Apple is doing what it needs to do, just like Blackberry years before in certain other countries. Or to make it right for one (or two) person(s), should Apple have pulled out of China completely?
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.
Craig Federighi Responds to Google's Subtle 'Luxury Good' Dig About Apple Products and Privacy
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Why lie about caring about privacy and speak of it being a "fundamental human right" then?
Apple cares about selling iPhones and iCloud subscriptions, that's all.
People usually fight and die for "fundamental human rights", not just instantly roll over and say "oh well it was a nice idea but the government said no".
Apple have embarrassed themselves with their rhetoric.
You didn't answer the question? Instead replied with some over generalized remark that has nothing to do with the post at hand.
So you believe Apple has "embarrassed" themselves and I believe they are complying with the laws of a country they do business in.
One opinion against another.
If Apple truly believe what they say then they shouldn't sell iCloud subscriptions in China.
They should offer a minimal free service for the sake of not breaking data syncing etc, but regularly warn users about the laws.
They should stand by their convictions (if they were real) and say they're not prepared to charge for a service that doesn't live up to their standards.
Ok, thanks for explaining. I just disagree that Apple should cut it's nose off to spite it's face. They have to comply with the laws of the countries they do business in, and they did just that. It's not about being "two-faced".
As I said Blackberry did the same thing and was called out in a similar fashion, but in they end they wanted to do business in those countries.
Then don't use the language of "fundamental human rights" in your marketing if you're prepared to drop your principles the moment it costs you a dollar to defend them.
IMO it's shameful and offensive to people who have sacrificed a lot more than $0.99 per month.
That's where we disagree. They didn't drop their principles and they certainly shouldn't cut their nose off to spite their face. They complied with local laws.
I guess this is one of things that people will just disagree on. And their language is spot on. It's irrelevant the other nations don't see it the same way.
Ask apple who has access to the private keys.
[doublepost=1559010493][/doublepost]it's high-larious to read how many apple sucking fans there are in the world. I mean, $1500+ smartphones, $4000+ laptops, and in return you get quality issues and apple never listens to you anyway. Yet you still defend this company as if they are the next coming...
I bet you if they told you your data was safe you'd sleep at night all tucked in knowing your $1500+ iphone was well "worth it"
If you want your data private, just don't even use the internet. But that's not possible so please stop with the privacy nonsense. The backbone of the internet and all these encryption algorithms - if it's made by man, it is broken by man. Just that you won't ever know!
Ever hear of DragonFly? Google employees quit the company because of what Google was doing with China.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/sep/18/google-china-dragonfly-search-engine
Nobody said anything about hate. I've made my fair share of criticism about Apple offline and I visit this website often, so I'm hardly a stranger to reading or holding critical opinions of the company. My point is that while they may have just filed a suit, nothing is decided.
Based on your response, I think you'd be surprised at how many people file lawsuits based on what they thought was "factual 'proof'". They may think that what they have is proof, but a part of the process in lawsuits and court cases is considering the validity of the claims made. Often this is done through the discovery process, on top of deliberations, arguments, etc.
Have you read the court filing? Based on what I've read, I can't conclude that Apple did what the plaintiffs are claiming. More information (aka proof) is absolutely necessary at this point to make a judgement from my perspective (probably much more so from a court's perspective). All in all, concluding that Apple is 100% guilty right now, and especially from this case that hasn't even moved forward yet, is premature to say the least.
I guess you're one of the very few who has done that. Most of the world's preference is Android and Google Services by nearly a 10 to 1 margin. Apple is pretty much done for on the mobile side of things. All of India and soon nearly all of China will be overwhelmingly dominated by Android OS devices. Apple foolishly gave all of their market share away by charging a king's ransom for iPhones. Apple's greed for profit alone will surely be its downfall. Apple desperately needs to gain market share. Most consumers of the world care nothing about privacy or security and happily give their personal data away for free services and cheap smartphones. On the other hand, most consumers totally hate Apple for charging so much for their iPhones. Apple is the company that everyone hates while Google and Facebook are the most cherished companies by consumers and Wall Street. Apple is slowly dying and Tim Cook doesn't seem to be aware of the fact.
[doublepost=1559014085][/doublepost]
Apple is completely out of touch with the current economy. Apple is barely trying to keep its iPhone business functioning as everyone is sure their iPhone business is failing. As an Apple shareholder, it doesn't make sense to me why Apple isn't trying to grow any mobile market share and is simply handing it over to the Chinese. It appears the Chinese consumers don't want anything to do with Apple which must have come as a huge shock to Tim Cook.
Quite ironic considering Googles internal catch phrase used to be "don't be evil" (it was replaced with "highest possible standards of ethical business conduct" in it's code of conduct in 2018!). Their search engine domination grew from being the only search engine that refused to sell top search results, and refused to use banner adds with images back when downloading of a single image was slow, in other words, from not being evil.
I agree that google have lost a lot of their "don't be evil", but not convinced they are quite "every fibre is evil"!
Because Timmy is on his hand and knees to China in an effort to sell more of his crap despite his blustering about caring about user privacy...
[doublepost=1559018162][/doublepost]
Really? Employee suicide is "not some major issue"?
Of course Apple Products are luxury goods. What is the man smoking. I guess that’s simply a billionaires view.
There are sometimes over 1M people working to assemble iPhone. There are bound to be some unstable people in such a large group. Again, other issues could be at play. Manufacturing isn’t easy. Ask Elon Musk. He probably considered suicide a few times if he weren’t a billionaire and maybe even still.Because Timmy is on his hand and knees to China in an effort to sell more of his crap despite his blustering about caring about user privacy...
[doublepost=1559018162][/doublepost]
Really? Employee suicide is "not some major issue"?
Honesty and integrity mean that you can’t be that way some of the time to have that statement apply to you.
You can’t hide or deny problem(s) like that and pretend to be a shining beacon.
You mean apart from the comment I was replying to.. which I guess you didn’t read?
And as for the rest of your comment it proves my point, it will have had to have a case to get to court. We will see if the evidence is good enough to win, and why do you not believe it? Is it simply because Apple, a giant greedy corporation told you?
[doublepost=1559025573][/doublepost]
I know that they have to be reviewed and checked for validity before getting to court. Otherwise the US court system would be a total joke.
Thinking that Apple, a company that has built it’s public image on privacy, would sell customized list of users contacts online -for a few thousand of dollars- is more than ridiculous
So you can buy Kindle books from an iPhone (and any other device and have it automatically sync to your phone). And you can use Google Maps, just sometimes you need to tap twice (not always, when you go and directly open the app it’s just the usual one tap).
That’s “very consumer hostile” for you? Please.
"Federighi emphasizes Apple's commitment to privacy throughout the interview, noting that the company aims to collect as little data as possible. When it does collect data, Apple uses technologies like Differential Privacy to ensure that the data cannot be associated with any individual user."
But if you care about privacy then the claim will be "this is how t should be for all" anyway. while is a itself a form of control.
No one tell me what i do with my privacy, and no one should. because above and beyond, it's MINE.
The feeling of "the data that is collected" the buck stops there, as there is zero exception. The moment you trust anyone, that privacy is gone.
Weather Apple knows it or not, they do answer questions in relation to this stuff despite several times they never get involved with the media... Craig could have always said "shove it" (..but then it will go viral)
But if you care about privacy then the claim will be "this is how t should be for all" anyway. while is a itself a form of control.
No one tell me what i do with my privacy, and no one should. because above and beyond, it's MINE.
The feeling of "the data that is collected" the buck stops there, as there is zero exception. The moment you trust anyone, that privacy is gone.
Weather Apple knows it or not, they do answer questions in relation to this stuff despite several times they never get involved with the media... Craig could have always said "shove it" (..but then it will go viral)
Last edited:
It’s not Apple that’s preventing you from buying kindle books directly from the kindle app. It’s Amazon’s choice not to allow customers to purchase books directly from the kindle app because they don’t want to give Apple the 30% cut for in app purchases.