Vratislav Holub The iOS 14.5 operating system will bring with it a long-awaited novelty, when applications will require consent, whether they can track us across other applications and websites. According to the latest study, apple sellers are going to use this option to block tracking. Epic Games continues to point to Apple's "monopolistic behavior" in that the Cupertino giant does not want to make available its own platform, which it developed exclusively for its systems, even for rival Android.
It could be interest you
Adam Kos Two-thirds of users do not allow tracking across apps and websites
Soon we should expect the release of the iOS 14.5 operating system for the public, which should bring with it the expected novelty. Already at the very introduction of the system, Apple boasted to us of a new rule where every application that collects user data across websites and other applications will have to explicitly ask for the user's consent. Subsequently, it is up to the user whether they allow the program to access the advertising identifier or IDFA, which collects this information and subsequently serves to create personalized, better targeted advertising.
According to the latest information from the portal study Adweek 68% of iPhone users block apps from tracking, which could significantly slow down the advertising industry. An analyst from the marketing company Epsilon Loch Rose commented on the whole situation, according to which no one yet knows what impact this new rule will have on the entire business. However, it can be expected that advertising prices will drop by up to 50% depending on the situation. The study goes on to mention that roughly 58% of advertisers will move from the Apple ecosystem elsewhere, primarily to Android and the smart TV space.
Apple has indirectly revealed why iMessage isn't on Android
On apple products, we can communicate with other apple users via the iMessage platform, which is hugely popular especially in the United States of America. Precisely for this reason, it is logical that they will keep this part of their systems under their own wings and not open it to competition. However, Epic Games does not share the same opinion. She recently shared new court findings in which she points to the fact that Apple does not want to develop a version of iMessage for Android.
Gallery
Epic Games specifically points to email communications and statements from Apple officials, namely people like Eddie Cue, Craig Federighi, and Phil Schiller, who allegedly want to keep Apple users so-called "locked" into their ecosystem. For example, the shared document mentions a 2016 email from an unnamed former Apple employee complaining about iMessage being locked out. To this he received a response from Schiller, who argued that providing their chat platform for Android would do more harm than good. The Cupertino giant could have developed this version as early as 2013, but in the end decided otherwise. Federighi intervened in the whole situation, according to which this step would remove an obstacle for families who only own iPhones and could buy a competing model for their children.
It could be interest you
These steps by Epic Games have been met with criticism on the discussion forums. Users will find it inadequate to point out the fact that the platform that Apple developed itself is not accessible to competitors. There are still dozens of alternative applications for secure communication. In the end, this is only a "problem" in the United States, since, for example, iMessage does not have such a presence in Europe. Which platform do you use most to communicate with family or friends?
I'm curious how the lawsuit with Epic will turn out, but I hope they get away with it. These practices of theirs are really very out of line.
I believe that Apple will continue to keep its platform closed ❤️
With the iMessage family and with anyone who only has an iPhone, iMessage too. Using anything else between two iOS devices is a misnomer.
Complete agreement! 👍
Why does the author list himself as a source? This is definitely not in line with normal editorial practice.