Tile CEO: 'We Welcome Competition From Apple, But We Think It Needs to Be Fair'

[Teejaye]

Imagine being so afraid that your product is going to lose to Apple, that you run to Uncle Sam 😂. We all know Apple’s stance on the government and tracking (just review the San Bernardino shooter and the Facebook war) so its surprising to me that tile was upset that users had to manually allow Tile to always track them. I also dont know why Tile is complaining about how they can’t access the Find my network but they won’t abandon their own App themselves. i get that’s like asking Apple to ditch iCloud for ibm, but you can’t have both worlds. You either have your app and your own settings , or you play by apple rules.

 

[Teejaye]

It’s not so much that Apple should, but more that they don’t have to open up their “find my” network to their competitors at all.

What’s the basis for this again?

no child left behind, I believe, but for businesses

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Google servers went down for few hours and people went nuts.

Yeah, but nowadays, some percentage of the internet public is keyed to “go nuts” for anything. Because, if they go nuts 4.3 seconds before the next guy and in a remarkable enough way, they could go Viral!! (oh, and don’t forget that go nuts YouTube thumbnail!

Hawaii sinks under the waves? Go nuts.
Comedian sneezes? Go nuts.
Just took the 400th breath of the day? Go nuts.

 

[Alan Wynn]

Are you lying or simply don't understand?

I understand, do you?

Everyone opted in to the Find My network in order to use Find My iPhone.

Everyone that opts in, does so to do get additional functionality for finding their lost devices. Apple expanded the base Find My system to cover iPhones, iPads, Macintoshes, and AirPods (Pro and Regular) quite some time ago. That version only could report the last known location those devices reported via their own GPS reporting back to Apple themselves. Then Apple offered people a choice, continue to have that functionality, or get expanded functionality by joining the Find My network. Your device will anonymously report the information on devices it sees, and in return, your devices will have their location reported by other Find My network devices.

No one opted in to being used as anonymous bluetooth tracking service for their neighbors pets.

Sorry, everyone joined the network to an anonymous reporter of device locations in exchange for being able to take advantage of that giant network when and if their device was lost. If they do not want that, they need not join and can still find their iPhone with the old system, where it last reported its own location via GPS assuming it still has battery and signal. I am trying to understand how you think it is reasonable for you to benefit from the value of the network without contributing to it. I also do not understand why you think anonymously reporting device locations when your device’s radio powers up normally, is an issue.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

To continue this thought, put yourself in the shoes of a person that doesn’t have anything of value of their own. Never built anything, never sold anything, never even produced anything that others would consider valuable and/or worth purchasing. Consider that everything you have that you consider “yours” was pretty much simply provided by someone else who gave it to you with no stipulations…

I can see how that worldview would lead someone to think that “everything should be shared with whomever wants access to it”. I mean, that would have been how their life had worked so far, the world has GOT to work the same way, right?

 

[FrozenDarkness]

It’s not so much that Apple should, but more that they don’t have to open up their “find my” network to their competitors at all.

What’s the basis for this again?

Again, my point this can both make sense but also be anti-competitive. The question you should ask yourself is does this ultimately hurt innovation.

something can both logical sense and be anti-competitive, they arent mutually exclusive

 

[Abazigal]

Again, my point this can both make sense but also be anti-competitive. The question you should ask yourself is does this ultimately hurt innovation.

something can both logical sense and be anti-competitive, they arent mutually exclusive

Yes and no.

The reason why Apple (and many other companies) bother with products and features like this is because they feel that there is either money to be made, or it represents a strategic advantage which can be used to further increase their profits (eg: laying the ground for AR glasses).

This in turn is what allows me as the end user to benefit from innovations like tight integration with the Apple ecosystem. Something which nobody does better than Apple.

If a company had a novel idea, but feel that it would be too easily copied by the competition, they may simply not bother with following through with said idea if they felt that the ROI isn’t worth it in the end.

There is good in bad, just as there is bad in good.

It’s not so straightforward an answer.

 

[AppleTLDR]

How exactly are they supposed to do that?

Tile has its own tracking network that they charge for (and rightly so).

Apple has now come in with the Find My network...a forced opt-in anonymous tracking network, that everyone can use, and no one can charge for.

Apple is abusing their position to reduce a paid service to free, by using all of the devices they control in the wild, with no consent from anyone.

The staggering hypocrisy here about what they just released with 14.5 and the prompting and opt-in for users on ad tracking vs. the Find My network which everyone is automatically opted in to is astounding. I wonder how well that would work if people were prompted to allow their device to be used by other people to track things.

Apple make their money selling you devices and part of the cost of that device is the built in software. The software including the use of the network isn’t free. When you pay for an iPhone, that covers everything from research and development, marketing, packaging, assembly, shipping, inventory control, running Apple stores and countless other things. The ‘Find My’ network is free at the point of use but you absolutely have paid for it. Apple doesn’t charge for every single one of its services out of the box because it’s bundled with the device. Another example is iWork. Or stocks. The find my network in its original incarnation, is way older than Tile, dating back to the iPhone 4.

As for the staggering hypocrisy, that’s the biggest load of crap I’ve ever heard. The find my network isn’t selling your data to third parties for starters. And it doesn’t collect any data about you or store it. You aren’t able to opt out because there isn’t anything to opt out of. A totally randomised ping is sent to an AirTag and your device is simply a network relay. It happens in the background, none of your devices data is even recorded.

You do realise that Tile basically do the opposite of that? They actively collect data for marketing and tracking purposes within their app. Not from the devices themselves (other than randomised location data) but whenever you use their app. Then they sell it to third parties so you can be spammed with junk ads.

Tile don’t have to access the U1 chip within their own app, true. But there existing products continue to work much as they always have. If they want to build a product with a U1 chip they can. But if they’d rather people keep using their app, they also still have that option. Apple has made a different product to them and bought an alternative choice to market.



So in conclusion:

1. Find my isn’t free. It’s a part of the cost of the device

2. There isn’t anything to opt out from because none of your data is stored, used to track you and is totally anonymous. It’s just a network ping

3. Tile collect your data and sell it to third parties, track you between apps without your permission (prior to App Tracking Transparency)

They want all the benefits of the Apple ecosystem but still want to abuse your privacy. And all of a sudden Apple offers a more private and secure alternative with a larger network and they don’t like it? Well tough!

 

[Ghost31]

Would you have been the guy saying, “Nokia’s been around forever, no one has come up to steal market share from them and never will!” or “No one has taken down IBM PC’s, they’re bound to be a major player in the PC space forever” or “Linux isn’t and never will be the OS that mission critical servers run on, Microsoft is just far too entrenched!” It’s never a bad bet to wager that “the technology leader will change”.


What if you’re NOT into Apple’s offerings? What if you prefer the number 1 cell phone OS in the US and the world? For any company interested in THAT market, the proof is out there that the majority of people with cell phones don’t want, can’t afford or would just rather not use Apple. So, you say that no company now or in the future will ever be able to take advantage of that MASSIVE market outside the Apple ecosystem?

Not anytime soon that’s for damn sure. It’s not even on the horizon. It’s not even an idea of “hey there’s this company and so and so is making a phone”. There’s nothing. Nada. Zip.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Again, my point this can both make sense but also be anti-competitive. The question you should ask yourself is does this ultimately hurt innovation.

something can both logical sense and be anti-competitive, they arent mutually exclusive

That’s not what anticompetitive means. I mean, you can continue to use it, I guess. It’s a free country. But I don’t think you know what it means.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Not anytime soon that’s for damn sure. It’s not even on the horizon. It’s not even an idea of “hey there’s this company and so and so is making a phone”. There’s nothing. Nada. Zip.

I know you think very highly of Apple, but they’re not the God of companies. They are just another company that makes things people buy. Anyone who’s working on the next thing are keeping it as quiet as Apple did before introduction. I know you believe that only Apple is capable of doing that, but companies do it all the time.

 

[Alan Wynn]

There's a lot of lip service in the comments defending Apple.

What? People arguing that a privacy preserving device tracking network is better than one that sells your personal tracking data to third parties (or at least reserves the right to do so with no notice) is ”lip service” to what?

But tile has been replaced by a closed system Apple product in a legally dubious way.

Tile has not been replaced by anything. Apple has offered a competing product to Tile’s in a completely reasonable way. Tile could have developed a privacy preserving cross platform for doing what Apple has done, but that was not what they wanted. They chose instead to build a platform that both charges its users, and retains the right to sell its users’ data (whether they have done so is unclear, as they need not provide any notice they are doing so).

I'm not comfortable with another company doing the same and don't believe anyone should support this action just because you like the products.

You are not comfortable with another company creating a better product or at least a more privacy focused one? I am happy it has happened because I want to use the network for tracking my gear (which I hope will directly integrate with Apple’s Find My network, rather than requiring me to attach an AirTag).

There's a similar issue with 3rd party repair and right to repair.

By the “right to repair” you mean ”the right to substitute dubious third party parts for Apple Certified parts”?

Competition disappears if action like this are allowed to continue and that's anti-capitalism and anti-competitive.

I am sorry, I am unclear how Apple’s offering a product that is different and (for some people - those who care about privacy, but not about cross platform usage) superior, is anti-competitive? Apple has opened its network to third parties, but said they cannot bridge Apple data to their own network, because Apple could not guarantee privacy that way. If Tile could take the data from the Find My network and import it to their network, they would be able to sell data from that Apple is generating, expressly against Apple’s wishes. Seem like a straight forward reason prevent this bridging.

Every time I hear someone complaining that Apple creating a better version of some tiny product by some equally tiny company and bringing it to hundreds of millions of people (often for free) is anti-competitive, I shake my head in confusion. Is it your argument that once someone has an implementation of an idea that they cannot or have chosen not to patent, no one can create a similar (identical?) or superior product in the name of “competition”? How does this make sense?

If the idea is original enough to be patentable, then there is a process to protect it. If not, then one must either keep innovating expanding other services one‘s product offers, or developing new products to sell as the major players in one’s space adopt one’s features.

 

[hellosil]

Dear Tile, I don't want to pay €34,99 per year for you to send me 'free' batteries and 30 day item history.

P.S. It still hurts me you tried to sell me Tiles with non-replaceable batteries in the past (Tile Original etc).
That's when you could have won the battle.

 

[justin0712]

So, depending on whose numbers you believe, Apple commands 20-30% of the global smartphone market, and yet somehow their "unfair" competition poses an existential threat to Tile? Not buying it. The Tile CEO knows full well that publicly whining about "Apple" and "unfair" in the same sentence will generate loads of clickbait-y headlines and free publicity. He also realizes/ hopes it might encourage unwanted attention and intervention from various competition authorities around the world. Who's competing unfairly?

It is widely known that Apple users tend to spend more when it comes to apps and accessories.
I would bet money that Tiles in house data will show the majority of people using Tile probably do so using iOS. Now that AirTags are out, well, relying on Android users to carry you is a bad business model. It is not a knock on Android by any means, but based on historical data, Apple users tend to just generate more revenue on many avenues.

* a one time 29.00 purchase with no subscription and no extra app to download< a one time 29.00 purchase with a subscription and separate app to download.*

 

[G33k@Work]

Tile is an anticonsumer money grinding plans and useless piece of tech, Im so glad that Apple made AirTags.
Well done Apple 👍

 

[Unregistered 4U]

It is widely known that Apple users tend to spend more when it comes to apps and accessories.

So, Apple’s misfortune is that they lucked up created a platform that people enjoy using and feel comfortable purchasing through. Even though they’re only 20 to 30% of the market, it’s their OWN fault their customers purchase more than other mobile OS customers. If only they hadn’t been so focused on making great products, they wouldn’t be considered a target of punishment now.

Maybe that’s why other companies don’t approach Apple’s level of quality and user friendliness. They know that if your customers are valuable, people will use any means to try to get access to them. That’s way easier than trying to build your own success.

 

[1258186]

Go to Privacy -> Location Services -> Find My to opt out.

Thanks

 

[1258186]

Surface runs on Android? That's new.

The Surface Duo tablet runs on Android 10.

 

[1258186]

And bingo. So we agree, Microsoft's failure in the smartphone market was because they failed to deliver. Not the market preventing their entry.

Microsoft can’t force developers to build Windows Mobile apps. By the time they entered the market it was too late. Developers had settled on iOS and Android. Maybe if they had entered the market earlier it would have been different. Who knows. Microsoft failed to see the potential of the smartphone market.

 

[quarkysg]

Microsoft can’t force developers to build Windows Mobile apps. By the time they entered the market it was too late. Developers had settled on iOS and Android. Maybe if they had entered the market earlier it would have been different. Who knows. Microsoft failed to see the potential of the smartphone market.

Before the iPhone or Android phones, there was Windows CE phones.

 

[arobert3434]

"Tile, welcome to the club." – Third party payment apps locked out of NFC

 

[Unregistered 4U]

What could Tile have done?

Amazon partners with Tile to take on Apple AirTags

Amazon partnered with Tile and smart lock maker Level to beef up its mesh network for tracking items.

www.cnbc.com

It really shouldn’t have taken Apple announcing AirTags two years ago, but at least they’re doing something. Good thing for them that Apple let them know well in advance and then delayed the release of AirTags to give Tile time to get this partnership in place.

 

[davidjschloss]

So here's the thing—in order for Apple to have this "unfair" advantage, they had to build an Operating System from scratch (which Tile used), they had to build their own processors, they had to make the U1 chip and put it into phones, AirTag, etc., they had to build Siri and they had to build the process and servers for Find My to work.

So, this "unfair" advantage comes as a result of billions of dollars in software and hardware development over decades.

If Tile wanted to, they could have gone ahead and built their own phones, computers and OSes, but instead they've chosen to piggyback on someone else—even using that someone else's App Store for distribution of their software.

If Tile didn't get that they were making something that depended on someone else not selling a similar product, then they did terrible business planning. If they realized it, then they shouldn't be surprised if that technology made its way into the platform they're piggybacking on.

Tile is perfectly able to keep selling their own solution, if they think it's a better solution. And the market will determine if they're correct or not. They've got the whole of the Android OS market to play with after all.

But let's not say that a company is being unfair when what's really happened is that they've spent decades and massive sums of money in order to build integrated technologies that can do things like track a little key fob.

 

[deevey]

Microsoft can’t force developers to build Windows Mobile apps. By the time they entered the market it was too late. Developers had settled on iOS and Android. Maybe if they had entered the market earlier it would have been different. Who knows. Microsoft failed to see the potential of the smartphone market.

Which is a shame because the "Metro" UI was pretty unique and intuitive in comparison to Androids "knockoff UI".

What let the Windows phones down for me in the short time I used one (Nokia Lumia something around 2011/12) was the lack of decent apps, and the ones that were available at the time were buggy as all hell.

 

[quarkysg]

Which is a shame because the "Metro" UI was pretty unique and intuitive in comparison to Androids "knockoff UI".

What let the Windows phones down for me in the short time I used one (Nokia Lumia something around 2011/12) was the lack of decent apps, and the ones that were available at the time were buggy as all hell.

Well, it’s hard to provide a platform with good guidelines and tools to allow developers to write good software without jumping thru hoops, especially for power constraint mobile devices. If it’s easy we would have seen a lot of alternative platforms. It takes years of investment and hard work.