Hacker News Reader

Comment by luchak | Hacker News Reader

But, somehow, as a consumer, I don't get any protection against Apple.

Hmm.

With something like $30 billion in cash in the bank, Apple's one of the companies that I'm not worried about selling information in order to make a quick buck. After all, aren't people always saying that Microsoft should use the privacy angle against Google? Why not Apple as well?

Generally companies don't get $30 billion in cash by turning down opportunities to make money.

Umm, did you bother reading Apple's financials before tossing out that piece of FUD? The vast bulk of Apple's financials, and that $30 billion in cash, comes from hardware sales. Call me crazy, but i think it makes sense to protect a profit source from unsavory types building who-knows-what from data collected in the background.

Hardware with their software on top of it, and their experience all around. Remove the software on top of it, and you have hardware that is priced much higher than it should be.

Naturally. If you remove half of a product while keeping the same price, it's bound to be overpriced. Software isn't free (unless it is free...).

Keep in mind what I'm replying to. The argument is that 'bulk' of the money Apple makes is from hardware sales. Remove the hardware sales, and Apple doesn't make much money. My argument is that if you removed the software, they wouldn't be making the hardware sales. People aren't buying Apple for the hardware. They are buying it for the complete package.

Even you admit as much by suggesting they are removing half the product.

If you have $30 billion in cash, chances are that you have somewhat of a reputation. Apple definitely does. That repuation is worth far more to the company than a couple hundred thousand or a few million that an agency could offer.

However, if you're a small firm that might be struggling to survive and is somewhat lacking in the morals department ("Is it illegal? No? Then why not? We need the money."), that same money looks far more attractive.

Ummm... who exactly are these "unsavory developers"? This is starting to feel like a bad political ad.

I never mentioned developers. I mentioned agencies. As in, advertising agencies. They already (or used to) sell email addresses to spammers. It isn't far fetched to imagine selling location-based data as well. That sort of information is far more valuable than an email.

someone has never heard of crush offers...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com