Apple Responds to Safari 11 Criticism From Advertising Groups: 'People Have a Right to Privacy'

[Left0verture]

“Apple's unilateral and heavy-handed approach is bad for consumer choice and bad for the ad-supported online content and services consumers love," reads the letter. "Blocking cookies in this manner will drive a wedge between brands and their customers, and it will make advertising more generic and less timely and useful.”

Translation: “boo hoo! Apple is impacting our cash flow and we don’t like it.” I say Bravo Apple. I support their stance on privacy - be it from advertising or three letter government agencies.

 

[hortod1]

“I really love this ad supported content all over my browser”

SAID NO ONE EVER

 

[Kabeyun]

Google is doing the exact same thing with Chrome where they're whitelisting their own ads and attacking competitors ads by not allowing them to autoplay in future versions of Chrome.

Please explain how blocking browser history tracking and whitelisting an ad subset are "the exact same thing." Google is not blocking knowledge of your web browsing habits.

 

[BlankSlate]

I love Apple for this. Thank you !!! Another reason to stick with Apples ecosystem.

 

[miknos]

Apple needs to make sure this turns of ALL cookies, including the ones from Google and Facebook, not just from small advertisers. Otherwise, this will just make Google and Facebook the de-facto internet advertising companies.

Difficult when most websites put those nasty widgets (Facebook like, G+, Twitter et all).

Another reason to use ad blockers.

 

[philosopherdog]

Apple is one of the only good players out there. Hope they keep it up. Ruffling the feathers of this criminals means they're on the right track.

 

[geoff5093]

LMAO who the **** loves ads? I certainly don't like to "consume"them.

I think their argument is people prefer ads relevant to them, i.e. tech products for tech lovers, rather than ads for shampoo or birth control pills.

 

[DemonBob]

I think their argument is people prefer ads relevant to them, i.e. tech products for tech lovers, rather than ads for shampoo or birth control pills.

The thing is, most of the ad's it shows me are of things I have already researched and in most cases bought. Why would I want to continue seeing ad's for that? Showing me random stuff might peak my interest if i see something I like.

 

[Falhófnir]

Apple are unequivocally right on this. You can't even really make the counter argument of public safety like with encryption etc, it's all about profitability from invasive advertising without giving anyone an easy way of saying 'no'.

 

[RogerWilco]

On the surface this seems like a customer-friendly stance by Apple, after all who wants to be tracked by anonymous "services"? It's also important to recognize that Apple decided to make this feature invisible to iOS users, and its inner workings are opaque. Nothing prevents a future "deal" with advertising interests that would alter the way this feature operates, perhaps significantly.

 

[Strelok]

Right. Apple cares about your privacy, so they say, but there is no preference to stop Apple from collecting our data and transmit it to their server (think Differential Privacy).

Another thing. The 'Share Mac Analytics' preference (a checkbox) on the Security & Privacy preference panel is re-enabled in all Developer Previews after you change this setting. Even their 'About Analytics and Privacy' says: "With your permission" and "If you agree to send Mac Analytics information to Apple" but all the collected data will be transmitted. Without you being able to even opt-out. Sure. I know that this is "normal" for a Beta, but then this preference and the about text should be disabled / changed accordantly.

Also. If they really cared, then this should be an opt-in feature. Not an opt-out feature. And their source code for their Differential Privacy should be open source so that everyone can see what they do. But nope....

But then they introduce a new feature, that hampers other companies. No props for Apple, as they have you grouped you into their Differential Privacy group and nobody knows for what and who they share your data with.

p.s. Any data on your computer is yours and you should have a say in what and who can collect it. That's what a company should do when they care about your privacy. Be transparent. And 100%

It’s a beta and they are giving you access to it early to test it out. When this becomes an issue in a release, let me know.

 

[NoNothing]

This is nothing more than Apple's way of exerting their large user base against their competitors under the guise of increased privacy. Don't be fooled.

Apple does not sell advertisements. They buy them.

 

[jerry333]

Good for Apple. Seeing an ad already puts me in the "I don't think I'll purchase this" column.

 

[BornAgainMac]

What is the big deal? Safari is only on Macs and I thought Macs was a tiny percentage of the browser market share on desktop operating systems? Not all Mac users use Safari. And the user can turn it off or use another browser.

 

[Tonewheel]

If a trade or marketing organization says that something is bad for consumers...it isn't. No different than lobbyist scum.

 

[BWhaler]

This is one of the main reasons I remain an Apple customer. And as these device contain more and more health, financial and family data, the more important this protection of my privacy will drive my purchasing behavior.

 

[saudade]

I like my privacy. Thanks.

xxx ?

 

[boswald]

Apple, please don’t buckle to their shifty negotiations and urge congressional legislators to refuse lobbyist bribes. Advertisers are nothing more than malware masqueraded as deals, wrapped in a suit.

 

[Rob_2811]

Good for Apple. Seeing an ad already puts me in the "I don't think I'll purchase this" column.

Me too. Particularly these ..

 

[v3rlon]

Great job Apple! This is one of the major reasons I am all in on Apple.
I like my privacy. I miss that more than I ever cared for that silly headphone jack.
It is things like this that make me inclined to pay that little bit extra for the Apple ecosystem. Okay, sometimes more than a little bit.

In other news, mercury and arsenic producers also wrote an open letter to Apple criticizing them for their use of environmentally friendly materials in making their products.

"Removing our poison from their manufacturing process raises prices and hurts consumer choice. There are already too many people on the planet, and consumers need to be free to kill off future generations while remaining free from prosecution."

And virus writers are angry about Apple's security features and Walled Garden. "Consumer need to be free to make their own choices while surfing sketchy web sites and opening emails."

Yeah.
I am with Apple on this.

 

[DailySlow]

This whining from the ad pumper coalition???
You've got to be kidding me.

"In the open letter, signed by the Data and Marketing Association and the Network Advertising Initiative, among others, the collective "digital advertising community" said it is "deeply concerned" because the update "overrides and replaces existing user-controlled cookie preferences" before going on to suggest that customers prefer targeted ads.

"Apple's unilateral and heavy-handed approach is (as bad as OUR heavy-handed approach) bad for consumer choice and bad for the ad-supported online content and services consumers love," reads the letter. "Blocking cookies in this manner will drive a wedge between brands and their customers, and it will make advertising more generic and less timely and useful."

 

[AdonisSMU]

I'd be more impressed if Apple stopped accepting $3B/year secretly from Google for allowing them to be the default search engine on iOS.

It's not a secret now is it?
[doublepost=1505572130][/doublepost]

"customers prefer targeted ads" <---- You've got to be kidding me. They actually said that

TBQH, I actually prefer ads that are relevant to me....ie Targeted ads. I always get angry when I see an ad that has no relevance to me at all. Like I can be bombarded about MSFT surface and Galaxy whatever products that I don't want without targeted ads. Targeted ads bombard me with stuff l want like Apple products, music, etc... If you're a male and you have to view ads do you really want to see products that are specifically designed for women without targeted advertisements.

 

[Wowereit]

Its a shame Apples commitment to user privacy didn't extend to them not accepting billions from Google for default search status on iOS. Yet again with Apple $ >>> anything else.

Option A:
Get 3 Billion a year and use the preferred search engine of most of your customers.

Option B:
Don't get 3 Billion a year and use something most customers don't want to use.

Yeah, stupid Apple. Totally stupid.

 

[Barry Marshall]

I wouldn't mind so much if advertisers paid me to view their ads but if you think "customers prefer targeted ads" then your snorting way too much coke and coming to work with a hang over.

 

[v3rlon]

It's not a secret now is it?

Someone has to be the default search engine. People kind of expect Google. Might as well collect the $3 Billion.

I keep trying to quit Google, but found the alternatives lacking.
Then again, reading this reminded me to try duckduckgo again, and it seems improved.