Calling tracking a cardinal rule of ads is like calling HTML a cardinal rule of communication. Sure it might be ubiquitous now, but if HTML were to suddenly disappear I guarantee communication between humans won’t stop — it would adapt. Tracking isn’t a foundation, it is merely what has worked this past decade or so.
Fact of the matter is, advertising today / web marketing relies on user tracking. I'm yet to see anyone debunk this.
But in no way does it need it. We could easily go back to untargeted, reasonably effective ads that appeal to broad markets instead of extremely specific ones.
It’s ‘disingenuous’ to claim that as some cardinal rule.
It’s not - it just happens to be the most popular business fad of the 2010s.
What works in business changes over time. That is a cardinal rule.
Let's call it what it is -- stalking.
Google built a super successful ad business on search terms alone, long before they got into user tracking.
Do you have any evidence that Apple tracks users for their ad business - which only sells ads for apps when users search for them?
As requested, evidence of tracking in iPhones - https://www.forbes.com/sites/kateoflahertyuk/2020/11/16/appl...
That isn’t evidence of Apple tracking anything.
IDFA is used by Facebook and ad-tech companies.
Apple are switching IDFA to be Opt-In rather than opt out.
That’s what Facebook is complaining about.
The mechanism for tracking users is already present. What more proof do you need?
Even if you manage to toggle 3rd parties out of your phone. You cannot toggle the Apple out of it.
Evidence that Apple uses it.
The mechanism relies on libraries which send user behavior from other app to Facebook. These are correlated by the ID.
The identifier is not the mechanism. The mechanism is Facebook’s library.
Apple has no such mechanism.
> You cannot toggle the Apple out of it
False.
There is a toggle for the entire feature.
Ads do not always mean user tracking.