Get ready, as a user, to pay for these apps which were once free.
Sounds like a great business incentive to be pro-privacy to me. You can count on profit motive.
Plenty of industries survived for centuries without these kinds of ads.
FB is going to use less accurate forms of tracking, so they simply won't be able to charge as much. I'm not going to feel bad for a company that has to work harder to circumvent the users wishes.
(2) Apple's margin (from their distribution channel) is not unreasonable, imo, given that most apps would simply not be successful without the trust and technology Apple provides.
(3) Apple is obvi not benevolent; they're a _self-interested_ supporter of privacy. [Company] does [thing I like] so I pay [price] is how companies work, why I back Apple here, and ultimately why I'm willing to pay $60 or whatever for a charging cord.
Apple did not take a choice away - they just changed the only option.
It's more than just $-for-product; 100s of millions of other users have Samsung, Google, etc. to buy from.
People have become accustomed to ad measurement. Performance marketing is a thing for a reason. How will ad performance be measured now? FB is already rolling out a tool to do that, but only if you share more data with them (lifetime value estimates, etc).
I’m sick of being the product when I have the damn money to buy services and products but everyone from startups to solo devs seem hell bent on pursuing advertising driven revenue models. If this drives some more developers to build more sustainable products and services then as far as I’m concerned Apple did a good thing.
I’m not going to comment on the validity of Apple’s 30% cut because I don’t think they deserve 30% however that doesn’t change the fact that I think this is a good thing.
A user will prioritize apps by value and pay for those that provide most value. Developer of valuable app will get paid. Is this a bad thing?
This seems like a straightforward example of something you should be applauding.