Om Malik, writing for the New Yorker:
Even their products sound remarkably the same. Apple Pay. Android Pay. Apple Photos. Google Photos. Apple Wallet. Google Wallet. Google announced its “Internet of things” efforts, such as Weave and Brillo. Apple came back with HomeKit. Android in the car. Apple in the car. At the Google I/O conference, Google announced app-focussed search and an invisible interface that allows us to get vital information without opening an application. There was an improved Google Now (a.k.a. Now On Tap). Apple announced a new, improved Siri. It also announced Proactive Assistant. Google launched Photos, which can magically sort, categorize, and even search thousands of photos using voice commands. Apple improved its Photos app—you can search them using Siri.
But when it comes to privacy, there’s a major difference.
On Google’s approach to your personal data:
the company must put all of your information inside Google’s gigantic server farms. Google then uses all of this data to make Google Now more personal and perceptive. If you’re texting a friend about dinner, Google will give you restaurant reviews and directions automatically. In the future, it might make a reservation and call a driverless car. The more repetitive you are in your behavior, the more the algorithms learn to automate things for you. Google’s approach has its benefits—the company’s products are free, and you can be fairly confident they won’t break. The cost is in your data, privacy, and lack of control. Someday, Google will want to make money from all these experiences, either through advertising or through transactions that are hyper-tailored to you.
And on Apple’s approach:
Apple’s approach is entirely different. For them, future personalization will be done by using information already on a device. When you search your iPhone, the company’s new Proactive Agent will quickly find content inside the apps on the device and bring it to the forefront. Imagine that you’ve organized a trip on an app such as TripIt, booked flights on United Airlines, and made hotel reservations. The travel plans will be synchronized with your calendar, but you will also get alerts on when to leave for the airport (depending on traffic conditions) and what route to take. When you arrive, your phone will show you your boarding pass. Any flight delays should automatically show up as well. If you like to read certain magazines on the plane, maybe the phone will download them for you in advance. It learns your habits. Plug in your headphones and you’ll get music recommendations based on your location.
Bottom line, Google’s approach is holistic, global. They take all your data, build a big personalized picture of you, your likes/dislikes, preferences, habits, then unapologetically use that data wherever there’s a need. Some of that need is for advertising (to pay the bills), some of that need is to make their services more closely tailored to your needs.
Apple has drawn the line at keeping your data on your device and, if it leaves the device, anonymizing that data. Craig Federighi, speaking about gathering user intelligence during last week’s WWDC keynote, said:
We do it in a way that does not compromise your privacy. We don’t mine your email, your photos, or your contacts in the cloud to learn things about you. We honestly just don’t want to know. All of this is done on-device, and it stays on-device, under your control.
Om compares Apple and Google to the Klitschko twins, two brothers who became great boxing champions. I thought this was a great analogy. The brothers were identical twins, incredibly alike in many ways, but also unique. And so it is with Apple and Google. One went into product design, one went into advertising.
“Google announced its “Internet of things” efforts, such as Weave and Brillo. Apple came back with HomeKit.”
A tad disingenuous, OM. Apple launched healthKit at the 2014 WWDC, the Google stuff was only just announced.
Your privacy disappeared years ago.
Some of Om’s article isn’t bad, but his conclusion is stupid. He soft-pedals Apple’s commitment to privacy and seems to believe Google’s “monetize the customer” approach is superior. Om implies that Apple is just playing catch-up to Google’s lead. This is, I think, bullshit, and, ironically, depends on ignoring context.
Apple’s revenue model is centered on continuing to offer a superior customer experience with its hardware products. Google’s revenue model is focused on selling the customer to advertisers WITHOUT THE CUSTOMER’S INFORMED CONSENT. Apple is inherently customer-centric. Google is inherently ADVERTISER-centric. Does Google provide great tools? Sure. Does Apple have a weakness in some software products? Sure.
Fundamental to Om’s error is his perception that privacy isn’t a core value to Apple. Rather than take Tim Cook at his word about Apple’s commitment to privacy (which is, as near as I can tell, COMPLETELY consistent with Cook’s values and, my God, Steve Jobs was probably the most PRIVATE head of any company in the Valley.), he depends on NOT believing Cook to reach his conclusion. Lame.
The Klitscko analogy is off, or at least ill-supported. The twins are both in boxing. But Malik failed to identify how they differed in their approaches. If the analogy is simply about how similar they are, then there are many more other twins to choose from. The fact is that computing is finally becoming ubiquitous. Google believes ubiquity requires personal identity be mined. Apple believes they can accomplish the same by geofencing identity within personal devices.
One more point – advertising is the means to an end, but not an end for Google. Anyone who doesn’t believe that doesn’t get Google.
Google is not advertiser- centric. Advertising is the means to an end. Google is at heart a computer science company that wants to change the world by archiving, sorting and processing data, all forms of it. Advertising gives them the financial means to do that. As long as you don’t understand this, you don’t understand Google.
Eh. I expect better from Om. His analogy is off. He’s even revising history. Lets take a look down memory lane (only 1-2 years). Apple announced CarPlay, HomeKit, iCloud Photos, etc well before Googles offerings. The only area where Apple is truly responding to a Google product is with Proactive Assistant in iOS 9. Every other area, Apple came out first, and Google was the one “responding.” Even with Apple Pay, despite Google having Google Wallet for years, the execution was SO poorly done, that I highly doubt Google Wallet served as ANY inspiration or motivation for Apple Pay. Apple simply spent more time and energy putting all the pieces in place.
Now Google is the one responding to Apple Pay, despite having Google Wallet for years. They couldn’t even come up with their own unique branding/implementation. It is a carbon copy of Apple Pay. Apple Pay was so different and executed a million times better than Google Wallet, it wasn’t even worth comparing the two. The only thing they shared was the concept, mobile payments. Which isn’t a unique concept.
I know the article isn’t about who did what first. Its to show how similar the companies are, and where they diverge. But I don’t buy that argument. They’re only similar because Google is constantly trying to tag-along. I think Apple is a company that sings to their own tune, for the most part. I highly doubt Google’s actions are the biggest motivator inside Apple. I can’t say the same for Google.
iCloud Photos came out after Google+ Photos which did automatic backup of photos.
Ok, but that was a social network, published online. Not a private photo storage solution. iCloud backups and Photostream came out before that, which could both be used for photo storage. My point was, iCloud Photo Library was not a response to Googles new “Photos” app.
Actually, you could keep it completely private and not have it published anywhere. Much like you can choose to publish your Photo Stream or not publish it. I used the service as my auto photo backup on my iPhone before the same existed on the iPhone.
Wow, the Klitschko brothers must be the first twins to be born five years apart!
Was about to reply the same. Wonder why especially the sites who complain most about people “just repeating false information” follow the same path.
“Google is at heart a computer science company that wants to change the world by archiving, sorting and processing data, all forms of it. ”
Yeah, but they’re paying for it by pimping you out to advertisers. To quote the Republicans vis à vis Obama, “not the change I was looking for.” Isn’t it funny that so much of the data they want to archive, sort, and process has to do with where I like to shop, eat, sleep, and travel?
Wow, kind of a big miss from Om. “They’re a company that has always understood hardware, not software, and they’re fumbling as software becomes something defined by data and cloud and constant connectivity.” SRSLY? Apple doesn’t understand software?