|
|
|
|
|
by saiya-jin
1357 days ago
|
|
Thats a bit naive approach. Both (and other) companies exist primarily to earn money to owners. If Apple will find it can extract even more money from consumers on top of hardware, ie overpriced forced walled gardens called app shops, it will. As long as it doesn't affects its main money pipeline which are devices. Like it or not, most folks don't care about nor understand privacy, so Apple has a lot of leeway there. The idea of taking Apple seriously on privacy is a bit of bad joke when they block Firefox having ublock origin or implement at least the same for its Safari, and give users full option to install plugins for this browser (even if only from Apple-curated plugin store). It would be trivial for army of Apple devs to create similar blocking, yet they just curate what ads you see based on what they think is maximum acceptable amount & type for users, so no real privacy choice there. I've heard even comments here on HN about how its actually a good thing to not have this freedom as 'power user'. Can't say I know how to respond to such schizophrenia so I'll pass on that, everybody can make up their own opinion. Apple - fix this, and I will start taking your PR about security seriously. Till then, I simply can't since its obvious you talk more than actually do where it matters most, the wild unruly Internet of these days. |
|
Apple saw how damaging the iCloud privacy scandal and Cambridge Analytica were. They responded by fully hitching Apple’s brand to the privacy train.
If Apple were to be caught intentionally violating user privacy now, the damage to the brand would be immense.
Apple makes their money primarily by selling cool stuff to people. If they tarnish their brand by violating people’s privacy like Google or Meta, end users have far less incentive to buy Apple’s products.