With Apple’s App Tracking Transparency having been available for several months now, advertisers have begun shifting their spending patterns. A new report indicates that the prices for mobile ads targeting iOS users have dropped, while prices targeting Android users have increased.
When Apple released iOS 14.5 with the new App Tracking Transparency feature, a report by the Post-IDFA Alliance showed that two weeks after that, advertisers have started spending more on the Android platform.
Now, according to a report by the Wall Street Journal, “the prices for mobile ads directed at iOS users have fallen, while ad price has risen for advertisers seeking to target Android users.”
“Digital advertisers say they have lost much of the granular data that made mobile ads on iOS devices effective and justified their prices. In recent months, ad-buyers have deployed their iOS ad spending in much less targeted ways than were previously possible, marketers and ad-tech companies say.“
Digital-ad agency Tinuiti Inc., for example, says its Facebook clients went from year-over-year spend growth of 46% for Android users in May to 64% in June. Its iOS clients, on the other hand, saw a corresponding slowdown from 42% growth in May to 25% in June.
Research director Andy Taylor explained that “Android ad prices are now about 30% higher than ad prices for iOS users.” The report also shows many advertisers have shifted their spending on Facebook’s owned-and-operated app as well.
“Instagram and its namesake social network, which form the core of its business, Mr. Taylor said. Spending to reach iOS users on Instagram and Facebook also slid since Apple’s change, he said, but by less than on third-party apps.
Since the switch, Facebook has significantly altered its Audience Network, which has relied heavily on device identifiers. The company told advertisers in an email last week that it was adding the capability to place contextual ads—which consider factors like time of day and the app’s content—as a way to continue providing relevant ads when certain identifiers aren’t available.“
In May, Flury Analytics data provided the unsurprising evidence that vanishingly few Americans were choosing to allow apps to track them, although it has risen from 4% at that time to 9% now.
The ad industry was afraid that users would largely opt out as a matter of course, and this data does suggest that’s the case.
A 9to5Mac reader poll also showed that almost nobody is opting -in for App Tracking with all apps, while a fifth of readers are letting trusted apps track them while blocking others.
After rolling out beta releases for four months between the release of iOS 14.4 and iOS 14.5, Apple stepped on the gas with its latest update, launching iOS 14.6 to the general public just four weeks after iOS 14.5 arrived. Although iOS 14.6 is a significantly smaller update than iOS 14.5 — which added App Transparency Tracking, Unlock with Apple Watch, support for PS5 and Xbox Series X controllers, and more — there are still plenty of reasons to update right away.
Of course, there are obvious reasons, such as security updates and bug fixes that could keep your data safe from attackers, but we are also discovering new reasons to install iOS 14.6 as iPhone users get their hands on the software. As spotted by 9to5Mac, some users on Twitter and Reddit claim that actions in the Shortcuts app are running faster on the latest version of iOS.
“Before this update [iOS 14.6], it took a little over a second to run the “Night Mode” shortcut I made that contains only seven different simple Settings actions,” said Reddit user jasonefmonk on Tuesday. “I’ve noticed after the update that it now runs in approximately 1/4 second! It is very noticeable and a welcome fix for something that should be quite quick.”
Another user in the thread claimed that their 700 action shortcut used to take 30 seconds to run on iOS 14.5 and earlier, but now completes in just 13 seconds. Others saw more modest gains, but pretty much everyone who tested their shortcuts seemed to confirm the speed boost.
In order to further corroborate these claims, 9to5Mac did tests of its own and saw improvements on both iOS 14.6 and the first iOS 14.7 beta, which began rolling out to developers and public beta testers last week. That said, the site only began to notice significant gains on shortcuts that involved “dozens or hundreds of actions.” In one test, 9to5Mac ran a shortcut with 380 actions. On one iPhone running iOS 14.5.1, the shortcut completed in 8 seconds, but on another with iOS 14.6, it took 4 seconds.
Apple usually highlights all of the biggest changes in the release notes for its software updates, but for whatever reason, faster shortcuts didn’t make the cut for the iOS 14.6 release notes. Nevertheless, all evidence points to shortcuts being faster, so if you’re an avid shortcut user, update today.
Of course, you really shouldn’t need any additional reasons to update your iPhone, because Apple released a security notice about iOS 14.6 on Monday covering the dozens of security flaws addressed by the update. Spend just a minute or two scrolling through all of the dangerous exploits that Apple patched in iOS 14.6 and iPadOS 14.6, and I can all but guarantee you that you will be installing the update on every device you own as quickly as possible.
Jacob started covering video games and technology in college as a hobby, but it quickly became clear to him that this was what he wanted to do for a living. He currently resides in New York writing for BGR. His previously published work can be found on TechHive, VentureBeat and Game Rant.
Apple’s iOS 14.5 update has triggered an unstoppable collapse in Facebook’s ability to collect user data
It is not unusual for the bosses of Apple and Facebook to be at loggerheads with each other over privacy. Back in 2018 Facebook chief executive Mark Zuckerberg accused his Apple counterpart Tim Cook of being “extremely glib” for making scathing remarks about Facebook’s involvement in the Cambridge Analytica scandal. Weeks later Apple introduced privacy controls that hampered Facebook’s ability to collect user data via Apple devices.
Things moved up a notch at the end of last year after Apple revealed that app-tracking transparency would be installed as part of its latest system update. Until iOS 14.5 came along, apps like Facebook could automatically track what people were looking at on their phones and sell targeted ad space accordingly. The update was designed so users were asked their permission for the tracking to happen first.
Facebook responded to the move by taking out full-page ads in the New York Times, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal accusing Apple of posing a threat to the “10 million businesses [who] use our advertising tools each month to find new customers, hire employees and engage with their communities”. Cook retaliated by tweeting that users “should have the choice over the data that is being collected about them and how it’s used”.
It may have looked like little more than a war of words between two rivals, but Facebook – which warned of the “headwind” posed by iOS 14.5 in its 2020 accounts – was right to be concerned. Since the update went live last month iPhone owners have been opting out of data tracking in their droves. According to Flurry Analytics, 85 per cent of worldwide users clicked ‘ask app not to track’ when prompted, with the proportion rising to 94 per cent in the US. Apple did not respond to requests to comment.
For an organisation like Facebook, whose entire business model is based around collecting, analysing, selling on and profiting from data about its users’ likes and dislikes, such numbers could be devastating.
“It’s a huge blow for Facebook,” says Jake Moore, cybersecurity specialist at ESET UK. “They have major issues when another huge tech firm such as Apple comes along and says privacy is important. When Apple is asking users not to track – and that language is important – if anything it’s sticking a couple of fingers up at Facebook.”
This strategy is important for a business that wants to position itself as being above the privacy concerns that have dogged the technology industry. Lawyer and data privacy specialist Heather Anson, director of Anson Evaluate, says that for a company that can make money from its hardware regardless of regulatory constraints, it’s reasonably easy for Apple to score points over its rivals by doing that. “Apple is very good at using these types of issues to make itself look better,” she says. “There was a case in San Bernardino where a guy shot his co-workers and the FBI wanted to get the log-ins to his iPhone. Apple said no because it would weaken security, but that was technically more of a publicity stunt than something that was legally binding, they could have handed it over.”
By taking this stance now, Anson believes, Apple is pre-empting strict data protection laws that have been mooted in US states including New York and Virginia as well as in the European Union. As with the EU’s Draft Digital Services Act, the US proposals, which are modelled on an existing Californian law, would require user permission to be given for data to be used. It is a carbon copy of what iOS 14.5 has already introduced.
While that puts Apple ahead of the curve, it creates an even bigger problem for Facebook. That is in part because it will further restrict its ability to target ads to individual users, but also because the more these rule changes are spoken about the more it shines a spotlight on exactly what it is Facebook does with user data.
Facebook still makes billions from advertising. But the world in which it operates is changing fast. How Facebook attempts to keep pace will be telling. Depending on take-up, Facebook’s digital currency diem, which will be piloted later this year, could also create masses of data due to the way digital transactions are logged by the technology that powers them. Meanwhile, WhatsApp, which Facebook acquired in 2014, is to start gradually switching off functionality for users who refuse to let it share information with Facebook about the businesses they have communicated with.
Even taken together, they are likely to be a poor substitute for what Facebook will lose if the iOS 14.5 opt-outs continue apace. For now, Facebook is continuing to frame the advent of the Apple update as an affront to the smaller businesses that benefit from its platform. The impact on its advertising revenues will, it says, “be much less than what will befall small businesses” that rely on its algorithms to promote their wares. “Many small businesses won’t grow, continue hiring or even survive as a result of an impact of this magnitude,” it says.
Similar to Apple’s strategy of proclaiming itself a privacy champion, it is a smart tactic for Facebook to put itself on the side of the little guy, particularly as laws such as the EU Digital Services Act remain in their infancy. “The EU act will be lobbied and debated over and won’t be passed for another couple of years then it will be another couple more before it comes in,” says Anson. “By that time Facebook will have done what it needs to do to comply and it will have bullied the EU by lobbying to get something it likes.”
It’s clear that Facebook needs that time to come up with a strategy that will allow it to thrive without unfettered access to data at its core. David Wehner, the social media giant’s chief financial officer, wrote in the company’s fourth quarter 2020 earnings report that “over time, we hope to help businesses by providing more on-site conversion opportunities through initiatives like shops, and also click to messaging ads”. A blog posted on Facebook’s corporate site last month says it is “important to acknowledge that the ways that digital advertising collects and uses data will evolve” and that Facebook is “investing in new approaches to privacy-enhancing technology and building a personalised advertising ecosystem that relies on less data”.
Less data is not no data, though. The problem Facebook now faces is that as time passes and developments like iOS 14.5 make users more aware of how their data is used to manipulate them they might not want to give any of it up at all.
“Over the next five to ten years people will start to learn the importance of privacy and keeping their data,” says Moore. “Facebook’s business model is all about tracking – they are not a social media company, they are an advertising company and if they can track you they can make more money. Apple has got nothing to worry about, but Facebook could be gone in ten years.”
Apple put the M1 in the new iPad Pro and it’s ridiculously good.
I’ve been such a big fan of my 2018 11-inch Pad Pro that I couldn’t find a reason to upgrade last year when Apple added a slightly better processor and a LiDAR sensor. If you don’t know what a LiDAR sensor is, well, then you understand why it wasn’t something I felt like I just had to have.
I do love my iPad Pro, however, and it’s often my preferred device for work for a lot of reasons. It was already the most powerful tablet you could get, and it was faster and more powerful than most laptops you could buy, even with a three-year-old processor inside.
Courtesy company
Now, Apple just made it even better, and not by a little. In fact, Apple made the new iPad Pro so good, it’s hard not to think it’s just showing off at this point. Here are just a few of the reasons why:
M1 Chip
You only need to know one thing about Apple’s M1 processor–it’s one of the most powerful and efficient chips you can get inside a computer. Except, now you can also get it inside an iPad. That means that the iPad Pro is more powerful than almost any PC you can buy that isn’t a highly customized setup that will also certainly be power-hungry and expensive.
Apple has no business putting this chip in a tablet. The only reason it did is simply because it could. The M1 isn’t just powerful, it’s also extremely efficient, which means it can run off an iPad’s battery and still handle anything you can throw at it. It also can run just fine in the small enclosure of an iPad, without a fan.
Courtesy company
It is fair to point out that Apple didn’t talk much about battery life. It only described it as “all-day,” which is certainly open to interpretation. Still, I’ve been using a MacBook Air with an M1 for months, and I regularly make it through a day of working unplugged with 60 percent or more battery life remaining. That’s just showing off.
Liquid Retina XDR Display
The display got a big upgrade as well. Apple is using MiniLED technology, which it calls Liquid Retina XDR, though it will only be available on the 12.9-inch model. Apple says it uses 10,000 LEDs, grouped in 2,500 local dimming zones, in order to provide “a stunning visual experience that reflects what can be seen in the real world by capturing the brightest highlights and the most subtle details in even the darkest images.”
Thunderbolt
This might be the most absurd thing Apple added to the 2021 iPad Pro, and I don’t mean that in a bad way. The Thunderbolt port gives the iPad Pro up to 40Gb/s of bandwidth. That’s enough to support a 6K HDR display, and 10GB Ethernet, meaning that the iPad Pro is capable of handling almost any pro workflow. You can also connect it to a Thunderbolt dock to give the iPad Pro even more connectivity.
That makes me optimistic that we may see some very interesting changes to iPadOS at Apple’s upcoming Worldwide Developers Conference in June. Adding better windowing support would make using an iPad with an external display that much more useful, especially with the ability to connect external drives and other peripherals via Thunderbolt.
– Apps need your permission to track activity across different apps in iOS 14.5, iPadOS 14.5, and tvOS 14.5
(Pocket-lint) – Apps that track you across other apps and websites on iOS, iPadOS and tvOS will now have to ask your express permission to do so. The move marks a shift in how apps can operate on Apple’s mobile operating systems and how apps can target you
All apps now have to detail what they track on the App Store (in a section called App Privacy). If they haven’t submitted details for this yet, they will be mandated to do so when they next submit an app update to Apple.
This is coming as part of the new iOS/iPadOS/tvOS 14.5 update. Apps have been able to ask for this permission in earlier versions of iOS 14, but now it will be mandatory.
Apple calls this App Tracking Transparency and it means users will now have to opt into their devices giving over information on their use. You’ll see a pop-up message like this when loading apps after they’ve been updated.
Apple
The new requirement has stoked the ire of some, especially Facebook, who rely on tracking to target ads. Your Apple device tracks what you do in apps using an anonymised Identifier for Advertisers (IDFA) – this means that Facebook can serve you ads for the item you’ve just searched for on eBay.
Google has a similar thing called Google Advertising ID or GAID. These essentially tie your activity together in a way that means you can’t be personally identified. They make ads more effective for advertisers but should – in theory – also make them more relevant to you. Facebook argues tracking gives you a “better ads experience” but it has already warned investors that Apple’s move could hurt its advertising business.
App Tracking Transparency means apps now have to ask for permission to use that shared information. Of course, you could still be targeted by the information you provide such as searches or previous purchases within a particular app – so you’ll likely still see ads personalised for you.
Apple
Apps can’t circumvent having to ask for this permission according to App Store rules, nor restrict app functionality depending on whether you’ve given permission to track. Equally, they’re not able to pass on other information, such as an email address or username to others.
Apple’s own apps will also comply with these rules, but as per Apple’s privacy policies, it doesn’t share information it collects about you with other companies.
Users have previously been able to access per-app Privacy settings, but have not been asked permission. You can also globally disable tracking for a period should you wish to.
How to disable ad tracking on your iOS/iPadOS device, either per app or globally.
Go to Settings > Privacy > Tracking. You can then see a list of apps you have enabled for tracking and toggle any one of them off.
Apple
At the top is a global setting – you can turn off Allow Apps to Request to Track. This means you won’t see any pop-ups from apps and will stop any new apps from asking for permission to track.
If you have already given permission to some apps to track you, you’ll then be asked whether you want to continue to allow them to track or stop them from that point onwards.
The original iMac was something entirely different from what people expected in a computer that sat on their desk. While everyone else was selling boring beige boxes, Apple said, “Hey, we have this translucent, gumdrop-shaped all-in-one computer that is, well, cool.” And it was.
It wasn’t anywhere near the most powerful computer you could buy at the time, but it was colorful and fun. It was approachable and friendly–you could pick the whole thing up with a handle at the top. It was, well, playful.
I think you could argue that the iMac’s personality made it–in some ways–the most personal of personal computers. Over the last 20 years, the iMac has evolved, but it almost always retained that sense of playfulness, even if it lost the colour.
Courtesy Company
The G4 version, which came out in 2002, was one of the most iconic desktop computer designs ever. That’s the one with a 17-inch LCD display floating on a stainless steel arm over a half-sphere dome that served as the base, and housed the computer’s “guts.”
If we’re really being honest, however, in the last few years the iMac has lost that playfulness. It still has a personality, but as its silver aluminium industrial design became thinner and more sophisticated, the iMac’s personality changed.
It is still a better-looking computer than almost any other desktop, but it’s starting to show its age. It has large bezels around the display, and a chin that makes it resemble a caricature of what a cool all-in-one might look like–seven years ago. Plus, it hadn’t seen a colour that isn’t either grey or darker grey in years.
Until now.
On Tuesday, Apple announced the newest version of the iMac. The highlight was supposed to be that it now includes Apple’s M1 processor. That’s certainly a big deal, and it shouldn’t be overlooked. After all, Apple had promised to transition all of its Macs to Apple Silicon within two years, and we’re nearing the halfway point of that promise.
Besides, the M1 is an order of magnitude faster than the Intel chips it replaces, making the new iMacs an incredible all-around computer. The M1 even meant that Apple was able to slim down, well, everything about the new iMac. It has thinner bezels, a smaller chin, and there’s no longer a bulge on the back to house all of the computer guts.
Honestly, though, I think a much bigger deal is that the new iMac is now available in seven colours.
Welcome back, personality.
Courtesy Company
It might not seem like adding colour is that big of a deal, but I think it’s brilliant, especially for the iMac. If the explosion of personalization that happened on the iPhone when Apple made it possible to customize your Home Screen and add widgets is any indication, our devices are more an extension of our own personality than ever before.
And most of us would probably prefer to think our personalities are colourful–not grey. It’s as if Apple is saying to its customers, you no longer have to choose grey or greyer-grey. Now, you can choose whichever colour suits you–just like you can do with an iPhone.
This latest design brings back the thing that made the iMac so popular in the first place. In this case, along with the fun, you also happen to get one of the most powerful Macs the company has ever made. That’s not a bad deal at all, and I suspect Apple will probably sell a lot of them. That’s brilliant.
On the surface, it looks like Facebook is upset because Apple has it out for small businesses. Apple, for its part, seems to take issue with Facebook’s highly lucrative business model of personalized advertising that collects and monetizes users’ personal information.
Really, however, the battle is far more simple. It began when Apple announced it would make changes in iOS 14 to require developers to create what Apple has called a privacy nutrition label for their apps, and to request permission before an app can track a user. Together, those two changes aim to provide users with more awareness and control over how their personal information is used.
“What we’re doing is giving the user the choice of whether to be tracked or not,” Tim Cook told Kara Swisher on her podcast, Sway. “I think it’s hard to argue against that. I’ve been shocked there’s been a pushback on this to this degree. I mean, how do you argue against that … I think you can do digital advertising and make money from digital advertising, without tracking people when they don’t know they’re being tracked.”
To be clear, Cook isn’t arguing that you shouldn’t be allowed to make money from digital advertising. He isn’t even arguing that you shouldn’t be able to track users. He’s just suggesting you shouldn’t be able to do it unless they know that’s what’s happening. The key for Apple, according to Cook, is that you should be the one who makes that decision.
“All we want to do is supply a tool so that the person that should make the decision can make it,” Cook said.
That, in the simplest terms, describes the difference between Facebook and Apple–and Cook managed to do it with seven simple words: “The person who should make the decision.” Apple and Facebook very much disagree on who should make the decision about whether you are tracked.
The person who gets to decide if or how your personal information is used isn’t Tim Cook, or Mark Zuckerberg. That person is you.
That’s important because Apple’s position has never been that digital advertising is evil or that it should go away. It just believes users should have an awareness and a choice about what happens with their personal information.
That’s why the company introduced App Tracking Transparency, which requires developers to get permission before tracking. Facebook has pushed back, claiming that Apple is threatening not only its business but millions of small businesses.
Apple has long made privacy a part of its brand and has used it to make the point that, unlike other tech companies like Facebook and Google, it doesn’t make money by tracking you and showing you ads. However, Cook says it’s about more than simply protecting Apple’s bottom line, an accusation made by Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg.
“It’s not about being a brand attribute. To be frank, for us privacy is a basic human right. It’s a right that other rights are built off of. It’s that kind of core–it’s bedrock … The individual should own their data and they should own the ability to say who gets it, and what of their data they get and what they use it for. And, frankly, that’s not the situation of today. I’m appalled by it.”
That’s about as stinging a rebuke as you’ll get from the usually calm and collected Apple CEO. It also clearly defines what is really happening, and why Apple is willing to continue to fight to change the status quo. It doesn’t mean the company is always right, or that there aren’t real consequences involved when people opt out of tracking.
But it does mean that Apple is fighting for a principle that is hard to argue with. When you find someone that does, like Facebook, it’s worth wondering the real reason why.
Apple has discontinued the iMac Pro. After introducing it in 2017 as “the fastest, most powerful Mac ever made,” the company has apparently decided it has become redundant. It is a spectacular fall in a mere four years for the machine that signalled Apple’s renewed commitment to the Mac.So, what went wrong? Did it lose its way among the upcoming Apple Silicon Macs or was it doomed from the beginning? As we pour one out for the iMac Pro, let’s consider what its failure tells us about the future of professional-level Macs.
The flaw at the heart of the design
Despite all the onstage bluster at its unveiling, Apple likely knew it was taking a gamble with the iMac Pro.
Although it was housed in an iMac’s shell, the iMac Pro was a step above its all-in-one sibling. It married sleek design with workstation-class components, including Intel Xeon processors and AMD Radeon Pro Vega graphics chips. It was the first pro-level desktop Mac to come with an integrated display (a 5K one at that), as all previous efforts — from the Power Mac to the trash can-like Mac Pro from 2013 — consisted solely of the computer itself.
As impressive as it sounded on paper, the iMac Pro was fatally compromised by its design. For the creative professionals it was designed for, unhampered performance and upgradability are both must-have features. These areas were exactly where the iMac Pro tripped up, which was a repeat of the maligned 2013 Mac Pro.
Although Apple boasted of a top-notch cooling system in the iMac Pro, there would always be limitations to stuffing all those components behind the screen in a slim, all-in-one form factor. There just wasn’t the thermal headroom needed to fully utilize the components inside. But the lack of modularity was an even bigger issue.
It was wrong for its core audience (creative professionals) because it was not upgradable, leaving customers stuck with the same components even as their workloads got more demanding. Replacing an expensive computer every few years just isn’t tenable — at least not compared to the flexibility of a traditional desktop tower. Hence, the eventual return of that design with the 2019 Mac Pro. In the end, the iMac Pro was just a stopgap until we got to the Mac Pro — and it has lived in the shadow of the former ever since.
The shadow of the Mac Pro
Julian Chokkattu/Digital Trends
Even before the iMac Pro came out, rumours abounded that Apple was revamping the Mac Pro into a machine that combined power with modularity — something Apple itself confirmed before the iMac Pro launch. You would be able to swap out any of its components for whatever you wanted, giving you a perpetually upgradable machin, the likes of which Apple had never made. Or so said the industry gossip.
In the end, the Mac Pro was never quite as modular as some of the more fervent dreamers had hoped, but all the talk inevitably cast a shadow over the decidedly non-upgradable iMac Pro, most likely stifling interest in it.
With the Mac Pro in the offering, convincing creative pros to opt for something with none of the upgradability and that would likely quickly be surpassed by the Mac Pro was a tough sell. After all, the shape of the iMac — its scooped back and razor-thin wedges — heavily limits how much power you can put inside it because it is exceedingly difficult to keep cool. A desktop machine with a focus on modularity like the Mac Pro would necessarily come with a more spacious chassis, thus increasing its cooling capacity and the power of its internal components.
And that is what we got. Apple had designed a range of attachable upgrades, from the Afterburner card to the MPX Modules, that would be impossible in the iMac Pro. For the first time in well over a decade, creative professionals had an Apple option that made more sense from a future-proofing perspective.
As soon as the Mac Pro launched in 2019, it was clear there was no real place for the iMac Pro. Even worse, rumours about Apple Silicon would create a whole new problem for the all-in-one.
The Apple Silicon dilemma
Before diving into the topic of Apple Silicon, I should first address just what came in the original iMac Pro. What did “the most powerful Mac ever made” get you in terms of processor performance? Well, it originally shipped with 8-core and 10-core Intel Xeon chips, plus an 18-core version that John Ternus, Apple’s vice president of hardware engineering, described as “really nutty.”
At the time, this seemed like a huge step for the Mac, which many people felt had been increasingly side-lined by the all-powerful iPhone. Yet, Apple knew that even the 18-core behemoth would soon be superseded by its own Apple Silicon chips — chips that the company was already working on in secret.
The difference between Intel’s and Apple’s chips has already been starkly outlined, especially in the Mac Mini, the most performant Apple Silicon computer yet. But the difference is even more glaring when the iMac Pro is thrown into the mix.
Today, you can buy a 10-core iMac Pro that scores 1117 in Geekbench 5’s single-core test and 9386 in its multi-core test. When we reviewed the Mac Mini, it scored 1744 and 7659, respectively. Trading blows, right? Although Geekbench results are far from a comprehensive look at performance, they demonstrate the pickle that these high-end Intel-based Macs have been in.
That’s especially true when you consider the price. The 10-core iMac Pro will set you back $4,999. The Mac Mini? $699.
Of course, Apple knew it couldn’t just snap its fingers and give the iMac Pro an Apple Silicon chip — it had to wait for Pro apps to be ready. It also had to develop its own professional-level performance. But the longer Apple waited, the more irrelevant the iMac Pro’s Intel chips would become compared to the M1 and its successors.
Something much better is coming
The death of the iMac Pro, though, is far from the death of high-performance Macs. If you need a professional workstation to get your work done, the outlook is still very favourable in Apple land. The Mac Pro, while expensive, is laser-focused on creative pros and still offers a great option if power is what you need. There are rumours that Apple is planning to update it with more powerful Intel chips, potentially this year, so it is not going the same way as the iMac Pro.
At the same time, Apple is reportedly working on a half-size Mac Pro that would come with an Apple Silicon chip and look like an enlarged Mac Mini.
Apple could easily stuff a high-powered M-series chip into the iMac Pro, but the Apple Silicon chips make it unnecessary. The regular iMac is due for a major revamp as early as this spring, when it is widely expected to come with Apple Silicon chips of its own. This could bring a big performance boost and put the standard iMac near the level of the current iMac Pro.
Yet at the same time, top-end Apple Silicon chips of the type that would be perfect for the iMac Pro are likely not ready yet. With the entry-level iMac offering what was previously considered pro-level performance on the one hand, and a lack of truly iMac Pro-class Apple Silicon chips on the horizon, there is no place for the iMac Pro to go.
So yes, the future of the iMac Pro is grim. The good news? For creative pros, the death of the iMac Pro doesn’t mean Apple is getting cold feet about catering to this audience. It’s merely making room for all the exciting Macs ahead.
Your iPhone has trouble keeping secrets. Thankfully, there’s something you can do about it.
What you do on the internet, what apps you download, and, often, where you go are all data points that can be linked to an iPhone’s so-called advertising identifier (Android phones have a similar Advertising ID). Combined with commercially available databases, this unique alphanumeric string can be enough for third parties to tie an iPhone’s actions back to the real name of its owner.
We were reminded of the real-world consequences of this Friday, when the New York Timespublished an article exposing the movements of individuals involved in the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol. The newspaper obtained a data set that linked phone location data to advertising identifiers, which, combined with other available databases, allowed the paper to link that location data to real people.
Assuming they’re playing by Apple’s rules, app developers get access to a phone’s advertising identifier by simply requesting it from the phone. Think of an ad identifier like the more familiar web cookie which follows you around the internet, remembering what you do and exchanging information with websites along the way. Your phone has something like a cookie, too — that’s the ad identifier.
While you may not have much sympathy for those described in the Times article — who, after all, may have taken part in the attack on the Capitol — the point remains. Your phone’s advertising identifier is yet another digital breadcrumb leading straight back to you.
If you want privacy when, say, going to the doctor, church, an AA meeting, this should concern you. Many of the apps on your phone that have access to your ad identifier are tracking your location. While the apps may promise to store this data anonymously — linked only to your ad identifier — the Times article provides an example of just how easy to it to tie those identifiers (and all the data associated with them) back to real names.
“Several companies offer tools to allow anyone with data to match the IDs with other databases,” the paper explains. And those databases might contain your real name and address.
But there’s a way to fight back.
Apple offers users the option, albeit buried deep in an iPhone’s settings, to deny apps access to your advertising identifier. Turning off apps’ access to location data is also an important step, but there are other ways for apps to estimate your phone’s location — like connections to WiFi networks. You should also not give apps access to your location data unless they absolutely need it to function, like, for example, a map app.
To deny apps access to your phone’s advertising identifier:
Go to “Settings”
Tap “Privacy”
Select “Tracking”
Disable the option that says “Allow Apps to Request to Track”
Limit how you can be tracked on your iPhone.
Image: screenshot: iphone
That’s it.
Interestingly, the menu page doesn’t make it immediately clear that this action will have the intended effect. But it does. Clicking “Learn More” takes the curious to a long page of text which explains what’s going on behind the scenes.
“When you decline to give permission for the app to track you, the app is prevented from accessing your device’s advertising identifier (previously controlled through the Limit Ad Tracking setting on your device).”
Accessory-gate: Loyal Apple fans’ long-standing gripe with new adaptors being required following a new launch.
First published in Daily Maverick 168
The biggest news from Apple’s usual hypefest announcement about this year’s latest iPhone 12 models was the removal of the charger and headphones from the box. The internet erupted, not just with rage, but with hilarious memes about it, pointing out the stark similarity to the iPhone 5 with its square, steel edges.
Apple says the lack of charger and headphones is a move to minimise its carbon footprint – a seemingly “woke” response to climate concerns but one that falls apart when scrutinised, quicker than an ANC integrity commission hearing.
Sure, it will reduce the footprint of the box for iPhone 512, as I’m calling it, but it won’t for the two new added accessories most users will now have to buy separately. Similarly, Apple announced that last year’s prices would remain unchanged, which appears correct, except that last year it included two items you now have to fork out for.
There goes any attempt to challenge the long-held belief by Macheads that there is always a cable or connector tax for Apple products.
This year the lack of charger is particularly problematic because Apple has abandoned (as it should) the old USB format for the new USB-C – which both charges and transfers data faster. Such chargers were distributed (in the box) with iPhone 11s and I have upgraded all our household chargers because of the quicker charging.
How much does a charger actually cost? Like just about every other iPhone user, I can’t tell you off the top of my head. Now, after a quick trip to the official Myistore.co.za website, I can tell you an 18W USB-C power adaptor costs R649 and another R499 for a 1m USB-C to Lightning cable. An extra R1,148.
People will grumble, but they will buy them anyway. “It’s always the way,” as an Irish friend liked to say in her lilting accent about perennial behaviour.
Apple critics like to point to this accessory tax as another reason the company profits off its customers. But … isn’t that what a company is supposed to do? Isn’t profit the whole bloody point? Can a case be made that many people buy additional headphones, anyway, given that they’re buying a more expensive iPhone in the first place? Is Apple trying to trim costs after a global pandemic?
Apple and Microsoft are the two exceptions to the Big Tech habit of mining our personal data for profit. Both sell you something, often on a monthly basis. I pay an annual licence for Microsoft 365, and I pay monthly for Apple’s iCloud offerings. It’s called business. I am happy to pay for these services because that’s what I am doing: paying for a service. Remember that immortal adage of the social media age: if the product is free, you are the product. Also, I know they won’t let anyone steal my credit card details. That’s their job.
What are the alternatives? Android as an operating system? Remember who owns it. And don’t think for one minute that Google doesn’t make all its services point back to the one thing that makes it the vast majority of its income and profit: search advertising.
Android is a free operating system, we’re still told. Free for whom?
Google effectively sells it to the handset manufacturers on condition they include all Google’s default apps, including search, Chrome, Gmail, Maps and the Google Play Store. Google locks you into its own form of the walled garden, a seemingly huge garden but walled nevertheless.
Apart from Facebook, WhatsApp, Instagram, Messenger (all from another global giant that gives its services away free as part of its surveillance capitalism), banking and streaming services, most people don’t instal other apps on their phones. Even if they do, the funnel always leads to Google advertising, either programmatic advertising in a browser or inside the apps themselves, which make money from … showing Google ads.
At least with Apple and Microsoft, I know the transaction is transparent.
I am paying for a service with my credit card, instead of paying for it with my personal data. An extra R1,148. Worth every cent. DM/DM168
Feature Image Credit: The Apple logo is illuminated at the company’s store in Hong Kong, China.
By Toby Shapshak
Toby Shapshak is publisher of Stuff (Stuff.co.za) and Scrolla.Africa.
_59450.png)
_59442.png)
_59438.png)
