If Facebook was as terrible as Apple makes them out to be, why would Apple allow Facebook in their App Store and take 30% of the generated revenue? It's hypocritical for Apple to criticize Facebook. If anything, the App Store made Facebook more popular than ever, so it's a "monster" that Apple helped create.
EDIT: My perspective is that the App Store and iOS lockdown have been harmful to user privacy, and Facebook is merely a convenient enemy to distract from the harmfulness of Apple's own current business model. On the Mac, I can install Little Snitch and prevent software from phoning home to both facebook.com and apple.com. I can't do any of this on iPhone. (And indeed, Little Snitch is not even compatible with the restrictive Mac App Store rules, so it has to be distributed outside the MAS.) The iPhone platform is designed such that software like Facebook thrives, and software like Little Snitch cannot exist.
Apple isn't "creating" an enemy here. They aren't running full page advertising against Facebook. Apple is making it so users have to give permission before companies can utilize an API. Just giving that one power to end users has apparently scared the hell out of Facebook.
> ...why would Apple allow Facebook in their App Store and take 30% of the generated revenue?
Apple doesn't get 30% of Facebook's generated revenue. It gets 30% of sales and in-app purchases. Facebook doesn't use either as far as I know.
> If anything, the App Store made Facebook more popular than ever, so it's a "monster" that Apple helped create.
If they had perfect foreknowledge, Apple would likely have done this from the start. Steve Jobs made it very clear at the time that Apple itself should ask permission before collecting information every time. If they'd foreseen influential companies like Facebook creating APIs which were widely spread through the App Store, they'd have likely closed this door a long time ago.
Facebook does have IAP, as already discussed in other sub-comments.
> If they'd foreseen influential companies like Facebook creating APIs which were widely spread through the App Store, they'd have likely closed this door a long time ago.
It's been more than 12 years since the App Store opened. Apple didn't need perfect foreknowledge to take action long before now.
Where is Apple doing this? Far as I can tell Apple are just saying that people don’t understand how their data is being used, and that companies should educate, and get informed consent.
It’s Facebook that’s demonising Apple here, not the other way around. Other than in direct responses to attacks by Facebook, where has Apple even used Facebook’s name?
They don't have to use the name. Everyone including the news media knew that Apple was implying Facebook.
Facebook seems to be making themselves look like the target for browny points, that plus their recent data fuckups means they’re probably the first name that pops into people heads when you say “abuse of peoples data”. But that’s just an inditement of Facebooks dodgy data practices, not evidence that Apple implying or targeting them.
Quite frankly I don’t think Apple gives a shit about Facebook. Why the hell would they? There’s no profit in targeting them specifically.
> I don’t think Apple gives a shit about Facebook. Why the hell would they? There’s no profit in targeting them specifically.
I think you answered your own question. :-) Facebook is a convenient punching bag. Which is the point of an Orwellian enemy, who isn't actually an enemy except for the need of some enemy.
If I say “I believe that company’s that abuse my data are bad, and we should do something about that” have I also made Facebook an Orwellian enemy?
There were dozens, maybe hundreds of news media stories yesterday stating that Apple was attacking Facebook, so it's not just me. Here are 2 examples:
https://gizmodo.com/tim-its-pronounced-facebook-1846152682
https://www.engadget.com/tim-cook-privacy-cpdp-2021-slams-fa...
Moreover, the original comment that I replied to said "Apple knows they're going toe-to-toe with Facebook", so I'm not even the first one in these comments to make the suggestion. Some commenters are acting like this all came from me, but it didn't. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25958158
You claim Apple "Created" an Orwellian enemy. But all Cook did was describe a company which spies on people to make money, We didn't need him to call out who it is because everyone knows who it is based on the Orwellian description.
Yet Apple somehow (You claim) "Created" them.
Facebook is this Orwellian, we all know it based on what we know about Facebook. Tim Cook didn't fabricate this, it's public knowledge.
In other words, Apple is creating an enemy for themselves, an enemy of Apple. When in fact the two companies are not enemies in the business sense of having competing products, and indeed Apple profits directly from the In App Purchases in the Facebook app — IAP which do exist, contrary to several other false claims in these comments — and profits indirectly by having Facebook in their App Store. Facebook too has profited and become more popular by being on iPhone and the App Store.
But now Apple's App Store is under serious scrutiny, not to mention lawsuits, so Apple is looking to justify its lockdown, and "privacy" fits the bill there, despite the fact that Facebook has always been "creepy", since the beginning of the App Store and before.
The purpose of an "Orwellian" enemy is to justify the heavy-handed control of the rulers and to distract the populace from that situation. "Good thing we have Apple's strict App Store rules to protect us from evildoers like Facebook!"
We're talking about adding a permission the user can select.
This is increasing the amount of control users have over their device. Yet you want to use this bizarre Machiavellian scheme to try and make it look like some sinister Apple Plot.
Guess what. Adding a dialog that warns me people are trying to spy on me isn't bad. Ever.
Apple may not see Facebook as a competitor, but that feeling is not mutual.
Given Apple's focus on privacy combined with their huge footprint in the US, Facebook may see them as an existential threat, and be using the word "competitor" to represent that.
0. https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/27/facebook-ceo-zuckerberg-says...
I agree that Apple is an existential threat to Facebook, given that Apple has absolute control over software distribution on iPhone. In that sense they're competitors, but not in the standard sense of having competing products.
It's the lesser of two evils for Apple. So instead of pissing off their customers, they have chosen to piss off Facebook.
In any case, part of my previous comment was noting how the decade+ of the App Store has actually contributed to and encouraged the advertised-financed "attention economy". Apple wasn't just an innocent bystander that whole time; they designed the platform and the App Store.
Recently, Facebook added in-app purchases for things like X.
Facebook is currently 43 in the list of the top grossing apps. I'm still running iTunes 12.6 which shows these lists.