Mark Zuckerberg calls Tim Cook's anti-Facebook retort 'glib,' defends ad-based model

24

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 72
    SoliSoli Posts: 9,276member
    Between Cook and Musk, Zuckerberg is getting no support from tech CEOs, but it's hard to feel sorry for him since he know about CA stealing data and did nothing to inform users.
    baconstangwatto_cobra
  • Reply 22 of 72
    SoliSoli Posts: 9,276member
    If Cook is really concerned about Facebook and Google he could remove all their apps from the App Store. He could replace Google as the default search engine in iOS. And he could tell his teams to make Apple software and services so good no one who owns an Apple device would want to use Gmail, Google Docs or Google Maps.

    i just upgraded my wireless router in my house. I bought a Google mesh system. I would rather have bought something from Apple but they don’t make it so Google it was. And so far it’s been working incredibly well.
    Their app isn't (yet) violating App Store rules so it's there. It no longer has deep ties to the OS, like it was back when Jobs was alive. The user gets a choice. You had a choice on which of the hundreds of router systems to buy and you choose to get Google's? Why? It seems hard to talk about Google invading your privacy and being unscrupulous and then grabbing the one item where every piece of data in your house will pass through it. I'm perplexed by that. I use Google every day from business email to search (I've tried DDG but didn't care for it), but I think I'll draw the line at a Google router. I say this is one of the few regulars here that doesn't seem to have any ill will for the company.
    mwhitechiaStrangeDaysronnpscooter63watto_cobra
  • Reply 23 of 72
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,768member
    If Cook is really concerned about Facebook and Google he could remove all their apps from the App Store. He could replace Google as the default search engine in iOS. And he could tell his teams to make Apple software and services so good no one who owns an Apple device would want to use Gmail, Google Docs or Google Maps.

    And of course if he did that, you’d be the first in line to whine about how Apple was using its market position to throttle the competition. 
    macxpressmwhitechiaStrangeDaysronnpscooter63fastasleepbshankwatto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 24 of 72
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 21,117member
    jbdragon said:
    If Cook is really concerned about Facebook and Google he could remove all their apps from the App Store. He could replace Google as the default search engine in iOS. And he could tell his teams to make Apple software and services so good no one who owns an Apple device would want to use Gmail, Google Docs or Google Maps.

    i just upgraded my wireless router in my house. I bought a Google mesh system. I would rather have bought something from Apple but they don’t make it so Google it was. And so far it’s been working incredibly well.


    If anything, Google is worse than Facebook. Facebook you can flee from, Google, there's no escaping that, other than going to iOS. If anything Google is more invasive than Facebook. Google pays APple a lot of money to be the default Search on iOS. First thing I do is change it right over to DuckDuckGo. No need to use Google Services either if you don't want to or limit what you do to like only gmail. Even then, Google is scanning those.

    WOW, you actually got Google's Mess system? That's the WORST one of the bunch!!!! Did you read any reviews on MESH systems? Sounds like you blindly just went and got it because it was Google's. It's a pile of crap!!! I would have instead looked at the Eero or the Netgear Orbi. Depending on the house. PC Mag 2018 review have Editor's Choice to the Linksys Velop and the Netgear Orbi. Buying Google?!?! Instead from a company who actually specializes in this area?!?!
    Are you speaking from personal experience? What problems have you had with the Google mesh system? I'm just a single data point but it's been pretty much bullet-proof for me. I'm surprised you put so much trust in PC Magazine, seems it would be atypical for most Apple users. Maybe not. In any event some top ten reviews put Google at the very top in both design and software, some rate it overall as one of the top three, one highly recommended it at the overall best choice considering design and features, and there's a lot of 'em out there I didn't even bother looking at with other placings so there's a mish-mash to look at if you're going to go by only online tech reviews. I couldn't find any that said they were a poor choice.

    Now as for your Google comment what specifically what makes them "worse" than Facebook? What does that even mean? What horrid and nefarious plan to cause you harm do you think they have in store for you? Ads are neither natively horrid (Some ads themselves are pretty badly done tho) nor nefarious, and Google doesn't sell user data so what else is there?

    Without a Google account they aren't logging "your" search history as they don't even know who "you" are, so what are you so concerned about? If you have a Google account, and a billion or more folks do, and you're not comfortable with some part of what they log just go in and limit or entirely delete it. Google is very transparent about what they collect, and offer the user 100% control of it. I very recently deleted all my Google services histories older than one year as I don't see any reason for them to have it.  Location, search, interests, YouTube history, everything. So why keep the most recent year? Because it makes those Google services I frequently use much more accurate and faster. It benefits me at least as much and probably more than it benefits Google ad revenues to allow them to store it for me. They aren't stealing from me. 
    edited April 2018 muthuk_vanalingamargonaut
  • Reply 25 of 72
    anton zuykovanton zuykov Posts: 1,040member
    georgie01 said:
    Zuckerberg says... "The truth is, we could make a ton of money if we monetized our customer —if our customer was our product,"

    I think the truth is that if Facebook started charging customers the user base would dramatically decline (far below those who could ‘afford’ it). They know their customers are either cheap skates or that their service isn’t valuable enough to charge for. Neither perspective sounds like putting a lot of value on customers beyond using them to accomplish one’s own desires, although that’s certainly a common approach to business.
    Of course, it isn't valuable. Those who sit on FB for hours do not have the money to pay for it. It is really as simple as that. Have you ever seen W.Buffett commenting on FB all day long? That is right, you didn't, because he spends his time more wisely. So, I am not sure who Zuck plans on monetize FB on the poor. Ad revenue model is the only one that works in this case.
    edited April 2018
  • Reply 26 of 72
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 4,979member
    If Cook is really concerned about Facebook and Google he could remove all their apps from the App Store. He could replace Google as the default search engine in iOS. And he could tell his teams to make Apple software and services so good no one who owns an Apple device would want to use Gmail, Google Docs or Google Maps.
    Aren't they already? I'd much rather use Apple's services than Google's. They aren't really all that great and I don't have to worry about Google tracking me and spamming with we numerous ads, etc. You can't honestly sit there and tell me that Google Docs is better than Pages. You will get the biggest LOL ever. 
    StrangeDaysronnspliff monkeybaconstangwatto_cobra
  • Reply 27 of 72
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 21,117member
    Soli said:
    If Cook is really concerned about Facebook and Google he could remove all their apps from the App Store. He could replace Google as the default search engine in iOS. And he could tell his teams to make Apple software and services so good no one who owns an Apple device would want to use Gmail, Google Docs or Google Maps.

    i just upgraded my wireless router in my house. I bought a Google mesh system. I would rather have bought something from Apple but they don’t make it so Google it was. And so far it’s been working incredibly well.
    Their app isn't (yet) violating App Store rules so it's there. It no longer has deep ties to the OS, like it was back when Jobs was alive. The user gets a choice. You had a choice on which of the hundreds of router systems to buy and you choose to get Google's? Why? It seems hard to talk about Google invading your privacy and being unscrupulous and then grabbing the one item where every piece of data in your house will pass through it. I'm perplexed by that. I use Google every day from business email to search (I've tried DDG but didn't care for it), but I think I'll draw the line at a Google router. I say this is one of the few regulars here that doesn't seem to have any ill will for the company.
    Why worries about the Google routers Soli? Your ISP is probably collecting much more personal data from you, but almost no one realizes it's going on.
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2017/03/30/fcc-privacy-rules-how-isps-will-actually-sell-your-data/#4127ffff21d1
    Google tells you upfront what they collect and what the purpose is and it might surprise you if you look. For instance did you know that unlike your ISP Google does not log any of the websites you visit, not one, nor do they collect any of the content that flows across your network? They don't sell your data, but the company you pay to connect you to the internet might. 
    https://support.google.com/wifi/answer/6246642?hl=en


    edited April 2018
  • Reply 28 of 72
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 4,979member
    Rayz2016 said:
    If Cook is really concerned about Facebook and Google he could remove all their apps from the App Store. He could replace Google as the default search engine in iOS. And he could tell his teams to make Apple software and services so good no one who owns an Apple device would want to use Gmail, Google Docs or Google Maps.

    And of course if he did that, you’d be the first in line to whine about how Apple was using its market position to throttle the competition. 
    The post doesn't make sense anyways. The apps themselves still have to abide by Apple's guidelines for being on the App Store. If there was anything out of line, they would be disapproved until they were on par with Apple's guidelines. It also is anti-competitive to do so which opens up a whole new can of worms for Apple. They deal with enough BS as it is. 
    ronnwatto_cobra
  • Reply 30 of 72
    blastdoorblastdoor Posts: 1,954member
    The reality here is that if you want to build a service that helps connect everyone in the world, then there are a lot of people who can't afford to pay. And therefore, as with a lot of media, having an advertising-supported model is the only rational model that can support building this service to reach people

    This quote is the crux of his argument and dishonesty. 

    Telephone and mail services of the past were able to connect people all around the world and they did not HAVE to rely on advertising to cover their costs. And when they did rely on advertising, they were worse services. 

    Once upon a time in the United States, people were excited when the mail arrived or when the phone rang, because the vast majority of letters and phone calls were NOT ads. Today, the vast majority of calls that come into my landline or items that land in my physical mail box are pure crap 
    advertising. 

    But it does not have to be that way -- there have been other "rational models" for providing this kind of service.

    Phone companies were once heavily regulated, but privately owned. The USPS is quasi-public, but if it received more taxpayer support (or were allowed to charge higher rates), it wouldn't have to rely on junk mail to pay the bills. 

    Even on the Internet, there are alternative "rational models" for "connecting" people -- how about Wikipedia and Usenet News? 


    ronnargonautwatto_cobra
  • Reply 31 of 72
    vmarks said:

    Nielsen ratings did come from somewhere, though. Advertisers weren't just throwing dollars at TV spend, they were working on spending on time slots when they knew people would be watching, and more than that, when they knew their target audience would be watching. Soap operas are called that because it was that time of day when the housewife was at home, and they could advertise soap to her.
    They came from some viewers, but not all viewers. Nielsen ratings are statistical projections. They have no actual and personally identifiable information on the vast majority of TV viewers. FB has such information on every one of their members. Or at least they think they do. I downloaded the information from my FB account, which I set up with a fake name. They have nothing on me. Not one single thing. They have no idea who I am.
    ronnwatto_cobra
  • Reply 32 of 72
    focherfocher Posts: 645member
    Facebook is a non-profit? Hard to not call Zuck's statement glib, when he implies that they only advertise to provide the service for free to people who cannot afford it. Where do the billions in profit go?

    I'm with Cook. Facebook's business model isn't just an ad supported one. The whole purpose of Facebook's existence is to collect data and monetize that data. The "getting connected with friends and family" is just the loss leader to achieve that end.  
    ronndewmebaconstangwatto_cobra
  • Reply 33 of 72
    Mark trying hard to cover his back side! If Facebook were so concerned about the customer then how does CA have data of 50 million users and why is it being investigated by several governments?
    The report does mention the fact that the CA trawl and exploitation of Facebook customers' data pre-dated their tougher privacy rules.

    That anyone would use Facebook or Google, or any other social-network service escapes me. We have an increasingly self-absorbed and indulgent world population willingly dragging itself down to the lowest denominator imaginable.
    baconstangwatto_cobra
  • Reply 34 of 72
    charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,215member
    Mark trying hard to cover his back side! If Facebook were so concerned about the customer then how does CA have data of 50 million users and why is it being investigated by several governments?
    forget about that. I mean according to the reports, FACEBOOK didn't sell them the data. it was gathered by another party who were the sellers. But Facebook has been rather lax with what they allow games etc to gather. At least Apple these days requires apps to ask us by item even if all the questions are annoying AF. And all because folks asked similar privacy questions 2-3 years ago. and apps that are caught not asking or asking for information they don't seem to really need get called out by Apple when the company finds out. That is a different attitude than Facebook is presenting. 
    ronnwatto_cobra
  • Reply 35 of 72
    zompzomp Posts: 53member
    Dear Mr z.  
    As a reminder, you wouldn’t exist today if it wasn’t for Apple and the iPhone. Prior to iPhone there was only locked down phones. The timing was right for fb. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 36 of 72
    If Cook is really concerned about Facebook and Google he could remove all their apps from the App Store. He could replace Google as the default search engine in iOS. And he could tell his teams to make Apple software and services so good no one who owns an Apple device would want to use Gmail, Google Docs or Google Maps.

    i just upgraded my wireless router in my house. I bought a Google mesh system. I would rather have bought something from Apple but they don’t make it so Google it was. And so far it’s been working incredibly well.
    How I wish Apple would disassociate any of its operating systems from Facebook, Google and the rest of the social-media platforms spread out across the internet like trashed discarded plastic.
    baconstangwatto_cobra
  • Reply 37 of 72
    charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,215member

    Facebook is charging it's customers. The price is not currency it is their privacy. For me, that cost may be too high.
    makes me wonder what would happen if someone came out with a facebook 'clone' that had no ads and made you pay say $5 a month to join. Especially if it was something that had all the 'stories', live video, silly filters etc that things like Instagram has. in this current climate they might make a ton of money. especially if they didn't mandate you use your real name, phone number etc so you could be totally anonymous if you want to be. unless of course you are claiming to be a known figure, those folks would have to prove they are legit and hopefully would be badged somehow so people would know they are vetted (which is one thing facebook has done right)
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 38 of 72
    thomprthompr Posts: 1,511member
    dewme said:
    Facebook is a content delivery company that charges advertisers to interleave their ads into the content. Facebook is essentially a "free" radio or television broadcast model with hundreds of millions of content provider channels, i.e., individuals who post on Facebook, and hundreds of millions of viewers, most of whom are also content providers. Using the radio/television analogy, Apple sells the radios and televisions and Facebook provides (some of) the content that gets played on the radios and television.
    But the problem is that Facebook does more than just present ads for other companies in their content.  They also provide access to their users' private information for targeted advertising.  This is where your analogy ends and the problems begin.
    edited April 2018 baconstangwatto_cobra
  • Reply 39 of 72
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 8,586member
    If Cook is really concerned about Facebook and Google he could remove all their apps from the App Store. He could replace Google as the default search engine in iOS. And he could tell his teams to make Apple software and services so good no one who owns an Apple device would want to use Gmail, Google Docs or Google Maps.
    What nonsense. Apple would be crucified for banning those apps since they don’t violate app store rules. You’re free to act in your own interests and not use them. 
    ronnwatto_cobra
  • Reply 40 of 72
    KuyangkohKuyangkoh Posts: 361member
    Waaa waaaa waaaa, Bellionaires quarrels are funny sometimes. These tech giants have different models that works on different needs so keep up the good works, let the consumers decides whats good for them....Not the CEO nor Government, oversight are there to make sure no laws are violated....
    i love these two spoiled ceo for continuously improving thier services....BZ to them
Sign In or Register to comment.