Right. One would expect the company with the "superior attitude towards user privacy" would choose the option not to give them the keys up. This isn't about which country's government favors privacy, the earlier post claimed a company had a superior attitude which is not completely true even when trying to make excuses for them.

If Apple leaves China, beside blowing a massive hole in their growth strategy, how is users’ privacy enhanced?

Privacy is a trust game. When for one country you'll make a very public stance against usurping encryption but for another you will do it and remain mum, your principles are called into question. User privacy depends on consistent application of principles and is harmed by setting the precedent that you willingly break it in inconsistent ways without even being vocally against it.

Apple alway get a bit leeway on HN.

Apple is talking the talk about privacy where it's favourable to them. Is it actually walking the walk when it actually hurts them? That's when you know if a company if serious about privacy or it's just another marketing strategy.

Well, they took a politically- and PR-unfriendly stance when suggestions were made that they should provide an iOS version to the the federal government that allowed a passcode bypass because terrorists.

Again, leaving China would not help their users, but it would be a huge blow to their finances today and in the future. Is martyrdom a good play for a business and its stockholders?

>Again, leaving China would not help their users, but it would be a huge blow to their finances today and in the future. Is martyrdom a good play for a business and its stockholders?

It absolutely will. Apple users will know for sure that Apple respects privacy and will not budge under pressure, no matter what. Point is, Apple talks about being all about user's privacy till it hurts their finances. Thus, it talks the talk but doesn't walk the walk.

Google famously even walked away from China at one point of time.

you could easily make the argument that in china, the govt is a given that you have to bow to. if apple believes (and i’m certain they do) that users are more protected from third party actors, then you could definitely argue that apple thought users are better off than they were before

it’s hugely grey; you can’t just say that apple only has principals when it suits them. china is a VERY complicated place, morally