I think the FBI might have made a mistake in picking a privacy fight with a gay, middle-aged Alabaman who controls the (2nd) most valuable company on Earth.
"and whose brand has taken a strong market stance on privacy and security."
I think people expect Microsoft and Google to cave given how cavalier they've been with user data, particularly of late, so seeing them back this is a bit two-faced.
However for Apple, this could have a significant impact on how their brand is perceived in the market depending on how high of a priority the "privacy/security" aspect is with their customer-base. They will fight this as hard as they can because those dollars aren't just wasted legal costs, they are building trust in the brand since they are putting their money where their mouth is.
Former Apple employee here. My impression is that Tim and other high level management are really committed to user privacy in a very Jobsian way. It isn't something that's being driven by some marketing person (although they are clearly using it that way). Honestly, I doubt their business would suffer if they caved. It's their philosophy. I saw it at all levels within the company. I think their stance on user privacy is a natural outcome of the need-to-know company culture within Apple.
Great point. And I think my comment may have implied more of a "this is a marketing play" message than I intended.
Everything Apple has done over the past few years have really cemented their stance on privacy/security as a top priority, even when it means sacrificing some obvious revenue in the short-term.
A more accurate way to phrase this is I feel privacy and security are now a part of Apple's DNA much like design has been historically. It isn't just what the leadership stands for, it is what the company stands for. So when the question arises internally of "how far do we fight this," I'm left with the distinct impression that the immediate response is "as far as we need to in order to win."
- Apple have chosen that strategy, and either loses or wins the trial
How different it's market share would look like considering that realistically it's largely a prestige brand, and the relatively low popularity of secure Android phones like the black phone ?
Tough call. It would certainly be one of the most public discussions around government privacy we've had with regards to mobile phones.
Apple would take a big PR hit from being associated with having unsecure phones, but that would also raise the question of whether other phones are any better (or worse). So it may be a wash all around.
I definitely agree. This, combined with Apple open-sourcing Swift, makes it feel like Apple is grabbing some of that coveted tech/developer-friendly cachet that Google and Amazon seem to have over them.
It's surprising that this is rarely mentioned in this debate. The US is pretty open and tolerant now, but Cook has lived through times where being gay would destroy a career. Even now there are countries where being gay can get you killed, and I'm sure this is part of the reason he's fighting as hard as he is.
Fair enough, although that has the unintended side-effect of very slightly enriching people without your scruples.
Slight tangent - this is a variant of the Trolley Problem. I think it is sometimes morally good to do something slightly morally bad in order to acquire significant resources which can be used in a much more impactful way. For example, I don't think it's hard to argue that it is net morally good to make millions in slightly sleazy mid-2000s affiliate advertising and then give away most of the money to the Against Malaria Foundation.
I agree that it is always difficult to know where to draw the moral line in cases like this, but if the Saud’s decide to sell Aramco then it will be because they are desperate for money. Anyone buying shares will only increase the price and hence the amount of money going towards propping up what is a totally corrupt theocracy. The sooner the House of Saud is forced by lack of cash to join the 21st century the better.
Yes, they're comparing the market cap in the article, which changes like every 5 minutes or with stronger gusts of wind. At current market cap AAPL is about 50B more valuable than GOOG. Hence Apple is again the most valuable publicly traded company in the world.
