[ad_1]
Monday, during the speech of Apple, Tim Cook presented a refined argument which explains why the services of Apple are different. They are intuitive, of course, and the usual details of Cupertino are complicated, but the important point came in the end. "They are designed to keep your personal information private and secure," he told the public. As each new product – credit card, news service, and premium television service – came out, executives emphasized how much attention they paid to the data in question and importance to protecting the privacy of the user.
From the right angle, you can see a broader picture of how Apple designs the services. With regard to streaming and digital payments, Apple is competing with a generation of technology companies deeply influenced by Jobs and the iPhone. A good sense of design and software ecosystems is a table issue, but not enough to give them an edge over Google and Facebook. The advantage of Apple is that unlike these giants, it does not sell targeted ads, nor does it collect or distribute huge amounts of personal data associated with it. Given this choice, Apple thinks you'll want the digital wallet without the billion-dollar advertising. With this in mind, online services are competing with each other, and Apple is launching as a confidentiality provider.
Apple has already made this presentation, although it has rarely been as pronounced as at the rally on Monday. While Facebook was resisting scandals, Tim Cook has positioned Apple as a responsible technology model, calling for a federal crackdown on data brokers and calls for new privacy standards. For services like Photos and iMessage, where Google and Facebook offer almost identical competitors, Apple wants to keep local data on the device, a step that the competition can not take for business reasons.
The Apple event this week was dedicated to a new credit card integrated with Apple Pay, a reorganized news app, and streaming services for gaming and television. Each of them has the same goal of confidentiality. You spend your money on extremely sensitive data, which is largely monetized through the same data brokers that Cook pushed to regulate. Apple may plausibly claim to be less interested in monetizing your data than Visa or Bank of America because it earns all the money it needs by selling you the device. When the Goldman Sachs partnership for the Apple Card was signed, a carefully worded promise of confidentiality appeared on the scene: "Goldman Sachs will not share or sell your data to third parties for marketing purposes." (The Privacy Page precise map: your data to use Apple Card. ")
The same privacy issues apply to articles you read, which are both potentially sensitive and jam-packed with cross-site tracking to allow sites to earn money. A subscription service removes all of this, at least in theory, leaving only the data to Apple. Netflix and Amazon are not targeting ads, but the new generation of smart TVs is doing more and more, giving you more reason to watch content on your iPad.
Like most Apple projects, it's more of an ecosystem than just one service. If you really believe that Apple protects your data better, you will not be content to use an Apple card to make payments. You will want to use Apple services for all your sensitive data – and of course, you will need Apple devices to do it. Even if the company does not earn extra money with the Apple card, privacy-focused services could generate huge dividends in other parts of society. Basically, Apple still collects a lot of data. In most cases, it's just about sharing it with fewer companies.
There are reasons to be skeptical. Apple still collects much of your data to optimize services and, sometimes, to serve targeted ads, even if it is not done at the scale of Google and Facebook. The fact that his services are private may also be less convincing against Netflix and HBO, Apple's main competitors on streaming TV, both of which sell a fairly simple product, without funding targeted by targeted shenanigans. Perhaps more importantly, Apple's new reputation for privacy protection is based on research that goes beyond iCloud's history of hacking, including the 2014 hacks that compromised security accounts. celebrities and flooded with nude images on the internet. Even if you fully trust Apple, you are entrusting your data to a single, centralized entity that knows who you are, which is inherently riskier than using a patchwork of more federated products.
Still, it's hard to blame Apple for trying. At present, the world of technology is sorely lacking in confidence and any company that can bridge this gap will reap enormous benefits. It's not easy to compete with Google and Facebook, and this kind of privacy game might be the best way to do it. While Apple is starting out in the service sector, it's exactly the right kind of angle.
[ad_2]
Source link