Clearly no one in these comments read the actual article. They are adding one more ad slot in App Store search results "according to two people familiar with its plans". This is such a non-story it's not even funny. Also what FB was doing and what Apple is suspected of doing here are completely different, it's apples and oranges. FB wants to track you across the web and apps on your phone, Apple wants to add one more ad slot in App Store search results, if you can't seen the huge difference between those two things then I don't know how to help you.

It's important to note that this new ad slot "will allow advertisers to promote their apps across the whole network, rather than in response to specific searches." This is exactly Facebook's game, and the underlying technology they use to target these ads could easily be repurposed for oh, I don't know...a new search engine?

Your comment implies that Apple somehow stopped Facebook from allowing network-wide ads on the Facebook app with the privacy changes, which is not true.

the point is that that apple is clearly messing up facebook in order to push their own ads. It doesn't matter if it's one ad for apple vs 100 of facebooks. The quantity is almost irrelevant. Anyway, i don't honestly believe that apple will stop with one ad slot. I'm sure the ultimate plan calls for 2 or 3, plus others mixed in with the search results like amazon does.

It is a huge deal. Apple is screwing up facebook, in order to promote themselves. I'm shocked if there are no anti trust implications.

Facebooks own challenging behaviour needs to be adressed, of course, but by taking this alleged step, Apple is demonstrating that we shouldn't rely on them to do so.

Besides, i hate irrelevant ads coming up on my search results, and apple don't even have the miserable excuse of needing the income to maintain their Store.

What does one have to do with the other?

Facebook runs ads and tracking inside the Facebook app. Apple isn't stopping them from doing that, it's just making users aware of how that sausage is made. It's not like they are showing their own ads inside of the Facebook app.

The App Store today is barely any less skeevy that app stores of old, like GetJar.com or whatever I was downloading apps on for my Win Mobile 6.1 BlackJack phone in 2007. If they choose to weigh it down with even more ads, that's their prerogative.

>Facebook runs ads and tracking inside the Facebook app. Apple isn't stopping them from doing that, it's just making users aware of how that sausage is made

lets just call a spade a spade. For better or for worse Apple's steps are essentially screwing up facebooks business model. Now to do that out of "privacy concern" is at the very least, morally bankrupt

As to your second point about App stores 'skeevines', i shall concede to you due to lack of knowledge.

As to making more ads being a prejorative of Apple, i'm still not happy with ads and certainly not more, and less specific ads.

> For better or for worse Apple's steps are essentially screwing up facebooks business model

If you need an argument in support of why Apple's move is really targeted at publishers like Facebook, take a look at the ATT/app tracking transparency prompt that Apple have designed.

It doesn't call out any of the benefits of allowing tracking (healthy for the free app ecosystem, helps publishers), rather it's just:

"Allow {app} to track your activity across other companies' apps and websites?"

That sounds like a direct, honest and correct explanation of the result of agreeing to the prompt. I see no reason why they should include propaganda from Facebook along with it.

> For better or for worse Apple's steps are essentially screwing up facebooks business model.

They chose to become a sharecropper on Apple's farm.

Facebook still works on web browsers and iOS offers one. Whatever problems Facebook has with that are shared with all other websites that don't want third party cookies blocked on iOS. Facebook hasn't been personally targeted here.

the article also says “Apple also sells ads in its Stocks and News apps.”

so clearly they are planning to expand their ad services a lot of places not just the app store

Any expansion from a company claiming to protect our privacy should be viewed with skepticism. That they’re disadvantaging a competitor in the process is likely illegal under antitrust laws.

Disclaimer: I didn’t read the article because it’s behind a paywall. I’ll stand by it not mattering for the purposes of this discussion though.

Apple has only ever claimed to protect your privacy from other people.

https://biblehub.com/exodus/34-14.htm

"For thou shalt worship no other god: for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God:"

https://archive.is/XQ9Jn in case you change your mind and want to read the article you're commenting on.

Thanks, I agree with the comment that this is a big nothing. If anything I’m annoyed as a user because I already think search is too monetized in the store.

Cripple the ad business of competitors and double down on your own. Then cover it all in the shroud of privacy and righteousness. Genius marketing. Right up there with Apple talking about their environmental credentials. One of the largest polluters in the world greenwashing themselves by bravely selling chargers separately. Let’s not forget that batteries are one of the most toxic things in the world at scale. And Apple is one of the biggest consumers of it.

“He suggested that Apple now wishes to regain this level of control. “If Apple cripples mobile advertising, then the App Store becomes the primary discovery point for apps again, and Apple decides how people use our iPhones, Apple decides which apps are the most popular,” he said.”

The privacy changes Apple made were the right thing to do regardless; it’s a question of users having control over what apps are doing with their data.

The two things should be treated as separate issues (the latter perhaps should be a topic of upcoming antitrust talks)

If they’re anticompetitive, as you seem to allow, then they should definitely not be treated separately. If Apple is purposefully undermining their competitors to build their own business they should be held to account. Charge the companies and charge the individuals. The threat of jail time will force the decision makers to consider their decisions.

Giving privacy to users is the ethically correct decision. It doesn’t even conflict with the act of ramping up their own ad business (which ostensibly respects the same rules they are applying for Facebook). The antitrust issue would be related to questions around the exclusivity of the App Store and how they benefit from that (including through advertising).

If they’re using their monopoly power to disadvantage a competitor while leveraging that disadvantage to compete against Facebook, it is definitely anticompetitive and could get them sued by the government and Facebook. It does conflict with them ramping up their own ad business if it’s anticompetitive.

Giving users privacy is indeed a good thing, but Apple is not an ethical company so I’m not sure why they should get the benefit of the doubt. Without inside information into the reasoning, it is wrong to assume they are doing this for peoples privacy. They could just as easily be doing it for selfish reasons.

clearly this was Apple's intention from the start. We cannot applaud them for incidentally benefitting users if that wasn't their intention.

This move was predicted here on HN when the news of limited ad tracking in iOS 14.5 first surfaced.

Let this be a reminder to all of Hacker News that “no corporation is altruistic”. Always assume “evil” by default, until proven otherwise.

I prefer to see it as 'nothing lasts forever', rather than assuming evil or malice.

Apple could afford to be 'the good guy' as long as hardware margins were crushing the competition. But that phase is over. Apple is now also a 'services company', and without the dense MBA-speak of a Stratechery article, that means ads.

Can you imagine the iPod interrupting music playback to show you ads for products on iTunes? Well, that's how Apple Music works now, by nagging you to subscribe to its paid service[0]. A $1000 iPhone/iPad can't play audio files out of the box without showing ads.

[0] https://the8-bit.com/stop-annoying-apple-music-ads/

> Can you imagine the iPod interrupting music playback to show you ads for products on iTunes? Well, that's how Apple Music works now, by nagging you to subscribe to its paid service.

Lol, the Youtube app on my Android phone (and Youtube music) do the exact same thing. Every time I open up the app on my phone, I get a gazillion prompts to sign up for a free trial of some new Youtube feature or service (TV, ads-free, listen to music offline etc).

I'm looking into alternative music player apps to replace the Youtube Music app, though I'm not sure how to avoid Youtube itself given that all the interesting content is on there.

I dumped the Google Music app the second they started co-mingling files that were on storage with songs available on their service. Been using third party apps ever since; currently on Phonograph from F-droid.

I use YouTube Vanced w/ microG on Android. No ads. I also have NewPipe that allows for downloading to MP4 or MP3.

Precisely. We all saw this coming. It is like when we invade, bomb countries, do regime change for human rights, democracy and liberation. Look how that turned out to Syria, Iraq, Libya, Honduras etc...

It is not always necessary for a company to be altruistic for them to act in my interest.

I have a metric ton of criticisms for Apple, and I hope they get slapped with antitrust charges in the future. But the privacy changes we're talking about here are good and should be implemented on other platforms like Android as well. They also represent an important shift in the privacy debate towards consumer control and consumer education that is long overdue and should be praised.

So don't be naive, but also don't look a gift horse in the mouth. Apple is definitely going to abuse their position, but there are other ways to handle that problem than letting Facebook have free reign to track whatever they want.

Brilliant. Not necessarily good. But boy.. smart move Apple

After all, He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named did great things—terrible, yes, but great. — Mr. Ollivander