What evidence do you have for this baseless accusation?
Apple have been hammering Google on privacy for many years and they have an incredible track record on privacy when they’ve had their feet held to the fire with the FBI.
Apple have been hammering Google on privacy for many years and they have an incredible track record on privacy when they’ve had their feet held to the fire with the FBI.
Yes in a world of infinite possibilities anything can happen, but realistically Apple is incentivized to maintain their privacy position.
This is what the current leadership believes. Tim Cook is a clearly brilliant manager. I have no hesitation in endorsing his record on privacy (and genuineness and truthfulness). However, he is mortal. The next CEO might see things differently. The unique selling point you mentioned will be on the table. There will be analysts who will crunch the numbers on what portion of prospective Apple customers will refrain from buying Apple for some particular transgression and how much such transgression will bring in additional revenue.
Apple can fend off these questions today because it has a huge chunk of the high end phone market. It would be stupid to ask Apple to do this not because it is immoral but rather because it will distract Apple from doing what it does very well: selling $1k iPhones.
"Campaign targets Apple over privacy betrayal for Chinese iCloud users"
Apple sold all their users data in China. Should that not count?
Granted, that’s only a CEO change or two away, but the culture very much appears to be one where short term profit isn’t the be all end all.
I meant if they did not they have to leave China like Google chose to do. It was for a buck versus Google thought the bucks to give up their users data not worth it.
Apple to China: What can we do for you, comrades?
China, on the other hand...
Not wanting to comply with a FBI request but then storing the iMessage private keys in Beijing.
Do purchasers of Apple hardware decide which "features" Apple should offer?
Do these purchasers decide what tradeoffs will be made between (a) not collecting user data (maximum privacy by design) and (b) collecting user data with the justification that a "feature" requires it (sacrafice user privacy as required by manufacturer's design)?
Apple's CEO calls privacy a "fundamental human right".
If by its design Apple hardware encourages or requires that right to be abridged (e.g. AppleID, AppStore, etc.), who makes the determination that the purchasers absolute fundamental right (hardware only, no data collection) is outweighed by the need to provide "features" that encourage or necessitate privacy tradeoffs (pre-installed software, ongoing "services", licenses to compile and install software, etc.).
Who decides when the "fundamental right" to privacy should be diminished to support a "feature" chosen by the manufacturer?
If there is (a) one type of hardware/software company that collects user data and sells advertisement, (b) a second type of hardware/software company that collects user data but does not sell advertisement, then is there (c) a third type of hardware/software company that does not collect user data?
What would be the most ideal company for the privacy-conscious consumer: (a), (b) or (c)?
China.