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 Losing Talent to Google Amid Push to Improve Spotlight and Launch Search Engine
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I feel that it all boils down to Apple's definition of tracking - an app following you across apps and websites from other companies with the goal of creating a personalized profile. There is nothing wrong with Google tracking you when you use their service; it's an informed choice made by the user at the end of the day.
If users want choice, they are free to switch to another search engine. If they want privacy, that's what ATT is for, to give users a choice as to whether they wish to be tracked between apps or not. But there is nothing wrong with Google tracking you within their own app or service, or long as they do not try and mix that data with a third party app (or vice versa).
I don't think that Apple is lying or misleading people. The issue here is that people are coming up with their own definitions for privacy which Apple has never subscribed to, and then claiming Apple has lost its way when they don't stack up to these arbitrary definitions thereof.
We are not in conflict. Apple does not push for privacy, they just have a better privacy policy. They are starting ad business so you can see where that is going. Their iOS now skips VPN connection for their own apps.
yes they can but you can do things to fight against it. As I previously mentioned, cigarettes still being sold but with a cancer warning on the box. If people want to use Google let them but those who care about privacy should not endorse it or support it. I do not expect to see RedBull sold in Whole Foods.
Whats ATT?
There is a lot of wrong things when they track you in app or cross app. IMO it should be illegal business just like gambling is illegal in many states. That being said, since it is legal , then its at the user's choice but it should be clear and upfront not burried in a 576 page ToA in 7pt font pdf book.
Double speak. Apple definitely show them selves as the "privacy" company and the anti-google tracking one. Its not true. They have access to your icloud, circumvent vpn , and starting an ad business.
ATT is app tracking transparency. Basically that prompt in apps asking you if you would like to be tracked or not.
I think it's worth clarifying how Apple's ad business works (based on my understanding).
Apple uses the following data to serve you ads in the App Store.
1) Apple ID account info
2) App Store downloads, browsing and in-app purchase activity
3) Apple device information
Apple does not
1) Send user data to third-parties (data brokers etc.)
2) Apple does not buy or use data from third-parties.
3) Use Apple Pay, Health, or HomeKit data for ads.
You are able to opt out of personalised ads in the settings app, but not out of ads altogether.
So far, Apple appears to be using only first-party data (ie: data collected from Apple-owned apps) to segment users and deliver ads. No data is mixed with third parties. This is in contrast with how tracking works with Google or Facebook, and is what ATT is designed to combat. Apple cannot and will not stop these apps from tracking you within those apps, but they can work in prevent different apps from pooling their data together to build a more comprehensive profile of you (and only if they are all from different developers).
Your first link doesn't seem to work for me. And whether Apple has access to my iCloud data, or whether their apps circumvent VPN is irrelevant (for now) because none of that data is used for App Store ads.
I am still of the opinion that what Apple is doing with their ads business is fundamentally very different from what Facebook is doing, and it's not fair to conflate all ad businesses together. Ads make up only a very small portion of Apple's total revenue. Rather than claim that Apple is stupid for squandering their good will for a minor payday in the form of ads, it makes more sense to think about just why Apple might want to take such a risk in the first place (if it is indeed as stupid as some people say).
It was increasingly clear that Apple felt compelled to step in because lawmakers were clearly not going to go anything about Facebook tracking.
I can only conclude that Apple's foray into ads is driven less by a desire to boost their quarterly earnings (though more money is always good), and more because Apple sees that they are in a unique position to offer ads in a way that is neither obtrusive, or violates its privacy culture (i.e. no personalised profiles being created with the intent of delivering ads or changing behavior). Such a product stands to be a win for both advertisers (who can get in front of users) and users (who receive relevant app suggestions).
This also serves to strengthen the vitality and the viability of the App Store. But bottom line is - Just as with Apple Maps and Siri, Apple wants to make the point that there is a way for ads and user privacy to co-exist, contrary to what people claim about needing to give up all their user data just to be able to benefit from said services.
Yes, users are free to switch search engines but by Apple making Google the default, they are essentially endorsing use of Google search and making a lot of money off of Google's privacy, tracking activities which Apple has claimed to be opposed to.
Apple could've made a very bold statement against Google's privacy and tracking activities by going with a more privacy-friendly search engine as the default.
The definition of endorse it to: “declare one's public approval or support of:”. That’s like saying the NFL endorses Coke because Coke runs halftime ads…the idea is ludicrous.
As long as apple allows access to goggle this will happen.
That’s not a bold statement. That’s internet meme at this point masquerading as criticism for criticisms sake.
Which is why I qualified it a bit by saying essentially.
Apple giving up billions of dollars to not make Google the default search because of their "undesirable" privacy and tracking activities would absolutely be a bold statement. A far bolder statement than what they do now.
It’s not endorse nor is essentially endorsed. The fact of the matter is google pays apple to make google the default search engine when an iPhone is setup that a user can change, if desired. Neither company makes a public statement about it.
It’s not a bold statement unless apple blocks all google traffic. Otherwise it’s a meaningless gesture to the masses and an inconvenience to many that want google as the default, that would only mean something to something to someone criticizing apple for this.
When has Apple ever said that they were opposed to Google’s tracking, especially in search? This sounds like a misrepresentation of Apple’s stance of privacy, which is what I have been trying to highlight for quite some time now.
The link is the ad where apple says whats on your iphone stays on your iphone.
You are saying that Apple has a better privacy policy than Google we can all agree on that, but people who seek privacy do not want to be tracked just like when the internet was in the late 90s. Apple still does tracking. Apple is in the middle between privacy and horrific Google/Facebook tracking. Its better, not private necessarly.
Actually you are wrong. When a company chooses a business partner this also means agree to their business behaviours. For example, I do not see a way to visit the PETA site and find a fur coat ad on it.
A huge reason why the WWE(wrestling company) toned down their in ring action from being bloody and the vulgar language is because advertisers especially ones that target kids do not want their brand to be associated with such actions. Today this wrestling company has Snickers and Nestle PureLife as advertisers. No way they will still advertise with them and blood is all over the screen.
I agree. Again privacy conscience companies does this like Proton and FSF organization. They publicly shame Google and Facebook.
There is a confusion here .
Apple claim to be a "privacy" option. Its not. They are a better option. People who seek privacy want no tracking or access to their data (which Apple does on iCloud). For example ProtonMail has zero knowledge storage, they can not unlock your account and see whats in it. They also do 0 tracking. that is privacy.
Apple stores you icloud data, can access it, will give it to any government, and also tracks you on their app store.
See the issue here?
Which is basically what iCloud CSAM scanning was intended to address (I believe it was meant to be introduced in tandem with encrypted iCloud storage), but then the people here were also vehemently opposed to it.
I don't think you will find a cloud storage option that can guarantee zero tracking (they will have to scan for child porn in the very least), and honestly, even companies like your aforementioned Protonmail are likely operating largely on trust. You really have no way of being certain that they are not tracking you in any manner beyond taking their word at face value.
At the end of the day, what this all boils down to, I feel, is trust. That while yes, Apple has access to all this data of mine, they will not misuse it in the manner that Facebook and Google do. And that's really what users buy from Apple. Trust, and not specs.
“What happens in the iPhone stays in the iPhone”, is a slogan. And apple aspersers took this as a literal statement of fact to criticize apple. It is Not a statement of absolute fact. An iPhone without any internal tracking whatsoever is not customer experience Apple wants. Which begs the point in your cell phone you are still being tracked by the phone companies towers. If you are the type that doesn’t want to be tracked by your cell phone whatsoever, even though, it’s to make for a better customer experience, this isn’t your platform. You won’t find a cell phone made that has no, as in zero, tracking.
I’m correct. As long as you can choose google as a default with or without $$$, apple is agreeing to googles behaviors, which is the point you are making. Apples only way to make a stance is to block google, somehow, from the apple platform. Which is a ludicrous idea. It’s possible that businesses engage with Ken another and still can be critical of each other.
An email service is different than a tech, lifestyle company such as apple. You keep saying the word “zero”, it’s not all or nothing. Plus, you are believing Proton mails claim of “0” tracking.
Yes, the issue is CSAM. And it’s a reasonable guess that Proton mail is scanning for it also.
Last edited:
It would absolutely be a bold statement given the money involved. Blocking Google completely would add to that but ending the search default contract would be hugely significant given how much money Apple would be giving up to take a stand against Google's privacy/tracking activities.
There have been a variety of articles over the years about Apple/Cook criticizing Google and others for their privacy/tracking activities. Below are a few.
https://www.businessinsider.com/apple-ceo-tim-cook-privacy-progress-false-tradeoff-2019-11
https://time.com/5433499/tim-cook-apple-data-privacy/
https://www.inc.com/business-insider/tim-cook-criticizes-privacy-policies.html
One way or another, Apple has criticized Google's business practices yet chooses to continue to make significant money off those business practices.
It won't make that type of a statement. Assuming Apple stopped accepting payments and offered an option on setup, imo, google would still be picked as the default. Apple might as just accept the $$$ and let people change the default if they want. The statement that would be a big statement, is if Apple blocked googles services on it's platform across the board.
Yes, and there is nothing wrong that. Google would still do the same thing if no money changes hands and Apple would still criticize. People make more out of this then there really is. But of course, YMMV.
Edit: Schiller deactivated his twitter account. Apple should ban the twitter app now as the it would a hugely bold statement for Apple to make?
Last edited:
Apple doesn't make anywhere near the money from Twitter that they do from Google so banning Twitter would be much less of a statement than removing Google as the default.
A big part of the boldness of the statement is how much Apple would be giving up ($15+ billion) to take a stand against Google's privacy/tracking activities. Saying they oppose something is one thing but saying they oppose something and are willing to give up that much money to show just how much they oppose it would be a much bolder statement.
There’s all sorts of bold statements for apple to make. Thankfully rational heads prevail and apple is not cutting off its nose to spite its face because some internet posters think that apple should make a bold stand. Ymmv.
Vote with your $$$ is my mantra.
Some programmer has to give his input on this, and yes it boils down to trust but trust has many levels. For example, Apple icloud can be seen by any Apple employee its not encrypted. On the other hand, the technology used by protonmail is end-to-end encrypted meaning they can not see whats in it.
Could they lie about it? yes but I rather go with option 2 over option 1. Plus they have audit and use FOSS software I think so that better option.
Think of it like this, which bank will you trust more. The bank that gives you a key to your safe and a backup for himself or the bank that has only 1 key to the safe and you have it?
Good mantra but companies could push towards a better cause and fix the market by themselves. We have seen Apple do this with reducing packaging size to reduce carbon footprint and using renewable energy. I am sure the average consumer doesn't go into the supermarket and picks up brands that only use renewable energy. Vote with your dollar, yes, but corporates can do more on their own. In the end its their choice though just don't be a hyprocrite to claim something that you are not.
IMO, Apple isn't hypocritical. Not yet being there 100%, as nobody is there 100%, doesn't mean they are hypocritical. Baby steps to get to the goal.
Wasn’t there a case recently where a user participating in illegal activity had their protonmail contents provided to Swiss authorities?
They are not there yet and I do not believe they want to go there. They want to hold a middle ground between Google/FB total exposure and zero-knolwedge, end-to-end encrypted, no logging services like ProtonMail or Skiff.com.
Its confusing to read Apple terms on what is encrypted , what is not, what is logged, what is not. Tos;DR gave Apple ToS a grade E which is the grade of Google and Facebook. Brave and ProtonMail got Grade B and Duckduckgo got grade A.
1) It was the law , they had to do it. Its also the law of the most privacy friendly which is Switzerland. They can't have their HQ in Mars. There is nothing they can do about it.
2) I believe logging the user was specifically made by the Swiss government to track that specific individual. Due to Proton technology they can only give out IP, time-stamps, and maybe device. The actual content of the messages was not provided.
More to read if you want to get into it:
ProtonMail logged IP address of French activist after order by Swiss authorities | TechCrunch
ProtonMail, a hosted email service with a focus on end-to-end encrypted communications, has been facing criticism after a police report showed that French
techcrunch.com
Important clarifications regarding arrest of climate activist | Proton
We would like to provide important clarifications regarding the case of the climate activist who was arrested by French police.
proton.me
One could argue that you can setup up your own server at home and install FOSS software on it which is more "secure" and no logging but then you have to keep up with secuirty patches, DDOS attacks, maintaining the server, and all the updates which is in all honesty is too much inconvenience , time waster, money waster, and people lack the know how. Its much easier to go with the free protonmail account.It gets you 95-99% there.
Can't really believe everything on the internet. https://www.wired.com/story/duckduckgo-microsoft-twitter-ft-bush-assassination-whatsapp/
yeah you are right but still much better option than Google or FB or even Apple. If you want absolute zero being invisible on the internet your best choice is probably Tor browser without logging in any accounts.
well depends on your use case. If you want to be anonymous maybe you should not get a smartphone. Maybe its ok that you are not anonymous but do not want someone to track you, read your emails, or have their employee look at your photos stored in their cloud. Different strokes for different folks. I use Twitter and fully aware they have my phone number and I post my tweets publicly for everyone to read. Its the stuff that you are not sure if its collected, stored, and shared that worries me (like my hdd content).
Sometimes you want to be anonymous but not all times. Like if you are a whistleblower , you can have a smartphone, but whatever you are reporting you maybe want to use Linux on a used laptop connected via Tor browser to make that whistleblow .