Apple CEO Explains How a Few Billion Dollars From Google Changes His Views on the Company's 'Unsettling' User Data Mining Activities (arstechnica.com) 112
In an interview with Axios on HBO Apple CEO Tim Cook explained the decision to use Google as the default search engine on Apple products. This decision, which enables Apple to make up to $9 billion a year, has baffled some, considering Google's business model of making money off of users' data -- something Apple has spoken out against numerous times. From a report: "I think their search engine is the best," Cook said in the interview. He followed up by diving into privacy features Apple has implemented in its Safari browser. "Look at what we've done with the controls we've built in," Cook stated. "We have private Web browsing. We have an intelligent tracker prevention. What we've tried to do is come up with ways to help our users through their course of the day. It's not a perfect thing. I'd be the very first person to say that. But it goes a long way to helping." Google pays Apple to have its search engine be the primary one on iPhones and other Apple devices.
Re: (Score:2)
Google's data mining is terrible. Unless they pay us $9 Billion a year. Then, it's OK.
--Tim Cook.
Re: (Score:1)
I think that quote was from Microsoft (particularly Gates), including the one about copying their competitors - before Apple, and now Google ;)
Re: âoeTheir search engine is the bestâ (Score:2)
Thatâ(TM)s pretty much what certain people want you to believe, and itâ(TM)s not hard to do when the statement is right about most people.
By and large, the economy doesnâ(TM)t work well for the most discriminating consumers, because the 10% gets what the 90% will accept. Most companies will gladly dispense with their top 10% most demanding customers, so with few real alternatives, those who two care either have to k
Who is baffled? (Score:3, Informative)
Google bribed Apple and I'm not sure it could be any more transparent.
Re:Bribery implies illegality (Score:5, Insightful)
Bribery implies illegality. It's not illegal, it's just a failure to care about user privacy when a billion dollars are on the table. Privacy is only for people like Tim Cook, not for people who use his hardware.
This is similar to what lobbyists do with members of the US Congress, where this *is* bribery when one critically looks at it.
Re: (Score:2)
Bribery doesn't necessarily imply illegality.
bribe noun
\brb
\
Definition of bribe
(Entry 1 of 2)
1 : money or favor given or promised in order to influence the judgment or conduct of a person in a position of trust police officers accused of taking bribes
2 : something that serves to induce or influence offered the kid a bribe to finish his homework
https://www.merriam-webster.co... [merriam-webster.com]
As long as there is an inducement or influence being offered it can be considered a bribe. After all I don't think it is illegal to bribe your kids with candy or a toy if they do something you want them to (although maybe it should be).
Hypocrisy at it's Finest (Score:1)
Google is pretty blatant that they use customer data to target ads. Apple? Blatantly dishonest. "We respect your privacy" but give China whatever they demand while stonewalling the FBI against actual terrorists.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Hypocrisy at it's Finest (Score:5, Informative)
They don't give China anymore than what the FBI and other LEOs already get. The only thing China has is potential access to iCloud data. But Apple gives that up pretty freely upon being shown a warrant.
The only thing Apple cannot get you are unlock codes for the devices. China can't get them either. So Apple won't unlock a phone upon request because they can't. Doesn't matter if you're an FBI, China, ISIS, whatever.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm not sure if I'd say Google bribed Apple or Apple blackmailed Google.
At one point the default search engine in iOS was Bing. Now I doubt Microsoft's privacy stance is any better than Google's but it shows that Apple is willing to use a sub-par service if they want. The decision to move back to Google happened last year [techcrunch.com]. (Note that this is sort of getting into the weeds here as the default search engine for Safari has been Google for longer than that. When I say "default search engine for iOS" I'm talking
Is he wrong about Google? (Score:4, Informative)
I am speaking as someone who has sent Bing as the default search on iOS, but still use Google on desktop.
Why? Because Cook is right - Google is the best search engine, still by a fair margin. I tried REALLY HARD to use other search engines, but (especially for a developer) it is dumb to hamstring yourself with inferior search results in day to day work.
Cook is also right to point out anti-tracking things Apple has in place, so even though you are using Google on iOS you are giving them relatively little information.
Re: (Score:1)
By using
#bribe { opacity: 0; }
$1B would change my views on many things too (Score:5, Interesting)
Now $1B would change my views on many things too, but in this case, Cook was just being a smart businessman: lying to Apple customers (those gullible little marks) to get them to sign themselves and their friends up to his service, while at the same time telling Google that they would need to bring a truckload of money into a deal to get Apple to violate its lofty, lofty "principles". Well, the deal is done now that Google is bringing in the billions: in service to his shareholders, let's hope Cook gets a nice Christmas bonus.
Re:$1B would change my views on many things too (Score:5, Insightful)
>> Apple CEO Tim Cook explained the decision to use Google...has baffled some, considering Google's business model of making money off of users' data -- something Apple has spoken out against numerous times
Now $1B would change my views on many things too, but in this case, Cook was just being a smart businessman: lying to Apple customers (those gullible little marks) to get them to sign themselves and their friends up to his service, while at the same time telling Google that they would need to bring a truckload of money into a deal to get Apple to violate its lofty, lofty "principles". Well, the deal is done now that Google is bringing in the billions: in service to his shareholders, let's hope Cook gets a nice Christmas bonus.
Since you can easily change the default search engine on both macOS and iOS to any one of a number of other services, including the hallowed DuckDuckGo, this is truly a non-issue.
Slashdot ALWAYS favors systems that put the responsibility in the hands of the User. Apple has done that.
I don't see a problem here. It is absolutely consistent with the hive-mind of Slashdot.
Re: (Score:1)
But hardly anyone does.
Re: (Score:1)
>> Since you can easily change the default search engine
But hardly anyone does.
And that is Apple's fault, HOW, exactly?
Re: (Score:3)
Proof?
Their policy is crystal clear [duckduckgo.com] on what data they capture / store / pass forward.
In short, every query is unique, so there's no way to tie one user doing multiple queries, no cookies, no user-agent capture, no ip, and obviously no js fingerprinting.
They keep advertising to a minimum and instead try to use affiliate services;
but in either case, since they don't know who's doing a query, there's no personal info which is sent.
Another thing: since they don't store anything useful, they don't get any govern
Privacy features ... and compatibility (Score:5, Interesting)
As a user of Safari, I like the privacy features that Apple has put it. As a web developer, will they start fixing the compatibility issues in CSS and HTML (issues not present in Chrome or Firefox), otherwise I may confuse it for IE?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
The Apple CEO is speaking with a forked tongue. If Apple wanted to, they could easily become an anonymizer for the Google search engine. But the Apple CEO has decided to accept $9 billion from Google while sacrificing his customers' privacy. The worst treachery is to pass one's own sin on to the next person.
Apple could "easily" broker and anonymize ALL of the Google Search Traffic of EVERY macOS and iOS User?
Riiiight...
Duck duck go (Score:5, Interesting)
Apple added Duck Duck Go as one of the built-in search engines. I've been using it for over a year instead of Google. It works well enough and they don't set any tracking cookies. I'd recommend everyone switch to that.
Honestly. every other smartphone on the market uses Google too. Apple is just always held to some high standard that is impossible to meet.
Re: (Score:1)
Apple is just always held to some high standard that is impossible to meet.
Apple set that standard themselves. Then they made up for not meeting that standard with their patented Reality Distortion Field. "It just works." "You're holding it wrong." "Think different." Stuff like that. I even remember how it's not possible for a mac to get a virus. They're just architected in a way to make it impossible. Funny.
Re:Duck duck go (Score:4, Informative)
I’ve been using DuckDuckGo for the past few years - it works well enough.
You can even get it to redirect to Google’s search results by adding “!g” after your search terms. I do that occasionally to check whether Google gives me better results... but the Goog generally shows me the same list as DDG (sometimes in a slightly different order, but that’s about it).
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Duck duck go (Score:4, Informative)
Ditto with using DuckDuckGo for a year or two now. The search results are good enough. If my search doesn't show good results I just add a "!g" and that solves it.
Plus it's got a whole bunch of other good controls. "!w" for search wikipedia, !gm for google maps, !gn for google news, !n for DDG news, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
I have used DuckDuckGo for about that amount of time. Practically every search ends up redone with a !g in front of it. It is absolutely ridiculous how bad the results are on DuckDuckGo.
Please don't ask why it is still my default search engine. There is no good answer to that question.
Re: (Score:2)
I will say that I think the domain you're searching makes a difference. If it's something programming or technical there's a VERY high likelihood that I will need to add the !g...
Re: (Score:2)
"every other smartphone on the market uses Google too. Apple is just always held to some high standard that is impossible to meet."
it's not about that. even last week cook was claiming that it was immoral how these other companies treated their users and Apple would never do that.
sure Apple is probably not involved in search actions on your device, but they're helping google, which is arguably just as bad.
Re: (Score:2)
Proof?
Their policy is crystal clear [duckduckgo.com].
Nothing is stored, no ip, no user-agent, no identifying cookies, and obviously no js fingerprinting.
And since they don't store anything useful, they don't get government requests for data, as there's nothing to give law enforcement.
When you search at DuckDuckGo, we don't know who you are and there is no way to tie your searches together.
When you access DuckDuckGo (or any Web site), your Web browser automatically sends information about your computer, e.g. your User agent and IP address.
Because this information could be used to link you to your searches, we do not log (store) it at all. This is a very unusual practice, but we feel it is an important step to protect your privacy.
On the scale of things [duckduckgo.com], they make a tiny amount of profit from affiliate links, but again, nothing is passed to third-parties, except just the product you searched for.
Oh, and much of their profit is given to good causes [duckduckgo.com] such as open source pro
Hasty Generalization (Score:1, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Looking back on the articles listed it never mentions a company by name, just the practices they use. However, if you think apple doesn't collect your data you'd be wrong. They may not sell it to a 3rd party, but they allow targeted ads in some of their products, using things such as your likes and possible your demographics as well.
They never really cared about your privacy, they just want you to think they care about your privacy.
Sorry, no.
Their BRIEF toe-in-the-water with targeted advertising, iAds, was WILDLY UNPOPULAR with both Devs. and Users, and was DISCONTINUED in 2016, IIRC.
At present, there are NO "targeted ads" in Apple's Products, and no Ads for A DIFFERENT Publisher or Service in any Apps, either. I didn't say that, for example, "Freemium" iOS Apps don't have Ads for enhanced features, or even other Apps BY THE SAME PUBLISHER; but there are pretty strict rules about what is, and is not, allowed.
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
here is one example -
https://searchads.apple.com/ad... [apple.com]
SearchAds.
You can target ads by gender, age, location
This doesn't seem to pertain to ANYTHING but App Store Search Results. HARDLY "Targeted Advertising", as in browser Banner Ads, or those annoying "follow me" Ads. It is essentially something like "Google Ad Words", but for the iOS (and Mac?) App Stores ONLY.
BFD. Not impressed.
Try again...
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Like google ad words? You mean the service that they are using? (search) Thank you for proving my point that they are just as guilty as the service they are going to be using.
and only their app store? The ads here are bringing in $500 million by the end of this year, and expecting to bring in $2 billion by 2020
Now you might be thinking, only $500 million? that's nothing compared to apple's other revenue streams. But then, why are they selling out their principles for an extra (estimated) 0.15% revenue? I would guess because they don't really care.
Are they even Ads, or just search result-rankings in their App Store? Yes, there is a difference.
And Google hovers-up data from all KINDS of sources. Apple is just using internal demographic information from AppleID signups and other App Store purchases.
But it doesn't matter what I say; you'll just find some way to find some nefarious purpose in it.
He actually said it, Google is the best for search (Score:5, Interesting)
Now the $3billion doesn't hurt of course. But DuckDuckGo isn't good enough for a switchover at this point. I use DuckDuckGo as my main search engine but need Google as a back up often enough. This is something that needs to be fixed - Apple probably needs to make DuckDuckGo or whatever better and then cast off Google and their billions, but at this point DuckDuckGo's results aren't good enough. JMHO....
Re: (Score:3)
And did you know that DuckDuckGo uses Google as one of its search backends? Basically DuckDuckGo is not a search engine and never been. It's a search engine aggregator.
And without Google search DuckDuckGo would be worthless because, and I'm probably going to be downvoted a lot, but Bing is shit and I don't know any other decent world search engines.
Despite all the hatred towards Google, their search engine is by miles better than anything on the market (except maybe local search engines like Baidu) and
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, it's like (but not as good as) Google, but without the tracking. Figure that, it's popular that service.
Re: (Score:2)
Proof?
DuckDuckGo have their own crawler, and like any other search engine or AI personal assistant, sometimes they use third-parties for instant answers [duck.co], such as Wikipedia, Wolfram Alpha, Stack Overflow, MetroLyrics, etc, etc - basically "over 400 sources".
I don't think I've used Google in over 10 years now - I first switched to Bing, then about 6 years ago, to DuckDuckGo. And except on a handful of occasions (for image search), I've never used Bing, and certainly not Google!
In my opinion, DuckDuckGo has su
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Oh well, what can you do? (Score:2)
When the goose that lays the golden eggs gets cancer and dies, and your company is bereft of ideas for creating anything that's even innovative, never mind disruptive - how can you keep the lights on? If even the great courage required to dispense with a headphone jack doesn't grow your market fast enough, what choice do you have other than to sign a lucrative deal with a firm whose practices you openly revile? Poor Tim Cook!