Facebook has seemed to take the apple app-tracking update a little more to the heart than others and it is not coming down easy.
On Wednesday, two professors of reputed universities and Facebook's funded researchers published a paper pointing out everything wrong with the seemingly 'perfect' policy meant for added privacy and security. To be more specific, they claimed the strategy to be "anticompetitive and disguised as a privacy-protecting measure."
D. Daniel Sokol, who is working as a professor of law at the University of Florida Levin College of Law and Feng Zhu, Harvard Business School's associate professor of business administration went ahead to pick the service apart and let the world know that Apple is at its play again. As you might know, Apple is prohibiting the use of information gathered by non-Apple apps that provide relevant information to secure a more personalized and targeted campaign. The company warns users about all ads that have a seemingly 'opt-in' functionality that would be used to track users. However, it does so only with non-Apple apps while Apple applications keep tracking users and delivering optimized content.
They further stated that Apple's policy will dominate iOS use as well as iOS applications among users by seemingly 'protecting' their data when in turn they'll be reducing consumer choice and ruining the free-app ecosystem.
This research, although reeking of incentive, has shone a new light on the whole matter. It is quite true that Apple only warns users about third-party tracking and fails to add its tracking policies to the warning list. For instance, Cupertino doesn't require a consensual agreement before tracking users.
Also, Apple has a clever way of diminishing all third-party apps from the user base without making it obvious. It charges taxes on other non-Apple apps, which makes them less popular among iPhone users which in turn, reduces their popularity. This disables them from switching to a paid model to assist their business.
While there were countless arguments based on Apple's notions, Facebook does tend to be a little biased. These strategies would indeed harm iOS users in the long run, it is only a matter of time until iOS users figure it out.
We are now quite skeptical about Apple’s true intentions and using the term ‘privacy’ to mask them isn’t exactly a wise decision. It is working for them at the moment as cybercrime and piracy increase and people are looking for more ways to secure data, it is quite saddening to see such a large and reputable brand using it to their advantage.
Lastly, we would like to comment on how Facebook and Apple continue making our lives dramatic due to their ongoing rivalry. The public seems to benefit the most as both unleash the terrors and misdemeanors of the rival party.
If you’ve been keeping tabs on their rivalry for some time now, comment below which one do you think will secure the user’s trust in the long run.
Screenshot: Tim Cook.
Read next: Digital marketers are not much satisfied with the performance of recently launched Apple ad format
On Wednesday, two professors of reputed universities and Facebook's funded researchers published a paper pointing out everything wrong with the seemingly 'perfect' policy meant for added privacy and security. To be more specific, they claimed the strategy to be "anticompetitive and disguised as a privacy-protecting measure."
D. Daniel Sokol, who is working as a professor of law at the University of Florida Levin College of Law and Feng Zhu, Harvard Business School's associate professor of business administration went ahead to pick the service apart and let the world know that Apple is at its play again. As you might know, Apple is prohibiting the use of information gathered by non-Apple apps that provide relevant information to secure a more personalized and targeted campaign. The company warns users about all ads that have a seemingly 'opt-in' functionality that would be used to track users. However, it does so only with non-Apple apps while Apple applications keep tracking users and delivering optimized content.
They further stated that Apple's policy will dominate iOS use as well as iOS applications among users by seemingly 'protecting' their data when in turn they'll be reducing consumer choice and ruining the free-app ecosystem.
This research, although reeking of incentive, has shone a new light on the whole matter. It is quite true that Apple only warns users about third-party tracking and fails to add its tracking policies to the warning list. For instance, Cupertino doesn't require a consensual agreement before tracking users.
Also, Apple has a clever way of diminishing all third-party apps from the user base without making it obvious. It charges taxes on other non-Apple apps, which makes them less popular among iPhone users which in turn, reduces their popularity. This disables them from switching to a paid model to assist their business.
While there were countless arguments based on Apple's notions, Facebook does tend to be a little biased. These strategies would indeed harm iOS users in the long run, it is only a matter of time until iOS users figure it out.
We are now quite skeptical about Apple’s true intentions and using the term ‘privacy’ to mask them isn’t exactly a wise decision. It is working for them at the moment as cybercrime and piracy increase and people are looking for more ways to secure data, it is quite saddening to see such a large and reputable brand using it to their advantage.
Lastly, we would like to comment on how Facebook and Apple continue making our lives dramatic due to their ongoing rivalry. The public seems to benefit the most as both unleash the terrors and misdemeanors of the rival party.
If you’ve been keeping tabs on their rivalry for some time now, comment below which one do you think will secure the user’s trust in the long run.
Read next: Digital marketers are not much satisfied with the performance of recently launched Apple ad format
