In their guidelines Apple has said this is not allowed. If a user declines tracking the developer cannot hobble any of the app’s features.
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.
Mobile Ad Companies Form 'Post-IDFA Alliance' to Navigate Upcoming App Tracking Transparency Changes
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
In their guidelines Apple has said this is not allowed. If a user declines tracking the developer cannot hobble any of the app’s features.
I thought it was basic writing etiquette to write the full name initially, followed by the acronym (IDFA, in this case) in parentheses.
If that's the case, and Apple cares about privacy and also cares about their developers making money, then they need to reduce their cut. It seems quite difficult, maybe impossible to have it both ways.
When a company expects the majority of its "customers" to reject their product when given a choice, it should be a sign to them that they're doing something wrong.
On a personal level, if I had to suffer ads, I'd actually be fine choosing a category of ads for things that interest me.
1) safe for work/family friendly
2) 30-45
3) family focus (husband/wife+ young kids)
4) active lifestyle (outdoors)
5) frugal tastes
A sibling of mine would likely prefer
1) NSFW
2) 20-30
3) bachelor/ette
4) experiential (wine tasting, cirque du soleil, etc)
5) expensive tastes
I would be fine with generally categorized ads. What I don't like is companies trying to guess all aspects of my family's demographics based on sneaky tracking, then try to hide said tracking, when all they'd have to do is just ask. For Pete's sake. A former business partner was like that. I had immigration papers he wanted to "confirm". Inside of that were sealed financial documents. He unsealed them and tried to look at them while pretending not to, then botched the re-sealing job, then lied about the whole thing despite being caught on the security camera. All he had to do was ask and I'd have told him.
Just like Facebook, I dumped the business partner. Years too late but not a moment too soon.
swingerofbirch
macrumors 68040
Does anyone else feel more mad at Apple with these changes by learning that first Apple gave hard-coded UDIDs to developer/ad networks and then later the IDFAs?
They're being applauded/attacked for notifying customers now.
But why did they do it to begin with? It's not like cookies which had a purpose predating ads on the Internet.
They're being applauded/attacked for notifying customers now.
But why did they do it to begin with? It's not like cookies which had a purpose predating ads on the Internet.
Life is full of compromises is it not? You (the app developer) can simply as me to accept ads that you think I might like....AND, let me see and approve what you are doing with my data/information.
What I ended up doing years ago is to turn off the load images setting in email. There are a few times where it messes up images you want to see but generally helps with tracking transparent gifs.
If the only way an app can survive is to secretly do things that the user would not allow if he or she knew about it (because people are also not willing to pay up-front or via subscription), then perhaps the app shouldn’t survive.
Apple has made it clear that app functionality and features cannot be gated or incentivized by opt-in status. That means they can't give you free coins for opting in, nor can they give you more if you're opted in vs not. This means some apps will have an incredible financial burden for their first-party data (hosting, development, etc.) with no way of clawing it back. Most users do not and will not pay for an app subscription for a calculator app (for example) that's better than the iOS one. Some do, most don't. Say goodbye to your favourite calculator app.
Why does any ad tracking have to be evil? Why does an honest company like Rovio, who earns money from ads, and doesn't look for or share any personal data (just anonymized LTV data, and few other basic things that can't be traced to individuals) to maximize their ad yield get lumped in with Google and Facebook, who suck up everything they can?
There is no middle ground with Apple's solution.
You completely miss the point. If what Rovio is doing is so unobjectionable, then forcing them to tell people about it and asking customers to opt in shouldn’t be a problem. If, after Rovio tells people about it, they do NOT want to opt in, then maybe Rovio’s business model is a problem.
Except that's NOT what the prompt does. There is not enough room to explain what data is used, how it is used, or how sharing it helps Rovio keep the game free. There's a reason European privacy attorneys have said Apple's ATT prompt DOES NOT constitute informed consent under GDPR (which also means European users will need a double opt in!).
Put simply, the modal as it exists is a largely uninformed binary yes/no option for users. There's simply not enough context allowed by Apple.
Facebook is doing so. Apple has not actually said whether a pre-prompt will be allowed long-term. Again, there's still a double-opt-in for GDPR legal purposes.