ijeffApple's called Android a "massive tracking device" in an internal presentation
Substance_PIs Apple trying to convince me that the Health app, Apple maps or Siri doesn’t track me?
woelkchenIs Apple trying to convince me that the Health app, Apple maps or Siri doesn’t track me?
No, they are trying to convince themselves. It’s an internal brainwashing presentation after all, not for external PR.
Their slide seems to list Siri, Maps, and iAd not being tied to the user’s Apple ID as a pro. I didn’t realize this was the case.
Apple has very explicitly stated in very clear terms that the health app does not share data with other apps or devices unless you give permission. And as someone who has given that permission (twice, once to give a meal tracker write permission and once to link to my doctors office’s application for read and write) it’s for every application. It’s not a “hey you need to let everyone have access or no one”. You can get fairly granular.
There’s always the possibility of lying but usually when a company goes that hard on saying the same thing is so many different ways it’s legit. They don’t commit like that unless they know they won’t get in trouble. Those kinds of statements could open them to false advertising claims if it got out they were taking your health data.
Here’s a link to their privacy document which reviewed a good bit of info: https://www.apple.com/privacy/docs/Health_Privacy_White_Paper_May_2023.pdf
I’ll stand corrected on my original comment then. I hope that with Google being dragged through the courts at the moment, perhaps it may inspire more interest and conversation about how our data is handled and how it pertains to the implications around privacy.
Possibly linuxGoogle doesn’t make money off of those so its OK.
Health app has encrypted data that doesn’t go to Apple without explicit permission
Apple is 100% correct. It’s the entire reason Android exists.
Then again, Apple also does a fair bit of data collection. I hate that Apple has been able to market themselves as some kind of bastion of privacy. They aren’t.
Apple is 100% correct. It’s the entire reason Android exists.
Then again, Apple also does a fair bit of data collection. I hate that Apple has been able to market themselves as some kind of bastion of privacy. They aren’t.
So Apple is not 100% correct. They are 50% correct because the second half of their claim is that Apple is somehow different and not tracking its users…
When the pot calls the kettle black, it is technically correct.
I believe the reason Google acquired Android was to make sure that Apple didn’t dominate the mobile device landscape, which would be a threat to their ad business. The data collection was just a nice side-effect, from their perspective.
NathI think you underestimate how early Google acquired Android. In 2005, Apple wasn’t even in the mobile device market. Nokia were the dominant handset in those days.
This. If anything, they wanted to claw back some of that Blackberry market. Apple wasn’t even on anybody’s mind yet on the mobile side of things.
EldritchAll cell phones are tracking devices. Unless you faraday cage them. But yes, both apple and Android phones give out way more information than just that. And I definitely would not say that I would trust Apple more with data that I would Google.
Genuine question: in what ways do Apple track iOS users (that cannot be turned off)?
KazuyaDarklightThey both track you fairly closely. There are no winners if you are primarily concerned about privacy. Google is simply more open about it, and provides more access to that data to you (like timeline and takeout).
Actually, the reason Android exists isn’t so one-dimensional.
- The company Android was initially concerned more with Microsoft dominating phones like they did computers at the time, before being bought by Google
- They created two prototype chains initially, one touch, one that was more akin to BlackBerry
- iPhone came out, they ditched the BlackBerry-esque one and focused on what became now Android
Google was mostly just doing what all tech companies were doing at the time, trying to compete in a mobile arms race for dominance. The data tracking was just a bonus. Appeasing shareholders is paramount. Look at how Apple created an Alexa speaker just because they had to as another example of this type of behavior.
Also, Apple actually has a long history of tracking user behavior that predates both Android and the iPhone.
Apple apps since some time shortly after the inception of OS X would (and likely still do) phone home to configuration.apple.com to send apple metrics on usage. Earlier variations of LittleSnitch could actually block this collection behavior.
Apple has since reconfigured the network stack to guarantee that direct encrypted connections to Apple are always possible above any VPN, or other type of network filter connection. So there’s no way to prevent communication with Apple on an Apple product at all now short of keeping it off the Internet or blocking DNS to 17.* IP addresses, which would only work on a network one has control over.
Pot, meet kettle
Lol. Best comment.
FuckyWucky [none/use name]Says them.
They’re not wrong.
Apple has a better stance on data privacy than google because their profit model is being a premium consumer device whereas googles profit model is being a provider of ads.
Apple’s incentives are closer to the consumer since they want to make the consumer happy while googles incentives are aligned with the trackers because that improves ad revenue.
This changes the DNA of the OS.
Don’t trust either of course but I simply do have more confidence my apple data isn’t being exploited as much as my google data simply because Apple doesn’t stand as much to gain and stands more to lose from being embarrassed on the issue.
And pointing to custom android roms that replace google services with FOSS alternatives is a technically correct but still wrong answer to this because it doesn’t reflect the reality of the overwhelming majority of android users.
That is what they publicly say. However more than one company has discovered they can double dip: sell their premium devices and still track them. So long as they are not caught they get more $$$. I don't know if Apple is, but it is a risk.
I think the emphasis on better is key here. They’re better than Google on this front but not necessarily great.
Naive view of apple lol
My ads got way less creepily targeted when i switched back to iphone. It’s not perfect but it’s the best option for people who don’t want tofuck around with degoogling and all that.
sexy_peachI use android and yeah, it is.
Don’t forget our vehicles are also tracking us. Soon our Ai trainers will have enough data to guide us in their path and we’ll love what they tell they tell us we should do.
One more advantage of the used cars I buy: the cell network they can connect to doesn't exist anymore (the radios don't exist, the company itself exists, but they have upgraded towers to not support older cell connections).
My vehicle does not track me. I will take my old car to my grave
This logic is so short sighted... You are one accident away from being in this shiti market.
How do people not understand this simple concept?
You ain't opting out of jack shit peasant.
I have never had an accident in my life and I hope to continue that trend. However, if I need to replace my car I’ll just get something else old and used. I’m fine working on my own car and I don’t need a fancy set of wheels
Still missing the point...
Not mine the fuse to my modem has the leg cut off. It’s a triple leg fuse.
HubertManneThe real question when it comes to privacy is how much you can modify the device and os to get rid of the tracking.
Grammaton ClericYeah, but Android doesn’t make me constantly enter my password to do basic things. Also, Apple takes away a lot of control from their consumers.
I’ll take the phone that isn’t dumbed down tyvm
Ideally you shouldn’t have to compromise. GrapheneOS without Google is an option.
It literally isn't - Graphene only supports Google Pixel phones.
TrickDacyYou’ve apparently missed the point. Graphene exists solely to harden security and privacy by disabling the googly parts of the phone. That is clearly what was meant by “without Google”
BaroqueInMindYou can do that without Graphene though
Graphene is is way over hyped. You can basically the same thing with lineage os. The key is just not using gsf
Unlocked bootloader is considered a vulnerability tho
But if your threats model is toxic Tim, satya and sundae, it will dontje job
You can relock the bootloader though can’t you?
Genuine question. I used to be an avid Roamer back int day until I got really really annoyed at all the hoops I had to jump through to use Google Wallet.
Now I have a Pixel 7a and I’m considering ROMs again. So I am wondering if I can just relock the bootloader once I find a ROM I like and it’ll pass all the Safety net bullshit and allow me to use my phone like it should be, just with a custom ROM on it.
most phones nowadays don’t support relocking the bootloader, they will brick
pixel does support it still
Thanks for this info
Graphene and calyx would work for you
ExcursionInversionThe kids need to use their buzzwords though
LaggyKarBut then you can’t use any apps that require Play Services. The killer feature of GrapheneOS is letting you run Play Services in a sandbox.
Microg will most jobs tho
But that is unethical. Don’t run proprietary software when there are good alternatives. I don’t want google anywhere near my devices
SatyrSackWhy would you even do that in a sandbox? Aren’t you sending your personal data to Google servers all the same?
You can use MicroG instead of play services and most apps will work.
And how do you know there aren't hardware level trackers in Google's chips? Do you trust them that much?
Ultimately you can’t know everything. At some point you have to trust someone. The graphene people seem to know they are doing imo. Ultimately everything is flawed, you just have to know when to say "good enough ". The pixel hardware is pretty great imo and they are often cheap, so I think it’s worth considering them given that they can be hardened in various ways.
Because this will get .001% more total data considering the low number of GrapheneOS users. Besides, this is highly illegal and would result in significant public outcry and legal consequences far greater in cost than any potential benefits.
And if you cannot trust Google with their processors, you cannot trust any other company either.
Because all of that has stopped OEMs in the past...oh wait! No it hasn't (looks at Lenovo)
Yeah I trust them not to do it. Cause when it was found out not if when it would hurt them.
The people who install Graphene and other modified Android variants on their devices are a lot more likely to be monitoring packets sent from their devices.
Believe me, we’d know the same day an android device that had been de-Googled called home. That would make worldwide news.
Just use Lineage os