• flipht@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        26
        ·
        1 year ago

        100%. Most business is just advanced sophistry at this point. Marketing and advertising serves a useful purpose for new products, when the market isn’t aware that it exists.

        But by quantity and cost, most advertising is just social manipulation and is effectively an extra drain on the economy.

    • danielfgom@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Juan, YOU are the man! 💪

      Plus people forget that if they use iCloud Apple can also see all your data in the same way Google can if you use a Google account

      • Rexios@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        They can see your encrypted data. What’s the issue with that?

        • danielfgom@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Only to say it’s the same with Google. The data is also encrypted. So they want to point the finger and say how much Google collects, but so do they.

        • danielfgom@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m sure the Google is also encrypting the data with the exception of the interoperable data. So there’s no difference. Why point fingers when Apple do the same?

          Apple also know your browsing history. They also know your app usage. They also store your contacts, calendar, photos - just like Google. I don’t see the difference.

        • Rexios@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Apple already can’t look at most of your data. Advanced Data Protection makes it so they can’t see any of it.

  • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    146
    arrow-down
    17
    ·
    1 year ago

    Apple is 100% correct. It’s the entire reason Android exists.

    Then again, Apple also does a fair bit of data collection. I hate that Apple has been able to market themselves as some kind of bastion of privacy. They aren’t.

    • woelkchen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      71
      arrow-down
      17
      ·
      1 year ago

      Apple is 100% correct. It’s the entire reason Android exists.

      Then again, Apple also does a fair bit of data collection. I hate that Apple has been able to market themselves as some kind of bastion of privacy. They aren’t.

      So Apple is not 100% correct. They are 50% correct because the second half of their claim is that Apple is somehow different and not tracking its users…

    • skuzz@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Actually, the reason Android exists isn’t so one-dimensional.

      • The company Android was initially concerned more with Microsoft dominating phones like they did computers at the time, before being bought by Google
      • They created two prototype chains initially, one touch, one that was more akin to BlackBerry
      • iPhone came out, they ditched the BlackBerry-esque one and focused on what became now Android

      Google was mostly just doing what all tech companies were doing at the time, trying to compete in a mobile arms race for dominance. The data tracking was just a bonus. Appeasing shareholders is paramount. Look at how Apple created an Alexa speaker just because they had to as another example of this type of behavior.

      Also, Apple actually has a long history of tracking user behavior that predates both Android and the iPhone.

      Apple apps since some time shortly after the inception of OS X would (and likely still do) phone home to configuration.apple.com to send apple metrics on usage. Earlier variations of LittleSnitch could actually block this collection behavior.

      Apple has since reconfigured the network stack to guarantee that direct encrypted connections to Apple are always possible above any VPN, or other type of network filter connection. So there’s no way to prevent communication with Apple on an Apple product at all now short of keeping it off the Internet or blocking DNS to 17.* IP addresses, which would only work on a network one has control over.

    • GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I believe the reason Google acquired Android was to make sure that Apple didn’t dominate the mobile device landscape, which would be a threat to their ad business. The data collection was just a nice side-effect, from their perspective.

      • Nath@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think you underestimate how early Google acquired Android. In 2005, Apple wasn’t even in the mobile device market. Nokia were the dominant handset in those days.

        • folkrav@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          This. If anything, they wanted to claw back some of that Blackberry market. Apple wasn’t even on anybody’s mind yet on the mobile side of things.

    • Eldritch@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      All cell phones are tracking devices. Unless you faraday cage them. But yes, both apple and Android phones give out way more information than just that. And I definitely would not say that I would trust Apple more with data that I would Google.

    • ribboo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Genuine question: in what ways do Apple track iOS users (that cannot be turned off)?

      I’m of the viewpoint that most tracking can be rather easily be turned off, and that android plays in a totally other ballpark here. But I might very well be wrong.

  • Anti Weeb Penguin
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    101
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yeah yeah, wake me up when you can unlock the bootloader on apple phones.

      • PR_freak@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        What do you mean by get pretty close?

        Having to log into a Google account that uniquely identifies you across all your devices and milks you of every single data it can put its filthy hands on?

        I am an android user but honestly between the two I think Apple is the lesser evil

    • brax
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yup, the logic people use to call Apple phones secure would put Fisher Price toy phones at the S-Tier of security.

  • Substance_P@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    68
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Is Apple trying to convince me that the Health app, Apple maps or Siri doesn’t track me?

    • woelkchen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Is Apple trying to convince me that the Health app, Apple maps or Siri doesn’t track me?

      No, they are trying to convince themselves. It’s an internal brainwashing presentation after all, not for external PR.

    • ijeff@lemdro.idOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      1 year ago

      Their slide seems to list Siri, Maps, and iAd not being tied to the user’s Apple ID as a pro. I didn’t realize this was the case.

      • Uprise42@artemis.camp
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Apple has very explicitly stated in very clear terms that the health app does not share data with other apps or devices unless you give permission. And as someone who has given that permission (twice, once to give a meal tracker write permission and once to link to my doctors office’s application for read and write) it’s for every application. It’s not a “hey you need to let everyone have access or no one”. You can get fairly granular.

        There’s always the possibility of lying but usually when a company goes that hard on saying the same thing is so many different ways it’s legit. They don’t commit like that unless they know they won’t get in trouble. Those kinds of statements could open them to false advertising claims if it got out they were taking your health data.

        Here’s a link to their privacy document which reviewed a good bit of info: https://www.apple.com/privacy/docs/Health_Privacy_White_Paper_May_2023.pdf

        • Substance_P@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’ll stand corrected on my original comment then. I hope that with Google being dragged through the courts at the moment, perhaps it may inspire more interest and conversation about how our data is handled and how it pertains to the implications around privacy.

    • SulaymanF@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Health app has encrypted data that doesn’t go to Apple without explicit permission

  • Kokesh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    ·
    1 year ago

    One damn iPhone in my home network makes most calls home out of anything in my home network. I cn see it in AdGuard Home log.

    • PeWu@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I also can see this on router with Gargoyle firmware

  • Grammaton Cleric@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yeah, but Android doesn’t make me constantly enter my password to do basic things. Also, Apple takes away a lot of control from their consumers.

    I’ll take the phone that isn’t dumbed down tyvm

    • ijeff@lemdro.idOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      39
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ideally you shouldn’t have to compromise. GrapheneOS without Google is an option.

      • 520@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        It literally isn’t - Graphene only supports Google Pixel phones.

        • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          19
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          You’ve apparently missed the point. Graphene exists solely to harden security and privacy by disabling the googly parts of the phone. That is clearly what was meant by “without Google”

          • 520@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            And how do you know there aren’t hardware level trackers in Google’s chips? The kind Graphene can’t override? Do you trust Google not to do that?

            • yetAnotherUser@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Because this will get .001% more total data considering the low number of GrapheneOS users. Besides, this is highly illegal and would result in significant public outcry and legal consequences far greater in cost than any potential benefits.

              And if you cannot trust Google with their processors, you cannot trust any other company either.

              • 520@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Because all of that has stopped OEMs in the past…oh wait! No it hasn’t (looks at Lenovo)

            • Nath@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              The people who install Graphene and other modified Android variants on their devices are a lot more likely to be monitoring packets sent from their devices.

              Believe me, we’d know the same day an android device that had been de-Googled called home. That would make worldwide news.

            • Auli@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Yeah I trust them not to do it. Cause when it was found out not if when it would hurt them.

          • miss_brainfart@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I want to like Lineage, but while it doesn’t come with extra bloat, the system itself doesn’t do a whole lot of degoogling core services

      • soulfirethewolf@lemdro.id
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        GrapheneOS still takes away a bit of control though. Mainly in that it’s locked down for privacy in some ways that you can’t disable

        • Alonely0 🦀@mastodon.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          @soulfirethewolf @ijeff its biggest lockdown is the security model, which even though it won’t disallow you from doing anything you couldn’t otherwise do (if you’re motivated enough), it draws the line of tradeoffs to make. I gave up rooting and a lot of stuff (like contactless payments) for it’s security and stability, and I’m fine with that, but you should ask yourself if that’s worth it for you. If you have to go out of your way to break the security model, even once, then it isn’t for you.

  • 30p87@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Buying or updating an app requires system-wide sign in

    Only if one uses the official play store. Which apple does not understand, ofc.

    • woelkchen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      They are not wrong

      The best lies have a bit of truth in them, by making a factual statement and then deliberately coming to a wrong conclusion. They are wrong when the second half of the claim is that Apple is somehow any different. There is tracking and analytics everywhere in Apple systems. They don’t need to formally tie the Apple ID to other tracking methods when they can just use other means to find out that two connections come from the same device.

      At least in the Android world there at least is the option to go fully free of Google Services. There is no iOS Open Source Project that includes everything but a few things.

      • phillaholic@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’re making huge assumptions based on a single slide that doesn’t state it’s own conclusion. To me this easily is showing that Apple limits how data is used compared to Google, it doesn’t try to show that Apple doesn’t track you.

        • Auli@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s from 2013 Apple has got way more into ads since then.

        • woelkchen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          You’re making huge assumptions based on a single slide that doesn’t state it’s own conclusion.

          I’m making assumptions based on the fact that it’s a slide from an internal presentation. Since it’s an internal presentation, it’s about displaying Apple in the best possible light to its employees… employees who may think to accept job offers from Google.

            • woelkchen@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Again you’re assuming that’s what the target is.

              Yes, I literally wrote “I’m making assumptions based on the fact that…”.

              • phillaholic@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Which is 100% speculation on your part. Given this was from 2013 and Apple went on to advertise privacy publicly, it stand to reason it’s more about how they could market their product based on the truth of what they don’t do compared to Google than some sort of employee retention or spin.

                • woelkchen@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Which is 100% speculation on your part.

                  No, the slide being part of an internal Apple presentation is not speculation at all and going from that verified fact, it’s absolutely fair to make educated assumptions based on that. Nowhere it I claim that my comment is 100% fact. You don’t seem to get this in your head.

                  it stand to reason it’s more about how they could market their product

                  100% speculation.

  • books@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Google, the famous advertising company is using its hardware,software and infrastructure to watch everything we are doing?

    I’m shocked.

    • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Apple, ruthlessly opposing standards any time it can make them a buck no matter how many people have to suffer the consequences.

      I’m shocked.

      • MrSpArkle@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Apple got shit on when they went all in on USB on the Mac. People complained they couldn’t use their mice and keyboards anymore.

        They shit on FireWire and thunderbolt and called them proprietary, even those were both industry standard ports. Same for DisplayPort.

        They switched to USB-C exclusively and then people complained that they had to buy dongles.

        In the modern era, they have had maybe 3 or 4 proprietary ports.

        It doesn’t seem so ruthless to me.

        • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Which is why iMessage is open source and supported on all platforms, right? ;)

          They should have switched to USB c years ago, they only did it because the EU forced them

          Apple gets far less hate than it deserves. Fucking garbage company

          • MrSpArkle@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Did the EU force Apple to switch the iPad to USB-C? For that matter, didn’t Apple have like 20 or so engineers on the USB-C spec?

            I don’t know how much more hate Apple can get, their mere existence enables an entire tech-journalism ecosystem dedicated to laying out their evils and predicting their demise. It’s good for the economy!

            • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Interesting perspective. Apple did not roll it out on their phones for reasons of greed like I said. Their team being involved in the spec only makes it more frustrating that they refused to fucking adopt it universally.

              I don’t know how much more hate Apple can get

              I would say I don’t know how much corporate cock can be sucked by the public. This is the world’s first trillion dollar company for fuck’s sake

              • miss_brainfart@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                As I understand it, Apple was frustrated with micro-USB, pushed the development of C and released Lighting for the meantime.

                The fact that after years of USB C on the market, they still needed to be legally forced to use the spec they wanted to happen so badly…

              • MrSpArkle@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Apple didn’t make enough off of Lightning for greed to be a factor. Hell the majority of Lightning cables sold were unlicensed knockoffs from Amazon and the grocery checkout aisle.

                The reason Apple is so rich is that Apple isn’t really dominant in any of the markets they compete at this point(save for the tablet and watch, and that dominance is basically due to the incompetence of Microsoft(surface sucked and Android makers exited the market)) and Google(wearOS evaporated for like 3 years)).

                Apple is rich because aside from a few high profile failures, they sell premium products that are competent in targeted categories, and their competitors sell a wide variety products of varying quality in every market category imaginable. What happens then is if Apple releases a new ithing, you can probably buy it and be good, so one Apple purchase leads to another, and they all sync, so might as well pay for iCloud, etc.

                • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  If I knew you IRL after this conversation I would assume that any statement you made was the precise opposite of what is true.

                  You’re also sounding a bit like a shitty LLM that isn’t really making sense.

  • NessD@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    “only when it provides a better customer service” Hahaha. That’s so vague that it is completely meaningless.

    • mindlight@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Congratulations to you and the other 0.000000001% of Android users then.

      • /home/pineapplelover@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I would like to think that the percentage of users who have grapheneOS is maybe 5% of the pixel population. I’m just pulling a number out of my ass right now but basically a lot of people who want the very best privacy and security go for graphene which is limited to only Pixels even though there are more cool phones like the fp5.

        • Avero@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          Lineage is by far the most popular custom ROM and it has about 3.2 million active devices. Which is about nothing in comparison to 1.22 billion smartphones sold alone in 2022. Barely anyone uses third party ROMs.

        • Gunpachi@lemmings.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          There are some people who use other roms like Lineage without the google apps. It’s not as good as Graphene but it’s better than the OEM version that comes with the phones.

    • roguetrick@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t think they want to be. I just think they want to fragment Android. I agree with them.

      • krimsonbun@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        1 year ago

        The fall of android would be the fall of the only reliable open os for phones. I’m not seeing many custom roms for privacy based on iOS.

        • roguetrick@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Opening a space for an OS fork led by a consortium of mobile phone manufacturers that don’t have a vested interest in supporting their ad and tracking business would be an overall benefit. Google sees value in android only for that, and that’s a major problem.