Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple is now a privacy-as-a-service company

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 488 posts

Re: Apple is now a privacy-as-a-service company

#351

Post by max76 »

suspectdoubloon wrote: post #124
neuronic wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whoever would develop such an OS would sure need to get the app ecosystem going pretty fast. Because that's what has killed Windows Mobile phones.

Hmmm, I don't think is 100% necessary. Web assembly and PWAs have caught up in the last few years. I reckon things like firefox os would have a better chance now.

Some popular services like Snapchat and Tinder do not offer web versions of their service and are app only. The app ecosystem is important to get everyone on board because some companies prefer to keep their product off the web.

Re: Apple is now a privacy-as-a-service company

#352

Post by basch »

lucaspm98 wrote: post #235
pidg wrote: post #229

As a non-iOS user, can someone explain what is happening in this image?: https://techcrunch.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/2019060317... Does the 'X' mean "selected" or "don't share"?

From my iOS experience I would expect the 'X' to delete all of the text in the field, but it's very confusing considering the toggles below it.

I agree, my interpretation of that user interface would be that X clears the field and lets you type something else.

Re: Apple is now a privacy-as-a-service company

#353

Post by dlivingston »

lern_too_spel wrote: post #325
robkop wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just anecdotal data but I for one am very happy to be switching to apple this year after almost a decade of android. I'm only too happy to pay a premium if that gives me some control over my own privacy.

> I'm only too happy to pay a premium if that gives me some control over my own privacy. Apple gives you less control over your privacy. Do you want to open map links in an offline maps app? Impossible on the iPhone. Do you want to develop apps for your own device without handing over card details? Also impossible. Do you want to install apps at all without telling Apple you installed them? Too bad. Would you rather…

More hyperbole...

> Do you want to open map links in an offline maps app? Impossible on the iPhone.

Yes and no. The app launcher defaults to Maps. You can copy and paste addresses into any offline maps app.

> Do you want to develop apps for your own device without handing over card details? Also impossible.

Blatantly false. You can compile and sideload direct from Xcode to any iOS device without the need for a paid dev account. The paid dev account is only for putting your app on the App Store, or using Test Flight, etc.

> Do you want to install apps at all without telling Apple you installed them? Too bad.

I currently have a Nintendo DS and GameBoy Advance emulator on my unjailbroken phone. I installed direct from a website. I had to 'trust' the developer's certificate first.

> Would you rather not tell Apple your location every time you use GPS?

Citation needed. This information is stored locally and not (afaik) sent to the cloud.

Re: Apple is now a privacy-as-a-service company

#354

Post by dcosson »

tfha wrote: post #314
nafizh wrote: post #22

Lots of negativity/skepticism here which is reasonable I would say given tech companies' abuse of our trust. I for one, am happy that Apple can afford to offer privacy as one of its strong suites. Whether they can do it because of their business model or not is moot IMO. Everyone is here to make money, I would rather have someone who doesn't have to sell every aspect of my life to do it.

The biggest problem that I have is that it's privacy built on a closed source platform that works extremely hard to wall users in and create substantial vendor lock-in. As someone who has tried multiple times to dip their toes into the Apple world, I can tell you that it's highly hostile to users who try to pick and choose how much they want to be an Apple citizen. If you don't agree to sign up for Apple cloud on the…

I've been using iPhone and MacOS for years and successfully picking & choosing different parts of the ecosystem. Sure, the defaults are usually set up to opt you into their own products so it takes a bit of fiddling but it's not hard to opt into just the set of services you want to use - i.e. sync only particular services like iCloud Notes and password manager, but use gmail for email and calendars (using open formats to sync these natively to your phone), use dropbox instead if iCloud for file syncing, etc. It's very configurable and I don't feel particularly locked into anything.

And iMessage seems like a particularly bad example of lock-in because you can take your identifier (phone number) with you. If you switch from iOS to Android pretty much all that happens from a user experience perspective is your message bubbles are now green instead of blue when you text your friends with iPhones. It's very seamless between SMS and iMessages as far as messaging platforms go. To the extent that group threads with your family become harder, that's because group SMS sucks, not because you're locked in to iMessage.

It really seems like most of the time when people talk about lock in, all they mean is that the feature is particularly good. It does what I want and makes things easy, so there would be friction to change. How dare they build features like that!

Re: Apple is now a privacy-as-a-service company

#355

Post by satyenr »

TomVDB wrote: post #326
freehunter wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are Apple phones really more expensive though? Yes you can get cheaper Android devices, but the hardware that competes against iPhones still costs roughly the same as an iPhone. A Galaxy S10 costs $900, an iPhone XS costs $999. Cloud storage from Google costs $10/TB, iCloud storage costs $10/TB. Apple Music costs $10/mo for one person, $15 for families. Google Play Music costs $10/mo for one person, $15 for families.…

It’d be interesting to review today’s lowest iPhone (a $450 iPhone 7) against similarly priced Android phones. My hunch is that you’ll still get much more !/$ for Android.

I wouldn't be so sure about that.

* An iPhone 7 will likely receive timely updates for another 2-3 years, going by Apple's track record. Can the $450 Android phone guarantee that?

* The $450 Android will likely have a mid range chip -- which will likely not run Android very smoothly. iPhone 7, on the other other hand, runs iOS 12 like a charm. Sure, it is not as smooth as iPhone XS, but that is not what we are talking about, are we? And while I suspect that iPhone 7 may not beat the $450 Android on benchmarks (or maybe it can -- at least on single core performance, which matters more than one would think), benchmarks do not necessarily represent the real world performance.

* Resale value of an iPhone is always superior to any Android in my experience.

* While the camera quality varies from phone to phone, I suspect the iPhone is still above average in that regard.

* Sound is still better than most Androids I have seen -- including those costing $100 more.

* Should something go wrong with my phone, I can be reasonably confident that Apple will be able to fix it -- that they will have spare parts available. I can't say the same for Androids -- even flagships do not do well in this area -- I've been burnt too many times.

The only thing you'll miss out on is the latest design trends like bezel-less display and the notch. But I don't see how that counts towards value for money.

I know there are phones like OnePlus which are supposed to be flagship killers, but they come with their own caveats. Search for OnePlus privacy goof ups. And the latest OnePlus is not exactly cheap.

I use an iPhone and an Android on a daily basis -- I am not merely speculating here. I am just not motivated enough to collect data to substantiate my claims.

Re: Apple is now a privacy-as-a-service company

#356

Post by satyenr »

t0t4lnoo3 wrote: post #249
wycy wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but that's the always-acknowledged reality. Either you're paying for the product, or you are the product.

> Either you're paying for the product, or you are the product. Where would you place an app like Signal?

Will signal continue to be free if they have a billion users like WhatsApp? Who will fund the infrastructure and development?

Re: Apple is now a privacy-as-a-service company

#357

Post by hgty6u7i »

asutekku wrote: post #322
Snd_ wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, for starters: xposed gave me a LOT of options to customize every aspect of my phone. Statusbar tweaks, screen brightness tweaks, deeper tasker integration, to name a few... for a tech savvy person with too much time on their hands it is heaven to be able to customize your phone so much more than what is initially "allowed".

But is any of it essential? Those all seem like “nice to have” features instead of something major.

...isn't the vast majority of a smartphone just a collection of "nice to have"s?

Everyone values features differently. If my valuations aren't in line with yours, what makes yours more major?

Re: Apple is now a privacy-as-a-service company

#358

Post by isbjorn16 »

throwayEngineer wrote: post #310
untog wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"control over your device" isn't a big concern for many in the way privacy is, though. Certainly, in the early days of smartphones I rooted my Android phones and iPhones but these days I just see my smartphone as a utility that I want to work well. There isn't really anything I want to do with my iPhone that Apple blocks me from doing.

They block tons of competition in the App store.

Which isn't really privacy related.

I value privacy more than a robust and fair market. I can understand why others wouldn't, but I'm not the one spending their money, nor are they the ones spending mine.

Re: Apple is now a privacy-as-a-service company

#359

Post by graeme »

pmontra wrote: post #299

In other news "Apple’s privacy reputation at risk with new iTunes class-action lawsuit" > The plaintiffs allege that a third party can purchase a list of iTunes customers based on different demographic requirements, like a list of unmarried people who have a taste for a particular genre of music: > The lawsuit further alleges that the third-party beneficiaries of this listening data match it to other sensitive person…

Do they have any evidence? The prices listed are 13 cents per itunes user.

That seems an awfully low price for apple to throw away its privacy reputation.

Re: Apple is now a privacy-as-a-service company

#360

Post by [deleted] »

mirimir wrote: post #98
nafizh wrote: post #22

Lots of negativity/skepticism here which is reasonable I would say given tech companies' abuse of our trust. I for one, am happy that Apple can afford to offer privacy as one of its strong suites. Whether they can do it because of their business model or not is moot IMO. Everyone is here to make money, I would rather have someone who doesn't have to sell every aspect of my life to do it.

Until a month or two ago, I was believing that Apple was committed to protecting its customers' privacy. Sure, it had been caving to the Chinese government. But I accepted that it had to, or stop doing business in China. And then I learned that Apple does not guarantee that apps from its online store respect users' privacy. That rather gives the lie to its commitment to privacy. I mean, it did (along with Google) tak…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN