Slashdot Mirror


'I Asked Apple for All My Data. Here's What Was Sent Back' (zdnet.com)

"I asked Apple to give me all the data it's collected on me since I first became a customer in 2010," writes the security editor for ZDNet, "with the purchase of my first iPhone." That was nearly a decade ago. As most tech companies have grown in size, they began collecting more and more data on users and customers -- even on non-users and non-customers... Apple took a little over a week to send me all the data it's collected on me, amounting to almost two dozen Excel spreadsheets at just 5MB in total -- roughly the equivalent of a high-quality photo snapped on my iPhone. Facebook, Google, and Twitter all took a few minutes to an hour to send me all the data they store on me -- ranging from a few hundred megabytes to a couple of gigabytes in size...

The zip file contained mostly Excel spreadsheets, packed with information that Apple stores about me. None of the files contained content information -- like text messages and photos -- but they do contain metadata, like when and who I messaged or called on FaceTime. Apple says that any data information it collects on you is yours to have if you want it, but as of yet, it doesn't turn over your content which is largely stored on your slew of Apple devices. That's set to change later this year... And, of the data it collects to power Siri, Maps, and News, it does so anonymously -- Apple can't attribute that data to the device owner... One spreadsheet -- handily -- contained explanations for all the data fields, which we've uploaded here...

[T]here's really not much to it. As insightful as it was, Apple's treasure trove of my personal data is a drop in the ocean to what social networks or search giants have on me, because Apple is primarily a hardware maker and not ad-driven, like Facebook and Google, which use your data to pitch you ads.

CNET explains how to request your own data from Apple.

172 comments

  1. Would you like to buy a bridge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    If you believe that's all they have on you then you are the kind of sucker born every minute.

    1. Re:Would you like to buy a bridge? by bsolar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Tinfoil hats are fine, but they should not stop you from thinking logically. Why would they risk withholding information? It would be a PR nightmare for Apple when found out and as far as I know it would make them non-compliant with the GDPR. The EU would be jumping somersaults at the prospect of being able to fine Apple 4% of their annual global turnover and Apple would be very foolish in risking that.

    2. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Iâ(TM)m a proud Android user and Iâ(TM)ll never believe Apple is less evil than Google. #roundedcorners

    3. Re:Would you like to buy a bridge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Extraordinary allegations require extraordinary evidence... of which I'm sure you've got plenty

    4. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by saloomy · · Score: 1

      You are also a fool. Why did Apple write iOS? Why did Google write (buy?) Android?

    5. Re:Would you like to buy a bridge? by fluffernutter · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Just like it would be a PR nightmare to slow down an older phone without asking? Just like it would be a PR nightmare to put a keyboard prone to failure in one of the most expensive laptops available? Yeah, you're right that would be a big mistake. People might create class action lawsuits.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    6. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Allegations like Google sells users' data?

    7. Re:Would you like to buy a bridge? by Pinky's+Brain · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Unless you think they have a National Security Letter holding a gun to their head you are just stupid if you think they hold more than that.

      They aren't going to risk 100% hardware profit margins to pick up a couple advertising pennies in front of a scandal steamroller.

    8. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's a big difference between Apple's business model and those of Google and Facebook. If you've read this site for any length of time, you've surely seen the statement that if a business isn't selling you their product, then you are the product. There are a few exceptions like open source software, but that statement is generally true.

      Apple is primarily interested in selling hardware and some software applications. When I buy an iPhone or iPad, part of the purchase price surely includes paying for iOS. When I buy a Macbook, part of the purchase price certainly pays for macOS. Software like Garageband and Final Cut isn't free, and some Apple software products are quite expensive. A lot of the software doesn't readily run on non-Apple hardware, which is part of how Apple convinces users to pay the premium for their products. With Apple, you are clearly paying for a product, so it's plausible that you're not actually the product. It's certainly possible that Apple isn't selling your information and they're not collecting massive troves of data about you. They primarily make their money other ways.

      In fairness, Google sells some Android phones and they do have some paid services like G Suite for Business. However, many Android users and users of Google services aren't actually paying Google anything. If Google isn't making users pay for storage in their cloud, applications, and services, they're bringing in revenue by monetizing their users. As for Facebook, their business model is selling ads and targeting those ads at users. These business models are totally different from Apple's.

      Is it plausible that Apple could draw revenue from monetizing data about their users? Sure, they could do so, but they have a viable business model without doing that. Another way to possibly know how much data a business stores about you is from their virtual assistants. Siri is widely criticized for being very limited in comparison to other virtual assistants. If a virtual assistant knows your preferences better, it means the company probably has more data about you.

      I find it very plausible that Apple isn't storing and mining massive amounts of data about their users. I see no reason to inherently distrust Apple. They receive plenty of well-deserved criticism, mostly because the quality of their products has slipped in recent years. I don't see any reason to criticize or doubt Apple on this issue, though.

    9. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      Why would they sell their data? They don't want anybody else to have it.

      If you pay them enough they might promise to show your adverts to some relevant users of their products but there's no way they're going to anybody a zip file full of user data.

      --
      No sig today...
    10. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stating what a company does is not an allegation.

    11. Re:Would you like to buy a bridge? by triffid_98 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      They aren't going to risk 100% hardware profit margins to pick up a couple advertising pennies in front of a scandal steamroller

      They clearly are willing to risk 100% hardware profit margins purposely throttling their old hardware to pick up millions of dollars in new hardware sales...but that's admittedly a separate topic.

    12. Re:Would you like to buy a bridge? by Joce640k · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I want to know how two dozen Excel spreadsheets is "roughly the equivalent of a high-quality photo snapped on my iPhone".

      I'm not sure anybody who writes sentences like that is qualified to judge what Apple is up to.

      --
      No sig today...
    13. Re:Would you like to buy a bridge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly; apple is one of the shadiest tech companies out there.

    14. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      you've surely seen the statement that if a business isn't selling you their product, then you are the product.

      A bit like Slashdot, then?

      --
      No sig today...
    15. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These are not illegal, and the first one had a reasonable explanation even if you donâ(TM)t like it. Breaking privacy laws is the kind of infraction the EU would definitely use to fine them to hell.

    16. Re:Would you like to buy a bridge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you not been paying attention to the world and tech lately? These allegations are hardly "extraordinary".

    17. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where do these numbers come from? How would they gain so much with data and without people realizing it? The only companies I know making that kind of money target ads with it, which Apple doesnâ(TM)t know. That sounds more like a conspiracy theory.

    18. Re:Would you like to buy a bridge? by bsolar · · Score: 2

      No, the PR damage would be much worse. Apple has stated multiple times it's stance is to protect the privacy of its users and has promoted multiple times this stance to differentiate itself from Google.

      Furthermore, class actions are the least of your problems if you have provided the EU a reason to fine you 4% of your global turnover.

    19. Re:Would you like to buy a bridge? by hackertourist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The "slow down older phones" brouhaha was way overblown in the media. Apple had a choice between slowing down phones with a marginal battery or having them randomly crash at times of high workload. They made the right choice, one that resulted in a much longer device life and higher customer satisfaction. All they did wrong was failing to communicate why the phone slowed down.

    20. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by saloomy · · Score: 1

      I wasn't being sarcastic, that's what I meant by my post. Apple writes iOS because selling $1000 phones is a good business, and having an OS that drives those sales rocks. Google wrote (bought?) Android because it wanted a collection device in the hands of more people.

      I agree with your point, I have seen that quote, and that's what I meant by my post.

    21. Re:Would you like to buy a bridge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      yeah see people keep saying that when the exact opposite is true, they would have gotten more hardware sales by letting the problem be the way it was, i.e., randomly shutting down the phone

    22. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by bsolar · · Score: 1

      Having cash in the pockets didn't stop courts from find Apple in the wrong in the past, from the ebook antitrust issue in the US to the Irish taxation issue in the EU just to cite a couple egregious examples.

    23. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by fluffernutter · · Score: 0

      And what did the courts do to make it feel more than a slap on the wrist than apple? This is a company with $246 billion in a bank. Nothing less than a fine of $50 billion would change their behavior.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    24. Re:Would you like to buy a bridge? by iamhassi · · Score: 1

      Just like it would be a PR nightmare to slow down an older phone without asking? Just like it would be a PR nightmare to put a keyboard prone to failure in one of the most expensive laptops available? Yeah, you're right that would be a big mistake. People might create class action lawsuits.

      I don't know, nvidia is hit with giant class action lawsuits all the time and everyone still buys every new $800 nvidia gpu as soon as it hits the store shelf. But I was happy to replace my $2,000 dead gpu gaming laptop with the $100 netbook Nvidia offered. Thanks class action lawsuit!
      https://arstechnica.com/tech-p...
      https://www.consumeraffairs.co...

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
    25. Re:Would you like to buy a bridge? by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      "advertising pennies"

      You are ignorant if you think that. Apple's advertising revenue is in the billions.

    26. Re:Would you like to buy a bridge? by fluffernutter · · Score: 0

      Affecting the performance of an older device without telling people about it is the wrong choice. Apple knows what they are doing, and they made the choice that would put them in a better light. Heck, even if they had explained what they were doing it and why they were doing it and not given a choice, that would have been better. Apple is smart enough to know that they should not handicap devices that they don't own. This went through their PR department and they made the wrong choice.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    27. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by bsolar · · Score: 1

      In the ebook case the court disrupted the whole business strategy Apple tried to put in place to win the ebooks market.
      In the Irish tax case we're talking about the largest tax fine in history (although technically it's more a tax recovery).

      Claiming these were "slap on the wrists" is just ridiculous.

    28. Re:Would you like to buy a bridge? by bsolar · · Score: 2

      The alternative would have been letting devices draw more powers from a spent battery than they safely could. The only mistake was about the communication, not the solution itself which was technically and ethically sound.

    29. Re:Would you like to buy a bridge? by bsolar · · Score: 1

      The throttling only affected old devices with a spent battery which was unable to safely provide the power required at peak usage anyway. It was not communicated well and that was a PR mistake, but the solution itself was sound.

    30. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple writes iOS because they want to get their slice of the app market. Because they understand that while making hardware will generate a good revenue it also requires work. On the other hand their slice of the sales on the app stores is about as close to "free money" as they can get.

    31. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      If I'm using my R250s Neither Apple nor Droid will get my data.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    32. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1, Insightful

      No, the alternative would be telling people what they had done to the Apple devices they owned. Like, when somebody came into the Apple saying their phone was acting slow and non-responsive, telling them it had been throttled that and a battery replacement would speed it up again. Instead they would sell them a new phone.

    33. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by bsolar · · Score: 1

      The alternative I was discussing was about drawing power from a spent battery. Nobody questions the mistake in communication, but if a device is able to attempt to draw more power from a batter than it safely should there is no discussion it has to be prevented doing it.

    34. Re:Would you like to buy a bridge? by Lost+Race · · Score: 1

      Bits is bits, man. It's just a bunch of ones and zeroes.

    35. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Slap on the wrist implies that some negative feedback is done to the company to prevent future behavior. Disrupting the ebook strategy was not a slap in the wrist. Apple is free to do whatever crap they want without risk. They may not get away with it. But there is less than nothing to lose, so there is no negative feedback mechanism here.

    36. Re:Would you like to buy a bridge? by triffid_98 · · Score: 2

      The throttling only affected old devices with a spent battery which was unable to safely provide the power required at peak usage anyway

      If by old devices you mean pretty much anything more than two years old that you were gullible enough to accept an OTA upgrade on then sure. Until about 2 years ago I was still rocking a Samsung S3 (circa 2012).

      Why yes I am a cheap bastard, that's not my point. My point is that it still worked fine in 2016 and even the battery died I could have replaced it myself inside of 2 minutes with a $20 battery. No scandal or class action lawsuit required.

      As an added bonus, my 64GB memory upgrade option was $40 and not $340, another fun way Apple has been screwing their customer base over since pretty much forever.

    37. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by bsolar · · Score: 1

      Slap on the wrist means there is punishment but it's bland enough to be ineffective. In the ebook case the sentence barred Apple from doing business in the ebook marked the way they wanted for years, not including the damages it had to pay.

      I'm unsure what people expected if what amounted to effectively a death sentence to their business strategy in that market was apparently only a "slap on the wirst".

    38. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like a hardware design flaw to me; not that apple would ever admit to that.

    39. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by fluffernutter · · Score: 0

      I was thinking the same. Apple hasn't designed the device to be used long term from the start.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    40. Re:Would you like to buy a bridge? by Raenex · · Score: 0

      Apple had a choice between slowing down phones with a marginal battery or having them randomly crash at times of high workload.

      That's what they claim. Odd, then, that they always timed these "fixes" for when a new version of the iPhone came out?

      "The U.S. study analysed worldwide searches for 'iPhone slow' and found that the search term spiked significantly around the time of new iPhone launch."

      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sci...

    41. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      The size of the ebook market is only 20 billion dollars. Apple has over ten times that sitting in a bank account. It doesn't matter if Apple was told not to sell ebooks ever, the size of the market bears little importance to them. The fine was $415 million. They had to give up 0.16 percent of their bank account. Big freaking deal. Apple only has around 10% of the ebook market, meaning there was another 2 billion at stake. Even if the judge had said to Apple they could never sell ebooks again, it amounts to 0.9 percent of just the money they have sitting in the bank. Ebooks really meant very little to apple.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    42. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Precisely why they would withhold data.

      Why can i imagine some other wholly owned subsidiary having the complete set of information so they could technically say that's all they have?

      Also, unless the editor never used cloud services, shouldn't there be several hundred mb of his own content?

    43. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, they made the wrong choice.

      Most people who find inexplicably slower devices put up with it unless it affects what they do. Considering most people have simple games and social media, they probably won't notice...

      Until of course the faulty battery degrades to the point of failure.

      Good luck getting your data off a dead phone.

    44. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes but technically, the iPhone cannot take high quality photos.

    45. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by bsolar · · Score: 1

      415 millions might be a relatively small amount compared to Apple's overall revenue and assets, but it's a fine to their ebook operations and compared to their ebook yearly revenue it's about 25%: it's actually quite a big deal.

      I'm unsure what you would consider "adequate" if disrupting a multi-billion dollar business and a 13B dollar tax recovery are "not enough". What would you impose, a 50B fine? 100B?

      For reference, the larges fine ever against a company was 20B, against BP for the Deepwater Horizon environmental disaster.

    46. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is how current battery technology works, it has nothing to do with the size of the battery, and is all about how old the battery is and how many cycles it has. The only reason it's really is an issue is the group fixing the issue probably didn't think it was a big deal. While yes you can attribute malice to it, but working in technology people seem to have tunnel vision on solutions and rarely notice or test for issues like this.

    47. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not if itâ(TM)s encrypted and unavailable to Apple.

    48. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      Did Apple actually pay any penalty for the EU mistake? I thought they had just paid back the taxes they owed in the first place. Or do you mean they paid the taxes + the 13B? Didn't they technically owe more than $13B in taxes? I'm betting they got some sort of break.

      What should the penalty be? Enough to affect stock prices, for sure.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    49. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Considering how greedy they are, adding a tax to practically everything and breaking 3rd party things intentionally, why wouldn't you assume they're charging $1000 for their phones *AND* use the information for ad targetting? They force devs to use their own platform...

      Does this mean that they are providing an inferior product and should be much cheaper than Google and FB's ad placement services?

    50. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are really stretching to find things to hate about Apple. Move on with your life. Walk away from the keyboard and take a walk outside. Better yet, go adopt a pet from your local animal shelter.

    51. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by jeremyp · · Score: 1

      Exactly like Slashdot. Your point?

      --
      All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
    52. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by mikael · · Score: 1

      In industry, the goal is to get the solution out as quick as possible and not to say to mangement "nothing can be done". They could just ignore the problem and just let phones go blank in hours. Or they could make use of the power saving features built into the hardware and underclock the CPU based on battery capacity.

      There is nothing worse than having a low battery level on a smartphone (close to 1%/0%), enough for one last outgoing call, when some Facebook notification or recruiter spam activates the wireless network and shuts down your phone.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    53. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That 4% is for a second or subsequent offence.

      First time offence is up to 2% but, depending upon the specific country, size of the business, and specific offence can be as little as court costs.

      European government agencies are more about helping organizations comply with the law, than punishing them for violating the law.

    54. Re:Would you like to buy a bridge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      MODDOWN! ; creimer spam post again!

      creimer wants you to click on his youtube channel, then click on his stupid amazon affiliate link spam on Youtube. There is nothing of value on creimer youtube channel. Only creimer click-bot goes there.

      Creimy Dumpty sat on the wall,
      Creimy Dumpty had a great fall.
      All the king's horses
      And all the king's men
      Couldn't put Creimy Dumpty
      Together again.

    55. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      $15bn (the amount that they've just started repaying over the Irish tax issue) is less than $50bn, but I'd think it is a bit more than a slap on the wrist - it's about 15 weeks of Apple's total worldwide profit. It's large enough that you can't just factor it into the cost of doing business and expect to remain profitable.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    56. Re:Would you like to buy a bridge? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      I almost agree. The problem with your argument is that you're ignoring the fact that their decision meant that people didn't notice during the warranty period that their battery was degraded. I suspect that their engineers made the correct decision for the correct reasons and then someone in accounting figured out how much they'd save on warranty replacements of batteries if people didn't notice the dead batteries for a few more months. Contrast this with the Mac, where they show the full charge capacity of your battery and the discharge cycle count, so it's trivial to figure out if you're eligible for a warranty replacement (they publish the number of recharge cycles for each model that it is expected to retain 80% of its capacity for).

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    57. Re:Would you like to buy a bridge? by Waccoon · · Score: 1

      PR nightmare? Apple? Surely you jest.

      Apple had the guts to tell people they were holding it wrong, and then initially charge people $30 for a plastic bumper to fix the problem that didn't actually exist. Later they did offer to give away the bumpers for free, but only if you could demonstrate that you were having a problem with your device. That was when Jobs was alive, which was quite a while ago. Since then they've only continued to go downhill while their customers kept buying like crazy and their profits still skyrocketed.

      These days, Apple is refusing to service their own top-of-the-line computers -- at any price -- while people like Linus and Rossman blare about it on YouTube. The company doesn't give a shit. I'm not sure anyone does anymore.

    58. Re:Would you like to buy a bridge? by Waccoon · · Score: 0

      Apple had a choice between slowing down phones with a marginal battery or having them randomly crash at times of high workload.

      Funny... almost every other device I've used ever has either given me a low battery warning or failed to turn on at all, citing insufficient power. Crashes due to low battery power rarely happen.

      I wonder why Apple has such a hard time simply detecting power draw and informing users that the battery needs to be replaced, just like every other company in the universe. If everyone but them can do it, it must be a really hard problem to solve.

    59. Re:Would you like to buy a bridge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks for the link. I don't care that it's from the Daily Fail, the research and results are a smoking gun in my opinion.

      Fuck Apple.

    60. Re:Would you like to buy a bridge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Explain this you dirty Apple apologist!!!

    61. Re:Would you like to buy a bridge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    62. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was thinking the same. Apple hasn't designed the device to be used long term from the start.

      Nope, they were dumb enough to let Samsung make some of their CPUs. Everybody knows Samsung only makes shit.

    63. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      Yup, just read up on it. The $13B was only for two years, not the entire time Apple was getting the break from Irelend. So in other words, this was not a penalty, this was just part of the money they owed. People gamble with taxes all the time, some lose, in this case Apple still made out pretty well. How you can call this a 'penalty' is beyond me.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    64. Re:Would you like to buy a bridge? by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 2

      Apple had a choice between slowing down phones with a marginal battery or having them randomly crash at times of high workload.

      That's what they claim. Odd, then, that they always timed these "fixes" for when a new version of the iPhone came out?

      "The U.S. study analysed worldwide searches for 'iPhone slow' and found that the search term spiked significantly around the time of new iPhone launch."

      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sci...

      Yes. And it did so years before any throttling actually took place.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    65. Re:Would you like to buy a bridge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have no proof of that so its not actually a fact.

    66. Re:Would you like to buy a bridge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Online search results are hardly proof of anything. It could just as likely be that a new release causes perception of a measurable "slowness" that's due to comparisons of more and less advanced devices. There would need to be more data to show that the actual changes to the devices occurred during the releases of later versions.

    67. Re:Would you like to buy a bridge? by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 2

      You have no proof of that so its not actually a fact.

      https://benchmarks.ul.com/news...

      Why do searches for "iPhone slow" spike when new models are released?

      Our benchmarking data shows that, rather than intentionally degrading the performance of older models, Apple actually does a good job of supporting its older devices with regular updates that maintain a consistent level of performance across iOS versions.

      That said, there are some factors that might affect people's perception of performance after updating an older device with a newer version of iOS. An update might add new features that use more resources or require more processing power. New apps developed for the latest models might not run as smoothly on older devices. Conversely, apps designed for an earlier version of iOS might not take full advantage of optimizations in the latest version. And then there is always the psychological effect of knowing that there is a new and improved model available, which can make your own device seem outdated.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    68. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then why did they not let those phones run at full speed when connected to a power source?

      Aside the above question, all is fine with what Apple did.
      That one aspect puts it all in doubt.

      aRTee

    69. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      And, speaking of shit, the display in the iPhone X is made by Samsung.

    70. Re:Would you like to buy a bridge? by Raenex · · Score: 0

      https://benchmarks.ul.com/news... [ul.com]

      You know what's funny about that article? Apple came out and admitted they were intentionally slowing down the devices on updates, of course for "good" reasons, completely refuting the claim by the article that Apple was not doing that. Their benchmarks didn't catch it.

      Step out of the reality distortion field.

    71. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      Zing!

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    72. Re:Would you like to buy a bridge? by hai_Priesty · · Score: 1

      Then it's the English of the writer and editor that is sub-standard. It's the file size that is equivalent, not the content. (if writer added "which is" before "roughly" in that sentence nobody would comment.

      I have my fair share of grammar fails and typos but article writers should write better than an average poster if he/she wants to be respected with any air of authority.

    73. Re:Would you like to buy a bridge? by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      https://benchmarks.ul.com/news... [ul.com]

      You know what's funny about that article? Apple came out and admitted they were intentionally slowing down the devices on updates, of course for "good" reasons, completely refuting the claim by the article that Apple was not doing that. Their benchmarks didn't catch it.

      Step out of the reality distortion field.

      Try to follow the thread. Then shut up.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    74. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      And, speaking of shit, the display in the iPhone X is made by Samsung.

      And thanks to the things Apple changed about it, it's been tested as the best cell phone display. Ahead of those in shitty high end Samsung phones.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    75. Re:Would you like to buy a bridge? by strikethree · · Score: 1

      The issue was never that Apple wanted to fix a flaw or whether or not it was even a flaw. The issue is that the device was modified after it became the customer's property. If Apple had felt that such a decision should have been made, they should have offered it as an option to the consumer instead of forcing it upon them.

      We can see what not asking the owner of the device for permission to modify the behavior of the device can do.

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
    76. Re:Would you like to buy a bridge? by mjwx · · Score: 1

      The "slow down older phones" brouhaha was way overblown in the media. Apple had a choice between slowing down phones with a marginal battery or having them randomly crash at times of high workload. They made the right choice, one that resulted in a much longer device life and higher customer satisfaction. All they did wrong was failing to communicate why the phone slowed down.

      Erm... Either that answer is utter bollocks... or the phone is incredibly badly designed.

      I've got a Nexus 5x which is approaching 2.5 years old. The battery, as predicted is no longer holding the same charge as it did new (I still get a full day out of it, 2 if I don't use the phone much, but 3 or 4 days between charges is no longer possible). The OS does not crash under high workload, devices crash under high workload for 2 reasons, 1. OS is incredibly poorly designed or 2. The hardware is incredibly poorly designed (usually it's overheating, from my experience with PC gaming). Gimping the CPU can help prevent overheating... but that would be admitting their hardware is crap.

      Its far more likely that Apple was trying to encourage you to buy a new phone.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    77. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      "High end" phones in general are beta test platforms. My phone was $120, though I've seen it for $80, too. I apparently was a little too early of an early adopter.

      It's so nice that there are suckers who will spend all that money for a cell phone, so 'the rest of us' don't have to.

    78. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1
      It would be best for all involved if you kept postponing purchases until they were cheap enough for you, but then instead of buying you'd decide on a better product and then waited for that.

      Oh BTW, you sure as hell spend more on smartphones than me, so what does that tell you about yourself?

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    79. Re: Would you like to buy a bridge? by Kopp · · Score: 1

      There's no penalty, because Apple was not judged here. It's Ireland that was judged, by having anticompetitive tax rules w.r.t other european countries, and were asked to retrieved the tax they should have perceived if they had done things correctly.

  2. Hardware manufacturer huh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "
    [T]here's really not much to it. As insightful as it was, Apple's treasure trove of my personal data is a drop in the ocean to what social networks or search giants have on me, because Apple is primarily a hardware maker and not ad-driven, like Facebook and Google, which use your data to pitch you ads.
    "

    Why can't they make a decent wifi antenna then?

    I'd work for them and develop it, I'm not trying to complain and I have applied at these places but they are just too god damned high and mighty to actually read anything. Objective C huh.

  3. Dang... by Freischutz · · Score: 4, Funny

    There's really not much to it. As insightful as it was, Apple's treasure trove of my personal data is a drop in the ocean to what social networks or search giants have on me, because Apple is primarily a hardware maker and not ad-driven, like Facebook and Google, which use your data to pitch you ads.

    Dang... I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of Apple hating conspiracy theorists suddenly cried out in righteous fury and fired up their flamethrowers..

    1. Re: Dang... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stupid isheep with a retarded logic - disturbance in your stupid ass, not force.

    2. Re:Dang... by lazarus · · Score: 3

      I tried to explain this to a friend recently. I believe that Apple tries its best to protect my privacy because its business model is selling devices. That is not Google's business model. If you think that you can protect your privacy while doing business with a company who's model is sell your data then you're dreaming.

      I wish there was a good, third, open source alternative. Maybe Librem will see the light of day.

      --
      I am not interested in articles about life extension advancements.
    3. Re: Dang... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What data does Google sell? If company A bought data from Google, why would company B also buy from Google? Company B can just buy the same data from Company A for a cheaper price.

    4. Re: Dang... by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      I don't know man, why don't you buy bread from a homeless guy on the street corner instead of from the grocery store?

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    5. Re:Dang... by Solandri · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The problem isn't data collection per se. It's retention. If you want to put your entire life history on Facebook, it's not a problem as long as Facebook will delete it all if you change your mind and decide you no longer wish to share it with them. Facebook refuses to do that, and will hang on to your old data (apparently forever), which makes them by far the worst transgressor. (They used to also make it near-impossible to get a copy of all your data, in case you wanted to leave but didn't want to lose everything. But apparently they've addressed that recently.)

      Google at least makes it easy for you to get a copy of your data should you wish to leave or change services, and to delete data they've collected on you from their servers.

      I read TFA a few days ago when it first came out. What's notably lacking is that this isn't a way to delete your data from Apple's servers. Just a way for you to request a copy.

    6. Re:Dang... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh yes of course. Anyone critical of apple is one of those dreaded apple haters. Revel in your ignorance.
      Put the word 'critical' in front of the word 'thinking' and you have something more blind apple worshippers should start doing.

    7. Re: Dang... by Tangential · · Score: 1

      I think that in addition to being willing to delete, they have to be willing to seriously protect it so it doesnâ(TM)t end up in the hands of researchers who can sell it to political or other organizations.

      --
      Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of congress. But then I repeat myself. -- Mark Twain
    8. Re:Dang... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Easier to explain it this way: customers pay money for services. If you aren't paying Google, you aren't Google's customer. People that pay Google for your info are - and your information is Google's product.

      Google is not a charity, running all those data centers and doing all that android development for charity.

    9. Re: Dang... by iamhassi · · Score: 1

      What data does Google sell?

      Better question would be what data does Google NOT sell. When it comes to advertising there is no bad data, everything someone does can be used to make the perfect ad to entice a purchase.

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
    10. Re:Dang... by whoever57 · · Score: 1

      who's model is sell your data

      It's possible that I am wrong about this, but I think that you have Google's business model back to front.

      I think Google guards the data it holds on people very carefully. It doesn't sell that data. Instead, it uses that data to place ads on behalf of the ad buyers. In other words, it sells access to relevant eyeballs. It's possible that it also uses the information it has to manipulate people into buying products, reading websites, viewing more ads, etc..

      I don't think that you can buy the data from Google because selling that data is contrary to Google's goals.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    11. Re: Dang... by lazarus · · Score: 1

      You are correct, that is what I meant, but you have put it much better. The bottom line is that their model requires that they collect as much data on you as possible and then profile you to advertisers.

      --
      I am not interested in articles about life extension advancements.
    12. Re: Dang... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because you can not make an exact copy of the bread for free.

    13. Re:Dang... by Freischutz · · Score: 1

      Oh yes of course. Anyone critical of apple is one of those dreaded apple haters. Revel in your ignorance. Put the word 'critical' in front of the word 'thinking' and you have something more blind apple worshippers should start doing.

      You need therapy.

    14. Re:Dang... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everyone pretty much understands that except for the Google hating apple worshippers that have to continually make apple sound like some sort of honourable company.

    15. Re:Dang... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your original comment make me think maybe you should lose the Star Wars Underoos and move out of your parents basement.

    16. Re:Dang... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're following in the footsteps of the millions of other people who are using the wrong term.

      No ad company wants to give away or sell it's user data. That'd allow the other company to write the ad service out of the company.

      No, the ad company intentionally inserts itself between the people with ads and the people who displays ads (and sometimes be the people who displays ads themselves). At no point is Google selling my data - they are simply selling targetted ads being distributed from their server.

      It's seems like a small difference, but it's actually huge. In this case, Google is the business of protecting my user data, because if that got out... any other ad company could be equally effective without the huge overhead of all of Google's Projects.

    17. Re: Dang... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you ignoring that i os devices have only one ad provider? (themselves) If not, then if they don't have your data... does that mean app developers are being forced to buy an inferior product and annoy users (irrelevant ads are worse than targetted ads to most people)?

    18. Re:Dang... by antdude · · Score: 1

      I don't trust any companies. I am sure they have backups of your datas even if you ask them to delete them. :(

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    19. Re:Dang... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Why would Google sell your data? Aside from being illegal where I live, it would be giving away a major source of revenue.

      Their business model isn't selling your data. It's selling ad impressions guided by that data. Ensuring your privacy is a key part of the model, because the moment that data leaks out its value is destroyed and users will no longer trust them with it.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    20. Re:Dang... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Can confirm. I called Apple years ago to get my account deleted. You couldn't do it online back then, don't know if you can now. Anyways, after 20.minutes of warnings and legal agreements and "are you sure?" they deleted it...

      Except that they said I could never sign up with the same email address again, so clearly they didn't delete everything.

      Oh, but today the GDPR comes into effect, so I might contact them again.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    21. Re:Dang... by Freischutz · · Score: 1

      Your original comment make me think maybe you should lose the Star Wars Underoos and move out of your parents basement.

      Is that really the best insult you could come up with?

    22. Re: Dang... by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      Are you ignoring that i os devices have only one ad provider? (themselves)

      What a load of crap. Tell me you get paid to write this, and don't actually believe that.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    23. Re:Dang... by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      Why would Google sell your data?

      They don't need to sell all of it, they simply give out enough that their customers have enough to rob you blind (figuratively). Like IP addresses and Cookies, as well as the target information. Which the advertisers can cross-corellate with similar data from other ad-networks.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    24. Re:Dang... by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      Can confirm. I called Apple years ago to get my account deleted. You couldn't do it online back then, don't know if you can now. Anyways, after 20.minutes of warnings and legal agreements and "are you sure?" they deleted it...

      Except that they said I could never sign up with the same email address again, so clearly they didn't delete everything.

      Errm, yeah, either they clearly didn't delete everything, or they try hard to avoid that anybody (including you) can just open an account under a name that already had been used i the past, and then receive messages send now intended for that old account.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
  4. Apple wanted to be advertising driven by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 4, Interesting

    [T]here's really not much to it. As insightful as it was, Apple's treasure trove of my personal data is a drop in the ocean to what social networks or search giants have on me, because Apple is primarily a hardware maker and not ad-driven, like Facebook and Google, which use your data to pitch you ads.

    You can thank the fact that iAds failed miserably (because Facebook and Google already locked-down the ad sector) or they'd have even more information on you, given the lock-in/walled-garden approach they have.

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    1. Re:Apple wanted to be advertising driven by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can thank the fact that iAds failed miserably....

      Word. Search Ads suck real hard too. I wonder if they're putting any resources into improving them or if the revenue they generate isn't worth the trouble.

    2. Re:Apple wanted to be advertising driven by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      [T]here's really not much to it. As insightful as it was, Apple's treasure trove of my personal data is a drop in the ocean to what social networks or search giants have on me, because Apple is primarily a hardware maker and not ad-driven, like Facebook and Google, which use your data to pitch you ads.

      You can thank the fact that iAds failed miserably (because Facebook and Google already locked-down the ad sector) or they'd have even more information on you, given the lock-in/walled-garden approach they have.

      iAd failed because Apple didn't give out "enough" personal information, you deceptive little shitheel. https://www.computerworld.com/article/2475874/data-privacy/apple-values-your-privacy--ads-firms-complain.html

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    3. Re:Apple wanted to be advertising driven by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL

      Looks like computerworld was trying to stay off apples blacklist.

      https://techcrunch.com/2016/03/28/the-downfall-of-the-walled-garden-heres-why-iad-failed/

      Maybe get your head out of apple ass and read more then the pro-apple stories to better educate yourself.

    4. Re:Apple wanted to be advertising driven by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      The article claims iAd failed because of the "walled garden" - that not enough personal info got out to the advertisers. IOW exactly what I and all of Apple's "conspirators" (that would be everybody living in reality, unlike you) said.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
  5. Excel? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why the fuck is Apple using Excel?

    1. Re:Excel? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why the fuck is Apple using Excel?

      Back in the day MS Office and Macs went hand in hand. They had their breakups but I think they've been back together for quite awhile.

    2. Re: Excel? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interesting historical fact: Excel was originally written for the Mac; the Windows version came out two years later.

    3. Re:Excel? by iamhassi · · Score: 2

      Why the fuck is Apple using Excel?

      Because Excel was made first for Apple in 1985. Windows didn't get Excel until 1987. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik...

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
    4. Re: Excel? by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Originally Excel was a Macintosh-only software product. At the time Microsoft's spreadsheet for MS-DOS was Multiplan. They didn't produce a PC version of Excel until they released Windows.

    5. Re:Excel? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because exporting the data to Excel format makes it easy to open the files and it's human readable.
      If these are .xlsx files with only data in them that's even one of the best data exchange formats, any spreadsheet will open it.

    6. Re: Excel? by LinuxIsGarbage · · Score: 1

      Originally Excel was a Macintosh-only software product. At the time Microsoft's spreadsheet for MS-DOS was Multiplan. They didn't produce a PC version of Excel until they released Windows.

      But Apple does currently offer the competing product iWork Numbers.

  6. That's not the whole story. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lots of data that is stored "anonymously" turns out to relatively easy to re-attribute to specific users. They just don't store it that way and so can pretend they don't know who's in there. It just takes someone to sweep up all the data and put the ID tags back on.

  7. Reminds me ... by PPH · · Score: 4, Interesting

    .. of the scene in Das Leben der Anderen where Dreyman goes to the Stasi headquarters to view all the files they had on him. They bring out hand trucks with boxes full of paper files.

    Isn't technology wonderful? Now they can just hand you a thumb drive.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  8. Excel - synonym for spreadsheet ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    > The zip file contained mostly Excel spreadsheets,

    Looking at the screenshots, one can see a bunch of .csv files. Text files where data is comma separated. That's hardly an excel spreadsheet, though one can use excel to look at those.

    1. Re:Excel - synonym for spreadsheet ? by Cederic · · Score: 1

      More worrying is that ZDNet's security editor apparently can't tell the difference.

      Forgive me if I harbour doubts regarding their security credentials too.

  9. Cue google-loving android apologists and zealots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Go on. Rationalize.

  10. Re:Apple doesn't trust its own spreadsheet program by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Come on, stupid... You can be an Apple customer (iOS, ITMS etc.) without owning a computer that runs macOS and Numbers ("its own spreadsheet program").

  11. If you're NOT on social media by shubus · · Score: 1

    Yah, so I'm sure there is a ton of info being stored on social media and as an Apple customer, I'll be curious to see what they have on me as I don't use Siri or Facetime or any other Apple services. Google, yah, I'm on YouTube but that's it as I don't use Google Search. Time for to find out what's out there--As we all should and work towards pairing down our public footprints.

  12. You are putting the cart before the horse by SuperKendall · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You can thank the fact that iAds failed miserably (because Facebook and Google already locked-down the ad sector)

    You are assuming that is why iAds failed. The whole point of iAds was that Apple would not collect data the way other advertisers were - so is it any wonder iAds did not gain traction when the advertisers could not acquire a huge amount of demographic data on you?

    Apple has never changed it's approach on privacy, not even for advertising. Even if iAds had worked they still would have nothing more on people than they do today.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:You are putting the cart before the horse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And your blindly believing and parroting whatever the apple PR machine tells you. Maybe think for yourself for a while.

    2. Re: You are putting the cart before the horse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      He's parroting their past and current behavior. They haven't sold us out yet. So far so good. Nice troll shill.

    3. Re:You are putting the cart before the horse by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Apple has never changed it's approach on privacy

      Really? Because it seems we've covered changes in Apple's privacy policy on a yearly basis.

    4. Re:You are putting the cart before the horse by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

      The changes have just been made to re-assure people what they are not collecting, as it was brought to light what Google has been collecting all along... so what the hell is your point here?

      As stated, they've never been collecting the kind of data Google has been collecting since day one.

      Yet another pointless attempt from an Apple Hater to make Apple look bad when they are the only company who actually gives a damn about privacy. How many others have you hurt in your attempts to steer other people away from Apple I wonder...

      --
      "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    5. Re:You are putting the cart before the horse by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      Ahh, protection of data from Apple! I guess that's why they now allow Google to sift through all your iMessages, because they value your protection and privacy!

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    6. Re:You are putting the cart before the horse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Prove it. Its sad how you expect everyone to blindly believe every assertion and lie you claim as the apple gospel truth without providing any form of proof. Pathetic. Your pro apple stance makes me wonder what you are getting out of this.

      LOL Trust me no one is "hurt" in steering clear of apple products. You sound like some sort of sick apple supremacist.

    7. Re: You are putting the cart before the horse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Past and current behaviour?

      This should be good:

      - They complete lie about features on a regular basis to get more sales (see Siri lawsuit, which to this day, cannot do the commands in the commerical. See Australia LTE Tablets, which were sold when there were no available LTE bands to connect to. See... etc.)

      - On a regular basis, they hide things from users. Errors? nope, no crash prompts. Battery bad? Nope, won't tell you. I'll just throttle it until it's unusable instead of saying "hey let's get this fixed". Hey let's fight the FBI for the phone unlocking, but we'll just hand over data from all our cloud servers (which, by the way, you must use because they don't work well with 3rd party solutions)

      - They get as much money out of their users as they possibly can. Taxing everything from headphones to connector cables. Promising to open source things then... oops, some company just sued us... one we could easily buy out without batting an eye.

      Combine those three points, and there certainly have a strong case of hiding the real data that's been collected for ad targetting purposes.

    8. Re: You are putting the cart before the horse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except they donâ(TM)t. Read the story.

    9. Re: You are putting the cart before the horse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dont forget ebook price fixing.
      Stealing ideas from people who write apps for them then banning those apps.
      Taking schools to court over using the image of a apple at the schools.
      Suing a polish guy that wanted to buy the domain a.pl because it looks to much like their stock name.
      Stealing patented tech from University of Wisconsin.

      The list goes on....
      It must take some special kind of rose gold lens to make apple look good.
      No wonder there are so many "apple haters".

    10. Re:You are putting the cart before the horse by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      The whole point of Google's ads is that advertisers can't gather information on you. That separation of the company holding the personal/demographic data and the advertiser is the whole point of their model.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    11. Re:You are putting the cart before the horse by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      The changes have just been made

      So there have been changes.

      to re-assure people what they are not collecting

      You know an easy way to assure people? Not have a terms of service saying we will harvest your soul in the first place. There's no arguing that Apple's policy especially right now is a cut above the rest, but if you believe that their practice has been consistently this way then I have a bridge to sell you.

      Yet another pointless attempt from an Apple Hater

      It's all about perspective fanboi.

    12. Re:You are putting the cart before the horse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is not what your article says. Maybe you don't use iOS so it isn't as clear to you, but this allows you to perform a Google search (of the internet) from within in the messages app. You are not searching your messages, iOS can already do that.

      Nothing leaves the messages app apart from the search string.

    13. Re:You are putting the cart before the horse by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      The whole point of Google's ads is that advertisers can't gather information on you. That separation of the company holding the personal/demographic data and the advertiser is the whole point of their model.

      Yeah, you just proved you are a gullible fool. See, Google doesn't have to sell me that info, your claims about Google prove that.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
  13. GDPR by Xord · · Score: 2

    This post has given me an idea. Google are now claiming to comply with the EU GDPR regulations, so I can submit a request to them for all the personal data they hold on me and they are required to give it to me. Should be an interesting read. It will be also interesting to see how they define holding my personal data for 'no longer than necessary' and how they justify that.

  14. What I'm really curious about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd like to know what Google stores about me.
    I don't think I can simply request that, though.
    I use Search, Maps, Earth, YouTube, and two Android devices, but I don't have a Google account.

  15. Kind of a stupid take by SuperKendall · · Score: 1, Interesting

    So Apple doesn't send a Numbers spreadsheet? It sends Excel?

    Numbers can export Excel document nimrod, they sent out what they thought would be most compatible...

    Only someone as stupid as an Apple Hater can take a positive action by Apple (sending out the most portable document format) and pretend it's a negative.

    I can tell why you post as AC, to hide your shame (which is substantial). But you know in private, we all know you cry yourself to sleep at night...

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Kind of a stupid take by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yet here you are proudly displaying your ignorance under your real name. Your parents must be so proud of you.

    2. Re:Kind of a stupid take by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh...

      Wait, did you just say Apple did somoething that is "most compatible"? There must be a mistake here.

      LOL

    3. Re:Kind of a stupid take by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL

      Exactly. I'm a little surprised apple didn't send the data in a proprietary format that can only be read on one of their crappy laptops. But in all honesty apple has been slipping in their hardware ; software and walled garden game.

  16. Sent within minutes? by Zorpheus · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Makes you wonder if they can really make sure that it is not the wrong person requesting all that data.

    1. Re:Sent within minutes? by Xord · · Score: 1

      It's a good point. The law goes into effect next week, so we will see what checks they do on my identity when I request it.

  17. Slashvertisement? by dk20 · · Score: 0, Troll

    This Slashvertisement brought to you buy Apple.

    Anything else you want to tell us about this wonderful company while you are here?

    1. Re:Slashvertisement? by Stan92057 · · Score: 1

      So ..please tell us who we can trust and buy from? and remember no matter WHO you say is the least evil, you will be plugging their product/products...And question how much you are getting payed to plug them..

      --
      Jack of all trades,master of none
    2. Re:Slashvertisement? by dk20 · · Score: 1

      "u will be plugging their product/products"

      What am i plugging? i just think this reads like one of those "paid advertisements" you sometimes find in newspapers. Sort of like an actual story, but clearly placed as an ad.. but iwhtout the "paid advertisement" banner.

      FWIW, I have an iphone SE and android Galaxy S8.. both have pro's and cons and both are from for-profit companies...

    3. Re:Slashvertisement? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You might as well ask which color the safest email attachments are, which font indicates websites you can "trust and buy from". Something something which cryptocurrency exchange.

      It's a tech forum. Full of people with a hard-on for open source, for roll your own, for Stallman ranting about black boxes. We run articles about how never/under vetted libraries and packages and dependencies are found to have flaws or outright foul play. Articles suspicious about courts that use sealed-code algorithms in their decisions.

      "Trust no one" is too edgy for me to say with a straight face, but I can at least say that asking "how should I faith" around here is a bigger discussion than apple fanboys.

  18. Control the narrative: Dismiss concern. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Control the narrative: Dismiss concern.

    1. Re:Control the narrative: Dismiss concern. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. apple has a media blacklist for a reason.

  19. Microsoft spies on you more than all others by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Massive amounts of personally identifiable info is sent to microsoft if you're using windows 10, no option to turn it off and yet here we have people crying about apple who gives you an easy way to opt-out of everything.

    1. Re: Microsoft spies on you more than all others by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      There are multiple setting changes you can make to reduce the amount of telemetry sent to Microsoft with Windows 10.

    2. Re: Microsoft spies on you more than all others by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yet no opt-out, no way to turn it completely off.

    3. Re: Microsoft spies on you more than all others by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      There is no black/white perfect world out there. I am not happy with the level of telemetry intrusion within Windows 10, but it's not over-the-top outrageous. It's certainly no better or worse than most Android implementations.

  20. I think by DaMattster · · Score: 1

    I am more surprised at the lack of data that Apple has collected from the author of the article. Apple may care more about your privacy than the other companies because it could certainly choose to scrape more data from your service usage and sell it as an additional source of revenue. A 1/2 dozen spreadsheets worth of data is probably not all of that useful beyond debugging and software and hardware improvements.

  21. Apple uses Excel to store data on customers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I doubt that Apple uses MS Access and Excel to store data on billions of customers. He likely received CSV data files.

    1. Re:Apple uses Excel to store data on customers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They don't use it to store, but from my previous involvement with them the use of MS Office is pretty universal in Apple, especially excel.

  22. I think they DO keep text messages by Camembert · · Score: 1

    âoeNone of the files contained content information -- like text messages and photos â Well, if I remember well, last time I changed an iphone, after the setup process it had my past conversations, which i thought was neat, yet it also means that Apple does store the data, perhaps in a way that can only be decrypted using your password.
    I write âoeif I remember wellâ since I may be confusing with icloud. It is definitely the case, and desirably so of course as it is its reason of existence, that your photos and other apps that use icloud are kept bu Apple. Again it all depends whether this is encrypted against their possible own snooping.

  23. Who Do I Ask at MS? At Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I want to know all the information MS has on me after nearly 30 years of using DOS and Windows in a variety of devices. I suspect none from DOS, a little from Win3.1, and a growing amount with each version of Windows from 98 on up.

  24. Re:Apple doesn't trust its own spreadsheet program by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

    Come on, stupid... You can be an Apple customer (iOS, ITMS etc.) without owning a computer that runs macOS and Numbers ("its own spreadsheet program").

    Well, if you are an Apple customer and don't have a Mac, you can still use Numbers on your iPhone, or at iCloud.com.

    --
    Of course news about a fake are Fake News.