The Germans are wrong, John Gruber is right, but when you drill down into the details...
From "Data and Definitions," posted Tuesday on Stratechery:
Definitions matter. The opening paragraph of Apple’s Advertising & Policy page, housed under the “apple.com/legal” directory, states:
Ads that are delivered by Apple’s advertising platform may appear on the App Store, Apple News, and Stocks. Apple’s advertising platform does not track you, meaning that it does not link user or device data collected from our apps with user or device data collected from third parties for targeted advertising or advertising measurement purposes, and does not share user or device data with data brokers...
“Tracking” is not a neutral term! My strong suspicion — confirmed by anecdata — is that a lot of the most ardent defenders of Apple’s ATT policy are against targeted advertising as a category, which is to say they are against companies collecting data and using that data to target ads. For these folks I would imagine tracking means exactly that: the collection and use of data to target ads. That certainly seems to align with the definition of “track” from macOS’s built-in dictionary: “Follow the course or trail of (someone or something), typically in order to find them or note their location at various points”.
However, this is not Apple’s definition: tracking is only when data Apple collects is linked with data from third parties for targeted advertising or measurement, or when data is shared/sold to data brokers. In other words, data that Apple collects and uses for advertising is, according to Apple, not tracking; the privacy policy helpfully lays out exactly what that data is (thanks lawyers!).
My take: Too long, but a must-read if you are invested in the mobile ad business. Thompson includes the 20 second ATT clip from WWDC 20 that led, 19 months later,...
to Meta announcing a $10 billion revenue shortfall, the largest but by no means only significant retrenchment in the online advertising space.
Thompson ignores the fact that FB and Google -sell data- to third parties, and that’s what I, at least, find so objectionable.
It would be interesting to know if they use data brokers for targeting for their own advertising of their products and services.
If Facebook and Google hadn’t misused the data they collected then Apple’s actions wouldn’t have been needed either.
Please allow me to introduce myself, I’m a man of wealth and fame…(with apologies to Mick Jagger).
Sorry, but I have no sympathy for the devil. You’re a better man than I.
It’s not my personal exoneration of FB & others, but my suspicion of the view “critics” of Apple’s hold against the company’s ATT policy. They see Apple holding all those marbles in its hands for its coveted benefit.
If Facebook “lost” $10 B in revenue, it didn’t go directly into Apple’s pocket, for the simple reason that it was literally “stolen” money that Apple stopped being stolen.
Yes, there’s a tiny amount of legit revenue that Apple accrues directly from 1st party ads, but nowhere close to that $10 B.
Where Apple “gains” is in creating a platform that protects its users from theft, which many clearly value, thus attracting those customers.
Zuckerberg & Co deserve nothing but scorn and, if there were justice, jail time and payment of reparations.
Uh, no. See my comment from John Gruber above.
I found the ads in Apple News to be sufficiently obnoxious that I don’t use that any more. But at least Apple isn’t selling my data to others, and that’s the CORE DIFFERENCE.