Finally, the Apple co-founder also said he would be interested to see how aggressively the press decides to pursue other device manufacturers with regard to user privacy. "Some of them don't do what we do," he reportedly said. "That's for sure."
Why would the press investigate companies that are advertising with them, doesn't Steve understand they are mad that Apple isn't throwing money at them?
I'm mostly satisfied with the resolution here, it just kinda stinks of conveniently calling these things bugs after vast media attention brought them to light. I can't imagine their development team never thought about the amount of data they were storing, or the possibility that people would want it to be secured somehow. Also the fact that it still did this with location services turn off seems suspicious as well. If the user isn't using the location services, the phone shouldn't be doing anything to determine it's location and therefore not logging it.
I thought that turning off location services meant only denying access to that data to Apps - not that you couldn't still use it for example to find where am I now - or E911 service to find where is your body. not that I paid all that much attention to it other than to allow or deny apps as I saw fit based on whether I wanted a given app to access that data or not.
If Apple wanted to spy on us, then the files would be encrypted, obfuscated, offloaded, and flushed. The fact that it was out in the open is proof that it was an oversight. If you look at the data it's like a shotgun was shooting pins at a map. At best someone could know what zip codes you've been, but not what bathroom you frequent the most. On top of that they would need access to your phone or computer. Umm, then they already found you.
This story makes great blog food though! Learning from how Apple maneuvers through this PR mess is delicious.
Why would the press investigate companies that are advertising with them, doesn't Steve understand they are mad that Apple isn't throwing money at them?
PS: Are we ever going to get a response from Google on this matter or is now effectively closed. If it is that says a lot about the mindshare of Android.
'Ever'? After all the apologia this past week, Why has this issue become important to you now -- because Apple has explained (as some of us have wanted it to) and Google hasn't?!
'Ever'? After all the apologia this past week, Why has this issue become important to you now -- because Apple has explained (as some of us have wanted it to) and Google hasn't?!
For the same exact reason I wanted and expected Apple to respond. I?m curious to know the specifics.
I?m certainly not worried about what Google is doing with the information just as I was not worried about this harmless db on the iPhone, but for some reason you don?t see how one can be interested in a topic without claiming their is a dark conspiracy despite all the evidence saying otherwise.
For the same exact reason I wanted and expected Apple to respond. I?m curious to know the specifics.
I?m certainly not worried about what Google is doing with the information just as I was not worried about this harmless db on the iPhone, but for some reason you don?t see how one can be interested in a topic without claiming their is a dark conspiracy despite all the evidence saying otherwise.
Are you talking about a response to what they use the data for? They've already responded about the file stored on your device.
If you have a WSJ subscription, you can read the full article. As I don't at the moment, here's a link to the TechCrunch article about it:
To my knowledge they haven't responded directly to what the data is used for since the Apple uproar, at least nothing more than what's in their privacy policy already. I'd be interested to hear what it's about as well, but remember, the big blowup with Apple's tracking is that it was an unencrypted file (so you could view stuff yourself=more drama) and it didn't delete old records. Since Google's program on Android doesn't do that, the whole thing might get swept under the rug, at least for the moment.
Like I said earlier, I think all companies need to do a better job explaining the benefit of things like location aware applications/devices.
I guess we will now see the difference between iOS and Android now that the dog has pisssed on the flag pole. How tracking is done the "open source" Google way is vastly different than how Apple curated apps work.... this is going to be fun....
We already know the answer to that. Apple has stated several times that they do not track the user's location. When will we hear the same thing from Google? <crickets>
Google's business model is based on tracking the user and sending them targeted ads. They have a massive incentive to track you - and have not yet denied doing so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by magicj
The only explanation needed by the public was for Apple to say they were aware of the problem and working on a fix.
Apple has now done that and I think we can put this issue to bed.
Not a chance. The Apple haters and Android shills will continue to spread lies and FUD for months or years.
We already know the answer to that. Apple has stated several times that they do not track the user's location. When will we hear the same thing from Google? <crickets>
Google's business model is based on tracking the user and sending them targeted ads. They have a massive incentive to track you - and have not yet denied doing so.
They don't need to deny tracking you. The tracking is opt in (you are presented with the option when you register the device). If I have to see an ad, I'd much rather see one that is targeted to me.
What google needs to do is explain how they use the information, and the privacy measures they take with said data. They've talked a lot about privacy in the past, but more clarification would be nice. The problem with that is that most customers won't pay attention to it, people who distrust google will continue to do so because they'll doubt the PR, and people who support google will continue to do so as well. Still, clarification from everyone would be nice.
Quote:
Not a chance. The Apple haters and Android shills will continue to spread lies and FUD for months or years.
Thus is the power of the internet.
But that stream goes both ways. Apple Shills are great at spreading Android FUD as well. Again, that's the internet.
Like I said earlier, I think all companies need to do a better job explaining the benefit of things like location aware applications/devices.
Which is my stance from the beginning but if I?m getting into hysterics over my privacy and some potential hacker getting into my secured system I?m apparently an fanboy apologist.
Now I?m curious about the data usage per month. The file on my iPhone is 8.3MB. That?s pretty damn big and I doubt that is sent anonymously to Apple 2x a day, every day. If it was it would be 500MB a month.
If it?s 50KB per package then we?re only talking about 3MB per month and shipped quickly without any noticeable effect on the data. Love for someone to figure the average amount of data that is sent to Apple.
Is 3MB per month too much to waste for those with 250MB limits that are only on 3G. I wonder why Apple didn?t opt for a less carrier heavy way to send the data, like when you?re connected to WiFi and it?s been over 12 hours.
And why every 12 hours if they have timestamps? This makes me think the data is much, much simpler and therefore smaller than consolidated.db for Apple to being 12 hour bursts.
Note: I?m only curious since I have unlimited data.
The risk exposure is almost non-existant as it can, at best (after you get physical access to a device/computer), pin point a user to an area of many 10's of square miles. At worst, the information covers an area of 1000's of square miles.
The amount of sensitive information available (like email/text/calendar/schedules/contacts) once you get physical access to a device far outweighs the data the consolidated.db file contains.
Exacty! I have access to my information, not Apple. The whole public/private key security infrastructure is based on a private key that is supposed to reside physically on your machine. Why aren't people hysterical about that?
Exacty! I have access to my information, not Apple. The whole public/private key security infrastructure is based on a private key that is supposed to reside physically on your machine. Why aren't people hysterical about that?
Because you can?t make it into a picture that scares people?
Which is my stance from the beginning but if I?m getting into hysterics over my privacy and some potential hacker getting into my secured system I?m apparently an fanboy apologist.
Now I?m curious about the data usage per month. The file on my iPhone is 8.3MB. That?s pretty damn big and I doubt that is sent anonymously to Apple 2x a day, every day. If it was it would be 500MB a month.
If it?s 50KB per package then we?re only talking about 3MB per month and shipped quickly without any noticeable effect on the data. Love for someone to figure the average amount of data that is sent to Apple.
Is 3MB per month too much to waste for those with 250MB limits that are only on 3G. I wonder why Apple didn?t opt for a less carrier heavy way to send the data, like when you?re connected to WiFi and it?s been over 12 hours.
And why every 12 hours if they have timestamps? This makes me think the data is much, much simpler and therefore smaller than consolidated.db for Apple to being 12 hour bursts.
Note: I?m only curious since I have unlimited data.
For the same exact reason I wanted and expected Apple to respond. I?m curious to know the specifics.
I?m certainly not worried about what Google is doing with the information just as I was not worried about this harmless db on the iPhone, but for some reason you don?t see how one can be interested in a topic without claiming their is a dark conspiracy despite all the evidence saying otherwise.
'Dark conspiracy?' LOL.
Please have the decency to stop saying or implying things I did not ever say or imply.
» A bunch of folks on the regulatory side, both in the U.S. and elsewhere, said they are going to look into this. Do you guys plan on testifying before Congress? How active do you personally and does Apple want to be?
Jobs: I think Apple will be testifying. They have asked us to come and we will honor their request, of course. I think it is great that they are investigating this and I think it will be interesting to see how agressive or lazy the press is on this in terms of investigating the rest of the participants in the industry and finding out what they do. Some of them don’t do what we do. That’s for sure.
» Steve, how active have you been in examining this issue over the past couple of weeks?
Jobs: It hasn’t been a couple of weeks. This all started last Wednesday and we put out our response this morning. It took us slightly less than a week. Scott and Phil and I have worked together over this last week, first to investigate the problem.
We’re an engineering-driven company. When people accuse us of things, the first thing we want to do is find out the truth. That took a certain amount of time to track all of these things down. And the accusations were coming day by day. By the time we had figured this all out, it took a few days. Then writing it up and trying to make it intelligible when this is a very high-tech topic took a few days. And here we are less than a week later.
The Apple drama the past few days hasn't gone unnoticed by some other location collectors. Tomtom released a video today explaining how they use travel data collected from users. And logging into Garmin just now I was asked to again agree/decline to share my trip statistics anonymously to help in improving the navigation experience.
Comments
Old saying: Two wrongs don't make a right.
You're making a comment you obviously don't know anything about, or that you prefer to be what you think it is.
Finally, the Apple co-founder also said he would be interested to see how aggressively the press decides to pursue other device manufacturers with regard to user privacy. "Some of them don't do what we do," he reportedly said. "That's for sure."
[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]
Why would the press investigate companies that are advertising with them, doesn't Steve understand they are mad that Apple isn't throwing money at them?
I'm mostly satisfied with the resolution here, it just kinda stinks of conveniently calling these things bugs after vast media attention brought them to light. I can't imagine their development team never thought about the amount of data they were storing, or the possibility that people would want it to be secured somehow. Also the fact that it still did this with location services turn off seems suspicious as well. If the user isn't using the location services, the phone shouldn't be doing anything to determine it's location and therefore not logging it.
I thought that turning off location services meant only denying access to that data to Apps - not that you couldn't still use it for example to find where am I now - or E911 service to find where is your body. not that I paid all that much attention to it other than to allow or deny apps as I saw fit based on whether I wanted a given app to access that data or not.
This story makes great blog food though! Learning from how Apple maneuvers through this PR mess is delicious.
Why would the press investigate companies that are advertising with them, doesn't Steve understand they are mad that Apple isn't throwing money at them?
He's talking about Google, hint-hint.
PS: Are we ever going to get a response from Google on this matter or is now effectively closed. If it is that says a lot about the mindshare of Android.
'Ever'? After all the apologia this past week, Why has this issue become important to you now -- because Apple has explained (as some of us have wanted it to) and Google hasn't?!
'Ever'? After all the apologia this past week, Why has this issue become important to you now -- because Apple has explained (as some of us have wanted it to) and Google hasn't?!
For the same exact reason I wanted and expected Apple to respond. I?m curious to know the specifics.
I?m certainly not worried about what Google is doing with the information just as I was not worried about this harmless db on the iPhone, but for some reason you don?t see how one can be interested in a topic without claiming their is a dark conspiracy despite all the evidence saying otherwise.
For the same exact reason I wanted and expected Apple to respond. I?m curious to know the specifics.
I?m certainly not worried about what Google is doing with the information just as I was not worried about this harmless db on the iPhone, but for some reason you don?t see how one can be interested in a topic without claiming their is a dark conspiracy despite all the evidence saying otherwise.
Are you talking about a response to what they use the data for? They've already responded about the file stored on your device.
If you have a WSJ subscription, you can read the full article. As I don't at the moment, here's a link to the TechCrunch article about it:
http://techcrunch.com/2011/04/22/goo...oid-is-opt-in/
To my knowledge they haven't responded directly to what the data is used for since the Apple uproar, at least nothing more than what's in their privacy policy already. I'd be interested to hear what it's about as well, but remember, the big blowup with Apple's tracking is that it was an unencrypted file (so you could view stuff yourself=more drama) and it didn't delete old records. Since Google's program on Android doesn't do that, the whole thing might get swept under the rug, at least for the moment.
Like I said earlier, I think all companies need to do a better job explaining the benefit of things like location aware applications/devices.
I guess we will now see the difference between iOS and Android now that the dog has pisssed on the flag pole. How tracking is done the "open source" Google way is vastly different than how Apple curated apps work.... this is going to be fun....
We already know the answer to that. Apple has stated several times that they do not track the user's location. When will we hear the same thing from Google? <crickets>
Google's business model is based on tracking the user and sending them targeted ads. They have a massive incentive to track you - and have not yet denied doing so.
The only explanation needed by the public was for Apple to say they were aware of the problem and working on a fix.
Apple has now done that and I think we can put this issue to bed.
Not a chance. The Apple haters and Android shills will continue to spread lies and FUD for months or years.
We already know the answer to that. Apple has stated several times that they do not track the user's location. When will we hear the same thing from Google? <crickets>
Google's business model is based on tracking the user and sending them targeted ads. They have a massive incentive to track you - and have not yet denied doing so.
They don't need to deny tracking you. The tracking is opt in (you are presented with the option when you register the device). If I have to see an ad, I'd much rather see one that is targeted to me.
What google needs to do is explain how they use the information, and the privacy measures they take with said data. They've talked a lot about privacy in the past, but more clarification would be nice. The problem with that is that most customers won't pay attention to it, people who distrust google will continue to do so because they'll doubt the PR, and people who support google will continue to do so as well. Still, clarification from everyone would be nice.
Not a chance. The Apple haters and Android shills will continue to spread lies and FUD for months or years.
Thus is the power of the internet.
But that stream goes both ways. Apple Shills are great at spreading Android FUD as well. Again, that's the internet.
He's talking about Google, hint-hint.
I would guess he wasn't. Google is not a device manufacturer. Tomtom, Garmin, Motorola. . Yes, they are.
Like I said earlier, I think all companies need to do a better job explaining the benefit of things like location aware applications/devices.
Which is my stance from the beginning but if I?m getting into hysterics over my privacy and some potential hacker getting into my secured system I?m apparently an fanboy apologist.
Now I?m curious about the data usage per month. The file on my iPhone is 8.3MB. That?s pretty damn big and I doubt that is sent anonymously to Apple 2x a day, every day. If it was it would be 500MB a month.
If it?s 50KB per package then we?re only talking about 3MB per month and shipped quickly without any noticeable effect on the data. Love for someone to figure the average amount of data that is sent to Apple.
Is 3MB per month too much to waste for those with 250MB limits that are only on 3G. I wonder why Apple didn?t opt for a less carrier heavy way to send the data, like when you?re connected to WiFi and it?s been over 12 hours.
And why every 12 hours if they have timestamps? This makes me think the data is much, much simpler and therefore smaller than consolidated.db for Apple to being 12 hour bursts.
Note: I?m only curious since I have unlimited data.
The risk exposure is almost non-existant as it can, at best (after you get physical access to a device/computer), pin point a user to an area of many 10's of square miles. At worst, the information covers an area of 1000's of square miles.
The amount of sensitive information available (like email/text/calendar/schedules/contacts) once you get physical access to a device far outweighs the data the consolidated.db file contains.
Exacty! I have access to my information, not Apple. The whole public/private key security infrastructure is based on a private key that is supposed to reside physically on your machine. Why aren't people hysterical about that?
Exacty! I have access to my information, not Apple. The whole public/private key security infrastructure is based on a private key that is supposed to reside physically on your machine. Why aren't people hysterical about that?
Because you can?t make it into a picture that scares people?
Which is my stance from the beginning but if I?m getting into hysterics over my privacy and some potential hacker getting into my secured system I?m apparently an fanboy apologist.
Now I?m curious about the data usage per month. The file on my iPhone is 8.3MB. That?s pretty damn big and I doubt that is sent anonymously to Apple 2x a day, every day. If it was it would be 500MB a month.
If it?s 50KB per package then we?re only talking about 3MB per month and shipped quickly without any noticeable effect on the data. Love for someone to figure the average amount of data that is sent to Apple.
Is 3MB per month too much to waste for those with 250MB limits that are only on 3G. I wonder why Apple didn?t opt for a less carrier heavy way to send the data, like when you?re connected to WiFi and it?s been over 12 hours.
And why every 12 hours if they have timestamps? This makes me think the data is much, much simpler and therefore smaller than consolidated.db for Apple to being 12 hour bursts.
Note: I?m only curious since I have unlimited data.
I didn't call you a fanboy over this.
Not my definition of a fanboy. But certainly a dedicated fan of Apple.
For the same exact reason I wanted and expected Apple to respond. I?m curious to know the specifics.
I?m certainly not worried about what Google is doing with the information just as I was not worried about this harmless db on the iPhone, but for some reason you don?t see how one can be interested in a topic without claiming their is a dark conspiracy despite all the evidence saying otherwise.
'Dark conspiracy?' LOL.
Please have the decency to stop saying or implying things I did not ever say or imply.