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 to Launch New App Usage Tracking Tools for Developers to Balance User Privacy
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
... That was my point, if that iPad's THAT old, why would there be a screenshot of it? sounds like old news, but maybe they reused an old screenshot, idk.
Your comment would have been just as effective without the snarky "paranoid much" intro.
Seems to be a decent balance that will shut up the paranoid people in BOTH camps (consumers AND devs) who keep thinking the sky is falling.
Well I can see both sides of this. As a consumer I would be ok with them know how much I use their app, but anymore than that I would be iffy.
But then some developers would argue that they need GPS coordinates and private info in order to improve their app based on usage and their users' demographics.
Which is fine if the users choose to opt in for giving away that info, and only if.
There's no misunderstanding around here. We all get that it is a device specific ID numbers etc. Which is the issue. Because a group of developers could get together and compare notes on that ID and create an aggregate profile of a user that is at least bordering on privacy violations. We've seen what has happened before when Apple trusted developers not to misuse their power. We got things like Path uploading your address book when it wasn't needed to do anything in the app. Even just a few folks doing it is bad. Better that Apple shut it down and force the developers to play nice now before something major gets out there via this kind of abuse.
Man ! Tim Cook sure is doubling down on secrecy isn't he ? Wow.
I'm pretty sure they don't want this to be secret.
Apps already have to request user permission for location access. If this rumor is true, and it probably is, this is about making it easier for developers to provide a more consistent experience for users from device to device. Don't worry, Apple is not Google. The original inclusion of the UDID was just poor thinking on Apple's part, and now they're probably trying trying to find a solution that is a fair tradeoff for both users and developers.
Speaking as a developer, I'm all for an anonymized ID. I have no desire to track users, but I have a desire that users should never have to log in more than once to server-based apps. A persistent ID would facilitate this.
Tracking needs a complete rethink
Hang on a minute technology snuck up too fast suddenly we have a debate on the level of snooping permissible, how much and by whom.
The debate seems to be about where to draw an inevitable line.
I put on the table for serious consideration that any tracking (anon or not) of any kind for any reason by anyone be entirely and completely transparently opt in only.
I say this not only because there have already clear violations of law regarding this issue whether by accident or design.
This line drawing is only taking place because technology has made it possible.
The obvious argument for allowing tracking is the benefit it affords to developers in order to create better products. Product that they are sure we want because they have the digital proof.
But step back, have we been a bit conned, how precisely does the use of the application or whatever information is gleaned actually result in a better product, (without defining 'better'). How did people used to do it in the old days.
How did Apple get it so right and everyone else so wrong after everyone else had a big head start and had Apple on the ropes in 1999. It took Apple longer but with the iPod they started a tsunami.
I don't want some two bit app developer improving his product by analysing faceless data and grinding that data through his bottom line machine. Then if one is allowed they all have to do it to.
This Orwellian future leaves no room for the lone visionary. The genius who gives people what they wanted before they knew they wanted it.
Just something to consider.
Peace.
Hang on a minute technology snuck up too fast suddenly we have a debate on the level of snooping permissible, how much and by whom.
The debate seems to be about where to draw an inevitable line.
I put on the table for serious consideration that any tracking (anon or not) of any kind for any reason by anyone be entirely and completely transparently opt in only.
I say this not only because there have already clear violations of law regarding this issue whether by accident or design.
This line drawing is only taking place because technology has made it possible.
The obvious argument for allowing tracking is the benefit it affords to developers in order to create better products. Product that they are sure we want because they have the digital proof.
But step back, have we been a bit conned, how precisely does the use of the application or whatever information is gleaned actually result in a better product, (without defining 'better'). How did people used to do it in the old days.
How did Apple get it so right and everyone else so wrong after everyone else had a big head start and had Apple on the ropes in 1999. It took Apple longer but with the iPod they started a tsunami.
I don't want some two bit app developer improving his product by analysing faceless data and grinding that data through his bottom line machine. Then if one is allowed they all have to do it to.
This Orwellian future leaves no room for the lone visionary. The genius who gives people what they wanted before they knew they wanted it.
Just something to consider.
Peace.
Except for the fact that obeying "do not track" is voluntary...guess what's really going to happen?
--Eric
The UDID (Universal DEVICE ID) has been misused in the past, sometimes out of stupidity, sometimes out of malice. Stupidity: When a games server keeps track of scores based on a DEVICE ID, so when you sell your iPad, the buyer inherits your scores. Malice: When multiple developers act together to gather information about the use of a device - being anonymized doesn't help, because I'll get targetted as the owner of that device. My name is totally irrelevant to these people anyway.
What you really want is an ID for ("the combination of this user and my application"). That gives you as a developer exactly what you need. It would also be impossible to match against other apps that I bought, so nobody could find out that I bought your app and their app. The only information that you would have about me is that I am some unknown person who uses your app.
This is a good thing. Some developers actually ban you from using their services by the UDID (like instagram) Hopefully this changes too.
Again, you "would like to know", but thats at my discretion, if I want you to have that privileged information.
If Apple can take secrecy to the Nth degree, and they do, why should I have to put up with being tracked simply because I use an apple device and purchase an app from the app store?
What I do and where I go online, or anyplace else, is my business and NO ONE ELSES, just so long as it's legal. If Apple and its developers can't handle that point of view, tough, there are other people to do business with.
What I do and where I go online, or anyplace else, is my business and NO ONE ELSES, just so long as it's legal. If Apple and its developers can't handle that point of view, tough, there are other people to do business with.
I guess they will have to go old school and target ads to websites and not to consumer profiles. I own a marketing and advertising company and I totally support the idea that any such tracking should be clearly opt in by the consumer.
----------
There are other ways to find out who your users are and what they want besides secretly tracking them.
I understand, but you should be willing to pay more than users who do allow me to collect feedback. As a developer, users who provide me with information that helps me improve the product are worth more to me; therefore I am willing to charge them less. I am perfectly willing to allow you to opt out, but please don't complain that you are being treated differently from more cooperative users.
They haven't removed the Kindle app from the store and it uses the UDID as part of the key for DRM encryption/decryption. Maybe they're only removing apps that use the UDID to track users?