Apple
Apple
Out of context: Reply #2896
- Started
- Last post
- 3,604 Responses
- NBQ002
- The black & white yes/no is going to screw advertising. Which matters, as most of the shit online is for free... due to targeted advertising.inteliboy
- Good thing advertisers have a far superior, larger market with the android platform that surely won’t be as shit as Apple. And they will win because Apple sucksmonospaced
- Acting like everything online is Apple is kinda missing the big picturemonospaced
- It's a nice PR effort, but, like that stupid "Accept all cookies" crap on every website outside of the US, it'll just turn into a pain in the ass.formed
- People have decided long ago that convenience is the #1 priority, which included free articles that rely 100% on ad dollars.formed
- Apple cares only about their profits, thinking they care about people is a joke. It's smart business on their part, but that's all it is.formed
- It’s not a PR stunt. It’s what Apple stands for with privacy. Nothing new even. Also how can it be a nuisance if you only have to tap it once ever for an app?monospaced
- People actually decided that targeted ads are not really that desireable which is why this is going to be considered good for people.monospaced
- You argue they only care about profit, but this doesn’t make them money.monospaced
- not acting like anything, just stating something. personally I think it's a good thing. guess am not as cynical as formed.inteliboy
- It’s definitely a good thing. That’s always been a good thing about Apple. They have always refused to sell data for profit with advertisers.monospaced
- Now I know the face behind all those overinflated tire app icons on my iPhone.utopian
- mono, I get you'll defend anything Apple, but c'mon, they are one of the most profitable companies in the world, of course money is what matters!formed
- This is good business for them as it hurts their competition. And yes, people go on Facebook and Google, enjoy reading/watching free content, etc.formed
- Obviously I am not saying transparency isn't good, but when it hurts content creators, then you have to weigh the pros/cons.formed
- Most of the news and articles I read won't survive without ads.formed
- Google is actually on Apple’s side: https://www.bloomber…NBQ00
- ^because they launched FLoC https://www.eff.org/…grafician
- I certainly do NOT defend anything Apple. Ridiculous. I never said they don't care about money either. I pointed out that for Privacy, they are quite serious.monospaced
- I can't believe you would side with "content creators" as if Privacy regulation was not more important than them tracking your every move. Fucking hell.monospaced
- Well, you do, but that's another discussion. It's about a balance. I hate Facebook more than anything else online and pray it dies, but people have no problemformed
- giving their data to access it constantly. Everyone knows what it does, everyone knows of all the hacks, everywhere, but no one leaves, so it's all there.formed
- There are no absolutes. These are mega companies with their own agendas in mind, that's it. Money is what matters, and whether it's PR or giving things forformed
- free, it's in their best interest, no one else's.
Remember iAds? Yeah. If that hadn't flopped we'd be having a different chat.formed - Just because we are being tracked by other companies doesn’t mean Apple has to follow suite. Their decision here will be copied and become the norm.monospaced
- Your argument that people don’t care and that Apple is doing this for money is odd, because people DO care and this isn’t a money grabbing schememonospaced
- And no, I do not defend all things apple. This thread is proof. In fact, every post I’ve made is a criticism.monospaced