Hacker News Reader

Comment by throwGuardian | Hacker News Reader

But but Apple has spent millions branding itself as the privacy focused alterative to Android. Is it really possible that Apple lies about how privacy friendly their products are? Are we all to trust the Apple apologists who'll jump through hoops to excuse these findings?

Were we, the users, holding the phone wrong and causing antenna-gate? [1]

Were our tight pants to blame for the bending iPhone plus models? [2]

When Apple purposefully slowed our 1.5 year old iPhone to a crawl, after an iOS update, was it us hastening the degradatiom of the measily iPhone batteries? [3]

[1]: https://www.pcmag.com/encyclopedia/term/62034/antennagate

[2]: https://youtu.be/qkNlfMC1lzE

[3]: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-42615378

View on HN

> But but Apple has spent millions branding itself as the privacy focused alterative to Android.

That's not difficult to do, given how loose Android is with privacy. There are effectively two Phone OSes to choose from: iOS and Android. iOS is not perfect, far from it, but the breathless way the tech press at large has covered every foible with the iPhone has made me immediately question articles like this from the set out, and sure enough, sensationalized. Well it's only happened the last 500 times so I suppose it was fair to check.

Meanwhile Android runs like shit on phones with sixty bagillion cpu cores and 400 gigabytes of RAM, and the fanboys come out in droves to tell us iPhone users how stupid we are for having such "limited" devices, that despite all their limitations, all their battery problems, antenna problems, retain a good 40% of their resale value when you upgrade. Why? Because people want them, even used ones, because an out of gen iPhone running on a crippled battery with a cracked screen is STILL a better experience than an Android.

Sounds like you haven't used a flagship Android device in a while, or are a big fan of over the top hyperbole. Maybe both.

It's always funny when Apple comes up, it's almost like a holy crusade against them.

Apple is far more pro-privacy than its competitors, because its chief competitor requires reduction in privacy to make money.

That's what you get when you build a walled garden and then fail to deliver on your promises. That breaks the suspension of disbelief. The walled garden is a fundamentally immoral way to practically implement security features; but when the feature falls short you can't hide the wrong behind the good anymore.

I just don't see how it's immoral. That seems to be a stretch, and again, goes back to my claim of "religious crusade." Morality? Really?

From Apple, we expect perfection. They're trying to be pro privacy, so when they aren't, the pitchforks come out. Meanwhile Android's sole purpose is less privacy to feed into Google's business.

There are certain things I WANT to be a walled garden. Anything that holds my information, I would prefer that less people have potential access to that. And Apple is the only one who leads the way in this regard in true consumer products. Despite not being perfect, at least they put some effort in.

Let's see... a search on "Apple Sells Data"... oh those lawsuits and investigative journalism from different media outlets in the past calendar year is all bullshit. Because Apple wouldn't lie in its PR and advertisements! No lies are able to come out of the mouths of people when they're on stage at tech conferences. I'm so silly. Totally forgot all of that.

Hell, here's a fun read: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2019/01/apple...

PS. Apple's anti-consumer practices are really messed up.

What exactly is fun about that read? The guy is just shitting on Apple for basically allowing their users to use Google and Facebook and proposes mad solutions like banning Google and FB from the app store, or enforcing some privacy standard on all apps submitted to the App Store. As if enforcing that was even remotely feasible! And at the same time he complains that dev accounts cost $100 a year.

What an amazingly shallow and dumb article. The author clearly didn't even come close to thinking his ideas through. Is that the best one you could find?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com