You can. And, as expected, you get worse suggestions as a result. Unless you're talking about not having Apple Track the apps you purchase (so you can't re-download) or the services you subscribe to (so you can't play streaming content)?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Agrees to Make 'App Tracking Transparency' Changes in Germany
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
turbineseaplane
macrumors Penryn
Really? I didn't know you could.
Where is the setting to disable all analytics on my device inside Apple first party Apps?
Is that per App or a system wide toggle?
I've never been able to find it.
It’s when you set up the device. If you disable analytics, that’s it. Done until you get another device.
You can check by going to Settings > Privacy & Security > Analytics and Improvements AND Apple Advertising
If you want Apple NOT to keep track of what you buy and the services you’re subscribed to, they don’t allow that (likely because there are few people that simply want to pay for things then not have access to those things. It would be more considered a huge bug than a desired feature).
The good news is that there’s an easy way for Apple to NOT have any data on a given user. And, that’s for that user to get rid of their AppleID. And, submit a request to have their history deleted from Apple’s servers. And, unlike the data brokers, they will collect no more data on that user unless that user voluntarily creates a new AppleID.
BaldiMac
macrumors G3
Apple’s own apps don’t track across third parties, so what are you referring to?
If you’re saying that Germany is requiring them to equate first party tracking with third party tracking then, then they are effectively requiring Apple to include an explanation to differentiate.
canadianreader
macrumors 68000
Ad companies would say that “track your activity” sounds too scary. Not recognizing that if the factual representation of what they plan to do is scary, then maybe they shouldn’t be doing it. 🙂
Last edited:
canadianreader
macrumors 68000
Sure Apple could make the wording less offensive to these companies. Personally I'm more interested in clear Allow and Deny buttons. "Ask app not to track" is vague and unconvincing.
It’s vague because there is absolutely nothing Apple can do that can prevent someone on a device using multiple different apps with ads in them from being tracked. If I signed into Facebook, then opened an app with a meta ad being displayed, they can effectively assume that’s me. Then, using a meta tracker from reddit, if they also see that I’m posting there, they can connect all I’ve done on reddit and Facebook to ensure that the ad they show me in that game is most likely to get a response from me. NONE of that requires the device’s identifier, just assumptions based on third-party trackers they have embedded in the apps. Ask not to Track provides your intent to the developer. The developer can ignore your intent, but if it’s found that they did, they could be pulled into court for it.
Further, if the person posts an image to Facebook, Meta can use that image or the meta data attached to determine where a person is without tapping into the devices location services. And now they can get ads from local businesses.
canadianreader
macrumors 68000
Unless the EU regulates their citizens privacy away. 🙂
canadianreader
macrumors 68000
I agree with you on that also Apple could prevent such apps from snooping on each others’ content by default unless it’s specifically allowed by the device owner. This is the reason I favor more open source apps that don’t collect any type of data. If Apple don’t want to protect its users then they absolutely need to do it themselves otherwise they’re the product.
With chat control alone EU have shown their true colors. People need to step up and protect their privacy by themselves instead of expecting governments or corpos to do it for them because they won't.
Deleting unnecessary apps
Using browsers instead of apps
Physical media that you own over subscriptions
Selfhost your data instead of the Cloud (someone else’s computer)
More local AI and less corporate AI
etc
ItsASpider
macrumors 6502
How exactly is this bad for protecting your privacy? Not only does this take away the trap off apps having to ask the user twice not to track, giving the user twice the opportunity to misclick, but it also means that Apple now has to be more honest about its own tracking behaviors and can no longer give itself positive language whilst app developers have to deal with Apple's negative language that it picked out for them.
That the language of the new pop up makes you think that it appears less negative than the old popup says more about Apple's original malicious intent, because clearly they don't want to associate the old language with their own apps, despite the old prompt for third parties and their own first party apps serving the same exact purpose.
This is literally a win for privacy across the board; both in keeping Apple accountable and by making the UX simpeler for users by reducing the number of privacy prompts.
Don't bother, this has been mentioned multiple times underneath articles about this topic, still they keep depicting it as some malicious thing from EU regulators...
What makes you think Apple Search Ads and Apple Ads Attributions don't share data with parties outside Apple? Because they do. Apple's ad network is just as bad as any other ad network out there for your privacy, don't fool yourself. There is a reason why the prompt you got for Apple's apps is a GDPR-compliant one while third party app developers had to both go through the "Ask app not to track"-prompt (which isn't GDPR-compliant) and then ask again with a GDPR-compliant prompt.
Last edited:
Ad companies don’t like current state because people are intentionally choosing to be tracked. As a result, the change is guaranteed to be geared to making MORE people choose to be tracked. Is wording the tracking in a way that the user feels like saying “yes” better than being offered the facts and the user saying, “no”?
Apple doesn’t have to make any changes because ATT affects only companies that are monetizing uses via third-party tracking. They’re not going to start third-party tracking, other reputable companies aren’t going to start third-party tracking, so this only affects those companies that provide data to data brokers. If you’re in favor of data brokers, that’s fine, I just didn’t expect that there would be that many folks in favor of companies tricking people into enabling tracking.
People being tricked into enabling tracking is a win for privacy!
BaldiMac
macrumors G3
Again, Apple doesn’t engage in third party tracking, so it’s a lie to say they the language favored their own apps for the exact same purpose. And even bigger lie to make up “malicious intent”.
"Significantly impacting their revenue" is good if their revenue is made by preying on people without their knowledge. Many of these developers depended on (or at least were fine with) obfuscation and opting out, and it's only because of Apple's opt in App Tracking Transparency that they're forced to be transparent about their relationship with their users.
Apple has agreed to make changes to its App Tracking Transparency feature in Germany, according to the country's competition regulator.
Since the release of iOS 14.5 in April 2021, Apple has required apps to ask for permission before tracking a user's activity across other apps and websites for personalized advertising. If a user selects the "Ask App Not to Track" option, the app is unable to access the device's advertising identifier. Apple says the feature is designed to enhance user privacy, but some advertisers have complained that it has significantly impacted their revenue.
In Germany, Apple has agreed to remove "possibly discouraging symbols and wording" from the App Tracking Transparency prompt, the regulator said. Apps will also be "given more scope to explain to users what significance personalized advertising has for their offering and their business model," and the "freedom to combine the consent request required by Apple with the consent requests required under data protection law."
Apple has four months starting on the date it is formally served with the decision to implement the changes in Germany, and it will test them with app developers first, the regulator said. The changes will apply for seven years.
Over the past few years, Apple has faced similar regulatory pressures over the App Tracking Transparency feature in other EU countries, such as France, Italy, and Poland, and from the overarching European Commission.
Apple has maintained that App Tracking Transparency protects user privacy and is compliant with competition law in Germany. Nevertheless, it agreed to make the changes, and the regulator said the proceedings have thus concluded.
Apple issued the following statement regarding the changes:
Note: Due to the political or social nature of the discussion regarding this topic, the discussion thread is located in our Political News forum. All forum members and site visitors are welcome to read and follow the thread, but posting is limited to forum members with at least 100 posts.
Article Link: Apple Agrees to Make 'App Tracking Transparency' Changes in Germany
But these seem like reasonable adjustments. I still don't know why a user would want to be tracked across apps, but I suppose that's what developers want the chance to explain, and I support that ability to explain and to leave it to the user to decide (maybe it will keep the app free from having to pay with money and they would rather pay with their data). Transparency and opting in is the main goal here.
Let's also be clear that the main underlying motivation for a lot of these tech regulations is not for consumers, but for developers. We know this because sometimes the regulation benefits the consumer, and sometimes it's borderline anti-consumer, but it always greatly benefits developers.
If Apple even tried to do anything like that, the same companies that got their governments to go against a simple, non-binding ATT would ABSOLUTELY have their government go after Apple for an actual blocking solution. No one should forget that these deep pocketed organizations have their governments in their back pocket.
ATT is for consumers which is why developers/publishers/ad companies don’t like it.
Analog Kid
macrumors G3
Add an option to allow for all apps provided by a specific developer so I can just blanket approve the Apple apps and decline everything else unless there's a good reason to allow it. Strange as it may sound, "better ads" isn't a good enough reason for me.
One of the reasons I left Android was that it seemed to favor advertisers. No matter what I tried, I couldn’t completely prevent apps from sharing information with one another. Facebook was also pre-installed on my Galaxy phone and couldn’t be fully removed because it was part of the system.
I thought Germans were very serious about privacy, but now the government wants to profit from selling citizens’ data. I fear the rest of the EU will soon follow. Developments like these are pushing me toward buying a Pixel and installing GrapheneOS.
I thought Germans were very serious about privacy, but now the government wants to profit from selling citizens’ data. I fear the rest of the EU will soon follow. Developments like these are pushing me toward buying a Pixel and installing GrapheneOS.
Germans likely are. Their ad companies… well, they’re very serious about profits and would like to see number go up.
Yes that is the courts interpretation of the argument. Now look into the motivation for this case.
You will find that advertisers (like Google and Meta) are upset that Apple is making it ever so slightly harder to track you across platforms. So they use the DMA to harass Apple.
If you want to pretend this is a win for corporate competition, I guess you can. Still doesn’t change the fact that the end goal is to reduce personal privacy though.
The Bundeskartellamt says:
When Apple asks for consent for tracking in their own apps, it has to be the same popup, then when a non-Apple App asks for consent for tracking.
Bundeskartellamt does not care about which company / ad agency actually does the tracking.
Bundeskartellamt does not care about cross-app.
Bundeskartellamt does not care about WHAT the popup says.
The popup just has to be same for Apple Apps and for non-Apple Apps.
Why? Do you think Europeans are so stupid that they'll fall for this? We've had cookie banners for years. We're conditioned to decline everything by default.
You will have to explain that one for me, please.
===
Now, some rambling:
In one thread, posters argue that users should have the choice, the right to be wrong, and the ability to decide for themselves.
In this thread, posters argue that choice and competition are bad.
Sometimes I feel like it is just a matter of always taking the most anti-European position possible...
Last edited:
The Bundeskartellamt didn’t read the popup then. 🙂 Which is par for the course for politicians, even in Germany!