Maybe the open source promise of Android was indeed a lie. To me this industry has no value to society at all.<p>Not a fan of Apple, but they seem to be serious about privacy showing other companies how it is done.<p>Microsoft could have really established itself as an alternative to Google on the same front, but they utterly failed by mirroring the worst aspects of the disastrous landscape we see on mobile devices. I hope their telemetry generates billions too, since that is probably in the range of their missed opportunities for both desktop and mobile devices.<p>Some still pretend that users want personalized ads and want to be tracked. Yes, there are some that really do. Glad we get options for the other ones.
This is a big reason why I continue to use apple devices.<p>They seem to be one of the few large tech companies that aligns themselves with users rights to privacy.<p>Apple isn’t perfect. But they build very good privacy and security into their products. And they structure their UI and defaults in such a way that the average user benefits with no effort or specialized knowledge.
I have a serious question. Obviously if one were to choose between an ad-free experience and an ad-full experience, one would choose ad-free. But, if ads were needed for monetization, wouldn't you choose personalized vs non-personalized?
Personally, I would go with personalized because a non-personalized experienced usually has no relevancy and frankly it is inefficient use of money in this world.
From there, it really comes down to companies invading your privacy, usually they make the wrong assumptions from it. Why can't there be a way for me to tell the ad-world what I'm in the market for and have them stop trying to snoop around and guess what I want?
Most may say that making a Google search is enough to tell ads what I want but I think there are a ton of assumptions made there.
In a previous life I worked in ad-tech, and I don't think it's as black and white as the OP makes it out to be. I think that's actually a Bad Thing™️ as this industry needs to profoundly change or die.<p>This isn't a new, unexpected thing for sell or demand side ad-tech platforms, they've seen the death of IDFA coming for a few years. The reality is that this will likely stop more 'above board' players (a good thing) but the gray area and outright malicious, scummy ad and data companies will still attempt to generate unique identifiers through things like native fingerprinting. I think Apple will also stop them incerementally, but this sadly isn't an outright victory.<p>I don't understand it myself, but people DO opt-in to personalised ads in pretty decent numbers, it's anecdata, but I've seen data from very large control trials (testing for exactly this scenario) where ~50% of users opt-in. The devil is in the detail with these things: what will the copy be? will alternatives be presented? how will users be able to link 'value' to what they're being asked for?
This won't be the end of it. It's just one of the many battles.<p>And iOS isn't for everyone. Yes it's great for protecting privacy but it's also extremely restrictive for the users. The fact that they don't even allow real third-party browsers is baffling in this day and age. I also can't use my Yubikey in OpenPGP mode which I really need for my password manager and SSH access. I know it supports U2F now but that's not enough (and was way too late as well).<p>But I agree the advertising industry has to die. I don't believe in the 'working together' approach of the EFF with their plugins that stop blocking cookies when they see the privacy policy file. I mean, if you're not tracking me, then why need third party cookies in the first place?<p>It'll never happen though. They'll always find a way to track us.
This is the number one feature on iOS 14 that I cannot wait for. I am getting very tired of finding out that unrelated services know that I have used a specific app (like Facebook knows way too much).<p>Somewhat related (even though this is focused on Apps). I have noticed an uptick in websites that don't support safari, likely due to how they handle cookies. I hope this does not become super common (but I can't imagine many sites wanting to loose out on the iOS market)
I've been using the full desktop version of the ublock origin plugin on firefox mobile for quite some time, and it's dramatically improved my mobile experience.
If an entire industry dies because users were given an explicit upfront choice, because of one popup like the article says, then it wasn’t a productive industry.<p>We’ll see what really happens.
>But being the most popular mobile ecosystem<p>I keep seeing quote similar to this about Apple's iOS being so popular, yet the numbers clearly show that Android devices/users out number iOS. Are they saying that even with those numbers, Android is unpopular and people would rather be an iOS user? Is the price point whats preventing them?
Since there is already an incentive for apps to grow as big as possible to show ads to earn more money, I wonder if there is a legitimate way to slow-pivot all the app stores to an automatic developer payout; no IAP or monthly subscription per user per app or ads shown in app, simply a payout to devs based on app install size.<p>Where does the money come to make those payouts and how do the app store owners still make money per download too?<p>I wonder if, with increased care about privacy in consumer minds, Apple or Google would try an Apple-Arcade-style subscription for apps. Users could pay $5/month (or tired,lower/higher rates) and get access to a selection of 'paid' apps without having to pay per app.<p>Devs would still be incentivized pretty much the same and users would have higher-quality apps with fewer ads.<p>Just thinking out loud.
Worth noting that you can already get some of these benefits today by going to Settings -> Privacy -> Advertising and turning on "Limit Ad Tracking".<p>This sends an all-zeros IDFA to all APIs that request it^1.<p>iOS 14 begins the new prompts, lets you toggle this on a per-app basis, and, by being in front of users is just about guaranteed to dramatically increase the number of users who are opted-in.<p>[^1] <a href="https://support.appsflyer.com/hc/en-us/articles/115003734626-FAQ-Impact-of-Apple-Limit-Ad-Tracking-on-attribution" rel="nofollow">https://support.appsflyer.com/hc/en-us/articles/115003734626...</a>
Unless all traffic is routed through Apple servers advertisers will still be able to track the ip address.<p>(A visit to some url, say google.com, with login cookie, and the link between ip and user is made again.)
While I applaud the feature and hope it gets used by everyone, the idea that it's going to harm FB/Google/Etc. is unlikely.<p>There's a good argument to be made here that it will actually _entrench_ them.<p>Facebook's power comes not just from being creepy, but by having built an internet-wide advertising platform that anyone can run ads on. You run ads in one place and billions of people can see them.<p>While IDFA blocking is nice, it does basically nothing to change FB's incentives. Until using the personal data they've collected to run ads is illegal, they'll continue to collect it (and probably after, let's be honest).<p>All the while, the complexities of running an effective ad network get higher and higher, making it harder for 3rd parties to compete against FB.<p>At the end of the day, we have to make ads targeted with previously collected personal data illegal. End of story.
But doesn't this privacy setting get nullified anyway by companies tracking your device at the cellular network level? I'm not too familiar with it, but regardless of whether you accept cookies, etc., they are able to ID you through your carrier anyway?
While I believe Apple making the right choice, perhaps they could also find a way to help app developers make money, without ads.<p>Perhaps one of the reasons developer include ads and tracking is that recurring revenue is a problem for small developments shops.
Once this feature is released and verified live, this is a big reason for me to potentially move back to iPhone.<p>I just hope Apple follows through on their promises and not backout of it like they did with some of the end to end encryption stuff with iCloud.
Neither Internet or TV advertising ever worked for me in the US. As a matter of fact I always tended to avoid whatever was advertised to me or whoever targeted me since I know I will end up paying for that myself when I buy their product and I'd rather not.<p>So as a customer I think they should offer me free ads blocking since seeing the ads would make me avoid those products. If we want to see this industry change we should all make clear it rarely works and it's an absolute waste of money.<p>What worked were ads that were creative back in the day before they all became canned into the same thing, same voices, etc. Back in Europe the advertising USED TO BE a lot more fun, I'd genuinely enjoy watch some commercials on TV, to the point of watching an hour compilation of said best ads.
If you're working in ads and this comes as a surprise to you, then you haven't been doing your homework. Steve Jobs himself, RIP, announced this over 10 years ago.
To anyone that took GDPR seriously and not as a reason to shove another popup in everybody's face this doesn't come as a surprise<p>It will be even better when advertisers (that is, the ones that pay for ads, not the ad networks) realize that "over tracking" and retargeting are just ways of parting them with their money but doesn't increase conversions.<p>You have basic info about your user, you don't need to track them to 11
Apple is a bit naive. How will they block adtech companies fingerprinting TF out of users?<p>There's too much money on the plate. Companies such as Adjust have fingerprinting tech and announced this as one option against Apple's move. All GDPR compliant because they don't need to get user's approval but their customers need to. And do their customers ask for approval <i>before</i> fingerprinting? Isn't the approval not often mandatory for using the app? Or somewhere buried deep in the Privacy Statement and given <i>afterwards</i>? And if customers just fingerprinted without approval how would Apple ever find out that Appsflyer or Adjust just were used to fingerprint and to track you until you get your next iPhone?<p>If Apple was serious about privacy they would have detected and banned anyone using fingerprint SDKs. As sad this sounds for most users: Adtech won't die, Apple will rather make fingerprinting tech even stronger.
Always interesting to see the "advertising industry needs to die" comments here. 40% of FAANG is built purely on advertising (7% of the S&P500). Some non-zero percent of commenters are employed by adtech funded companies.
When did Medium get a “sign up” paywall?<p>It feels like more and more content linked on HN is paywalled, adblockwalled, or otherwise obscured these days.
Off topic, I have been enjoying the iOS and iPadOS version 14 betas.<p>This privacy feature is pro-consumer and I am all for it! I pay money to Google (GCP, Play entertainment stuff) and FaceBook (Oculus VR addict, here!), but I don't want them using any of my data to enrich themselves or other companies.<p>Everyone should read "The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power." It was printed about 15 months ago, but is still highly relevant to both convince people that there is a serious problem and also advice on fighting back.
<!-- You are not allowed to visit this page on a Safari browser/iOS --><p>Apple didn't solve that the ad industry is an alternative for paying to see a website's content.<p>So what will happen is that:<p>- Safari/iOS users will be required to pay for a ad-supported website<p>- Safari/iOS users will be denied access to the website