(no title)
dialtone | 4 years ago
It's pretty obvious Apple doesn't have financially valuable properties on the web but they have plenty in their application ecosystem.
In Apple's view Apple News is how people consume news, not go to the web where the user experience isn't custom tailored by Apple. Apple News is barely different than Google AMP that everyone rages against, try to get someone to share a link to a piece of news from Apple News and it will come with the ask to subscribe or download it.
So in Apple's ideal plan almost every place where today ads are displayed will be inside Apple News.
And hey, I wasn't aware there exist another App Store where people can buy applications or in-app purchases on iOS.
And yeah you can turn FLoC off too both today and when it will be in production.
Lastly, when did the argument move from "advertising bad, tracking data always bad, targeted advertising terrible" to "if Apple does it then I'm good with it"?
pvg|4 years ago
when did the argument move from "advertising bad, tracking data always bad, targeted advertising terrible" to "if Apple does it then I'm good with it"?
It'd be a lot cooler if you could respond to my actual argument without namecalling and putting words in my mouth. For one thing, it's rude; for another, it doesn't contain much of a counter-argument.
You said the distinction between what Apple does and Google does is 'thin'. The distinction is Apple does this in two specific services of their own, one of which is completely optional and in both cases, the cohort bucketing and tracking can be turned off. Google is putting it in the browser people use to do just about everything on the internet. A roughly similar thing would be Apple adding cohort bucketing to Safari. They haven't. These seem, to me at least, some significant distinctions. Why do you think they aren't?
dialtone|4 years ago
So your argument is maybe valid (I don't think so, tracking is tracking and this isn't just contextual targeting) only now, as time goes by and Apple accumulates more power your argument is back to being invalid again.
unknown|4 years ago
[deleted]