Apple is in the middle of a minor fuss right now over their use of software updates as a promotional device. It turns out that if you are a Windows user with a copy of iTunes, Apple’s update process does its best to get you to install a copy of their web browser, Safari, along with whatever you need to keep your iPod humming along properly:
Of course, it’s not particularly unusual for companies like Google, Adobe, and Apple to try to sneak their software onto your system using somewhat deceptive practices. Last time I checked up on my Dad’s PC his browser had Google Toolbar, Yahoo Toolbar, AOL Toolbar, and a Toolbar from his ISP. The actual browser window was a miserable little ribbon a few hundred pixels high. Dad had no idea how the toolbars got installed, but I have no doubt they were all stealthily piggybacked on one piece of software or another.
But Mozilla CEO John Lilly seems to think this use of the update feature to promote a web browser goes beyond aggressive marketing and into the depths of evil. His angry blog post basically says that using an update/patch service to load new software violates some sort of basic compact between users and providers:
It’s wrong because it undermines the trust that we’re all trying to build with users. Because it means that an update isn’t just an update, but is maybe something more. Because it ultimately undermines the safety of users on the web by eroding that relationship. It’s a bad practice and should stop.
John goes on to say that he doesn’t condemn the common practice of using installed software to push your other products – he seems to be saying that the update program is a special case.
Things get really interesting when you start reading the comments to his post. As is often the case with All Things Apple, the issue seems to have caused extreme polarization. A selection of anti-Apple comments include:
This is disgraceful. It fails the user in favor of serving Apple. It is, in fact, malware-level tactics.
This is just a sick way of tricking users to download their browser by making it seem as if an update if available for a piece of software already installed. I bet it even takes over as the default browser afterwards, which would look very bad on Apple.
Right on, John Lily. “Update” means “update,” not “Give me your other products.”
But predictably, the Apple apologists insist that Cupertino can do no wrong:
You Windows users are not only paranoid, but so anti-Apple that your comments are hysterical. This is the biggest NON-ISSUE yet – and anyone using a computer that can’t use that screen and make a good decision should go back to a typewriter.
The consumer has already trusted Apple (or any company) by downloading one of their pieces of software already. There is already a placement of trust in Apple (or other company). If they trust Apple enough to install one of their apps, then extending that to another one of their programs seems to make sense to me.
Some of the complaints here are over the top. Pushing Safari with a iTunes update is “Malware”? Please. Sure, it’s marketing, but it is utterly benign, other than using a little disk space that is trivial by modern standards. … Compared to all the real malware issues faced by Windows users, this is not worth notice. And, most of all, compared to the execrable practices of Microsoft and other PC software vendors, this is a tempest in a teapot.
I think one thing we can agree on is that there are tens of millions of Windows users with iTunes installed, and the vast majority of them are going to be clueless about what Safari is and whether they should uncheck that radio box.Does this mean Apple is preying on the ignorant? Are they in fact somewhat evil? Or is this just the way the world works now?
Use the comment box to let me know what you think. Inquiring minds want to know.
(By the way, I should note that in the past I’ve always used Firefox on OS/X – Safari 2.0 was lame, unstable, your basic piece of crap. I’m writing this on Windows using Safari 3.1, which is surprisingly fast and seemingly bug free. Quite an improvement!)
11 users commented in " How Evil Is Apple? "
Follow-up comment rss or Leave a TrackbackI can give a real user experience on this. It’s been years since I used a Mac, and I used firefox when I did, so I had completely forgotten that Safari existed. When my itunes updater popped up with two updates, one of them “Safari”, and no information on what it was, I immediately assumed it was some itunes utility. Then I thought: “that sounds familiar actually.” So I googled it, and found out it was Apple’s web browser.
And yes, I do resent it. It’s clearly stealth installing, and it’s wrong. Yes, Safari is a quality product, and I’d actually like to try it out, but there has to be a line drawn somewhere, or else our PCs will be stuffed with junk software from companies with vastly less ethics or public profile than Apple.
Apple is using the tactics of spyware vendors. It’s that simple.
@valency:
Well, I can’t claim to have your integrity, I did D/L it and give it a try. The 3.1 release is pretty nice, but ultimately I’m back to Firefox 3 beta 5, which is pretty nice as well.
I totally agree with your post. Once I got Apple’s quick time installed, it always asks, whether I would not like to make it default software (apple image viewer). And even I check “don’t ask me again”, it persistently asks me next time, after I got rebooted my PC. Let’s face it: Apple is a pile of crap because of this. Peace, out ;)
Much ado about nothing.
(By the way, I should note that in the past I’ve always used Firefox on OS/X – Safari 2.0 was lame, unstable, your basic piece of crap. I’m writing this on Windows using Safari 3.1, which is surprisingly fast and seemingly bug free. Quite an improvement!)
Yeap! It is mostly based on Linux KDE’s konqueror.
Can’t disagree with the premise, but as my Mac gives me about 1/10th the problems my Windows machine gives me, and their apps are so darn stable and good (although I still use Firefox) I can forgive a little evil.
@Jeff: I don’t know about the 1/10th factor, I think my mileage must vary :-)
Evil….mmm… world and its business have gone so much worse these days there is no way you can define this anymore… with all the layers of outsourcing, globalization bigger companies just plainly escape from being called a cheat… same way companies like apple, coke, Pepsi, just escape using marketing, brand management and propaganda control…. Soviet went down for good but it went down with all the hopes to evolve a better economic system for the world…
The order of the world is
20% make options for the other 80% which they choose happily…
I have found Apple’s intrusiveness offensive. I used Macs back in the 1980s and loved them, and I hate MS and their practices, but Apple seems to have more nerve than is good for them.
A common problem among software providers from mainstream to shareware to freeware is that the author/publisher seems to think that his software is the only stuff I will ever need or use. This skewed viewpoint results in overpriced products and software vendors trying to push more stuff out to my overloaded PC than I wish to receive.
I first noticed this back in the shareware days, when purveyors of trivial shareware products were so proud of them that they thought they warranted fees of $20, $30, $50. In fact, I would be looking at having dozens or scores of such products if only the were more reasonably priced. As it was I used almost none of them.
This is intrusive marketing, plain and simple.
They are pushing their product on others in the hope that the recipient won’t mind getting software they never would have considered otherwise.
How evil is Apple? One word: Bonjour.
QED.
Google recently attempted to submit GoogleTalk to the Apple apps store as a free app. Apple refused to accept the submittal. Of course, its their store so they can sell or post what they want. Traditional telcos _hate_ google. A GoogleTalk app on an iPhone would allow a user to pass “voice” calls over the phone’s packet channel (wifi or 2.5G), rather than the voice channel…a revenue-losing prospect for the telco SP. Google’s CEO, Eric Schmidt, used the occasion to resign his position on Apple’s board of directors. I dont think Apple and Google like each other any more.
And, now we know, given the choice of pandering to their iPhone selling SPs or serving the better interests of their end customers – which choice will Apple make?
Leave A Reply
You can insert source code in your comment without fear of too much mangling by tagging it to use the iG:Syntax Hiliter plugin. A typical usage of this plugin will look like this:[c]
Note that tags are enclosed in square brackets, not angle brackets. Tags currently supported by this plugin are: as (ActionScript), asp, c, cpp, csharp, css, delphi, html, java, js, mysql, perl, python, ruby, smarty, sql, vb, vbnet, xml, code (Generic). If you post your comment and you aren't happy with the way it looks, I will do everything I can to edit it to your satisfaction.int main()
{
printf( "Hello, world!\n" );
return 1;
}
[/c]