Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Really? Employee suicide is "not some major issue"? :confused:

Don't worry they installed nets on the building to catch the falling people. I'm sure it will be as effective as the membrane installed on the butterfly keyboard.
[doublepost=1559038110][/doublepost]
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

Yep let's just stick to the stuff they admit to doing, like selling your Apple News reading history.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Naraxus

Attachments

  • upload_2019-5-28_7-26-58.jpeg
    upload_2019-5-28_7-26-58.jpeg
    15.1 KB · Views: 134
San Francisco has always refused to put up anti-suicide nets on the sides of the Golden Gate bridge. Death toll so far over 2,000. The suicide rate among Foxconn employees is much less than the suicide rate among US citizens, and much less than the rate at which US retail employees are murdered. And not a tenth of the victims of the Golden Gate bridge. Yet, Foxconn took action to reduce the numbers further.
San Francisco is a city, not a company. You're not even on the same page as the rest of the discussion, it's a pathetic attempt to defend Apple.

Comparing a county's suicide rate or a city's suicide rate to a company is irrelevant. If you want to make a comparison, compare the suicide rates between companies.... that is if you want to have a shred of honesty.

Also, San Francisco has been a majority Democrat city since the 1960's. You would think that with all that "love and equality" they have there, that they would put anti-suicide nets up on the bridge.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_San_Francisco

Furthermore, no company, organization, or city should have to have anti-suicide nets. They should have a culture change.

But Apple fanboys needz their phonez at any cost while trying to throw red herrings and weak analogies to an honest comparison.

I provided evidence showing that Apple is not a moral company despite their appearance of caring about privacy. Apple only cares about the bottom line (as do all successful companies). You don't become a multi-billion dollar company through moral actions....
[doublepost=1559043443][/doublepost]
The original Pixel was made in Taiwan - that was a long time ago. All current Pixel 3 phones are made in China.
Well if we want to get into the politics of who China is, the ROC or the PRC.... then by all means.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ipponrg
Y
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.

LOL, what? No, lawsuits don't get "checked for validity" before going to court. Lawsuits get filed; then they go to court. The defendants can file a motion to dismiss at that point, which the judge can rule on.
 

The Independent,

"I don't buy into the luxury good dig," says Federighi,

giving the impression he was genuinely surprised by the public attack.

No you self-righteous, self serving, incomprehensible manipulating POS.

He gave the impression of a 'dig', not an ATTACK.

A dig is poke in the ribs, an attack is punch in the face, something you deserve.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1146331
LOL, what? No, lawsuits don't get "checked for validity" before going to court. Lawsuits get filed; then they go to court. The defendants can file a motion to dismiss at that point, which the judge can rule on.

Right.. so I could sue you because you look funny.. because no checks are carried out according to you?
I don’t think your correct in that one....
 
For all the ignorant posts here stating "who cares about privacy, I have nothing to hide" I post this:

https://blog.mozilla.org/internetci...cracy_blog&utm_term=11820&utm_content=rel_esr

Although focused on the US it doesn't just apply there.

Edit: check my sig if you're still not convinced.
It's the most annoying argument ever. My ex-wife had that view until she realized that a lack of privacy can oust an affair.

Privacy matters and is a key part of being an American. Even outside of America, democracies should understand the importance of privacy. People under tyrannical governments certainly understand the importance of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: decafjava
It's the most annoying argument ever. My ex-wife had that view until she realized that a lack of privacy can oust an affair.

Privacy matters and is a key part of being an American. Even outside of America, democracies should understand the importance of privacy. People under tyrannical governments certainly understand the importance of it.
Thanks, and my argument with that article isn't to praise or blame any company in particular even if I feel Apple is better than other tech giants - I have issues with them for other reasons - that is a separate argument. That particular point stuck in my craw.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1146331
Right.. so I could sue you because you look funny.. because no checks are carried out according to you?
I don’t think your correct in that one....

You can file a lawsuit against a person or company claiming pretty much any action or lack of action by a person or company has physically or economically harmed you. A judge can dismiss the claim if he finds it frivolous or irrelevant, but that doesn’t happen that frequently. The defendant can also file a motion saying that the suit has no basis to try and force the same outcome. This happens more frequently than a judge just dismissing a claim.

In some states if you file a lawsuit and lose or have the case dismissed then you are responsible for all of the costs of that case, including court costs and the cost the defense had in preparing a defense. So, lawyer and staff fees and any costs in gathering evidence. This is supposed to reduce frivolous lawsuits.

But yes, if you want to waste a bunch of money and time you can file a lawsuit against someone because their hair color is exactly the wrong shade of brown. It will probably be dismissed immediately, you may have lot of trouble getting a lawyer -which you may or may not need depending on the state you file the lawsuit in- but the lawyers on both sides and the state will be happy to keep taking your money, then dismiss the case.
 
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.
Ah, you are right; I did not read that other user's comment. My bad.

But . . . you're point was that Apple is automatically guilty simply because the lawsuit was introduced. And my point was that neither have I come to a judgement (so I don't believe it, but I don't not believe it), but that nobody should come to a conclusion until more actually damning and conclusive evidence is introduced.

About your comment regarding the US court system . . . I don't quite agree with that. Anyone can technically file a lawsuit. Americans have that right. The lawsuit process includes the response of the accused, and then verification of the complaints filed by means of the discovery process.
 
  • Like
Reactions: apolloa
The point is more about privacy. Pichai is clouding it (IMO) by attaching to luxury.
In otherwords, can you put similar privacy in a $500 vs a $1000 smartphone?
Yes, you can.

Pichai conveniently forgets that iPhone 7 starts at $449.

Also, you can get it much cheaper if you look around.
 
Technically they can if you backup iMessage to iCloud. And they provide these messages to law enforcement all the time.

Before iMessages in iCloud, one’s messages would have been part of one’s iCloud backups, and would have been provided to Law Enforcement with an appropriate warrant.

Now, if one use iMessages in iCloud, they (Apple and Law enforcement) cannot decrypt them, and if one uses iMessages in iCloud, your iMessages are not stored as part of your iCloud backup of your device (this has the additional benefit of making your various device backups smaller).
 
Last edited:
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.
You can file a lawsuit with whatever court has jurisdiction for about anything with or without evidence. Whether it goes any further than that—which has not been decided yet—is up to the court.
[doublepost=1559056170][/doublepost]
Before iMessages in iCloud, one’s messages would have been part of one’s iCloud backups, and would have been provided to Law Enforcement with an appropriate warrant.

Now, if one use iMessages in iCloud, they (Apple and Law enforcement) cannot decrypt them, and if one uses iMessages in iCloud, your iMessages are not stored as part of your iCloud backup of your device (this has the additional benefit of making your various device backups smaller).
If you use both iCloud Backup and Messages in iCloud, the iMessage encryption keys are stored in the backup and will thus provide access to your messages if law enforcement wants to subpoena or get a warrant for both.
 
I just wished my “great product” wasn’t crippled. If I want to buy a Kindle book, that’s my right! And if I want Google maps as my default maps app, that’s my right! Apple’s biggest annoyance is that they want to control what we’re able to purchase and customize on our phones, and that’s not ok. Sure, privacy is amazing and very welcomed. But you can’t just keep calling your devices “great” when you intentionally cripple them.

Really? I thought that would require YOU building the OS to your specs.... But who am I? You don't have a RIGHT to dictate to the manufacturer what can and cannot be "default" on your device... Just like you cannot require BMW to use a Mercedes feature on their cars just because you like it over the other. Think Much?
 
I just wished my “great product” wasn’t crippled. If I want to buy a Kindle book, that’s my right!

Having looked at the U.S. Constitution, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the First through Fourth Geneva Conventions, I cannot find a reference to a right to purchase books in the Kindle store via in app purchase. However, nothing Apple does prevents you from purchasing books from the Kindle store. Apple does not even prevent this from happening, Amazon does. Apple has defined a set of rules for its ecosystem and Amazon has decided that the benefit to the consumer is not important enough to take the profit hit of pay Apple a percentage of sales via in-app purchase. Overall, this must have had very little impact on consumer purchasing behavior or Amazon would have decided to enable it.

And if I want Google maps as my default maps app, that’s my right!

Again, I cannot find that right enumerated anywhere.

Apple’s biggest annoyance is that they want to control what we’re able to purchase and customize on our phones, and that’s not ok. Sure, privacy is amazing and very welcomed. But you can’t just keep calling your devices “great” when you intentionally cripple them.

However, given that you are in the U.S., I am fairly confident that, given how important these issues are to you, nothing prevents you from purchasing devices that allow in-app purchase of books from the Kindle store and have Google Maps as the default. I think Google makes one called the Pixel, and I am pretty sure I have read about others (I do not currently own any, so I cannot say for sure).

Like any product, Apple products have trade offs between features one likes and features one does not and between features and prices. Apple is very clear about how their devices work with respect to the features you want to have and until something changes, will not let you do what you want, but nothing forces you to purchase an iPhone (or any Apple product). If these trade offs do not work for you, you are free to switch to a system that offers a better set of them for you.

Are you seriously suggesting that Apple Maps and iBooks are better than Google Maps and Kindle? Because that's objectively untrue. They're not even remotely as good.

I own several Kindles, but have not used any of them for years. I simply decided that carrying a second device with me for reading not worth it. I do read some books that I get with my prime subscription via the Kindle app on my one of iPad Pros. I tend to purchase my books using the iBooks store where I can, as I like the ability to share them with my family. So while you may like the Kindle app and store better, its advantages do not out weigh its disadvantages for me.

As for Google maps, having done experiments with friends (three people starting at the same point, one using Apple Maps, one using Google Maps and one using Wayze), my experience is that there is not a substantial enough difference to make giving up my data to Google worth using it to me. In addition, there are some features I like in Apple Maps better (e.g. noting when a merchant accepts ApplePay). Apple has spent a lot of money and effort improving Apple Maps, and I am really happy with the results. However, even before that, it was good enough that I was happy to use it rather than give Google all my data.

Your evaluation of the trade offs is clearly different, and nothing stops you from doing that evaluation on your own. At the moment it seems that you have chosen to use iOS despite these trade offs. At some point, your evaluation may change. You might decide to switch to Android, or decide that your privacy matters more than the incremental differences in data and switch to Apple Maps.

I have no problem with Apple deciding to allow a switch of the default mapping app, as long as it does not take any resources from development of features I want more, nor does anything that makes my user experience worse.
 
Ah, you are right; I did not read that other user's comment. My bad.

But . . . you're point was that Apple is automatically guilty simply because the lawsuit was introduced. And my point was that neither have I come to a judgement (so I don't believe it, but I don't not believe it), but that nobody should come to a conclusion until more actually damning and conclusive evidence is introduced.

About your comment regarding the US court system . . . I don't quite agree with that. Anyone can technically file a lawsuit. Americans have that right. The lawsuit process includes the response of the accused, and then verification of the complaints filed by means of the discovery process.

You can file a lawsuit with whatever court has jurisdiction for about anything with or without evidence. Whether it goes any further than that—which has not been decided yet—is up to the court.
[doublepost=1559056170][/doublepost]
If you use both iCloud Backup and Messages in iCloud, the iMessage encryption keys are stored in the backup and will thus provide access to your messages if law enforcement wants to subpoena or get a warrant for both.

Are you sure? I mean that does sound utterly ridiculous, that any case can be brought to court for anything with or without any evidence?
Seems like an awful waste of time and money. I mean surely their must be some sort of check an actual law has been broken first right?

I based my opinion on the fact that the case would of had to of been checked for its validity before going to court, that it would have been checked valid evidence was present. But you guys seem to imply that’s not how the US court systems work..?
 
Are you sure? I mean that does sound utterly ridiculous, that any case can be brought to court for anything with or without any evidence?
Seems like an awful waste of time and money. I mean surely their must be some sort of check an actual law has been broken first right?

I based my opinion on the fact that the case would of had to of been checked for its validity before going to court, that it would have been checked valid evidence was present. But you guys seem to imply that’s not how the US court systems work..?
You can basically file a lawsuit written yourself on a used napkin accusing someone of a tort violation as long as it's in the correct jurisdiction and you're seeking some legal remedy. The court will decide later whether it's worth hearing. There's no "check" before that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: apolloa
DuckDuckGo founder has said that Google can be profitable without tracking but they opt for the maximum profit means.

I have no problem if they use anonymous data, but to track me and have profile specific of me and keep my data stored indefinitely is not ethical. We all used the free web but we thought they made their money by presenting ads(like TV) not via privacy breach. They at least could give a paid non-tracking encrypted option.

We have to praise Apple for their higher ethical behaviours and I am happy to pay the extra $ for this service.
 
You can basically file a lawsuit written yourself on a used napkin accusing someone of a tort violation as long as it's in the correct jurisdiction and you're seeking some legal remedy. The court will decide later whether it's worth hearing. There's no "check" before that.

So do they consider that going to court still? If the court decides if the case is worth hearing?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.