The problem is Apple allows itself to do things in its own apps that it won't allow 3rd party apps to do. To that point, Tile has a good argument. Apple should have to play by their own rules for their apps too. There is an increasing trend of Apple taking over a segment by changing/limiting their rules, but not abiding by it themselves in the name of privacy (as if we should just trust them to always be perfect in their privacy intentions). For example, parental control apps being effectively gutted, Tile and location tracking, etc...
I guess it depends on whose perspective you look at matters from.
From the developer’s POV, it makes sense that they would want more freedom in how their products are allowed to work.
From the consumer’s perspective, I agree that everything should be disabled and opt-in by default. Simply because I often have no idea what the app is doing behind my back, so I have to rely on Apple to play enforcer for me.
And as far as Apple goes, it’s Apple first, consumers a close second, and developers a somewhat distant third, as it should be, considering that we users are the primary consumers, not developers.
If anything, I won’t be surprised if this attention was brought to Apple’s attention from user feedback about how their iPhones were experiencing poor battery life or bluetooth functionality, which in turn led Apple to investigate the matter further and conclude that they had a better way of enabling this sort of experience for the end user.
So if you want to do something new, you should have to create your own device? Under your argument, why should any apps be allowed at all? Why don't we go back to the original days of the iPhone where everything was 100% Apple? Why should we trust Apple and not third party app developers? Apple still controls the OS and isn't handing over any keys to competitors. But at some point, they need to play by the rules they set for their own playground. Non-essential apps (like Tile/Apple Tag) should have the same level of access.
Because from Apple’s perspective, it’s easier for Apple to police themselves than third parties. I believe Apple when they say that they have no interest in monetising my data and they have enough riding on that reputation they have so painstakingly built up over the years that it would be foolish to give it all up for whatever limited revenue or benefit can be had from selling my user data.
Or to put it another way, Apple has no incentive to.
Just look at how Tile works. I need to create an account before I can use the app, which then records my location dozens, maybe hundreds of times a day and sends that information to their cloud service. Going by how their Bluetooth tracker works, there should be no need for any of this, yet it’s there.
This is precisely the sort of rogue behaviour Apple set out to quash with their improved privacy settings. Meanwhile, Apple has come up with their own Bluetooth implementation which anonymises the users and makes it impossible to identify individuals even if the data gets leaked out, which is superior to what Tile has to offer (and will likely ever offer).
Perhaps if this was a more benign company in the news, I might be more sympathetic to their plight, but when the company accusing Apple is no angel themselves, I can only smirk and go “If Apple is giving you so much grief, than it’s evidence that users’ privacy is being enforced.”
And this is precisely what I pay Apple to do. Fight the battles that no one else can.
