Google and Meta are currently all three sides of the same coin. Take your pick but don't claim any virtue for doing so.
- deafpolygon 3y ago
  > So why not keep it that way? That's like asking "This company's stock is doing well. Why not dump everything you've got into it?" Apple is diversifying their income stream, and leaving money on the table if they don't take it.
  - ethbr1 3y ago
    On the one hand, Apple has some potential ad business ceiling. That ceiling number varies according to how well they can target. On the other hand, Apple has some amount of iPhone et al. sales that occur because they respect privacy. Eventually, increasing the former will decrease the latter. I think Android shows us the link is weak (because most people don't care, if tracking is hidden), but it exists. My impression would be that right now, Apple is targeting far less than their customers would allow (while still buying equivalent amounts of hardware). The issue is +5 or +10 years, when Apple has a few bad product launches and needs to find a revenue stream, and selling a piece of their privacy soul to juice revenue is an easy bargain to make. Google's central evil was allowing ad revenue to metastasize and dominate the company, which in turn meant that ad execs have more pull than is healthy.
- sumeno 3y ago
  > So why not keep it that way? Because capitalism incentivizes unsustainable growth at all costs.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - 3y ago
makeitdouble 3y ago
Looking at Apple's latest reports, their services and App Store revenue has become the main vector of growth. Considering this includes App Store ads, gambling apps and the bulk of it is in-app purchases, I don't see Apple having a moral high ground.
tomcar288 3y ago
I don't understand why people are so against Advertisers targetting people based on their data? what are people so afraid of? the way i see it, the worst case scenario is you get an Ad for something you might actually like...
- bloomingeek 3y ago
  Because it's none of their damn business! If you are cautious in public around strangers, and you better be, why would any sane person trust a company with their personal data?!? Your question is either super naive or you have a stake in facebook or apple.
  - tomcar288 3y ago
    I could care less if someone or the whole world knows that I like elvis presely, fence repair or cucumbers and gardening and a whole host of other random facts. i mean so what? that data can go out of date very easily. any second now I could decide I don't like elvis presely, etc. the vast majority of "data" collected is all nonsense anyways. the things I don't want getting into anyone's hands are things like: financial info, address, phone number, social security, my middle name, birthday, etc. none of those things are stuff I share with a social network.
- Keirmot 3y ago
  If that’s the worst you think it can happen, you lack imagination. I Myanmar fingerprinting helped the military find dissidents, the the US Cambridge Analytica managed to get enough data to influence an election, and there’s many more examples. Besides, if a private company can sell access to you through ads, less benevolent actors can use that access for other more nefarious practices.
  - cscurmudgeon 3y ago
    If that’s the worst you think it can happen, you lack imagination. It is 2023 and you don't need ads to influence people. E.g, TikTok not acting on dangerous trends. https://www.vox.com/technology/2023/6/1/23742757/kia-hyundai-challenge-tiktok-instagram-youtube https://www.vox.com/technology/2023/6/1/23742757/kia-hyundai...
heavyset_go 3y ago
If we're going to get technical, Facebook doesn't sell your information, it sells access to its ad network. Apple has an ad network it sells access to, too.
go_prodev 3y ago
I'm not an Apple device user so I could be mistaken, but Apple devices must be collecting all of this information about their users if Facebook is able to access it.
- beebeepka 3y ago
  They are collecting lots more. I think the argument is that selling said data is not their business model. At least for now.
wodenokoto 3y ago
They are already tracking all users across the highest grossing App Store and all text entered into the search bar of the 2nd most used browser flows through their servers. So tracking might not be their business but they can very easily start a big business.
cscurmudgeon 3y ago
This is an AOL-level understanding of how digital ads work.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

xbmcuser 3y ago

Apple does not need a tracking pixel as it has better information on 50+% of Americans then facebook. Where they live where they eat who they hang out what they spend on all the info is with apple.

nicce 3y ago

Apple's ad business, however, is growing all the time. And in significant margins. https://www.wired.co.uk/article/apple-is-an-ad-company-now https://www.wired.co.uk/article/apple-is-an-ad-company-now https://www.statista.com/statistics/1330127/apple-ad-revenue-worldwide/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1330127/apple-ad-revenue...

isodev 3y ago
Apple shows ads for apps in the App Store sans behavioural targeting. If there is a kind of “ethical ads” that’s as close as it gets.
- rchaud 3y ago
  There are ads in the Apple News app that are the same kind of garbage you'd see on Google ads.
- goodbyesf 3y ago
  What's with the pathetic apple fanboyism? They are one of the biggest vaccuums of data. They will use that data for money just like everyone else. Apple's just late to the ad game. Years ago it was google fanboyism with 'don't be evil'. Now it's the unbearable apple privacy fanboys and the insufferable tesla/spacex cult members.
  - shuckles 3y ago
    What's the point of this name calling? I could call you a dead-end Apple cynic, of which there are plenty (and they're often wrong).
- matthew-wegner 3y ago
  Apple advertising extends beyond the app store, both for iOS and macOS, and is personalized by default. You can disable this in Settings -> Privacy and Security -> Apple Advertising on both platforms.
  - turquoisevar 3y ago
    You’re right, it’s a bit more than the App Store. AFAIK it also includes ads in the News app and apps that load articles from the News app (e.g. Stocks app). Their fine print also mentions the TV app, but I haven’t seen ads there, so perhaps they’re referring to content suggestions. This seems to be confirmed further down the line in the fine print when it says: > We create segments to deliver personalized ads on the App Store, Apple News, and Stocks. I’d say the main difference between Meta and Apple is that the latter doesn’t combine data from different source and only relies on their own data (what Apple calls “tracking”): > Apple’s advertising platform does not track you, meaning that it does not link user or device data collected from our apps with user or device data collected from third parties for targeted advertising or advertising measurement purposes, and does not share user or device data with data brokers.
    - gandalfgreybeer 3y ago
      The ads on the TV app I think are 30s trailers when playing episodes or movies (only once per session as I’ve experienced) which can immediately be skipped like a recap. It’s the only ad on a streaming service that has never annoyed me (I also like the fact that it’s not targeted). Zero ads are better but their implementation on tv plus is the least irritating I’ve experienced.
      - nicce 3y ago
        I have been getting them on every episode on specific series. But yeah, could be worse.
  - shuckles 3y ago
    It's been opt-in since at least 2021: https://appleinsider.com/articles/21/09/02/apple-pushes-pop-up-for-personalized-ads-on-apple-apps-in-ios-15 https://appleinsider.com/articles/21/09/02/apple-pushes-pop-...
- Zambyte 3y ago
  > If there is a kind of “ethical ads” that’s as close as it gets. A news paper ad? A builtin board? I think advertisements that hijack your attention are always unethical. You should have to look for ads to see them.
  - hinkley 3y ago
    I picked up a copy of Popular Mechanics yesterday and it took me a solid 2 seconds on half a dozen pages to determine if it was an ad or an article. The styles have sort of blended together and I don't think that's an accident.
    - nicce 3y ago
      It is the same in some digital newspapers. It is also harder to block them as ads. So called ”sponsored” articles.
  - LexGray 3y ago
    Isn't looking at an Apple device just like looking at a newspaper? I seem to recall papers being chock full of ads outside the front page to a far greater extent than the Apple News app. Our society depends on advertising for promoting new services, gaining new customers, and building trust. I would call it a social necessity which makes it very ethical as long as it is truthful. The hijacking that occurs is consensual as you should not visit sites if you disagree with their advertising habits. Even with the App Store almost never open it directly. The ones that cannot be avoided are in the outside world. I would celebrate if every billboard, postal mail item, and other real world advertisement were banned completely as that is the part I have no direct control over.
    - lancesells 3y ago
      > I would call it a social necessity which makes it very ethical as long as it is truthful. Disagree on this one. Blogs, media, social, word of mouth, etc. would still exist without advertising and would serve the purpose of all of those things. PR teams would become as large as marketing teams, things would get exploited (they already are), but we wouldn't be subjected to distraction and manipulation. I don't think ads are the most evil thing there is, but society would be fine without them and you would probably see a much smaller imbalance of power in wealth and companies. I'll take 1000s of small forums compared to one big Meta.
- r0m4n0 3y ago
  If I'm going to see an ad, I would way rather see an ad about something I care about vs not. Have you watched the evening news on broadcast TV? That is what untargeted ads look like. I don't have IBS but I know the names of every drug that would help me if I did. I've actually found furniture I'm looking for on websites I didn't know existed on Instagram. Why is targeted ads a bad thing?
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
innagadadavida 3y ago
> In 2022, Apple generated 4.7 billion U.S. dollars with its global advertising business. > By 2022, Facebook's ad revenues had hit $135.94 billion. $4.7B is not a small number but no where close to Facebook’s.
- glitchc 3y ago
  Velocity is often more important than the absolute amount in a business context. If velocity is 100% growth, year over year, it holds true for a couple of years, it's going to draw significant attention.
  - riversflow 3y ago
    This isn’t really a business context though, it’s an ethical one. I think most people would agree that velocity hardly matters here, what’s been actually done is generally what gets judgement, not where you will be in some time if you do everything the same. What you are describing is essentially pre-crime.
- kaba0 3y ago
  Also, not all ads are the same from an ethical standpoint. Displaying an app ad in the appstore upon searching for a similar term is very different than displaying ads based on your whole life, collected in malicious ways.
  - 2Gkashmiri 3y ago
    I don't own an apple device now but why does app store have ads ? After paying upwards of $1000+ on a iPhone, why can't you expect an ad free experience on a first party app store?
    - tgma 3y ago
      That's kind of arbitrary though. Why if they wanted to price it at $2k if it were to be ad free? Would the consumer then prefer ads if offered with such choice? They are taking the risk of repelling their customer who paid $1k+ and still sees ads and they are entitled to the courage of their conviction to take that risk.

Timber-6539 3y ago

What the difference between Meta's tracking pixel and Apple's IDFA?

95014_refugee 3y ago
Meta wants to know everything it can about you because other people will pay them for the information. Apple doesn’t. It’s really that simple.
- Timber-6539 3y ago
  To my knowledge, Apple has not invented a new form of advertising that works without tracking users.
  - kaba0 3y ago
    I’m fairly sure there are many forms of advertisement that works without tracking.. like a billboard. Displaying an ad next to search results based on the search query for example is similarly benign.
    - Timber-6539 3y ago
      Sure. But Apple didn't invent billboards and you can be rest assured it (billboard advertising) is never coming up in an iOS update in the future! Enough with carrying water for a megacorp that makes money from selling advertising services.
      - kaba0 3y ago
        I am no bootlicker for any corp, but I do value and appreciate Apple’s focus on privacy, and I think that many criticisms of it is just nitpicky and doesn’t help anyone (e.g. calling that buy icloud service label an ad..). On the other hand, I very much await sideloading to be forced out of Apple by the EU.
        3y ago

dazc 3y ago

'Apple's main source of income is through luxury hardware and subscription services.' So why not keep it that way? I understand the temptation of veering from the path of 'do no evil' but Apple are not exactly short of revenue? Apple, Google and Meta are currently all three sides of the same coin. Take your pick but don't claim any virtue for doing so.

deafpolygon 3y ago
> So why not keep it that way? That's like asking "This company's stock is doing well. Why not dump everything you've got into it?" Apple is diversifying their income stream, and leaving money on the table if they don't take it.
- ethbr1 3y ago
  On the one hand, Apple has some potential ad business ceiling. That ceiling number varies according to how well they can target. On the other hand, Apple has some amount of iPhone et al. sales that occur because they respect privacy. Eventually, increasing the former will decrease the latter. I think Android shows us the link is weak (because most people don't care, if tracking is hidden), but it exists. My impression would be that right now, Apple is targeting far less than their customers would allow (while still buying equivalent amounts of hardware). The issue is +5 or +10 years, when Apple has a few bad product launches and needs to find a revenue stream, and selling a piece of their privacy soul to juice revenue is an easy bargain to make. Google's central evil was allowing ad revenue to metastasize and dominate the company, which in turn meant that ad execs have more pull than is healthy.
sumeno 3y ago
> So why not keep it that way? Because capitalism incentivizes unsustainable growth at all costs.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- 3y ago

makeitdouble 3y ago

Looking at Apple's latest reports, their services and App Store revenue has become the main vector of growth. Considering this includes App Store ads, gambling apps and the bulk of it is in-app purchases, I don't see Apple having a moral high ground.

tomcar288 3y ago

I don't understand why people are so against Advertisers targetting people based on their data? what are people so afraid of? the way i see it, the worst case scenario is you get an Ad for something you might actually like...

bloomingeek 3y ago
Because it's none of their damn business! If you are cautious in public around strangers, and you better be, why would any sane person trust a company with their personal data?!? Your question is either super naive or you have a stake in facebook or apple.
- tomcar288 3y ago
  I could care less if someone or the whole world knows that I like elvis presely, fence repair or cucumbers and gardening and a whole host of other random facts. i mean so what? that data can go out of date very easily. any second now I could decide I don't like elvis presely, etc. the vast majority of "data" collected is all nonsense anyways. the things I don't want getting into anyone's hands are things like: financial info, address, phone number, social security, my middle name, birthday, etc. none of those things are stuff I share with a social network.
Keirmot 3y ago
If that’s the worst you think it can happen, you lack imagination. I Myanmar fingerprinting helped the military find dissidents, the the US Cambridge Analytica managed to get enough data to influence an election, and there’s many more examples. Besides, if a private company can sell access to you through ads, less benevolent actors can use that access for other more nefarious practices.
- cscurmudgeon 3y ago
  If that’s the worst you think it can happen, you lack imagination. It is 2023 and you don't need ads to influence people. E.g, TikTok not acting on dangerous trends. https://www.vox.com/technology/2023/6/1/23742757/kia-hyundai-challenge-tiktok-instagram-youtube https://www.vox.com/technology/2023/6/1/23742757/kia-hyundai...

heavyset_go 3y ago

If we're going to get technical, Facebook doesn't sell your information, it sells access to its ad network. Apple has an ad network it sells access to, too.

go_prodev 3y ago

I'm not an Apple device user so I could be mistaken, but Apple devices must be collecting all of this information about their users if Facebook is able to access it.

beebeepka 3y ago
They are collecting lots more. I think the argument is that selling said data is not their business model. At least for now.

wodenokoto 3y ago

They are already tracking all users across the highest grossing App Store and all text entered into the search bar of the 2nd most used browser flows through their servers. So tracking might not be their business but they can very easily start a big business.

cscurmudgeon 3y ago

This is an AOL-level understanding of how digital ads work.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]