3 ms·

> There's a difference here but it's a difference of degree, not kind. True, but what a degree, and the difference matters [1]: - 91% of Apple's income is fro

> There's a difference here but it's a difference of degree, not kind. True, but what a degree, and the difference matters [1]: - 91% of Apple's income is from hardware. - More that 90% of Google's income is from advertising. There's also a very big difference between trying to understand your customers better so that you can build a better mousetrap, rather than selling their information to third parties, directly or indirectly. [1] http://www.zdnet.com/article/apple-google-microsoft-where-does-the-money-come-from/ http://www.zdnet.com/article/apple-google-microsoft-where-do...

fauigerzigerk 11y ago
Apple does not just sell hardware. They charge for hardware, but they sell a well integrated combination of hardware, software and services. That's what makes Apple unique. Otherwise they would be like Samsung. The question is how much the usefulness of that combined offering depends on collecting user data. I think the dependency is not as deep as for Google but it is growing fast if you look at the ever more central role of iCloud. Google does not sell user information by the way. Google sells conclusions they draw from user data. I am concerned about the wealth of data Google holds about me. But I'm not that much less concerned about the data Apple holds about me.
sangnoir 11y ago
Apple and Google both collect user data and send it to the cloud. Why does the degree matter? If it's a matter of principle, don't collect user data at all! Since Apple are collecting data anyway, I guess the reason is not principle. IMO, the why doesn't affect personal privacy. Pure motives don't count for anything when user data falls into the hands of 3rd parties (through hacks, leaks, or divorce lawyers). > - 91% of Apple's income is from hardware. > - More that 90% of Google's income is from advertising. So, in a nutshell - it's not the collection of data that is bad, but advertising? That's BS. The collection of personal data itself is inherently bad, motives be damned. Apple is no snow-flake as Tim would have you think, they also want to gain a competitive edge from aggregating and mining user data.

fauigerzigerk 11y ago

Apple does not just sell hardware. They charge for hardware, but they sell a well integrated combination of hardware, software and services. That's what makes Apple unique. Otherwise they would be like Samsung. The question is how much the usefulness of that combined offering depends on collecting user data. I think the dependency is not as deep as for Google but it is growing fast if you look at the ever more central role of iCloud. Google does not sell user information by the way. Google sells conclusions they draw from user data. I am concerned about the wealth of data Google holds about me. But I'm not that much less concerned about the data Apple holds about me.

sangnoir 11y ago

Apple and Google both collect user data and send it to the cloud. Why does the degree matter? If it's a matter of principle, don't collect user data at all! Since Apple are collecting data anyway, I guess the reason is not principle. IMO, the why doesn't affect personal privacy. Pure motives don't count for anything when user data falls into the hands of 3rd parties (through hacks, leaks, or divorce lawyers). > - 91% of Apple's income is from hardware. > - More that 90% of Google's income is from advertising. So, in a nutshell - it's not the collection of data that is bad, but advertising? That's BS. The collection of personal data itself is inherently bad, motives be damned. Apple is no snow-flake as Tim would have you think, they also want to gain a competitive edge from aggregating and mining user data.