There is a financial incentive to NOT share data because there is a demand in the market for privacy. Apple can pursue this market because they charge for hardware. Google had no way of making money on privacy because they don’t sell a physical product.

So it is simple: Apple has a choice. Google doesn’t.

> There is a financial incentive to NOT share data because there is a demand in the market for privacy

Where? I can't identify a single non-tech-oriented person in my life who makes phone purchasing decisions based off of vague notions like privacy.

In fact, I'd say that the market does not demand privacy, it is ambivalent to it. I don't agree with ambivalence, but I also don't see consumers making privacy-minded purchases, either.

As long as the money is flowing in. I don't think people will be buying $1500 smartphones in a recession.

Few people in America pay full price for the phone. All of the carriers offer zero percent interest payment plans as does Apple. Yes I know it’s paying the full price but psychologically, most people only care about the monthly amount.

Sure, but what do you think those incentives could probably be for a company that makes its living based not on data collection but selling physical products whose 'best product is now privacy' according to the post, and who are more profitable than anyone else?

Profit, pure and simple. Just because they're profitable, does not mean they will not seek other avenues of revenue. I won't pretend to be able to predict the future, but markets shift, and should Apple find themselves in less favorable position than the one they're in today, I'd have a hard time believing they wouldn't sell user data.

Google was once the "don't be evil" company.