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.
Snap Tells Investors Apple's Opt-In Ad Tracking Privacy Measure Presents 'Risk' to Advertiser Demand
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I have been rather surprised at how many people shrug at their lives being sold for easy profit by companies like FB. It happens so much, and the majority of people don't give a damn. Will the sheeple ever wake up? How bad does the data sellout have to get before people wake up and demand laws to protect their data.
Is this privacy update in the beta or is it waiting for the full release? Will there be a section in settings to check incase you have let someone track you?
Thanks
Thanks
Personal data is weird. It doesn’t necessarily have a lot of predictive value. (Let’s say advertisers knew you went to a convenience store every morning at a certain time and could show you an ad for a product you mind find at said store, that doesn’t mean you would have any interest in the product in question. I don’t drink alcohol, but the convenience store I go to has a whole wall of it. Seeing an alcohol ad right before going to the store wouldn’t change my behavior, since I have no interest in the product.) But the aspects of it (and of metadata) that do have predictive value are random and hard to guess. So companies collect massive data profiles of data that may or may not have predictive value and thus may or may not have monetary value. The default is to vacuum up data first and determine what has value later. I’m not sure how well any of these firms will weather the next recession, especially when investment dollars dry up.
Aww, Poor snap. Said nobody.
Anything that restrictions the wild west of data collection, sales and advertising the better.
Anything that restrictions the wild west of data collection, sales and advertising the better.
That is a good idea not only for apps, but games as well.
Those Freemium games are getting out of control.
Of course they are right, Apple supporting its users' privacy is a financial risk for some companies. They risk making less money from it. However, as an Apple customer I appreciate what Apple is doing, and I value my privacy much more than I value Snap's bank account or Snap's investors.
Digital advertising has been the Wild West in the last 20 years, with targeted advertising growing exponentially as privacy regulation trailed far behind. Now the laws are catching up and the ad traffickers are whining about their sweet revenue streams being threatened.
We've seen a proliferation of “free” advertising-supported products and services mainly because people were not aware of what information they were giving up in exchange. Now the veil is being lifted, and those who have been profiting from the capture and sale of people's data are the only ones crying foul.
Create products and services people are willing to pay for, and the problem will be solved.
We've seen a proliferation of “free” advertising-supported products and services mainly because people were not aware of what information they were giving up in exchange. Now the veil is being lifted, and those who have been profiting from the capture and sale of people's data are the only ones crying foul.
Create products and services people are willing to pay for, and the problem will be solved.
You missed the point. I have no issue with advertising but their ad revenue is grossly inflated from abusing user privacy. These companies have been making obscene amounts of money by charging a premium for access to user data that they shouldn't have in the first place. The weak security is Apple (and others) allowing them access to this data.
I want to believe you, but the number of users on here who throw a fit every time a developer has to switch to a subscription model is insane.
People will be upset they have to pay, but infuriated that they’ve been lied to into ever thinking the product/service was ever really free.
Yes, I agree, but playing devil’s advocate for a bit, the freemium game companies and social media networks would (truthfully) tell you that subscription models would result in losing most of their users. It seems that the optimum monthly price for Facebook for most users would be so low that the credit card processing fees would eat all of the subscription fees. It seems that even most active Facebook users would only pay less than a dollar. In order to move away from ads, we’d probably need subscription bundles of multiple social networking firms, similar to what Apple Arcade does for games. But it’s not obvious who would set up the bundles, as the bundles would have to cross ownership lines, so companies would likely have to be part of bundles that include direct competitors.
Yes! It's finally happening: we got those data stealing bastards on their knees. Now, to make DuckDuckGo the default search engine on all Apple products.
People on here got mad when a dev started charging $3 a year for a package tracker and said they got no value out of it. $3 A YEAR.
This exactly. Don't like the 'cost' of a free app and don't want the 'cost' of a subscription but want to use the app..
No one is banning advertising. Just tracking. Show me all the ads you want based on 1st party content. But no one deserves my 3rd party tracking.
I suspect it will happen when it hits peoples wallets, like insurance premiums that suddenly go up based on "additional data".
Ads are not the problem though. It's the targeting of those ads. I'm fine with ads being used as a primary business model but as Facebook has already stated, generic ads have considerably less revenue.
I suspect facebook is a liar/making misleading statements. You dont have to run generic ads, you have first party data which can customize the ad. Further non-3rd party tracked ads are cheaper because there is tracked ads. Eliminate tracked ads, the value of non-tracked ads goes up.
It’s the targeting that most people have a problem with, not the idea of advertising in general. Example: If you get the Seattle Times delivered to your door, should the owner of the paper be allowed to know what you are doing in your home while you are reading it, or afterward? Obviously not. So then why are these apps able to see your behavior after you close out of their app?
This is not merely a question of whether advertising is good or bad. It’s the level of, and persistence of invasive tracking that is in question here, particularly given the lack of transparency from app developers.
I am quite interested to see what the end result of this will be.
I suspect it won’t be as big as many think. Our carriers sell our info also. So do merchants. Anyone here pay in store as you shop (Sam’s Club)? How about use their phone number as a discount club in the checkout line?
For many here, think back to the early mobile days before targeted ads. It bothered me to no end when I would get advertisements in my email / browser / other for products that meant nothing to me. Freaking annoying. I welcomed original targeted ads. However what they do with data these days … ugh. I like what Apple is claiming. I just wonder how really effective it will be, what kind of vetting Apple does with apps, what alternative ways the companies will come up with, and many of the younger generation don’t seem to care as long as they don’t have to pay $$$.
Now how to get the carriers under control.
I suspect it won’t be as big as many think. Our carriers sell our info also. So do merchants. Anyone here pay in store as you shop (Sam’s Club)? How about use their phone number as a discount club in the checkout line?
For many here, think back to the early mobile days before targeted ads. It bothered me to no end when I would get advertisements in my email / browser / other for products that meant nothing to me. Freaking annoying. I welcomed original targeted ads. However what they do with data these days … ugh. I like what Apple is claiming. I just wonder how really effective it will be, what kind of vetting Apple does with apps, what alternative ways the companies will come up with, and many of the younger generation don’t seem to care as long as they don’t have to pay $$$.
Now how to get the carriers under control.
Last edited:
The bigger problem is that there is no analog to the traditional free updates and paid upgrade for major release model of "purchased" software in the App Store. You have 3 choices: ad-supported (bad), subscription (annoying but better), or paid (with unlimited upgrades). The paid model eliminates the developer from ever have additional opportunity to generate revenue from the product post-sale, regardless of the improvements made to the app. Unless, of course they EOL the product and offer another "upgraded" product in its stead as a new paid app. I know there are some workarounds to that, but it is not easy (or east to explain to users).
I guess there is a fourth, even worse model - paid or low cost app, with adds, and with IAP. Not that there are too many of those in the App Store (/s).
and if a dev has to go subscription revenue instead of ad revenue, Apple gets a nice little boost $$
Wonder what the impact to apps will be …