Profiling the user based on their seemingly private usage of the device is a breach of privacy. This is the big issue. It's not okay to be all for privacy when it's other corporations' tracking methods, but employ the same methods for yourself.

What Apple basically did was say "tracking users for ads is great, and we realized we don't have to share this data with other ad companies, so good for us."

Apple can collect device data for technical purposes, which is borderline, but more acceptable.

> If they feel they can deliver ads and protect customer data, they should start an ad business. They owe it to shareholders and to their customers.

Collecting data about people is already an infringement of privacy in itself.

It doesn't matter here if you keep that data out of the hands of yet other people.

I actually don't care that much about the privacy stuff, you are insane if you don't think Apple tracks user metrics and device data for at the very least business intelligence. I care about the UX being worsened.

They use some pretty sophisticated tech to do this in a way that respects user privacy:

https://www.apple.com/privacy/docs/Differential_Privacy_Over...

Oh 100% they collect and track user metrics, but I do think they abide by the answer you give when any Apple device asks you if you want to send metrics to the mothership at setup.

It's also a matter of how well the data is anonymized. Given they've gone through the trouble of adding private email proxy features, secure web proxy features, and lockdown mode, I don't think it's lip service, but that's just my opinion.

I hate ads but I live with a few now. I have privacy to some extent. I don't want to give up privacy for ads. As an example, there's no reason Apple couldn't hash the screen constantly to see what videos you're watching, what images you're looking at, who you're talking to (face recognition, text recognition). They own the OS, they can do all of that in the name of serving you ads. Some TVs apparently already do this. And if you don't think they can hash what's on your screen well they already shipped that tech.

So I would most certainly not choose a phone that spies on me over one that has ads. I already have a phone that has ads. Sure I want less ads but not at the expense of less privacy.

In fact arguably, the less privacy you have the more ads you'll get since they'll have more data to target you.

I care more about an ad free experience than the privacy angle. Not that I don't value privacy, I do value it highly, just not as highly as avoiding ads.

Anticompetitive to deny others the ability to run ads on your platform. Apple's gonna be hit big time with antitrust.

> Anticompetitive to deny others the ability to run ads on your platform.

Yeah, if that were true it'd be pretty bad. (It's not true.)

Yeah, that's not true.

Apple doesn't stop anyone from running ads. They stop companies from collecting and aggregating data across multiple apps without explicit user consent.

Yet they do it themselves :)

It's a smart business decision. Basically "If you want to have deep tracking on users using iPhones, you need to go through us".

Yes, but it's almost certainly not legal for Apple to aggregate across multiple apps while not allowing for other advertisers to do the same.

How can a product be overpriced if more than 50% of the [US] market buys and uses that product?

You might want to reconsider who's doing mental gymnastics lol

source: https://9to5mac.com/2022/09/02/iphone-us-market-share/

That is only a few markets, in one of the wealthiest countries of the world. In the rest of the world android is pretty much +%90 and iphones are luxury goods, like a designer handbag or a porsche.

Apple is definitely the Porsche or Mercedes of computing.

Neither of which are overpriced, they just target a different segment of wealth with a different set of features and build quality.

Apple might be, but iOS is not.

I can assure you 50% of America doesn’t have a Porsche or Mercedes lol

iPhone is just that much better than its nearest competitors.

Do they buy it outright of pay a fraction of the cost upfront then overpay for it on expensive monthly contracts? I very much doubt most of the 50% US market aren't tied into 24 month contracts.

Why does that matter? It's an interest free loan and they eventually do pay for it. We don't criticize people for buying cars with loans or even houses. When we purchased my dads car we were going to buy it cash but we got a 6 yr loan at 0% interest so it was a no-brainer to do that. Additionally most carriers now are offering incentives when you're on their payment plans. If your argument is that you should ditch your current carrier and use some cheap MVNO service instead then that's something entirely different.

Does it matter? There is no such thing as “overpriced” for products that fly off the shelves except only in one’s personal opinion.

I don't think it's gymnastics. The last part about being "genuine" is a stretch, but the fundamental point they're making is reasonable or at least worth discussing. It's relevant to the discussions of gambling and the lottery, for example. I don't appreciate Apple and their lock-in (especially the "we're protecting you" marketing) but the case for "the lesser evil" of advertising is worth discussing. I actually want Apple to start pushing ads, not because of the reason given by GP but because it will almost definitely kill Apple. I think they know that and will go only as far as they know they can without giving up their brand which is ultimately their most valuable asset.