You know what they say, “You’re damned if you do and damned if you don’t.” I like this one, too– “No good deed goes unpunished.” We can apply both to Apple Inc. For example, there is rampant speculation that the heat is turned up on CEO Tim Cook and he may need to be replaced.
Isn’t it obvious? iPhone sales are down. Last quarter’s financials were barely the second best in the company’s history. APPL stock fell so low that when it recovered it was still the most valuable company on earth.
Then, there’s that whole privacy debacle where Cook advocates for privacy, his retail honcho is leaving because Apple Stores are just too crowded with customers, he skewered the likes of Google and Facebook for how terrible they treat users, and then Group FaceTime gets wonky.
Apple chief Tim Cook is under sustained pressure as the firm continues to report tumbling iPhone sales.
Pressure from whom? Shareholders who have grown rich on dividends and buybacks? Customers that crowd Apple Stores? “Continues to report…?” Once is not continuing.
What about privacy?
Apple has an Approach to Privacy for all to read. Yes, there are plenty of words to read but the process is far simpler than anything from Google or Facebook. Surely you have lost faith in Apple because of that dastardly Group FaceTime bug that broke both privacy and security, right?
It was a tin-foil hatted conspiracy theorist’s wildest prognostication come true: the trusty and beloved iPhones that accompany users to work, to bed and even to the toilet suddenly transformed into an all-purpose spying device, transmitting audio and video to anyone with your phone number or email.
Except when it didn’t, which was most of the time. Apple plugged the hole within hours, then issued a fix. Case closed, right?
Apple put itself on a limb for up the tree of privacy and security, so any misdeed become magnified almost beyond belief because critics and laymen alike cannot differentiate what Google and Facebook do to a few billion users vs. a bug that so far doesn’t seem to have caused any harm (ambulance chasing lawyers don’t count).
Mathew Ingram is an example:
There are plenty of reasons to agree with Cook that privacy legislation probably should be updated… it’s true that Apple doesn’t do anything like the kind of data-mining, active surveillance, and behavior-based targeting that Facebook and… others do
Apple gets billions of dollars from Google to make Google the default search engine on more than 1-billion Safari users. Apple is complicit with Google for privacy violations, but not of the Group FaceTime genre.
Apple sits on both sides of the privacy and security fence.
Apple arguably has a vested interest in promoting the idea of privacy regulation, because any regulatory oversight or complications stemming from such a move would by definition hit its competitors harder than it would Apple, and that could give the company a competitive advantage.
Indeed, but let’s not conflate Apple’s approach to privacy and security with that of Google and Facebook. All are complicit in taking as many liberties as possible for profits.