Slashdot Mirror
Apple CEO Explains How a Few Billion Dollars From Google Changes His Views on the Company's 'Unsettling' User Data Mining Activities (arstechnica.com)
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.
Google's data mining is terrible. Unless they pay us $9 Billion a year. Then, it's OK.
--Tim Cook.
Google bribed Apple and I'm not sure it could be any more transparent.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
>> 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.
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?
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
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.
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.
- Vincit qui patitur.
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.
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.
Well, he said it right off there. Google search is the best and his customers are used to it. If Apple switched it over to DuckDuckGo it'd be a Apple Maps launch size of complaining and dissatisfaction.
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....
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.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
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...
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 I will continue to use it, though in incognito mode ;-) which I don't mind a single bit.
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...
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).
The reason I use google is for video search. DDG shows only a few. Youtube search is not good enough.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
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!
'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
Yeah, it's like (but not as good as) Google, but without the tracking. Figure that, it's popular that service.
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
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 knuckle under and have their privacy violated while shaking their fist, or cast of technology altogether and become sustenance farmers.
Critical thinking begins at an IQ of around 110, and 2/3rds of humans are below this. People with IQs under 100, and almost certainly those with IQs under 90, could not care less about their private data. Alas, the sub-100 population dwarfs the 120+ folks, so as it so often happen when certain things hit critical mass, average people determine the market ... where the market goes, what companies expect us to tolerate, etc.
Itâ(TM)s not that âoepeopleâ donâ(TM)t care, itâ(TM)s that the people who do care are vastly outnumbered.
This is the main problem with Democracy as a form of government too. Itâ(TM)s idiot rule. You have twice as many below-average people as people in the creative/technical classes, and all the votes count the same. Candidates donâ(TM)t have to make sophisticated arguments to win. In fact, quite the contrary more often than not.
Bottom-line, there are plenty of people who care. Millions. Most of them are in the technical class (sysadmins, developers, etc). Itâ(TM)s the masses that tend not to care, and this is the demographic that companies cater to.
Itâ(TM)s overly-simplistic to use this Darwinian numbers game as evidence that nobody cares.
Proof?
DuckDuckGo have their own crawler, and like any other search engine or AI personal assistant, sometimes they use third-parties for instant answers, 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 surpassed Google by far, as they don't mess with your query, they don't bubble you in your own little world, and you can use advanced queries to target what you really need.