Tim Cook Threatened to Remove Uber From the App Store Over iPhone Tagging Tactics

[Radon87000]

Your argument makes absolutely no sense.

That Tim Cook is willing to personally step in shows that he does have the interests of his users in mind. At the end of the day, Uber removed the offending feature from their app and that's what matters. I am willing to wait and see if anyone at google is willing to go the distance, but I won't be holding my breath. I won't be surprised if the android uber app is somehow a worse offender in this regard.

I think the narrative here is very interesting. That people are alarmed and concerned that this could happen on ios shows how much regard people have for iOS's security. That nobody raises the red flag with regards to android goes to show that people have seemingly accepted that android is full of bugs and teeming with this sort of shenanigans, to the point that this is considered expected and normal.

No point going the distance as the company will keep finding new ways to track you. They infact already do as Uber tracks your location for 5 minutes after your ride has ended and for some people found they were being tracked for even weeks on end.

Had Tim Cook removed the app they wouldnt have dared trying again.

In short, I trust Apple to look out for me, the user, in this regard more so than Google ever will.

And yet they removed the option to track my location while I use the app and only set it to "Never" or "Always" and Apple didnt do a thing

Actually I'm confident Jobs wouldn't have done anything. But we can ARGUE that point till the cows come home. Good for cook delicately handling a situation that turned out to be a win-win for both sides.

If he had removed the app from the store, Uber wouldnt have dared to risk it again but now they will and for all we know have

So you admit the shady practices happen on android, but don't really know if they happen on iOS. It seems Apple employees figure it out and unlike android care for their customers privacy.

Uber is already tracking you if your app is on the phone. More or less on each OS doesnt make a difference. You are being tracked along with your device. The only reason I use it is because I just find their app and service better then the competition.

They were also using private APIs to pull this stunt. We dont know if that was possible on Android

 

[coffeemadmanUK]

If Uber are paying their drivers so low then I don't see it too often in their drivers. In fact more Uber drivers have told me how much they like Uber and the flexibility it gives them. I suspect I have talked to more to who it to complement a full time job elsewhere mind you.

I'm impressed beyond belief by London black cab driver's knowledge test they need to take. I am. And I feel for them that their job is being endangered to an extent.

However as a Londoner, I can't afford black cabs. Their cost is absolutely outrageous. Easily double that of the same journey in an Uber. Sitting in traffic, watching that meter still run up even though you're not moving is absolutely the reason people use Uber and this is completely OK and understandable.

I've had some tricky times with getting Uber drivers to the exact place but by God is it not worth the double cost and unknown end cost in a black cab to just get the exact place 100% of the time.

Have an issue with Uber's practices that are unlawful? I'll be there with you.
Have an issue with Uber's moral practices? I'll debate it with you.

Have an issue with Uber *just because* black cab drivers are losing work? Absolutely not. They have no "right" to exist in a monopoly in the same way no other industry does.

 

[I7guy]

No point going the distance as the company will keep finding new ways to track you. They infact already do as Uber tracks your location for 5 minutes after your ride has ended and for some people found they were being tracked for even weeks on end.

Had Tim Cook removed the app they wouldnt have dared trying again.

If that bothers you dont use the app. You agreed to the t and c when you installed used the app. And now the app meets the app guidelines so if you do t like the apps behavior that you agreed to use the android version. Cook handles the matter appropriately.

And yet they removed the option to track my location while I use the app and only set it to "Never" or "Always" and Apple didnt do a thing

This is not an Apple thing, don't make Apple responsible for apps that meet the guidelines. Don't like the behavior, vote with your dollars.

If he had removed the app from the store, Uber wouldnt have dared to risk it again but now they will and for all we know have

Jobs wouldn't have removed the app either.

Uber is already tracking you if your app is on the phone. More or less on each OS doesnt make a difference. You are being tracked along with your device. The only reason I use it is because I just find their app and service better then the competition.

They were also using private APIs to pull this stunt. We dont know if that was possible on Android

So don't use the app, I only care that it (the apps)meets developer guidelines; what it does beyond that is in your court to decide. As far as what android does, you can bet uber went as far as being g underhanded as possible in the android version..and it will never be pulled.

So let's get this straight you're criticizing Apple for not acting in a strong manner while letting android off the hook. That's some great hyperbole.

 

[wlessard]

Apple has engineers working in other locations than Cupertino. And even if Uber geofenced all known Apple premises, some testing by Apple engineers will be done off-site, eg, for testing their own mapping service. It'll take longer until Apple finds this behaviour, but sooner or later some Apple employee will stumble across it.

Not that I should care because I plan to continue using an iPhone for the foreseeable future but in any event does Google care about these kind of practices? Apple appears to be fairly diligent about reviewing apps for policy violations, I just wonder if Google is more or less stringent.

 

[jujufreeze]

Here's where I am conflicted. I love the service, even as I find some of their practices deplorable, and as long as Uber continues to operate in my country, I will never use another taxi for as long as I live.

The taxi companies really have only themselves to blame for becoming so lazy and complacent and allowing themselves to be disrupted by a better, more efficient service. The uber drivers I have encountered are way more polite, knowledgeable and have a better attitude overall compared to the taxi drivers I have come across.

How do you know your uber driver won't be the most awful driver in the world or an insect-disguised serial killer? There is no bar of entry to becoming an uber driver, when I use a taxi service at least I know the driver went through a more thorough background check and had to be semi-competent with a passable resume/ in-person interview and driving test to get the job.

 

[rhett7660]

What can I say... I love Uber!

Affordable, quick, polite, secure, convenient... as long as there is Uber, I wont take another taxi in my life. Why pay more for an inferior service? Perhaps taxis shouldnt have slept complaciently in their monopoly for so long... a better competitor came in and took their lunch. God bless the free market.

I feel the same way. The amount of time I have wasted waiting on the phone to get a taxi in my area. Horrible. Yup, I won't be taking a Taxi any time soon. I actually use both Lyft and Uber. Which ever has the closest ETA is who I go with. But I tend to lean towards Uber as a whole. I just wish this company would get their **** together, as it seems we are continuously hearing about them in the news for other things besides being a ride sharing company.

Okay talk about lack of equality! Most companies simply get their app pulled, yet Tim went crazy to avoid it. Sounds like someone owns shares of Uber.

I wouldn't be surprised if most of the company's you are referring to, receive a notice or two before the rug is pulled out. Now granted, something like what is mentioned in this article should have been dealt with pretty severely and quickly. But then again, if you are bringing a lot of money, of course they are going to be treated differently. Lets look at this like a real world situation.

I agree with another poster, if Uber would have went to Apple in an attempt to do find a way to stop the "scamming" that was going on, this whole issue would be mute.

 

[mcarling]

Uber app forces users to choose between the app knowing their location "Always" or "Never". In the latter case, the app doesn't work. Apple should require all apps (including Uber) that want to know a user's location to implement the "Only when using the app" option.

 

[ackmondual]

You know, hundreds of responses later, no one has stopped to asked the obvious question - so what exactly is Uber getting away with on Android?

You kind of covered this in your own post.... Uber is convenient, so the shady issues surrounding the company are forgiven in part or in whole. People want cheap whenever it's available, so that's why they'll go Android or a competitor instead of getting an iPhone every bit as why they'd rather hail an Uber than get a taxi.
[doublepost=1493137385][/doublepost]

Yes and no.

You have a point in that I may be biased because I like the Uber service and cannot opt to not use the same way I can choose to not use a Samsung phone.

However, the deeper reason is that in a sense, I just admire the way Uber simply muscled its way into a new market and totally disrupted the system with a new product which simply worked way better, while making the incumbents seem like complete idiots in the process. Despite the fallout.

Where have we seen this happen before? Apple under Steve Job's tenure. The way the iPhone made every smartphone before it seem like a joke. The way the iPad reinvented the tablet market. The way the MacBook Air redefined the ultra book. And all the upheavals that ensued in the market subsequently. That was fun to watch.

And to some extent, that's why I actually kinda admire Donald Trump. Because he won the elections even when it seemed like the whole world was against him. Just like how Apple has clawed its way to the top of the pecking order despite decades of critics chanting "Apple is doomed!"

I love a good underdog story, of how a new world order displaces the current world order in the greater scheme of things, even if the end result is that you create a system which may be worse than the current one. If you have seen the movie "fight club", you might know what I mean. Every revolution in history, be it technological, cultural or political, has been like this. To break the rules, you create new rules, and in turn, become part of the new status quo.

It's all just so philosophical. And wonderfully ironic when you think about it.

I just can't accord Samsung the same credit because well, simply, they haven't earned it. Not when their product philosophy is to "beat Apple" instead of making good products true to their own company ethos.

To put it succinctly, Samsung hasn't earned it.

Not to veer too far into Politics, but dems got arrogant. Unfortunately, I see this arrogance in Apple, being actually, genuinely surprised how when they released the MacBook Pro 2016, scores of Apple fans instead went to purchase 2015 and older models instead. I'd say they're also becoming more and more like the Big Brother in their 1984 super bowl ad, but Mac, Iphone, and Ipad users alike have corrected me saying they were ALWAYS like that. They just did a good job of hiding it is all.

In my ways, I find Samsung to be the underdog... Apple was on top of the world with their iPhone, but the Galaxy and Note series managed to snatch very large shares of users. Many folks who both used or never used iPhones will admit they upped the game. Which indirectly made iPhones better by forcing Apple to up their game.

I can't say Uber isn't an underdog either, but going around saying "we respectfully disagree" how we need to follow regulations in registering autonomous vehicles, how their drivers get to call the shots, but then impose prices and hours on them (so they restrict them like employees, but pay them like contractors) takes the cake. Even Samsung nor Apple are on that level.

 

[Jvanleuvan]

And that dare didnt turn out to be a good bet. Google maps wipes the floor with Apple maps in almost every part of the country

Kicking google maps out as the default map was genius! It was AWESOME for IOS users!


Before Apple kicked google out; google REFUSED to allow NAVIGATION on the IOS platform; yes the built in google based maps didn't have navigation because google wouldn't allow it. The only available navigation apps for the Iphone cost good money (I believe in the $15-$30 if I remember correctly).


After Apple kicked them out now we have Both the built in apple maps (decent) and a free version of Google maps with NAVIGATION (great)


how is this a loose for the customer? went from NO free navigation to 2 (and others now) and we now have access to the best one: google.

 

[StonewallBrown]

LOL that's easy to say when you're not affected dude.

It's a pathetically childish and illegal way to protest and it doesn't gain them any support from the general public but if anything has the opposite effect.

If they want to protest, sure, go and protest. WHy not do it in a legal way which doesn't negatively affect innocent bystanders? WHy do you think innocent people just HAVE to be punished by the arsehole black cab drivers? It's just not necessary like you're suggesting for some bizarre reason...

Yes their tactic gets them more (very negative) attention but there's no way it gets them more support unless you can prove me otherwise.

That's why it's called civil disobedience. The purpose IS to break the law, but in a civil way. I'm not condoning it, I'm just throwing it out there.

 

[Radon87000]

If that bothers you dont use the app. You agreed to the t and c when you installed used the app. And now the app meets the app guidelines so if you do t like the apps behavior that you agreed to use the android version. Cook handles the matter appropriately.

When I signed up for Uber years ago there was no such tracking going on so I agreed to nothing of the sort. And when you register for Uber I dont recall ticking any "I accept all terms and conditions" box.

This is not an Apple thing, don't make Apple responsible for apps that meet the guidelines. Don't like the behavior, vote with your dollars.

Just saying Apple is not the messiah of privacy considering they still have Google as default search engine and allow apps to track users in the background for weeks without reporting the same

So don't use the app, I only care that it (the apps)meets developer guidelines; what it does beyond that is in your court to decide. As far as what android does, you can bet uber went as far as being g underhanded as possible in the android version..and it will never be pulled.

You dont know if it meets developer guidelines nor does Apple. The company clearly managed to hide their treachery from Apple and considering how they implemented background tracking its not far fetched to think they did it again

For all you know Google could have done the same thing and it may have gone unreported.

So let's get this straight you're criticizing Apple for not acting in a strong manner while letting android off the hook. That's some great hyperbole.

Android users havent been shown to be fingerprinted.iOS users were. The onus is on Apple

Kicking google maps out as the default map was genius! It was AWESOME for IOS users!


Before Apple kicked google out; google REFUSED to allow NAVIGATION on the IOS platform; yes the built in google based maps didn't have navigation because google wouldn't allow it. The only available navigation apps for the Iphone cost good money (I believe in the $15-$30 if I remember correctly).


After Apple kicked them out now we have Both the built in apple maps (decent) and a free version of Google maps with NAVIGATION (great)


how is this a loose for the customer? went from NO free navigation to 2 (and others now) and we now have access to the best one: google.

Anyone who doesnt want to drive into a ditch or go to places which dont exist will install Google Maps on their device. Apple continues to force their maps application as default down our throat.

Google's refusal was justified because Apple was using their app and not giving them due consideration for it. And they were proved right because its obvious to any user that internationally Apple Maps is no match for Google Maps AND it was a laughing stock when it first launched. I bet even Google's engineers were laughing looking at it when it launched

 

[I7guy]

When I signed up for Uber years ago there was no such tracking going on so I agreed to nothing of the sort. And when you register for Uber I dont recall ticking any "I accept all terms and conditions" box.

Not recalling is not the same not doing. However to again repeat you have an android, use the android version of the app, I'm sure it's totally legit.

Just saying Apple is not the messiah of privacy considering they still have Google as default search engine and allow apps to track users in the background for weeks without reporting the same

This is one of the most egregious deflections, what does google have anything to do with "Apple being the messiah of privacy". At least Apple doesn't sweep crap under the rug like android.

You dont know if it meets developer guidelines nor does Apple. The company clearly managed to hide their treachery from Apple and considering how they implemented background tracking its not far fetched to think they did it again

this treachery is almost in the android app and while it's true "we" dont know if the app current meets guidelines, there are two things.
1. Use the android app, obviously it's totally legit.
2. Delete the iPhone app.

For all you know Google could have done the same thing and it may have gone unreported.

Yep, I'm betting on it.

Android users havent been shown to be fingerprinted.iOS users were. The onus is on Apple

Okay, you can believe what you want.

Anyone who doesnt want to drive into a ditch or go to places which dont exist will install Google Maps on their device. Apple continues to force their maps application as default down our throat.

Nice hyperbole, but nothing else.

Google's refusal was justified because Apple was using their app and not giving them due consideration for it. And they were proved right because its obvious to any user that internationally Apple Maps is no match for Google Maps AND it was a laughing stock when it first launched. I bet even Google's engineers were laughing looking at it when it launched

Domestically Apple maps is better tha gooogle maps. Apple has the last laugh here.

 

[StyxMaker]

Well I think we've all been in a situation where we want to do something but we're afraid to ask if we're allowed in case the answer is no, and then we go and do it anyway. I think this is one of those times.
[doublepost=1493030082][/doublepost]
Well yeah, it's going to get a vast boost without them having to pay all their drivers.

And they take on the expenses of keeping the autonomous cars repaired, housing then when not in use, licensing them, and at least for now hiring someone to sit at the wheel ready to take over when one of their cars blows through a red light again.

 

[StyxMaker]

I'm not a fan of Uber's practices, but you've got to admit that geofencing Apple's HQ is pretty ingenious.

I've never had geofencing work properly.

 

[zantafio]

"Travis to the principal's office... Travis to the principal's office"

 

[gnasher729]

assuming your family is inside. What if it's you and your golfing or drinking buddies? You still want the car to put priority on its occupants over an outside child?

Moreover, what if it's your own child darting into the street to try to say goodbye to you? A human driver is going to do anything to avoid that child. But not a car programmed to always put its occupants first.

There is simple mathematics. People inside a car are protected by lots of metal, seatbelts and so on. They are safer than pedestrians or cyclists. By prioritising people outside the car, the total number of people killed, or badly or not so badly injured will be minimised. And since you cannot predict which side you (or your children) will be in case of an accident, the best is to minimise the total damage.

And now imagine you were given a choice, you choose to prioritize your safety, and a kid is killed as a result. Things go to court. The judge decides that the kid died because of your decision, and you are done for manslaughter, or you have to pay huge damages.

 

[Jvanleuvan]

Anyone who doesnt want to drive into a ditch or go to places which dont exist will install Google Maps on their device. Apple continues to force their maps application as default down our throat.

Google's refusal was justified because Apple was using their app and not giving them due consideration for it. And they were proved right because its obvious to any user that internationally Apple Maps is no match for Google Maps AND it was a laughing stock when it first launched. I bet even Google's engineers were laughing looking at it when it launched

While apple maps are not as good as google's, the idea that it's totally useless is hyperbole; its a decent map app; In-fact the application itself is quite nice; it simply doesn't have the volume of data that google does.

When google was the built in app (IOS1-5); google was getting compensated by apple, they weren't doing it for free. But what google wanted wasn't more money to allow access to their navigation; no, they wanted to collect IOS users' data and apple refused.

Form an IOS 5 users perspective there were NO free navigation apps for IOS. And the maker of arguably the best navigation app wasn't budging on delivering that app to IOS.

Apple made a move; released their own app and forced google's hand... SO from IOS 6 and onward an IOS user has at least 2 free navigation apps; from ZERO to TWO, one of which is arguably the best navigation app available.

I'm not sure how that's not a win for the end user?

Google's refusal was justified because Apple was using their app and not giving them due consideration for it. And they were proved right

How? how were google proved right that they shouldn't have released a navigation app on IOS? By releasing their navigation app on IOS? How does that work?

 

[Radon87000]

Not recalling is not the same not doing. However to again repeat you have an android, use the android version of the app, I'm sure it's totally legit.

Just went into the register screen.Nothing there

This is one of the most egregious deflections, what does google have anything to do with "Apple being the messiah of privacy". At least Apple doesn't sweep crap under the rug like android.

Not deflecting. You were implying Android is worse than iOS as regards privacy

And what crap is Android sweeping under the rug

1. Use the android app, obviously it's totally legit.
2. Delete the iPhone app.

As long as you admit that Android is not the only platform where Uber is being shady we are good. There is just as much underhandedness going on in the iOS version. No point shifting as both platforms have Uber tracking you.

Domestically Apple maps is better tha gooogle maps. Apple has the last laugh here.

Domestically average. Internationally waaaaay below average

 

[I7guy]

Just went into the register screen.Nothing there

https://www.uber.com/legal/terms/us/

Not deflecting. You were implying Android is worse than iOS as regards privacy

I wasn't implying, I'm stating. And you can be sure the android app does "far worse" for whatever apple found in the IOS version of the app.

And what crap is Android sweeping under the rug

See above.

As long as you admit that Android is not the only platform where Uber is being shady we are good. There is just as much underhandedness going on in the iOS version. No point shifting as both platforms have Uber tracking you.

The IOS version is no longer fingerprinting, so yeah, I'd say the android version is shadier.

Domestically average. Internationally waaaaay below average

Iceland, apple maps was better than google maps. So there that goes.

 

[davie18]

And they take on the expenses of keeping the autonomous cars repaired, housing then when not in use, licensing them, and at least for now hiring someone to sit at the wheel ready to take over when one of their cars blows through a red light again.

Which would still be considerably cheaper than their current driver costs (once they don't have to pay for someone to sit at the wheel).

 

[gnasher729]

Uber app forces users to choose between the app knowing their location "Always" or "Never". In the latter case, the app doesn't work. Apple should require all apps (including Uber) that want to know a user's location to implement the "Only when using the app" option.

You can go to settings and disallow the app to get your location. And when you book a ride, you go to settings again and allow it.

 

[kdarling]

When google was the built in app (IOS1-5); google was getting compensated by apple, they weren't doing it for free. But what google wanted wasn't more money to allow access to their navigation; no, they wanted to collect IOS users' data and apple refused.

That fan myth about preventing data collection makes no sense. Which is typical for fan myths.

Google already had all that... with Apple's blessing. Heck, for the past decade Apple has made more than a billion dollars a year, sharing in Google Search ad revenue, in return for letting Google be the default search engine and thus gathering lots of iOS user info. (Sometimes access to Apple customers is indeed a product to be sold.) And just looking up stuff on Google Maps alone gives plenty of info.

According to insiders, Google wanted a couple of things in return for adding navigation:

1. Branding on their maps (they used to say "Google" in the corner but Apple apparently wanted that gone).

2. The ability to offer their Google Latitude service. That's the one which let users opt into sharing their location (general or specific) with friends and family. However, as is well known, Apple dislikes any competition with their own core services, and Family Sharing and Location came out in iOS 8.

 

[phrehdd]

Don't threaten to do it but instead do ban them and make an example of them. That is not just a corrupt practice but immoral at its core.

 

[JustGeekGirl]

I don't know how their board of governance sits back and allows this type of behavior year after year. Being privately held they can do whatever they want I guess.

From what I have been told, he has it in his contract that he cannot be removed. So, at least until they go public, he is free to continue acting like a jerk.
[doublepost=1493341724][/doublepost]

Here's where I am conflicted. I love the service, even as I find some of their practices deplorable, and as long as Uber continues to operate in my country, I will never use another taxi for as long as I live.

The taxi companies really have only themselves to blame for becoming so lazy and complacent and allowing themselves to be disrupted by a better, more efficient service. The uber drivers I have encountered are way more polite, knowledgeable and have a better attitude overall compared to the taxi drivers I have come across.

I live in San Francisco, where Uber started, and is headquartered. I have never, and will never, use Uber. If I need transportation, and transit isn't a viable choice, I use taxis. Sorry, but I have seen far too many Uber drivers acting like jerks. They ignore traffic laws, act in an illegal manner (for example, blocking bus stops to pick up a passenger, or let them off), and generally are some of the worst drivers around. No way would I use them. My original issue was Kalanick's infamous statement that he wanted to give his customers the experience of being a pimp.
[doublepost=1493341930][/doublepost]

Don't threaten to do it but instead do ban them and make an example of them. That is not just a corrupt practice but immoral at its core.

Yes, I can understand Cook's reasons to not remove Uber, but I do wish he had. It would have quickly put them out of business as they are close to collapsing as it is. They are not making money, and are under pressure to do an IPO. But Uber is desperately trying to avoid that, because the moment it goes public, the VC will dump their stock, and the stock will drop. Kalanick and others cannot sell their stock for anywhere from six months to a year, and by then, it will be worthless. Right now, they can hide a lot of information, though it is well known that they are losing money at a ridiculous rate.
[doublepost=1493342169][/doublepost]

You can go to settings and disallow the app to get your location. And when you book a ride, you go to settings again and allow it.

The is no legitimate reason for Uber to not offer an option to only use location services when using the app. I have seen a very few apps that don't have the option to only allow it when the app is being used. Most would not be worthwhile with it off, and the rest I simply turn it off entirely, or remove the app. Having it on all the time is murder on battery life.
[doublepost=1493342712][/doublepost]

How do you know your uber driver won't be the most awful driver in the world or an insect-disguised serial killer? There is no bar of entry to becoming an uber driver, when I use a taxi service at least I know the driver went through a more thorough background check and had to be semi-competent with a passable resume/ in-person interview and driving test to get the job.

I can only speak to how it is here in San Francisco... Taxi drivers are required to pass a very rigid background check, including fingerprints, have a clean driving record, attend a training course, and pass an exam. Uber's standards are much lower. Perhaps that is why Uber has had several incidents locally of drivers assaulting passengers, both sexual and with physical violence. The Uber apologists can only resort to bringing up a case from about 20 years ago where a taxi driver committed a murder.

 

[Skoal]

What can I say... I love Uber!

Affordable, quick, polite, secure, convenient... as long as there is Uber, I wont take another taxi in my life. Why pay more for an inferior service? Perhaps taxis shouldnt have slept complaciently in their monopoly for so long... a better competitor came in and took their lunch. God bless the free market.

What makes Uber more secure? I haven't noticed this.