Im curious to know who the criticism is being leveled at? Apple or Saudi Arabi. Because the latter isn't likely to even blink at LGBT rights and Apple cares far more about its bottom line than human rights. What's the desired change?
Im curious to know who the criticism is being leveled at? Apple or Saudi Arabi. Because the latter isn't likely to even blink at LGBT rights and Apple cares far more about its bottom line than human rights. What's the desired change?
I highly recommend watching a talk I was giving a few years back--the best version being when I did it at Mozilla Privacy Lab (link below)--which focuses on the ramifications of the core of this problem across the industry (but of course, with one of the narrative focuses being on Apple, as I have a lot of background knowledge there).
>Egyptian authorities are using dating apps like Grindr to lure, arrest gay men
https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/egyptian-authoriti...
If you pay them money, Apple has/will let you make virtually any data siphoning and user-hostile application you want, and they will allow you to sideload it without review (enterprise program). The common factor is control that benefits Apple.
Users are certainly very reluctant to drop into a command line, but in my experience if it is a true necessity for something they want to do, they don't actually have that much difficulty with it.
Yes, of course sideloading may still remain possible in such a scenario, but it would not be mainstream enough to sustain any kind of mainstream ecosystem of apps outside of the Google Play Store. Even F-Droid supporters have been worried that clamping down on sideloading could marginalize F-Droid even further than it already is.
Don't get me wrong, I agree that trying to restrict users from installing software of their choice on their own computing device is user-hostile, but in this specific scenario, users sideloading apps banned by their government, I don't think having to open a command line to do it would significantly shrink that userbase, which is already comprised of a small minority of particularly committed people.
But all of this is moot regardless, because AFAIK this doesn't extend beyond the realm of speculation.
And giving the evidence I am inclined to believe their repetition of privacy is more of an attack to Google and Facebook more than anything else. A similar tactics used against Qualcomm. Which basically align with your view, it is all about their bottom line.
Interestingly enough I guess this also describe the difference between Steve Job's Apple and Tim Cook's Apple. Steve was all about the Top Line [1]