It's anonymous, users can see the data (Privacy & Security > Analytics & Improvements > Analytics Data), and they can turn it off. It seems like if Apple were to lose this, the rest of the industry would be next.
I don't expect it to be private from apple. I'm just counting on apple not sharing it with 3rd parties like google or anyone willing to give them a buck to report my buying/app/whatever habits in order to send me ads.
You're making a very flawed argument, because Google isn't going to share their users data with 3rd parties either.
It's literally their business to gobble up as much data as they can get their hands on and sabotage anyone trying to do the same in order to become the only viable choice for Internet marketing campaigns.
Apple only sells marketing on the app store, so their privacy violations only extend so far for now. I hope it stays like that, but my gut tells me that the water will continue to get muddier over the years. But that's a future issue.
My argument isn't flawed, it states exactly what I meant to say. I trust apple's greed to not get bad publicity more than I do google's, who has been getting bad publicity for years and seems immune to being concerned over such things.
What if a user enables Advanced Data Protection (end to end encryption of everything stored on iCloud) on their Apple devices? How much does that change things?
Advanced Data Protection protects your data that you are asking Apple to hold for you. E.g., notes and photos. Apple doesn't need to see your notes and photos to hold them for you and give copies back to you.
The lawsuit is complaining about data Apple gets when the user uses the App Store, Apple Music, Apple TV, and similar. E.g., when you buy an app from Apple's app store, Apple knows which app you bought, how much you paid for it, and how you paid for it.
That's data that Apple is getting because it is necessary in order to provide the service you are using.
The case they cited is from Home Depot customer service chat. If this is about Apple customer service chats it’s fair but otherwise seems pretty disingenuous.
The document in question: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.40...
Note that the title here is a misquote in a way that misconstrues the meaning, it's actually:
> "Given Apple’s extensive privacy disclosures, no reasonable user would expect that their actions in Apple’s apps would be private from Apple."