It isn’t often that you see any company the size of Apple take that strong of a stance. Privacy is their best feature and it seems like they are doubling down.
For those who are security conscious it's a great reason to get an iPhone over an Android (or whatever variation). For those who aren't and who just like the iPhone because it's trendy and cool, they are getting privacy for free. There's a chance that this might set an expectation when choosing the next phone, as privacy pushes further into the public consciousness.
I would like to think there's a greater play, though, and that is humanity. Apple doesn't solve all its problems with tech/machine learning; they don't give you up to the mathematics. This makes some of their offering flawed when you compare it against what Google offers, but at the same time that's not such a bad thing. You won't get your entire digital life wiped out of existence, without recourse, because a calculation made an executive decision. If, as a developer, your app gets removed from the App Store or doesn't pass in the first place, it's because a human looked at it while also using a specialised toolkit. You get proper customer service, physical stores and authorised resellers...
They make as many poor choices as any other company but I appreciate their priorities and values.
I roll my eyes every time someone talks about the "premium price" of Apple hardware. Apple hardware is not all that much more expensive; it's just not subsidized via tracking/profiling (loss of privacy), and subsequent advertising, the way the competition is. This has always been the case with Android/Google, and more recently even somewhat true with Microsoft (Windows 10 and its multiple shenanigans).
I understand your sentiment about the price being subsidized with vendor lock in, advertisement and data gathering. But the point on the price might be true for the US only.
In most of Europe, as well as in my country, (let alone poorer parts of the world), a used, cheap iPhone can cost as much as two months of the rent money for a small apartment; a new iPhone/Apple device is out of the question.
So the dilemma for most people either no smartphone or an Android smartphone.
Edit: Looks like you've edited with additional information. Still you're off track with my point.
Android has better UX and has some nice features but there are no real privacy settings, Android apps have no proper inspection before being released on the market and too frequently some 0day RCE exploits are released publicly for Android.
Privacy features were the biggest reason I switched and even though it is not as convenient to use it, I'm going to stick with it for the foreseeable future.
Oh, and the hardware build quality "feel" seems much much better than any Android phone I have held as well.
ruhr? </scooby-doo_voice>
i have both an android and an ios phone, and i'm comparatively amazed at how bone-headed android UX can be. it's also a hot bed of paralysis-of-choice (in both apps and in settings/configuration). sure, ios has issues here and there, but (to me) ios is generally more intuitive (==better UX).
but in terms of apps, i find android much more intuitive than ios. on android, there is basically a universal back button, in position and in behavior, that always seems to just work. not so on ios, where i am constantly wondering how do i go backwards from where i'm at. the heavy gesture language on ios is very non-intuitive. for example, closing apps. on android, there is a two button press to close all apps or just a one button press plus swipe to close a single app. or there's a double-tap to return to the previous app immediately. on ios, it's a weird swipe up and right, then a ridiculously long hold, and then a one by one swipe. on lg android phones at least, there is serious multitasking. so i can have youtube playing in the top or bottom of the screen and then be browsing the web or on some other app in the other half. this is really, really useful. not to mention android can more frequently have an overlay of apps, such as video chat or youtube in a picture in picture type of situation. android's clip tray is also very useful, especially when composing e-mails that contain copied information from multiple places. on ios, i am constantly annoyed by editing the address bar. the tap, then wait, and then hit the little x is a constant annoyance because there is a mandatory wait after the first tap, and it's very finicky, as well as the little x.
yes, ios is very clean, but that doesn't mean it has good ux. i am constantly befuddled by ios design choices in how to do something. and the gesture language is extremely non-intuitive. the gestures on android or far more nature and less overbearing.
but the radio is a good example of the frustrating UX -- you can't use the radio without wired headphones to act as the antenna. you can't even plug in the wired headphones and then used wireless headphones for output.
apple actually makes sure the common use cases are well designed (and chooses to preclude less common ones to reduce that paralysis of choice problem), while android seems to be trying to check as many boxes as possible on a spec sheet.
closing apps on ios is a double-tap and a swipe or two swipes, depending on your phone. on my android, it's hitting a small, unintuitive square symbol and then hitting a small 'x' icon--both of which require more precision than on ios.
the lack of a youtube overlay in ios is a limitation imposed by google. ios has picture-in-picture mode but google won't implement it for ios for competitive reasons.
as for gestures, both android and ios have non-discoverable gestures, but i think ios's gestures are more intuitive overall. as in, once you find the gesture, you go "oh right, that's exactly what i would have expected that gesture to do there." i don't always have that satisfaction on android.
this, of course, is how i experience the two operating systems, so i'm not trying to discount your experience.
This is a bit funny, everyone said how intuitive iPhone is, but on the first day I accidentally opened magnifier and was unable to close it without getting to my computer and googling. None of my friends who had iPhone knew what that square was and how to remove it from the screen. It is not intuitive in any way to do 3 finger double tap.
And even custom keyboards are too limited by iOS SDK. For typing in languages where symbols with accents or diacritics are used it is inconvenient that the long tap doesn't bring the wanted symbol in focus and you have to swipe as well. That is not a problem on Android.
And you have to know when and where to swipe left or right to bring up some other menu or to go back one step. On Android you just click the OS back button on the bottom of the screen. For app switching - there is a button for that.
Overall it requires more clicks and swipes on iOS to get around.
I am not sure what Android version You used but the stock Google Android was a lot better in many ways. Sure, there are cool iOS features as well that are not available on Android but there are very few of those.
Apple isn't all that much better.[0] Moral of the story is, you shouldn't expect app store maintainers (google, apple, fdroid, whatever) to be effective at protecting you. The task is almost certainly automated, and error-prone, or dependent upon a small group, and error-prone.
0. https://gizmodo.com/top-apple-mac-app-secretly-sends-your-br...
Some things may slip through the cracks, but the Google Play store allows almost anything to be published with little to no checks at all.
Edit: On re-read I thought it might be unclear what I'm asking. Does Apple use Facebook and Google data for targeted advertising?
I don’t know the answer to either question, but I assume the answer to the first is yes of course they advertise on these platforms (on google at least), and the answer to the second is, I hope No.
So they have to rely on a punishment model where they demand apps provide a privacy policy then kick them off the store if they fail to comply with it.
The implication being that by doing so, they would be benefiting from the aggressive data collection performed by those platforms.
If an app is free, but makes its money through data collection, then no, Apple doesn't make money off of it.
If they charge for the app, and then do data collection, then yes, Apple makes money off of the initial app purchase, but not off of the data collection.
So, all that's really left that they can compete with commercially and effectively against Google's Android hegemony is in the one thing neither Google nor their device partners can even deign to pursue – consumer privacy. Apple is, and likely always will be, a hardware company. So, they do not see consumer's private info as a source of revenue. They just need folks to keep buying their devices. They can differentiate by making privacy a feature, something a device beholden to Google or the Play marketplace can never be, which is the vast majority of Android devices out there.
This is old but indicative: https://hothardware.com/ContentImages/NewsItem/45374/content...
No malice assumed, of course, but that means that your independence is no further than a config flag in a build process. As in, you don't have it.
https://www.theverge.com/2018/7/18/17587304/apple-icloud-chi...
Doesn't help things like mail or photos, of course, but it is extremely notable in the China context for one big reason: it does E2E encrypt messages. WhatsApp was banned from China when they implemented this. Apple stands out in this way... although they're probably getting away with it because most Chinese don't use Apple Messages.
[0] - https://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2016/03/21/attack-o...
I don't want to touch iTunes and do computer backup, that is like a very geeky way do it and most people in China don't even have Laptop or Desktop. If they can make Dual Sim and other features targeting the Chinese market; Apple's second biggest market, why cant they make Time Capsule specifically for China. ( Making it China only will likely piss off the Chinese Government. They could release it worldwide to avoid this.)
The encryption keys for Chinese users are stored in China, and the government has full access to data and keys on those servers as per Chinese law. Maybe “backdoored” is the wrong word since they can walk in the front door.
I never knew that - this might be a much better option than iCloud backup
I would immediately buy 3 if these.
Both small packets and maxing out the window size in one stream. Lack of DNS queries from the host. Single connection dominating the bandwidth.
There's a reason for all of those of course, but put them together on a residential connection: almost certainly a VPN user.
And these are all really simple heuristics. In practice, we know you can identify which Netflix video are you watching just by the packet sizes/timing.
I have a specific google account for my Android phones specifically because you can’t do anything on an Android without logging in. iPhones still work as phones just without cloud storage.
Would it send less telemetry data to Apple?
And the default is no.
Build the trust now, reap the rewards later. Glad they're doing it.
... you mean like a credit reporting agency leaking out ssn and other very important data information of millions. To be fair, as a dedicated apple hater, all these events, plus google's more recent lack of morality decision making, has made me rethink which computer, phone, maps, and search engine I will be using moving forward.
Best case scenario for the future is that these demands will be made publicly so we’ll know it’s not secure.
And there are journalists being locked up for allegedly compromising state secrets e.g. Myanmar, Cambodia. Dissidents being rounded up and jailed. You have Russia going after former spies and anyone criticising the government.
People are literally dying every day because of a true lack of privacy.
I don't take everything they say on faith, of course, but it seems plausible for them to take that stance given that their business model is to build and sell phones and software, as opposed to building up a profile of me to sell to advertisers.
The best business strategies are ones that benefit users AND makes the business money. That's what Apple's done here.
For example, how is Apple's emphasis on privacy, with the additional features they have added to push for it, different from their emphasis on backing up when they introduced Time Machine? I think that the Time Machine introduction was as much of a marketing move, at which point you've broadened the definition of the phrase where it doesn't really mean anything.
That being said, there's nothing wrong with privacy being both a marketing move and aligned with our interests as users. In fact, I'm more comforted by the idea that morals and profits are aligned here, because no company is above choosing the latter when push comes to shove.
Though it does not say that they guarantee the apps available on the platform are also as secure.
Sure they have. Every instance where they stonewalled an investigation was undoubtedly seen at least in part as a way to differentiate themselves from their main competition, which is an run by what is essentially an advertising company that functions by gathering user information.
If you can do something that differentiates you from your competition and they can't feasibly replicate it without changing a large part of how they function at a base level, you do so, even if it might take a while to (or never) pay off. The return on that gamble far outweighs the cost.
iAd stood out because it didn't share customer data with advertisers as was the standard in the industry.
>Apple has a lot of knowledge regarding its users,but what it doesn’t do with that data is share it with advertisers very freely. That makes Madison Avenue very mad.
>rather than offering a cookie-based ad-tracking and targeting mechanism, it essentially requires partners to tell it what kind of audience it needs to reach, and then trust that Apple will handle the rest, AdAge says. And it’s well worth noting that Apple prioritizes customer privacy here over a big potential upside in ad revenue.
>what it doesn’t do is hand over the keys to all that data and let advertisers plug into it directly with their own data-mining and targeting software. That’s not standard for the ad industry and that’s likely the reason a few Madison Avenue feathers are ruffled over their approach.
https://techcrunch.com/2014/02/18/advertisers-not-thrilled-w....
I am just arguing against GP's dismissal of Apple's stance on privacy as a marketing move. I believe it's truly close to their heart, and it's a happy coincidence that it's also increasingly a marketable asset (given the despicable data collection practices of the big tech/advertisement firms).
But neither me nor, presumably, GP has privileged inside information on Apple's true motives (and surely they're multifaceted and complex and not monolithic anyway). So, just asserting that it's purely a marketing move and then furthermore implying that a deviating assessment is delusional strikes me as unjustified.
I think it's both, and impossible to separate. It's a public company, it doesn't have stuff close to it's heart, but it does have ideals it strives for that it presents to the board as the path forward. Part of that explanation is explaining how it helps the company.
> So, just asserting that it's purely a marketing move and then furthermore implying that a deviating assessment is delusional strikes me as unjustified.
But, if you read carefully, it wasn't asserted that it was purely a marketing move. Just that it was one (which we've sort of covered tangentially), and it was delusional to think that it wasn't (which we've also covered). There wasn't any statement that it also wasn't something they've incorporated into their company ideology.
That's one of the shortcomings of delayed text communication. What could have simply been a quick reply of "sure, it may not be the only reason, but it can't be discounted" from the original author gets blown out into a larger discussion where people are arguing slightly differently things based on their contextual interpretation of the statement.
I don't think it's just a marketing move necessarily. While power and idealistic managers can have a significant short term impact in direction and culture, in the long term of course financial incentives are generally the single greatest determinator of company behavior. However short term isn't meaningless particularly wrt company cultural values that last longer, and in turn leadership can still matter a lot. I think that may multiply when leadership isn't fighting a company's incentives, but rather there is a chance to bring both together in some ways. All that is leading up to sometimes forgotten (and how great that is!) fact that Apple's current CEO Tim Cook is a gay man who grew up in a time when that was flat out illegal and could be heavily persecuted even in the US, and now lives in a world where it's still something subject to death in many parts of the world. That's not determinative by any means, but I can't imagine it hasn't influenced him at all. One of the core business values of having a more diverse workforce and management team is precisely that they bring a wider set of experiences and viewpoints which can profitably inform the company.
I've seen a number of comparisons vs Steve Jobs that have called Tim Cook more "visionless" and "mundane" and so on and so forth, a "competent manager" but without the same animation. I honestly wonder though whether privacy and personal information security is in fact a real animating motivation Tim Cook's. It's inherently a much quieter, subtler one that doesn't on the face of it have the same end user feature impact (by definition). And it is something that can work well with where Apple gets their money and even their own corporate culture of secrecy. But that doesn't mean he can't drive them even farther and harder in that direction in turn then they might have gone otherwise right?
Maybe you didn't intend it that way, but when I see "this is a marketing move" it tends to feel dismissive and negative, like it's all just fake and manipulative. But something can be "good PR" while also being a genuine value people hold, in fact if anything I think the most sustainable and best win/wins are when it all comes together, when something someone is doing genuinely for real is good and is worth serious value and in turn is totally reasonable to be proud of and "market". That's the ultimate ideal of the market right, that someone is making something good and gets rewarded in turn?
points browser to eff.org
Ever since that letter I can't take Tim Cook or Apple by their word.
Indeed. Between that and the imminent arrival of dual-SIM iPhones, I may actually want to buy something here.
And yet, for all the information Apple provide about security and privacy, including much talk of end-to-end encryption in some cases, I have so far been unable to determine the fundamental way that all of their online services work and whether they have access to (for example) any photos I take or messages I send from the phone, if I choose to use iCloud services. Can anyone point me in the right direction?
https://www.apple.com/business/site/docs/iOS_Security_Guide....
EDIT to add: DuckDuckGo gave me the above link for the iOS 11 version, but it has actually been updated already for iOS 12.
Some things, like the keychain, are not accessible by Apple, and only on your enrolled devices.
Then I would be comfortable in having my photos and notes on icloud.
The fuck does that have to do with privacy? That's an incredible vague thing they are saying. Does it decide what is/isn't 'private' information for sharing? It just seems way out of context, and odd, to be mentioning in the same sentence.
By providing more On-device intelligence Apple believes you may prevent or reduce that initial egress of data outside your hardware where it's stored encrypted.
Feel free to argue the point but no need for the histrionics.
> note that when ad tracking is limited, the value of the advertising identifier is 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000
https://developer.apple.com/documentation/adsupport/asidenti...
Here is how you turn it off:
1. Go to Settings > Privacy > Advertising.
2. Turn on Limit Ad Tracking.
Both platforms allow you to disable tracking and/or reset the identifier to something new.
However, if you disable tracking on Android, it just changes the value of another variable called (to the effect of) "Ad tracking enabled" and you are politely asked to not "target ads" towards that ID. It's important to note here, that nothing ever stops you, you're just asked to. You can still harvest data, you can still analyse and sell it, but you just can't advertise back to them.
In comparison, disabling Ad tracking on iOS gives you the zeroed out advertising ID (which is shared with everyone else who opts out, which means you blend into the crowd (which makes that data more difficult to usefully separate and analyse).
Pretty sure Apple doesn't let you bundle dozens of Advertising SDK's that harvest everything by default either.
But not the ability to run software not approved by Apple.
I think this push is because other differentiators (that justify their 'premium' price) are running out...
A company just writing they're taking privacy seriously... I don't believe it.
Now, I would like a third party to audit it. That would be great.