Hacker News Reader

Comment by ethanbond | Hacker News Reader

Well Google’s intent in doing so would be solely to siphon up more user data, which is distinct and totally worth criticizing.

View on HN

I don’t know if the ends should justify the means. Apple is the only pro privacy player in the space but they still run their developer programs with an iron fist.

Personally, I want them to run it with an iron fist. I am happy to accept the limitations that come along with the trust I have in the platform. YMMV.

I’m going through App certification right now and while it’s a pain sometimes, man, you really need to be in the box. It’s actually kind of amazing how much attention each app gets.

Does that make you feel better as a user of apps?

Without a doubt.

If we have a modest app and it’s thing much of a struggle to cross all the t’s and dot the i’s... I highly doubt there is a lot of malware getting through.

Sure, they care about security until the FBI complains and they don't encrypt your backups :-).

Is Apple actually pro privacy? Or do they just brand themselves as that, while not really caring much about it?

I’ve seen it said before that Apple is pro-privacy because it suits them from a marketing standpoint. They tried being an anti-privacy ad provider with iAds and failed at it, so this pivot helps them.

A cynical read on the situation but it’s as valid as any.

The timeline doesn't work for that read. They were pushing their privacy credentials before launching iAds, and iAds failed as many predicted precisely because they wouldn't compromise their privacy stance.

Yep, Apple had trouble selling spots on iAd because the program had only very coarse targeting and shared almost no viewer info with advertisers. Apple wanted iAds to function more like newspaper ads than web ads.

I believe they care and they know it gives them a competitive advantage.

It’s kind of a stretch to suggest they aren’t pro-privacy, given the intentional features they provide: https://www.apple.com/privacy/

In my opinion, they are not so much pro privacy as anti user-rights. You can see that as pro-privacy yes, or you can also see that because they limit what users can do as much as possible. The privacy part just seems a side effect of the anti user-rights policies.

apple isn't pro privacy with respect to their hardware

I'm not an ios user but my understanding is that you can't install 3rd-party software on it (including your own!) without an apple account

phone home is always slimy

Indeed. However, many people trust Apple, so they don't have a problem with it. Personally I think this is a great thing and support the idea, but it's interesting to me that Apple rarely comes up in discussions about the coercive domination of large platforms and the merits of government intervention to reduce it.

And is manifestly the opposite goal of Apple, which is to create a privacy firewall between users and apps.

Lol, Apple's goal is the lock you into their ecosystem so that it is near impossible to ever switch away. Privacy comes with customer's controlling their data and Android has F-Droid.

Or they've run out of high growth low hanging fruit and are trying to grab a bigger piece of the pie now that the app ecosystem has fleshed out the tracking and mobile ads market.

The number of privacy conscious users is minuscule compared to the rest of the market (I'd love to be some evidence otherwise) and Apple is a corporation. Its way forward is clear.

It’s interesting that we would interpret exactly the same behavior as evil when done by one faceless corporation and good when done by another. It’s almost as though our interpretations are a Rorschach test where we just repeat PR and media narratives, rather than the product of independent thought.

Or we can read trends. Google earned its reputation for siphoning any data the can, while Apple has a precedent for making systems that are secure even against Apple.

I’m pro-Apple but will be all-in to the Apple Cares camp when they encrypt iCloud backups.

It’s not that Apple is “good” and Google is “bad”. Apple’s “strategy credit” is that their business model is not predicated on collecting user information.

Even Facebook can say that they will not have data centers in non democratic countries. Something that Apple can’t say. Since FB isn’t allowed in most non democratic countries, even it can spin their business model to their advantage.

Yes, and the business model is a choice.

So you’re saying that:

A) Google could choose to start a business selling high margin hardware so it wouldn’t need to sell targeted ads?

B) Apple could choose not to sell in the world’s most populous country? How would the shareholders or board feel about that?

They aren’t exactly the same. Google’s sign in shares your email address and “basic profile info,” e.g., your name. You may then be asked for a number of additional permissions. Apple’s lets you choose what name to give to the developer, if they even ask, and gives you the option to use an Apple relay email if you don’t want to give your email. You won’t be asked for more permissions. Apple also says they don’t track the apps you use or your activity and their terms forbid the developer from associating your relay email with other email addresses; Google has very clear privacy policy requirements but does track.

Given that, I wouldn’t say this is a mere Rorschach test.

Sign in with Google hands over a ton of information to both Google and the app. Sign In with Apple hands over zero information to either.

It’s not exactly the same behavior at all.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com