A lot of it is internal usage which is (usually) reasonable. And there isn’t anything as expansive as what we see Microsoft doing as far as I can tell. But given their size and reach I would say it’s safe to assume there is something(s) going on with our data we probably object to. They do overall seem more committed to privacy on their machines.
Just so I understand your reasoning, you have no evidence or examples of Apple using or abusing your data but you assume they do because (checks notes) their “size and reach”?
You are asking a legitimate question and I would be happy to answer it, but based on your tone and your use of the ridiculously overused/needlessly antagonistic “checks notes” joke you’re not here to have an actual conversation.
Edit:
Screw it here’s your answer before you claim I’m dodging it.
You are conflating compliance with law enforcement warrants, which is a legal requirement, with blatant usage of non-anonymized data FOR PROFIT. Really? Shame on you.
If your loyalty to Apple is so strong that you can’t bother to read what I took the time to put together, or even have healthy skepticism and take basic measures to protect yourself, then this conversation was a mistake to pursue. “Shame on me” indeed. Later man, not wasting my time further.
And if you can’t understand the privacy difference between using your data for profit and complying with law enforcement warrants you are being the disingenuous one here. Again, shame on you.
A lot of it is internal usage which is (usually) reasonable. And there isn’t anything as expansive as what we see Microsoft doing as far as I can tell. But given their size and reach I would say it’s safe to assume there is something(s) going on with our data we probably object to. They do overall seem more committed to privacy on their machines.
Just so I understand your reasoning, you have no evidence or examples of Apple using or abusing your data but you assume they do because (checks notes) their “size and reach”?
You are asking a legitimate question and I would be happy to answer it, but based on your tone and your use of the ridiculously overused/needlessly antagonistic “checks notes” joke you’re not here to have an actual conversation.
Edit:
Screw it here’s your answer before you claim I’m dodging it.
This is the company that cooperates with law enforcement the vast majority of the time by handing over vast swaths of user data and used to put in back doors that they would utilize to cooperate with warrants. They also do allow apps to collect data.
So no, it’s not just because they are massive, but because they are massive and have a track record that is pretty gray at best.
I am writing this on my iPhone, I do my work on a Mac. This isn’t some anti-Mac stuff or whatever. I just am acknowledging reality.
You are conflating compliance with law enforcement warrants, which is a legal requirement, with blatant usage of non-anonymized data FOR PROFIT. Really? Shame on you.
If your loyalty to Apple is so strong that you can’t bother to read what I took the time to put together, or even have healthy skepticism and take basic measures to protect yourself, then this conversation was a mistake to pursue. “Shame on me” indeed. Later man, not wasting my time further.
And if you can’t understand the privacy difference between using your data for profit and complying with law enforcement warrants you are being the disingenuous one here. Again, shame on you.