Tim Cook Says Apple's Customers Are Not Its Product, Unlike Facebook (arstechnica.com) 244
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Apple CEO Tim Cook said in an interview with MSNBC and Recode on Wednesday that Silicon Valley, and notably Facebook, should be far more careful with its customers' data in the wake of the Cambridge Analytica disclosures. "I think the best regulation is no regulation, is self-regulation," he said, according to Recode. "However, I think we're beyond that here." Cook reiterated points that he and former CEO Steve Jobs made previously, that Apple's business model -- unlike Google, Facebook, and many other tech companies -- is predicated on selling physical products rather than capturing data about customers. "We've never believed that these detailed profiles of people that have incredibly deep personal information that is patched together from several sources should exist," he said, according to The Wall Street Journal. "The truth is, we could make a ton of money if we monetized our customer -- if our customer was our product," he added. "We've elected not to do that."
They're elected not to do it... (Score:4, Insightful)
As an Apple user, I'm honestly surprised by this and don't expect it to continue for much longer.
Re:They're elected not to do it... (Score:5, Insightful)
... for now.
As an Apple user, I'm honestly surprised by this and don't expect it to continue for much longer.
To be fair, Apple sells actual products and provides services for those products. Facebook just provides a service "for free". Apple doesn't need money from your data while Facebook depends on it. The value of Apple depends on the value their products provide to you. The value of Facebook and their service depends on the value of your data - to you and others.
Re:They're elected not to do it... (Score:5, Insightful)
This is slashdot we don’t need to be fair.
We want everything for free, with no consequences just like when we were under 10 years of age.
Re: (Score:2)
Facebook made themselves a core part of many people's social lives. They organize events on Facebook, they post photos there, they want to chat on Facebook Messenger. So your choice is either lose those relationships and social interactions, or use Facebook.
In fact, without your participation Facebook might lose those users, so it's in their interest that even people who rarely log in and block all their ads/tracking are still on the service because it keeps the high value cash cows on there too.
Fortunately
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Facebook provides bait, to attract sheeple to fleece their digital identity and to sell the mind of those sheeple to other people to warp and twist in what ever way they want to try. The fish eats the worm, so the fisherman is now a contractor providing food services to fish, the hook, what hook, there's no hook, whose lying to you about a hook, not hook what so ever in that worm, nope, nah uh, no way, bite away. Facebook provides a service, not to the people who connect to it, to the corporations that want
Re: (Score:2)
... for now.
As an Apple user, I'm honestly surprised by this and don't expect it to continue for much longer.
To be fair, Apple sells actual products and provides services for those products. Facebook just provides a service "for free". Apple doesn't need money from your data while Facebook depends on it. The value of Apple depends on the value their products provide to you. The value of Facebook and their service depends on the value of your data - to you and others.
Exactly.
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair, Apple sells actual products and provides services for those products. Facebook just provides a service "for free". Apple doesn't need money from your data while Facebook depends on it.
While you are correct about the data specifically, I feel like they are actually quite similar if you step through what is being done with the data... ultimately the user data at Facebook is being used to manipulate people into thinking a certain way (we've moved from selling user data to the ultimate end point of physiological manipulation). Now look at Apple again, see any similarity? not political sure, but for other purposes. The difference is they haven't needed to invade peoples privacy to do it.
Re: (Score:2)
Considering how greedy they are, there's no reason why they can't do both.
They can do both if doing both doesn't reduce the value of either. Apple has spent the last few years trying to position themselves as respecting your privacy. If they stopped doing this, then they'd see a loss in sales. Their question is whether it will gain them more from tracking than they'd lose in sales. Given that other companies are a lot better at monetising tracking information than Apple, I'd expect to see the balance lean more in the not-tracking direction.
Re:They're elected not to do it... (Score:5, Informative)
I think that this is just marketing. If you read Apple's privacy policy it is actually pretty bad. It's basically the extreme case of "all your data are belong to us" and we'll use it however we want.
You are aware that Apple runs an Ad network, right?
https://developer.apple.com/ne... [apple.com]
https://developer.apple.com/ne... [apple.com]
Apple's ad platform allows advertisers to purchase ads based on previous purchases according to news articles. I've never personally placed an ad, but I think the above statement is intentionally misleading. Maybe they don't use the data from Apple Pay specifically, but they allow advertisers to target based on past purchases in the App Store and iTunes at least.
Non-personal information according to Apple:
occupation
language
zip code
area code
unique device identifier
referrer URL
location
time zone
customer activities on our website, iCloud services, our iTunes Store, App Store, Mac App Store, App Store for Apple TV and iBooks Stores and from our other products and services
We may collect and store details of how you use our services, including search queries.
"We may collect, use, transfer, and disclose non-personal information for any purpose."
"At times Apple may make certain personal information available to strategic partners that work with Apple to provide products and services, or that help Apple market to customers."
"Apple and our partners and licensees may collect, use, and share precise location data, including the real-time geographic location of your Apple computer or device."
Source:
https://www.apple.com/legal/pr... [apple.com]
Apple also uses differential privacy which according to these articles isn't as non-personal as they claim:
https://www.wired.com/story/ap... [wired.com]
http://appleinsider.com/articl... [appleinsider.com]
I'm sorry if I'm disappointing you, but Apple is making money off your personal information just like every other major tech company. Apple doesn't document how much they make from ads. This article claims they probably make about $1 billion a year off search ads, but that doesn't include Apple News adds, iTunes ads, App Store ads, and in-app ads. The total mobile ad market is estimated at $20.86 billion, but I don't know how much of that is Apple's share. Based on Apple's earning's report, their share isn't more than $8.5 billion (total for Apple "services"), but I don't know where in the $1 to 8.5 billion range the total is.
https://mobiledevmemo.com/appl... [mobiledevmemo.com]
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Then again, then sell tracking data via their ad network, and they sell the ability to sell to their customers (at a 30% tax)... so Cooks' statement is, in reality, patently false. If we, Apple's users, did not exist, they would find themselves unable to sell ads or access to their digital storefronts; we are what they're selling there.
Re: (Score:3)
Their privacy policy is precisely why I'm surprised they're not selling data.
Then again, then sell tracking data via their ad network, and they sell the ability to sell to their customers (at a 30% tax)... so Cooks' statement is, in reality, patently false. If we, Apple's users, did not exist, they would find themselves unable to sell ads or access to their digital storefronts; we are what they're selling there.
That's some nice circular logic there, bub.
If Apple users didn't exist, Apple couldn't sell their data?
Really?
If Apple users didn't exist, neither would Apple!
Re: (Score:2)
Then again, they sell tracking data via their ad network... [typo corrected]
... which is data about its users.
Re:They're elected not to do it... (Score:4, Interesting)
Their privacy policy is precisely why I'm surprised they're not selling data.
McDonalds doesn't sell tables and chairs, but those are one of the main attractions of going there (it's definitely not the food).
Apple says it shares your personal data with "strategic partners". What is a strategic partner, and more important how much do you have to pay Apple to become one?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:They're elected not to do it... (Score:4, Informative)
Years ago Steve Jobs submitted a patent for operating system level modal ads. I don't think more needs to be said regarding how Apple considers its customers.
Among other disclosures, an operating system presents one or more advertisements to a user and disables one or more functions while the advertisement is being presented. At the end of the advertisement, the operating system again enables the function(s).
http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi... [uspto.gov]
Re:They're elected not to do it... (Score:4, Insightful)
I am a "Steve Jobs hater" and readily admit Apple under his leadership applied for many radical and abusive patents. Anyone that has read slashdot has been part of discussions on many nasty patents Apple was granted. I recall posters here indicating that Jobs might have applied for these patents to ensure no one else would do it.
Many years of evidence showing most of those nasty patents not being implemented, including OS-level embedded advertisements, has proven those slashdot posters possibly correct.
Just because Apple owns patents for customer abusive features does not necessarily mean that the company is customer abusive...beyond massive overpricing and living off of a reality distortion field instead of technical merit ;)
Personal Information according to Apple (Score:4, Informative)
Your cherry-picking of paragraphs in the policy in isolation to describe your conclusion is not convincing to me. You also left out elipses on a sentence to indicate that you cut it off in the middle. I.e.,
"...Apple and our partners and licensees may collect, use, and share precise location data, including the real-time geographic location of your Apple computer or device."
At some point, Apple is expecting this document to stand up in court. If, to support their secret nefarious activities, it has to be interpreted so selectively and creatively, they have to expect that a judge will side with them and say "hey, it doesn't matter what we said at the beginning of the paragraph, here it says that we could do anything we want! "
It seems like an absurd interpretation of the privacy policy.
It's not a perfect document, but it's much better than what you you carve it up, scramble, misquote and quote out of context.
Re: (Score:2)
If Tim Cook was genuine, they'd have blocked facebook from the app store.
If it were some small time app, I'm quite sure the app would be removed from the app store for breaking some rule in the ToS. However, there is a symbiotic relationship there, and while apple may not be directly benefiting from it, they permit it because it suits them.
Re: (Score:2)
If Tim Cook was genuine, they'd have blocked facebook from the app store.
If it were some small time app, I'm quite sure the app would be removed from the app store for breaking some rule in the ToS. However, there is a symbiotic relationship there, and while apple may not be directly benefiting from it, they permit it because it suits them.
That's why Apple has removed Facebook and Twitter integration in iOS 11.
Learn some facts before you embarrass yourself again, Hater.
Re: (Score:2)
Then the file scans as an OS AV effort.
Re:They're elected not to do it... (Score:4, Insightful)
... for now.
As an Apple user, I'm honestly surprised by this and don't expect it to continue for much longer.
C'mon.
Apple has a long history of making good on that statement.
Plus, They have learned over the past se real years that Privacy is a MARKETABLE Product Distinction, and they are getting a Well-deserved reputation as being the only OEM and platform that actually walks the walk in that regard.
They also know that that reputation already translates into increased hardware sales of their products, particularly in the mobile arena.
Why would they jeapordize that?
Re: (Score:2)
why.. would you need headphones in such a contraption?
Re: (Score:2)
... how do you use your phone exactly?
Re: (Score:2)
... how do you use your phone exactly?
Does sort of beg that question...
Re: They're elected not to do it... (Score:4)
Re: They're elected not to do it... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm surprised no-one has made a dildo with a headphone jack yet. The user could "program" it by simply playing back different audio tracks. There could be a whole market for different experiences, pop artists could release songs with bass lines designed to stimulate their audiences directly...
BRB, filing patent...
Re: (Score:3)
Imagine the cannons firing during the 1812 Overture. Or maybe some Beach Boys..."Good, Good, Good, good vibrations..."
Well it's true (Score:5, Insightful)
People deride Apple for having high margins. But that is exactly how a company removes temptation to misuse data.
Tim Cook was asked what he would do in this position, and he said "well I wouldn't put myself in this position". In a lot of ways Tim Cook feels the same about the cross tracking ads and things that most of the people on Slashdot does - he doesn't like them, doesn't participate in things like that, and furthermore has had Apple altering browsers to help block cross site tracking...
Apple has a clear path to making money, when a company doesn't you can be sure there is SOME path to making money from you even if you are not paying directly.
Re: (Score:2)
People deride Apple for having high margins. But that is exactly how a company removes temptation to misuse data.
Tim Cook was asked what he would do in this position, and he said "well I wouldn't put myself in this position". In a lot of ways Tim Cook feels the same about the cross tracking ads and things that most of the people on Slashdot does - he doesn't like them, doesn't participate in things like that, and furthermore has had Apple altering browsers to help block cross site tracking...
Apple has a clear path to making money, when a company doesn't you can be sure there is SOME path to making money from you even if you are not paying directly.
I posted already, saying that Apple sells your data. Based on the idea that all USA companies are greedy bastards that will do anything they can do maximize profits(shareholder earnings). Convince me that Apple actually doesn't double dip. Charge people more and sell their data. Honestly, if you could, I would literally by an iPhone tomorrow. I just don't see why they aren't.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Find someone Apple is selling this data to. Get back to us.
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Absence of evidence is not evidence. You got nothing. Nothing.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Well it's true (Score:5, Insightful)
Find someone Apple is selling this data to. Get back to us.
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"
In the abstract, you're right. However, if Apple wants to make money selling their user's data, then they have to make it public knowledge. If it's secret, then the people who want to buy the data won't know it's available. It's kind of like saying, prove to me that Apple isn't selling self-driving cars. Well, if they were, someone would know about it, or else they wouldn't be able to sell very many.
So in this case, absence of evidence is evidence of absence.
Re: (Score:2)
However, if Apple wants to make money selling their user's data, then they have to make it public knowledge.
Like their privacy policy which states they collect data and reserve the right to do with it whatever the hell they want? That public knowledge?
Convince my that you aren't a Russian troll... (Score:2)
Do you see now why we ask for proof of guilt and not proof of innocence?
If true, Name the System. (Score:2)
I posted already, saying that Apple sells your data...Convince me that Apple actually doesn't double dip..
Hey guess what everyone, Flozzin likes to have sex with greyhounds!
I mean, I just posted that, therefore you have to convince me you don't doggie dip.
Such theoretical income would show up on Apple's earnings report. There would of course also be a company buying said data and someone could easily find that out via flow of money. Fact is there is no-one buying data from Apple because they don't sell an
Re: (Score:2)
I have no evidence that Apple sells data to third-parties, but there is plenty of evidence that they monetize customer data for their own ad networks.
Apple has ad networks like Search Ads and News Ads:
https://searchads.apple.com/ [apple.com]
https://developer.apple.com/li... [apple.com]
You are assuming that financial earning reports are itemized. They aren't. They only have broad categories. Search Ads and News Ads show up in the earnings report as "Apple Services." If they sell customer data that would probably fall under "App
Do you even read bro? (Score:3)
Search Ads is about improving App Store placement, which means all data stays internal to Apple. You just get a higher hit rate (potentially) in App Store visibility.
News Ads is about an SDK for Apple displaying ads the news PUBLISHERS provide. People purchase ad time from Apple as well, those may also get displayed - but again no data is going from Apple to anyone else. It's just that in Apple News some ads are displayed to iOS users...
Neither is a case of Apple selling data to anyone, you blind fool!
Re: (Score:2)
Search Ads is about improving App Store placement, which means all data stays internal to Apple. You just get a higher hit rate (potentially) in App Store visibility.
That is exactly the same as Google's ad platform. You don't get any of the data, Google just targets it at the demographics you select.
Yet somehow Google is evil. Not saying they aren't, only that if Google is evil then so is Apple.
Re: (Score:2)
People deride Apple for having high margins. But that is exactly how a company removes temptation to misuse data.
Tim Cook was asked what he would do in this position, and he said "well I wouldn't put myself in this position". In a lot of ways Tim Cook feels the same about the cross tracking ads and things that most of the people on Slashdot does - he doesn't like them, doesn't participate in things like that, and furthermore has had Apple altering browsers to help block cross site tracking...
Apple has a clear path to making money, when a company doesn't you can be sure there is SOME path to making money from you even if you are not paying directly.
Again, right on!
Re: (Score:2)
But that is exactly how a company removes temptation to misuse data
You bought the marketing quite well didn't you. Good consumer. Trust the soundbyte from the CEO while ignoring the legal privacy policy the company is held to. Ignore their advertisement network. Ignore the data they admit they collect for those purposes. Only the CEO soundbyte matters.
Good consumer.
Really (Score:5, Informative)
Strange.
In recent compliance audits for GDPR regulations in the EU, we've been unable to get any kind of statement out of Apple about where they store iCloud and other data, and whether it's held compliant to either the GDPR or Data Protection Act.
http://www.applegazette.com/ic... [applegazette.com]
Their policy flat-out contains a line that is illegal under EU data protection rules and prevents almost any company that processes any kind of personal data (even "this is your name and email for your iTunes account) from using them::
https://www.apple.com/uk/legal... [apple.com]
"All the information you provide may be transferred or accessed by entities around the world as described in this Privacy Policy."
Which is the same "no answer" answer I've had out of them when I've asked over the last ten years. They pay lip-service, but I ain't going to court to explain why my user's EU-protected ended up in Outer Mongolia.
The reason, of course, is obvious. iCloud is actually just Amazon, Microsoft and Google storage depending on whatever they bought this month:
https://www.theregister.co.uk/... [theregister.co.uk]
Maybe they give a shit in the US, but in the EU they have absolutely no interest and, hence, lose a lot of custom. Ironically, they claim to have focus "on education" now with new educational-models of iPad. Hilarious seeing as we can't legally store children's data on them.
Yep, if your child's school is using iCloud or even iTunes in any fashion, ask to see the data protection guarantee.
Do yourself a favour if you work in IT in the UK/EU and are checking for GDPR compliance - take all your Apple gear and bin it now.
Whoa there chuckles (Score:5, Insightful)
"All the information you provide may be transferred or accessed by entities around the world as described in this Privacy Policy."
Which is the same "no answer" answer I've had out of them when I've asked over the last ten years.
It's actually a very clear answer; you just are not listening.
I'm not sure you've not been able to figure out this giant mystery when everyone else knows how iCloud works. They take your data into pieces, encrypt and store that data usually around the region you are in, but possibly in other regions as well (it could be spread around) and then all metadata related to the data is held on Apple servers in your region.
There's pretty much nothing anyone can do with the actual iCloud data being stored apart from the user with that iCloud account and access to the information needed to re-assemble it all.
Do yourself a favour if you work in IT in the UK/EU and are checking for GDPR compliance - take all your Apple gear and bin it now.
And use what exactly... the same servers Apple is using, only with unencrypted data?
Instead of puking all over a solution because Apple, you should be treasuring a company that actually values security and takes the effort to make it all fairly secure.
Sad that an IT worker would seek to weaken protection around other people's data just 'cause he's mad.
Re: (Score:3)
Security is not the same as privacy. Apple shares your data with its "strategic partners". And more.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/fut... [slate.com]
https://www.wired.com/2016/06/... [wired.com]
https://www.macrumors.com/2017... [macrumors.com]
https://www.theverge.com/2017/... [theverge.com]
Re:Whoa there chuckles (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Also, they promised to put only the head in.
What a retard (Score:2)
Read your first link. I'll wait.
No, scratch that - your mind is obviously not up to the task of comprehending what that even says, I don't have all day.
What in fact that first link says is that apps can access some facial data (not the full FaceID scan) from the front FaceID cameras. WOW WHAT A MINDBLOWER. Did you know apps can ALSO access your rear camera? Your microphone? INSANE.
So in short, that has nothing to do with Apple selling data whatsoever and everything to do with what apps do with data and
Re: (Score:2)
Gosh, so hostile. And I thought we had a rapport.
But seriously, if you look at the other links, you will learn that Apple is indeed profiting off your data. But maybe now would not be the best time for you to read those links. Wait until you simmer down.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, the answer is "fuck you, we won't even bother to tell you we're not compliant at all".
Unlike EVERY OTHER CLOUD VENDOR. Google, Microsoft, Amazon, etc. ALL have EU-compatible data-protection guarantees and all have venue-choice and GUARANTEES that your data will only be held in that venue.
Because anything else is basically illegal for the whole of the EU business world to use for anybody's data.
I'm puking over a "fuck you, law" from a major company with a legal base in Ireland, which is subject to EU l
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah. And if you used "password" for your password, and/or information that any rando can get off your wikipedia page as your password recovery question, you'd get "hacked" too.
Talking about products, where's a full size tower? (Score:2, Offtopic)
Just wondering.
Who pays? (Score:2)
An obvious difference: People pay a good amount for Apple products and services. Most people pay zero for Facebook. Nothing is truly free, so Facebook is supported by ads, and targeted ads based on your personal info. Is is realistic to compare the business practices of a company that sells hardware and services to consumers to another that doesn't bill it's users?
Re: (Score:2)
Facebook makes a killing off of ads. Period. They do not need to make another 10% profit off of selling personal information as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Not to be a grammar nazi here.... (Score:2)
"I think the best regulation is no regulation, is self-regulation"
Is this a typo or something? Because that sentence does not make any sense to me, and I can't even figure out what he was meaning to say.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
You're just reading it wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
How... unhelpful.
That sentence I quoted has two present tense predicates, and it is unclear how a sentence of the form "X is Y, is Z" is supposed to mean anything. Are they saying that X is both Y and Z, are they saying X is Y and Y is Z (and thus X is Z by transitive property), or are they saying X is Y, and then amending Y to Z by repeating the predicate? Or do they mean something else entirely? It's entirely unclear.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It should read "Tim Cook Says Apple's Customers Are Not Its Product, Unlike Facebook's" if it's comparing Apple's customers to Facebook's customers rather than Apple's customers to Facebook.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Apple just does it differently... (Score:5, Interesting)
By locking their customers in a walled garden and charging outside companies 30% to sell things to those customers, they have little need to sell the information about their customers outside of their walled garden.
The other ecosystems don't charge 30% to outside companies and instead get them to pay them money for information about their customers...
Basically, Apple is making money taxing exchanges in eco-system where other eco-systems are relying on value-add sales...
Re:Apple just does it differently... (Score:5, Informative)
Err, yes, Apple, Google, and Microsoft all rip 30% off your products. Very generous of them, I'm sure. Used to be, a tithe was 10%.
FYI: retail markup, packaging, shipping (Score:4, Informative)
Have you ever even met somebody who is in business selling products?
Retail markup + box + packing + manuals + shrinkwrap + media (CD/DVD) + sales processing (credit card 2% tax) and finally marketing & product placement all take a sizable chunk out of a product's price. The general recommendation I've been told JUST for marketing overhead is 30% of the budget!
Now 30% might seem at the high end of the classic business model but it depends on the market. Apple wants to keep all the gains of going online for themselves rather than for the publishers (who often take an undo share while developers... like everywhere else the value creators often get the least in the chain of leeches.) The App store has a massive exposure with the promise to move much higher volume -- like how major brands PAY for shelf placement in the isles. Apple doesn't yet do a version of this but makes everybody pay more to be in the store.
I don't know if 30% is a good deal. It doesn't sound all that bad if you price accordingly and are clever in selling direct at a lower price-- where it is likely that the App store sales beat your own website... I've noticed more apps going on their store exclusively. They must have done the math for their situation.
Re: (Score:2)
Have you ever even met somebody who is in business selling products?
Retail markup + box + packing + manuals + shrinkwrap + media (CD/DVD) + sales processing (credit card 2% tax) and finally marketing & product placement all take a sizable chunk out of a product's price. The general recommendation I've been told JUST for marketing overhead is 30% of the budget!
Now 30% might seem at the high end of the classic business model but it depends on the market. Apple wants to keep all the gains of going online for themselves rather than for the publishers (who often take an undo share while developers... like everywhere else the value creators often get the least in the chain of leeches.) The App store has a massive exposure with the promise to move much higher volume -- like how major brands PAY for shelf placement in the isles. Apple doesn't yet do a version of this but makes everybody pay more to be in the store.
I don't know if 30% is a good deal. It doesn't sound all that bad if you price accordingly and are clever in selling direct at a lower price-- where it is likely that the App store sales beat your own website... I've noticed more apps going on their store exclusively. They must have done the math for their situation.
Not to mention there are a LOT of FREE Apps on the App Store that Apple earns exactly ZERO percent on. That 30% from Paid Apps partially subsidizes the FREE Apps.
But no one ever stops to factor THAT in.
Kicking FB while they are down are we? (Score:4, Insightful)
Read this for what it is. Tim is just kicking Facebook in the teeth while hey are down.
Why do I say this? FB's users ARE the thing they collect data about and sell, yea that's true. But who doesn't already know that Apple collects their user's information in order to market to their users? The only difference is Apple may not SELL the data to OTHERS to do this. But as big as Apple is this sure seems like a distinction without any difference given that they do collect marketing data.
Re: Kicking FB while they are down are we? (Score:2)
I've got an iPhone and the only time Apple has anything to say to me, it's to let me know that there's an update
Re: (Score:2)
Read this for what it is. Tim is just kicking Facebook in the teeth while [t]hey are down.
Yea right... I'm sure if apple really wanted to, they could find a reason to pull FB from the app store. Right now, it's just lip service and no more.
Re: (Score:2)
Read this for what it is. Tim is just kicking Facebook in the teeth while hey are down.
Not kicking them in the teeth. This isn't about Facebook, this is about Apple. This is an MBA douchebag smelling a marketing opportunity to come out and say in the most generic way possible that they don't do what their legalese and privacy policy say they do.
Hey everyone, look at me! I'm a good guy! *fingers crossed behind back*
Re: (Score:2)
It's that too, but it's a way to point a finger at a semi-competitor and say "See, we are as bad as THEY are!" when the facts seem to be contrary to that assertion. The whole announcement was an attempt to bolster Apple's image at the expense of Facebook.
Except Apple sold its users to Google (Score:2)
That's a load of crap (Score:2)
Well duh (Score:4, Informative)
"The truth is, we could make a ton of money if we monetized our customer -- if our customer was our product,"
It's kind of axiomatic that if the service is free, you're the product..which you are for Facebook, Twitter, Gmail, etc....
Makes sense (Score:2)
That makes sense, because you're actually paying for Apple products. Facebook offers its services at no monetary cost and its primary activity is data abuse.
That doesn't mean Apple won't try and use any data it has for profit whenever it sees fit. It's just a trend with tech companies these days: everyone is into data. But it does mean that because Apple's business is with its products, it will put selling those products first over data abuse.
Customers vs Product... (Score:2)
Of course not (Score:3, Informative)
Apple's customers are not its product. Apple's customers are it's MINDLESS SLAVES, as we have known for years.
--- Sent from my iMac.
Re: (Score:2)
True, but Facebook's customers are not it's product either. Who pays to use Facebook? It certainly isn't people posting updates of their relationship status. Facebook's customers are the people paying for ads, analytics, and the like.
Tim Cook should know this, but he is just yelling in the megaphone perched on the wall of the walled garden. Giving the aforementioned "Mindless Slaves" some reassurance that they are not being sheared too closely.
The product is a targeted platform for advertisers (Score:2)
Facebook produces a targeted platform for advertisers. The advertisers are the customer of Facebook.
He's right about that. (Score:3)
Cook is actually right about this. If more and more people become concerned about privacy, Apple could be at an advantage over Google and Facebook, if they play their cards right and make the transition to modestly priced online services. Selling new gadgets will only take them so far. Despite currently being way to expensive for my taste and being quite an annoyance when it comes to that, Apple still has the reputation of protecting its users privacy. More or less that is.
Re: (Score:2)
Maximizing profit is more complicated than that. He could argue that building a long term brand is more important than the short term profit selling data would achieve.
Re: (Score:2)
Surprise! (Score:2)
But that's just it. No company in the USA is about long term.
Turns out Apple is. Which is hardly a surprise at all if you know the history of the company, Jobs was very into the Japanese culture and long term thinking. He took great pains to hire people that thought the same way and install a similar strategy across the company, so it carries on in that approach.
And of course, Apple has enough actual cash on hand to have the luxury of being able to think very long term. If they didn't I would be more sus
Re: (Score:2)
But that's just it. No company in the USA is about long term.
Turns out Apple is. Which is hardly a surprise at all if you know the history of the company, Jobs was very into the Japanese culture and long term thinking. He took great pains to hire people that thought the same way and install a similar strategy across the company, so it carries on in that approach.
And of course, Apple has enough actual cash on hand to have the luxury of being able to think very long term. If they didn't I would be more suspicious - but they do. It removes a ton of temptation to make short term choices to stay solvent. It's not like I trust Apple so much, as I trust the soothing effect of large stacks of money.
With people like Microsoft(win 10) and Apple, you are the sucker and the product.
Microsoft : yes, as they have been low-balling things for years.
But what leads you to say that about Apple? They do not sell user data to other companies, at all. As stated, they don't even have a motive to do so, and have in fact a very strong disinclination to do so, since privacy is a marketing feature of Apple products, one that Facebook has just made tremendously valuable. A company thinking ONLY of pure profit would be driven to a privacy oriented approach now because it's hot; it just happens that Apple started there...
So how are Apple users the product?
Exactly!
Well stated!
Re: (Score:2)
Apple users are 'the product' because Apple delivers them to their limited number of sanctioned accessory makers. They've spent years making sure their connectors for add-ons are proprietary, to restrict who is allowed to sell add-ons to their customers.
Apple also restricts who is allowed to sell apps that run on their mobile gadgets. They 'sell' those people to the app developers who they choose to allow in their market.
WTF are you bleating about?
You make about as much sense as the moron Hater you are.
No one forces Apple users or developers to do ANYTHING.
Grow up, Hater.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So, you're saying Tim Cook just saved Apple?
Oh, come on!
Apple HARDLY needs "Saving"!!!
Re: (Score:2)
Ap
Re: (Score:2)
No, Apple is gathering deep knowledge data and monetizing it. Tim Cook is just lying about it.
https://yro.slashdot.org/comme... [slashdot.org]
https://yro.slashdot.org/comme... [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Especially given the cost of their hardware, which is easily twice what the same power is for any other platform.
Re: (Score:2)
So? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
See my post above:
https://yro.slashdot.org/comme... [slashdot.org]
In the interview, Cook said “The truth is, we could make a ton of money if we monetized our customer — if our customer was our product. We’ve elected not to do that.”
From what I can tell, Apple does monetize their customers for their ad networks like iTunes Ads and News Ads:
https://searchads.apple.com/ [apple.com]
https://developer.apple.com/li... [apple.com]
I agree that Apple doesn't make most of their money from advertising like some other tech companies,
Re: (Score:2)
Re: And its probably true (Score:2)
Re: And its probably true (Score:2)