Apple adds new "Limit Ad Tracking" feature to iOS 6 - Page 2

While attending one too many Android encore presentation, would you enjoy Google tracking the movement of your privates, deeply embedded in your underwear, as it ...uncoils to half-tension, for...'in extenso' seduced by its proposition?

 I guess you would, for Google would know first hand that you don't, in the bliss of this instance, have any need for a fail-proof condom...

 

Nope, based on the fact that Google was fined for being guilty while not having to admit that guilt, of overriding tracking cookie preferences in MY browser by using subterfuge and a browser hack, this was in spite of reassurances they specifically gave the US government, that they would respect people's requests not to be tracked.

That is a very interesting point.  I'll be watching the App store top downloads after iOS6 is released to watch for youtube and maps.  I know I won't be downloading them.  I don't use YouTube at all anyway and I'm happy to support Apple's new map app.

Agreed.  Google would be sitting great financially riding Apple's iOS and iPhone tails if they weren't so greedy to go head to head.  They would have been in a WAY BETTER position being Apple's Best Friend and Apps go-to-person.

 

Wonder how nice that future would have been.

That's a very good point - I've never thought about how Google would be making more money by cooperating with Apple instead of copying the iPhone. As someone pointed out, Google makes very little ad revenue on mobile devices, and they don't get royalties on Android phones or tablets. So every move by Apple that replaces a default Google app with something else is a kick in the wallet to Google. Not to mention the $12.5 billion Google had to spend for Motorola as a hedge against Apple patents, and now Motorola is losing patent cases against Apple.

Edited by elroth - 9/13/12 at 9:58pm

and rely on a third party for their success? that would've been rather dumb. What happens when Microsoft makes a better offer? Or maybe Apple decides to go their own route with services anyways? The only reason you think it would've been smart for Google to rely solely on Apple for their mobile success is because you gargle Apples like 90% of the people here.

Google had plans of going mobile since 2005...before Schmidt was even on the board at Apple so you can't even use the faulty tinfoil hat logic to claim he stole that idea.

Maybe the entire WORLD should bow the ego of Apple and the late Mr. Jobs?

And you people have strange definitions of copy.

By your logic the first person to build a working aircraft after the Wright Brothers* was a copycat and shouldn't exist and should've been sued into oblivion because they weren't the first to venture into such a field...

Then again you are the same people who feel a GUI should belong to one company not much logic here.

 

 

The timing....they copied the timing of the concept of the product.

 

 

No other points are necessary. When Eric Schmidt was blown away by the iPhone concept and UX, they changed the direction Google was taking by180 degrees and they copied Apple's path because he saw how much better it was. And because Samsung was so far behind, they, too, decided that copying their competitor would be much quicker than developing their own.

 

Apple is calling them out on it.

 

I got my gloves on.

Edited by Dickprinter - 9/13/12 at 10:56pm

I also note that the "Diagnostics and Usage" got invisibly changed to "Automatically Send" in my iOS 6 iPhone 4S, even though it was set to "Don't Send" when iOS 5 was installed.

I guess this is just collateral damage when upgrading, but it's not something you think about each time.

are you serious? 1.5 years after the iPhone and half a year after the 3G...that's when Android was released to the public...or nearly 2 years after the announcement of the iPhone or 2.33 years after Schmidt joined the board.

How the hell do you copy the timing by being 1.5 years behind it's release...how is it wrong to adjust your product which is unreleased and is by nature malleable to better compete in a new era of mobile computing ushered in by Apple? Since when is "damn that's hot, that's definitely the way to go about shit, what we been doing is wack" a bad thing?

If anyone truly paid any attention to Android 1.0 you'd realize it was obviously rushed to get to market before it was too late to even be a competitor. It was rushed because they didn't want to be left behind. Android didn't even truly (subjectively) catch up to iOS until May of THIS year...ICS was close, before that (including 2.3 IMO) the OS was ugly and extremely buggy IMO...and I say that as a fan of the damn thing.

But how and why is any of that bad? No one can explain that...the overarching theme seems to be that "it's bad because it competes with Apple and Schmidt was on Apple's board...and other illogical stuff I'll type a lot and hope that makes true."


EVERYONE was blown away...even though the device was extremely crippled...it was a game changer...no doubt about it. But so what...it changed the game, and now it's not the only player in the game...they still have the star player, score the most points, get the most endorsements, etc etc etc...they are not hurt and are arguably even helped by the other players in the game....so why is that an issue?

Samsung nearly directly visually 1:1 copied Apple...that's not up for debate IMO...Google on the other hand made a smart choice and modified their malleable OS to work better as a touch based OS with capacitance to better compete in an emerging market.

No one can explain how that's bad.


edit: Also, Mr. Printer, how long should a company wait to enter an emerging fast moving market?

How long do you feel Google should've waited until releasing Android unto the masses to avoid being called "timing copycats" ?
Edited by AbsoluteDesignz - 9/13/12 at 11:29pm

 

Interesting that you bring up the Wright Brothers:-

 

http://www.ideablawg.ca/blog/tag/curtiss-wright-corporation

 

But then you are deep in the Google fantasyland where Apple invented suing over patents.

 

Well, that's the whole idea of participating in a beta program.

 

How else will Apple iron out the bugs if people are too selfish to share them with them?

 

Don't like it, don't participate, wait for the final release like everyone else.

I don't recall saying that...and Wright Brothers had an asterix for a reason. I figured you'd get the point instead of being pedantic...but I see you made the rather predictable choice.

 

 

Instead of asking him how Android infringes iOS why don't you just go read the news headlines or one of the many other threads dedicated to this conversation? Since, you opened the can of worms. HTC was found to infringe Apple's 647 data syncing patent. Apple brought this over from the days of Mac OS. It is where the OS can recognize particular data (e.g. a phone number or date) and give you the option to perform tasks based on the data. When somebody sends you an email with a date, the OS understands the data and gives you the option to mark the date in the calendar. HTC has since worked around the patent, but it was found to infringe. All Android used or uses this patent. Microsoft has a license to use the patent. 

 

There was also the swipe to unlock that HTC was found to unlock, which was common on all Android devices. That of course has been modified. 

 

Motorola (as was Samsung) was just been found to infringe Apple's rubber band patent, which is or was a commonality in many Android devices. 

 

Moreover, there are some of the ones Samsung was found to infringe that applies to all Android devices. For instance, on an iOS device when you tap on a web article you are reading the OS removes sidebars and centers the article. Not practiced before iOS, and Samsung was found to infringe. Again that had nothing to do with Touch Wiz. 

 

Apple also has a patent on pinch to zoom, which Samsung was found to infringe. Google cautiously left that out of Android at first. Now it is there. The patent might seem obvious now, but not when Apple came out with it. The idea itself predates Apple, and Apple acquired the patents from Finger works. 

 

I am not going to debate the merit of the patents, as these few examples are ones where Apple has won in Court. There are many waiting to be litigated yet. 

 

Further, every Android manufacturer except Motorola is paying Microsoft hefty licensing fees. Motorola will be as well soon. Makes sense as a smartphone is nothing more than a small computer, and Microsoft has been making computer OSes for a long time. The only company making them longer is Apple (while maybe not only, if you consider HP, Texas Instruments, and IBM). Even though the same companies are offering to pay Apple a licensing fee, Apple isn't interested in licensing as is Microsoft. 

 

Moreover, the other poster is right. Android changed almost over night after the iPhone was released. Further, it stunk that Google through Google's CEO sitting on Apple's board had access to early information. There is also Apple's 263 patent. This covers real time computer APIs that Apple has accused both Motorola and HTC of violating. This was invented by Apple years ago while Andy Rubin, Google's Android product manager, was an engineer at Apple working on the same team. Judge Posner (a famous judge) ruled Motorola did infringe the patent and that the patent was valid. He, however, dismissed the case because Apple couldn't prove damages. Posner then came out and said he didn't like software patents. Apple is now asserting that patent against HTC. Again, this patent applies to all Android 

Edited by TBell - 9/14/12 at 7:09am

Bottom line...

 

When browsing from home or work, I am in a fixed place that is known to many people I do business with.

 

When I am mobile it is NON OF THEIR BUSINESS WHERE I AM OR WHERE I AM GOING!!!!!!!!!! /endrant
 

 

 

Google's application, meaning the patent hasn't been awarded. 

Obviously, you have no concept of how business works. Companies are most successful when they focus on their strengths and do not try to make everything but the kitchen sink - and then continue to improve their products and services.

We know that Google makes considerably more advertising money per iOS device than per Android device. And that's before you consider all their development and legal costs surrounding Android (not to mention their $12 B purchase of Motorola). From a business perspective, it is quite likely that they would have been far better off if they had not headed down the Android path.

Yep. In 2005, Google was working on copying Blackberry. It was only after the iPhone came out that they switched to copying the iPhone.

I guess that's better than the entire world simply copying Apple.

If the Wright Brothers had gotten specific patents for aspects of their technology, then they certainly would have had every right to sue infringers into oblivion. That is not, however, the same as claiming that the first one to venture into a field have the right to keep others out - as you are claiming.

Apple never said that no one else should make a mobile phone. They simply want people to stop stealing their IP. Why does that offend you so much?

Who ever claimed that Apple should be the only company to offer a GUI? Nice straw man.

Now, if you are saying that APPLE's GUI should belong to Apple, that's correct. Other companies are free to develop their own products without infringing on Apple's patents. But no one ever suggested that Apple should be the only company to offer a GUI.

 

Yes, apart from their illegal and unethical business practices, and their complete disregard, even disdain, for personal privacy, and, thus, personal freedom, Google's greatest weakness is the combination of lack of focus and their megalomaniacal desire to control everything.

 

Perhaps if they had more focus, they'd actually be able to innovate, rather than simply turning everything they do into a cheap knockoff.

 

But, in the end, it's their disdain for privacy that will turn, and is turning, the public against them and will lead to their fall. People are just starting to become aware of the depth and breadth of invasiveness of Google into their lives, and the more they learn about it, the less they like it, the more uncomfortable it makes them. The eventual and inevitable backlash cannot come too soon and will be devastating to Google's business model.

 

But that lack of focus LETS them better control everything.

 

Without their 20 whatever it is percent of "free time", they never would have made self-driving cars (which is really the only thing they've ever done of which I approve), and even those will be full of ads and drive you to the stores that pay Google enough against your will.

After owning several android phones / tablets, and having made extensive use of Google products, I've switched to IOS.  Why? because I'm growing increasingly wary of Google's privacy violations.  Especially after learning about the wifi raiding perpetrated by the Google streetview cars.  I now own an iPhone and an iPad, and for me the biggest revelation was the overnight cessation of junk mail!  I just don't get it on IOS even though I'm using the same email accounts.  I'm also impressed with Apples flawed but still admirable attitude to privacy and unwanted advertising.  But then Apple are hardware manufacturers, whereas Google are a giant advertising company using 'free' software to target even more advertising.

 

So for me any feature that removes the ability of any advertiser (Google or otherwise) to track my activities is a bonus :)  I can't wait to get this feature on my iPhone 4 (along with many of the other features of IOS 6 of course)

 

Pretty sure Google does all those things (self driving cars, google goggles, etc) for two purposes: the trickle down effect and it keeps the nerds and technorati salivating.

 

The trickle down effect (maybe not the correct term), as I'm using it here, involves announcing crazy "cool" albeit impractical technology, showing it off, and making a huge media splash. People get all excited, and don't mind that the tech won't be available for a long time and will likely be way less cool in real life; they just go "Oh wow, if that's what they can do, I'll take a look at their other products." It builds the brand and goodwill. 

 

It's pretty much the same strategy Microsoft took with the original Surface. Sure, it was crazy cool and looked like a sci-fi movie (kinda like Google Goggles), but it was also impractical. Not only was it insanely expensive, but was it really useful unless you're an architect or some designer? That it looked like something out of a sci-fi movie isn't necessarily a compliment: how many sci-fi movies, once we progress to the time period the movie covered, look so dated and campy? (Unless it was in Star Trek, that had everything right — big screen flat panel TVs, touch panels, floppy disks, computers that talk with a female voice, flip phones).

 

Wow. Just wow.

 

You know, you are right about the benefit in sharing more information due to it being a beta program, but your "This way or the highway" attitude is truly ridiculous, especially on a forum designed specifically to have discussions like this. <Sigh>

 

As to your question about how Apple could iron out the bugs, well there are a great many ways, a good number of which don't involve invisibly changing a user's privacy settings. Apple already has a bunch of 'em, too, such as a dedicated web page for developers to report bugs.

 

And don't even start about this "selfish" crap -- i paid Apple's asking price for the privilege of having a developer's account.

 

 

Folks, honestly, can't we discuss without this type of horse fooey posturing? Sheesh.

 

… No, it's Apple's way or the highway. It got changed because it's a beta. You're using the beta, you agree to their terms. You don't have to use the beta.

Perhaps. It was the GM version so it would be interesting to see if the setting also gets changed for the masses once iOS 6 is released.

In any event, I think Apple should have taken a more overt approach to this particular setting because it is privacy related. Just burying it inside reams of T's & C's is not the right way to get buy-in, IMO.

 

I must say you have an oddly confrontational approach for a "Global Moderator".

I don't usually feed Trolls,  But I find your accusations of lying to be extremely offensive.  Personally I don't agree with everything Apple says and does, I don't even like everything about the iPhone/ iPad designs, so your assumptions about my blind devotion to Apple are well wide of the mark.  If I say I'm wary of Googles privacy issues I mean it, and it is certainly no lie that I don't get junk mail on my iPhone (I don't know why but I don't).  I also just happen to prefer the iPhone / iPad to the Samsung phone/tablet I had before, my choice to make not yours.  I don't give a damn about the Android/Apple war, I do give a damn about people accusing me of lying.

 

I see you're new here. Welcome!