> Many tablet users ... struggle to truly embrace an Android device. It's hard to escape the bloatware and Google-ification
What does this mean? What is exactly hard about avoiding a preinstalled app? (possibly even disabling it?) Or does the author mean something else with the term 'bloatware'?
What is 'Google-ification' in the context of a OS that is primarily developed by Google? Is it the same as 'Apple-ification' on an Apple-tablet?
I am not sure what the author meant, but all my smartphones have escaped 'Google-ification' in the sense that I do not have and I never had a Google account.
This has created mostly minor problems. The most serious has been that one of the banks that I am using has discontinued their Web-based online banking services, which I could use with a browser from any desktop, laptop or smartphone, replacing them with inferior Android/iOS apps.
I no longer use Apple devices and for Android the bank has refused to provide their app by any other way except the official Google store, to which I cannot login without a Google account, despite the fact that the app is free.
Fortunately I use several banks, so with that bank I have stopped using most of their services. For their services that I still use, I use their ancient SMS-based interface, which continues to work for now.
I believe that it should be illegal for a bank to condition their services by the customer having to enter a contractual relationship with a third party, which moreover is located in a different jurisdiction, i.e. USA, while both the bank and the customer are in the EU. However, I did not afford to spend time and money to investigate the legality of the bank's actions.
Article feels like it was written by AI. It has exactly two talking points that it just repeats over and over: it's Android, but does not use Google apps. Something something, privacy, not an iPad, which is also known for more privacy, but even more privacy because this tablet is about privacy.
It's known that Apple collects a decent amount of telemetry, including URLs associated with certain actions on iOS, even when telemetry is disabled and Apple account isn't used. Some of this is detailed in the 2021 paper "Mobile Handset Privacy: Measuring The Data iOS
and Android Send to Apple And Google".
They're definitely working to connect telemetry on at least some of your habits.
Whatever it costs to collect and store this data is some absurdly trivial fraction of Apple's entire value.
Imagine if you personally could do the same to someone for an equivalent fraction of your net worth. Would you not try and maximize the number of people you collect data on? Just out of pure curiosity -- even if you couldn't sell the data?
some absurdly trivial fraction of Apple's entire value.
Sorry, that logic doesn't hold.
Charging users $1 per month for an iCloud subscription capable of backing up your phone is some absurdly trivial fraction of Apple's entire value --- yet they still do it.
Just out of pure curiosity
I think it's pretty well established that large corporations are mainly motivated by money --- not curiosity. But suggesting otherwise does tend to validate my point --- the extreme viewpoint needed to rationalize the actions of a company that touts privacy.
The data we're talking about has a strategic value even if its monetary value isn't quite so clear at this point in time.
Apple may not sell this personal data, but it can and likely does use bhavioral insights to optimize its products to increase engagement and ultimately ecosystem lock-in. These are indirect forms of monetization that accrue into revenue over time and it's hard to gauge their success right now.
So Apple like all big companies collect as much data as they can and store it because they know that the costs of doing so are trivial and the potential benefits are potentially very high.
So in other words, they're tracking you now just so they can monetize your data later if they choose to --- for example, if they decide they *really* need to goose profits a little.
This doesn't exactly give me a warm privacy feeling.
> Many tablet users ... struggle to truly embrace an Android device. It's hard to escape the bloatware and Google-ification
What does this mean? What is exactly hard about avoiding a preinstalled app? (possibly even disabling it?) Or does the author mean something else with the term 'bloatware'?
What is 'Google-ification' in the context of a OS that is primarily developed by Google? Is it the same as 'Apple-ification' on an Apple-tablet?
I am not sure what the author meant, but all my smartphones have escaped 'Google-ification' in the sense that I do not have and I never had a Google account.
This has created mostly minor problems. The most serious has been that one of the banks that I am using has discontinued their Web-based online banking services, which I could use with a browser from any desktop, laptop or smartphone, replacing them with inferior Android/iOS apps.
I no longer use Apple devices and for Android the bank has refused to provide their app by any other way except the official Google store, to which I cannot login without a Google account, despite the fact that the app is free.
Fortunately I use several banks, so with that bank I have stopped using most of their services. For their services that I still use, I use their ancient SMS-based interface, which continues to work for now.
I believe that it should be illegal for a bank to condition their services by the customer having to enter a contractual relationship with a third party, which moreover is located in a different jurisdiction, i.e. USA, while both the bank and the customer are in the EU. However, I did not afford to spend time and money to investigate the legality of the bank's actions.
Aurora Store will let you download the bank's app from the Play Store (and keep it updated) using throwaway Google Accounts it manages.
For now. Play Protect can attest the source of the application and any app can potentially use this to lock you out.
https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answ...
Article feels like it was written by AI. It has exactly two talking points that it just repeats over and over: it's Android, but does not use Google apps. Something something, privacy, not an iPad, which is also known for more privacy, but even more privacy because this tablet is about privacy.
> after testing it for a few weeks
Have LLMs graduated to testing physical devices?
While Apple may not sell your data if you opt out of tracking, it still knows your habits.
I've seen this stated many times but no one ever seems to follow through with the logic.
It takes time, effort and storage for Apple to "know your habits".
In other words, this costs them money. Why would they spend money collecting data if they don't intend to monetize it in some way?
It doesn't make sense does it? If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.
It's known that Apple collects a decent amount of telemetry, including URLs associated with certain actions on iOS, even when telemetry is disabled and Apple account isn't used. Some of this is detailed in the 2021 paper "Mobile Handset Privacy: Measuring The Data iOS and Android Send to Apple And Google".
They're definitely working to connect telemetry on at least some of your habits.
"Apple software update “bug” enables Apple Intelligence", 130 comments, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43008422
Think about it this way.
Whatever it costs to collect and store this data is some absurdly trivial fraction of Apple's entire value.
Imagine if you personally could do the same to someone for an equivalent fraction of your net worth. Would you not try and maximize the number of people you collect data on? Just out of pure curiosity -- even if you couldn't sell the data?
some absurdly trivial fraction of Apple's entire value.
Sorry, that logic doesn't hold.
Charging users $1 per month for an iCloud subscription capable of backing up your phone is some absurdly trivial fraction of Apple's entire value --- yet they still do it.
Just out of pure curiosity
I think it's pretty well established that large corporations are mainly motivated by money --- not curiosity. But suggesting otherwise does tend to validate my point --- the extreme viewpoint needed to rationalize the actions of a company that touts privacy.
The data we're talking about has a strategic value even if its monetary value isn't quite so clear at this point in time.
Apple may not sell this personal data, but it can and likely does use bhavioral insights to optimize its products to increase engagement and ultimately ecosystem lock-in. These are indirect forms of monetization that accrue into revenue over time and it's hard to gauge their success right now.
So Apple like all big companies collect as much data as they can and store it because they know that the costs of doing so are trivial and the potential benefits are potentially very high.
So in other words, they're tracking you now just so they can monetize your data later if they choose to --- for example, if they decide they *really* need to goose profits a little.
This doesn't exactly give me a warm privacy feeling.