Now with added video!
By making its entry-level new phone cheaper than last year’s one and only charging a fiver for its new video service, Apple is further compromising its premium image.
The roman numerals experiment is over, which means no more X in the iPhone nomenclature. Now we have the entry-level iPhone 11, the iPhone 11 Pro that has additional wide-angle and telephoto cameras on top of the regular one, and the iPhone 11 Pro Max, which is the same as the Pro but bigger. The most significant change, however, is the pricing of the 11, which is $50 less than the XR was last year at $699, which is also $100 less than the Google Pixel 3. The price of the other two phone remains the same.
On top of that the pricing of the new Apple TV+ SVOD service, which will launch on 1 November, has been announced at $5 per month, a lot cheaper than the standard Netflix package that costs $13 per month. The latter is a sensible acknowledgement that Apple TV+, which will only have original content, won’t have a fraction of the amount of stuff you can get from Netflix, while the phone pricing must surely be in response to increasing competitive pressure from the sub-premium market.
“With the tight integration between hardware, software and services, the advancements in iPhone 11 bring an unparalleled user experience at an affordable price to even more customers,” said Apple marketing boss Phil Schiller. “Apple TV+ is an unprecedented global video service with an all-original slate,” said Jamie Erlicht, Apple’s head of Worldwide Video. “We look forward to giving audiences everywhere the opportunity to enjoy these compelling stories within a rich, personalised experience on all the screens they love.”
The pricing angle has caught the attention of the commentariat. Bloomberg notes that not only is the iPhone 11 price cut significant, but the XR has had $150 knocked off it. “We view this as an admission that Apple stretched too far with the price points at last year’s launch,” Chris Caso, an Analyst at Raymond James & Associates, is quoted as saying in the Bloomberg piece.
On top of the aggressive price point for Apple TV+, anyone who buys a new iPhone, iPad, Apple TV, Mac or iPod gets a year’s subscription for free, which is not just a great way for Apple to seed TV+ into its existing customer base, but provide a strong incentive for new sales too, so this is a smart move. Having said that it’s further evidence of Apple’s sudden willingness to sacrifice margin at the altar of market share.
We spoke to Ed Barton of analyst firm Ovum to get his take on the TV+ move. “The price point and a free year of access for new Apple device buyers are aggressive moves which will help drive early growth and usage,” said Barton. “But it’s still, by volume of content, a very limited video service with no catalogue content wholly reliant on new, untested intellectual properties.
“The strength of the Apple hardware and services ecosystem means that it practically can’t fail and a lot depends on how effectively and frequently Apple drops new shows to maintain viewers’ interest levels. Apple’s $6 billion production investment and its ability to surface and promote Apple Video content to a global audience of hundreds of millions throughout its tightly integrated hardware and software ecosystem give the service huge potential.”
On top of the phone and telly stuff Apple also unveiled the latest versions of its Watch and iPad in a mega-launch that it would previously have scattered throughout the year. Just as with the phones the new devices are largely spec upgrades, but we were reminded what a relative bargain the iPad is at just $329 (Apple is still charging $130 for a modem, for some reason, and it’s hard to see why anyone would pay that when they can just tether).
One other announcement was Apple Arcade, a gaming subscription service that Apple has been banging on about for a while. Just like TV+ it costs a fiver a month (although there’s no free subscription offer) and offers a smallish selection of exclusive games. People are less impressed with the games service though.
“It’s difficult to get excited about the games subscription, it does include some exclusive, new titles which didn’t appear particularly noteworthy from a gaming perspective,” said Barton. “Most of the games included didn’t sell well on a standalone basis so it’s difficult to see who this will appeal to. Perhaps there is a casual gamer segment which appreciates the simplicity of a subscription for a heavily curated selection of mobile games, but I won’t hold my breath.”
Since smartphone innovation has been stagnant for the best part of a decade, Apple decided to seek revenue and margin growth from flogging services to its installed base. Apple TV+ is a major step further in that direction, but the decision to be more aggressive on pricing is also a sensible strategy when it comes to expanding that installed base and thus the addressable market for its services.
Zao, a new mobile app coming out of China, can replace characters in TV or movie clips with the user’s own facial picture within seconds, raising new privacy and fraud concerns.
Developed by Momo, the company behind Tantan, China’s answer to Tinder, Zao went viral shortly after it was made available on the iOS App Store in China, Japan, India, Korea, and a couple of other Asian markets. It allows users to swap a character in a video clip for the user’s own face. The user would choose a character in a clip from the selections, often iconic Hollywood movies or popular TV programs, upload his or her own picture to be used, and let the app do the swapping in the cloud. In about eight seconds the swap is done, and the user can share the altered clip on social media.
While many are enjoying the quirkiness of the app, others have raised concerns. First there is the concern for privacy. Before a user can upload their pictures to have the app do the swapping, they have to log in with their phone number and email address, literally losing face and giving away identification to the app. More worryingly, the app, in its earlier version of terms and conditions would assume the full rights to the altered videos, therefore the rights to the users’ images.
Another concern is fraud. Facial recognition is used extensively in China, in benign and not so benign circumstances alike. In this case, when an altered video with the user’s face in it is shared on social networks, it is out of the user’s control and will be open to abuse by belligerent parties. One of such possible abuses will be payment. Alipay, the online and mobile payment system of Alibaba, has enabled retail check-out with face, that is, the customer only needs to look at the camera when leaving the retailer, and the bill will be placed on the users’ Alipay account. By adding a bit fun into the process, check-out by face not only facilitates retail transactions but also continuously enriches Alibaba’s database. (It would not be a complete surprise if this should be one reason behind the euphoria towards AI voice by Jack Ma, Alibaba’s founder.) The payment platform rushed to reassure its users that the system will not be tricked by the images on Zao, without sharing details on how.
Though Zao is not the first AI-powered deepfake application, it is one of the best worked out, therefore most unsettling ones. In another recent case, involving voice simulation and the controversial scholar Jordan Peterson, an AI-powered voice simulator enabled users to type out sentences up to 280 characters for the tool to read out loud in the distinct, uncannily accurate Jordan Peterson voice. This led Peterson to call for a wide-ranging legislation to protect the “sanctity of your voice, and your image.” He called the stealing of other people’s voice a “genuinely criminal act, regardless (perhaps) of intent.”
One can only imagine the impact of seamless image doctoring coupled with flawless voice simulation on all aspects of life, not the least on the already abated trust in news.
The good news is that the Zao developer is responding to users’ concerns. The app said on its official Weibo account (China’s answer to Twitter) that they understood the concerns about privacy and are thinking about how to fix the issues, but “please give us a little time”. The app’s T&C has been updated following the outcry. Now the app would only use the uploaded data for app improvement purposes. Once the user deletes the video from the app, it will also be deleted in the cloud.
Google’s Project Zero security team has revealed a vulnerability in iOS that exposed large numbers of users to a hack that allowed the installation of a monitoring implant.
This kind of hack is called ‘zero-day’, the definitions of which vary, but which refers to a vulnerability in a piece of software that leaves it open to exploitation by outside actors. The stated aim of Project Zero is to make zero-day hard and it goes about doing so by trying to find such vulnerabilities. Apparently it always publishes these findings after giving the owner of the software time to address the vulnerability and Apple was told about this one back at the start of February this year.
“Now, after several months of careful analysis of almost every byte of every one of the exploit chains, I’m ready to share these insights into the real-world workings of a campaign exploiting iPhones en masse,” wrote Ian Beer of Project Zero in the blog post detailing the findings. “Let’s also keep in mind that this was a failure case for the attacker: for this one campaign that we’ve seen, there are almost certainly others that are yet to be seen.”
This is at best very embarrassing for Apple, which prides itself on the relative lack of malware on its close software platforms. The malware was able to install itself on iOS devices if they merely visited an infected website, with no manual download required. Upon successful installation the malware apparently granted the bad guys access to everything on the phone, including passwords, chat histories, etc.
Google is, of course, Apple’s sole rival in the mobile operating system space, so it does seem pretty convenient that it should be discovering iOS vulnerabilities and publicising them. Project Zero’s policy, it seems, is to publish all such findings after an appropriate delay to allow for patching, which it should be stressed Apple did immediately, but you have to wonder whether it’s quite as keen to bring Android’s failings into the public domain.
Apple has struggled to gain any sort of traction in the Indian markets to date, but new Government rules could perhaps open the door a crack.
India is a market which represents a significant opportunity for the major players in the digital economy. It has the second-largest population globally and a smartphone penetration rate of roughly 24%, but one of the few markets worldwide where smartphone shipments are increasing quickly. Thanks to certain market disruptions, India is currently under-going its own digital revolution, with the increasingly wealthy middle-class easing into the digital euphoria Western consumers have been accustomed to as the norm.
|Year||Smartphone penetration1||Average income (US $)2|
1Statista 2World Bank Group
The evolution of India and the surge of the digital economy in the country is moving at a dramatic pace. The opportunity for profit is monstrous, but this is a tricky market to crack.
This is the conundrum which Apple is currently facing. It currently has less than 2% of market share across the country (which isn’t increasing), and premium prices are stifling any genuine ambition to increase this.
Indian consumers are gradually spending more on devices, though by the time Apple’s prices would be deemed palatable, other brands might have already developed a strong sense of loyalty; do not underestimate the power of the Android/iOS divide.
Figures curtesy of Counterpoint Research – Q2 2019 shipments
However, there is a glimmer of hope. The Indian Government has this week announced it will relax rules which dictate how foreign companies can operate in the country. Fortunately for Apple, the easement will allow it to sell directly to customers through its eCommerce channels.
In by-gone years, a foreign company had to source 30% of its production locally to create a retail presence in India. This presence includes online channels. With such reliance on China for the manufacturing elements of the supply chain, Apple has always struggled to meet these requirements. As a result, Apple’s devices have been sold through local partners, who add a premium to an already premium product; it has struggled to gain a foothold in the market.
Another element tied to this is the brand story. The Apple Store is a presence in 25 countries around the world, not only presenting a direct-selling opportunity, but a chance to offer an experience to current and potential customers. This is a fundamental building block in the Apple strategy, which is all about creating a brand and an identity to cultivate customers into the loyal iLifers you see around the world today.
Thanks to new elements being considered by the Indian Government, Apple now meets the requirements and will allegedly begin selling products through its own eCommerce channels in the coming months. These new considerations take into account more iPhones will be manufactured in India, not only for Indian consumers, but for export to Europe as well. This is massive win for Apple.
In short, there are two massive benefits for Apple. Firstly, it can own the purchasing relationship with the customer, dictating the messaging and reducing the price while maintaining profit margins. Secondly, it can begin to create the Apple experience for customers to nurture the sense of loyalty which is so critical to the Apple success over the years.
Apple is an incredibly successful smartphone manufacturer because it creates excellent devices, but the work which has been done to build loyalty with its customer base should never be underestimated.
Think back to the 90s and 00s when you saw Apple adverts on TV. None of these adverts ever really discussed products in the way you would expect but talked about the Apple experience. A huge proportion of advertising today is designed around story-telling and brand experience, but Apple was arguably one of the first to do it and remains one of the best at building this experience.
The result of these campaign was an ‘us’ and ‘them’ mentality which persists today. Whether it pins iOS versus Android, or Mac versus PC, the split is very apparent, and crossover is very rare. Not only does this segmented approach maintain loyalty for the individual products, it presents significant cross-selling opportunities. How many iPhone users have an iWatch, an iPad or a Mac also? We suspect a high percentage.
Shifting people into, and keeping them in, the Apple universe can partly be attributed back to the brand marketing campaigns, the closed ecosystem and ownership of sales channels and brand experience. And now, it presents another massive opportunity moving forward; software and services revenues.
|Period||Net sales||Software and services revenue||Percentage of total|
Figures taken from Apple financial reports – USD ($) in millions
Apple CEO Tim Cook has made a big deal about software and services, and he is very right. It attracts recurring revenues without the R&D and manufacturing price tag. There will of course still be R&D, but smartphones are very expensive products to produce at the level Apple customers demand.
Generating revenues through AppleCare, iTunes, Apple Music, iCloud, Apple Pay, Apple Books, Siri, maps, search or TV subscription services becomes substantially more profitable once people are bought into the ecosystem. And as you can see from the table above, it is becoming an increasingly important facet of the financial spreadsheets.
With many users persisting with the OS they have become accustomed to, if Apple wants to make India a profitable market, it will have to start embedding itself in the minds and lives of Indian consumers today.
The Indian market is one which offers great prospects and profits for those who play their hands wisely. Up to now, Apple would have been written off by many industry commentators, but will changes to the rules, the door is slightly ajar. But that is all it is right now.
Apple will have to convince smartphone users it is a better alternative than the Android ecosystem, while also justifying the premium it traditionally charges for products. This will be a very difficult battle, but Apple is in a better position today than it was yesterday.
While Apple registered modest growth, with the strong performance of Services compensating the declining iPhone sales, Samsung’s revenue and profit continued to plummet, thanks to weakness in the semiconductor market.
Apple’s Q2 2019 results (its financial Q3 2019) were respectable, if not exciting. The total sales went up by 1% to $53.8 billion from $53.3 billion a year ago, therefore making it the company’s record June quarter in terms of revenue. Gross margin slightly declined from 38.3% to 37.6%, and the operating margin dropped from 23.7% to 21.5%.
The iPhone contributed almost $26 billion, a decline of 12% from $29.5 billion the same quarter in 2018. This represented the first quarter when the iPhone accounts less than half of the total revenues since 2012. Notably, the iPhone is the only product category that reported year-on-year decline this quarter, with growth reported in Mac (+10.7%), iPad (+8.4%), Wearables, Home and Accessorie (+48%), and Services (12.6%). The $11.5 billion revenue generated by Services now accounts for 21.3% of the company’s total income.
“These results are promising across all our geographic segments, and we’re confident about what’s ahead,” said Tim Cook, the CEO. “The balance of calendar 2019 will be an exciting period, with major launches on all of our platforms, new services and several new products.”
If by “promising” Cook meant decelerated decline, he was right. Apple’s revenues continued to drop in Europe (-1.8%) and Greater China (-4.1%), the second and third largest markets after the Americas, albeit at a slower pace. Greater China would have registered a growth on constant currency, Cook insisted.
When it comes to the “balance of calendar 2019”, Apple gave a guidance showing mild improvement in Q3 (its financial Q4). The midpoint guidance points to a 16% growth in revenue, largely similar gross margin (38%), similar operating expenses, implying an improved operating margin of about 24%.
While the iPhone’s shrinking contribution may be expected, the strong performance of Services was encouraging. The company claimed it now had 480 million subscriptions across all its service portfolio, and both Apple Pay and the ad income from App Store search delivered triple-digit growth. The 3rd-party subscription revenue generated by the App Store went up by 40%. The Service growth momentum is likely to be further strengthened by the launch of the video streaming service Apple TV+ and the subscription gaming service Apple Arcade in the next quarter. The Services strength helped lift Apple’s share price by 4.2% pre-market.
A few hours later Samsung Electronics announced its less impressive though not surprising Q2 numbers. The company continued to see its profit plummeting by more than half, a trend we have seen in the preceding quarters, and largely in line with the profit warning the company published earlier this month. The total revenues declined by 4% to KRW 56.13 trillion ($47 billion) with the operating profit coming in at KRW6.6 trillion ($5.6 billion), down from KRW14.87 trillion ($13 billion) a year ago, indicating an operating margin of 11.8%, down from 25.4%. The net profit of KRW 5.18 trillion ($4.4 billion) represented a 53% decline from Q2 2018.
Not everything is bleak. IT & Mobile Communications division, Samsung’s largest revenue generator and which includes Samsung’s mobile handset business, reported a 7.8% sales growth although the operating margin declined by 41.5%. The revenue growth was largely driven by the strong sales of the Galaxy A series geared towards the young users. This has helped Samsung gain market share in a contracting smartphone market. On the other hand, the flagship Galaxy S10 series have met “weak sales momentum”, the company conceded. Recently Samsung announced that it has fixed the problem with the Galaxy S10 Fold and is now ready to launch it in “select markets”.
Continued to be worrying is the Display and Semiconductor business division, the biggest profit generator for Samsung. Despite that the display panel business turned profitable after making loss in Q1, weakness in the memory chip segment drove the operating profit down by 71%, on the basis of a revenue decline of 27%, indicating strong price pressure. This has led to the data centre customers to continue to adjust the inventory levels, Samsung claimed.
Another uncertain, though Samsung did not explicitly discuss, is the on-going trade dispute with Japan, which has resulted in trade embargo on the export of selected high-end equipment from a few Japanese companies. This could potentially impact Samsung’s plan to deliver the more advanced semiconductors in the second half of this year. Samsung insisted that it did “see 2H demand recovery” though.
At the time of writing Samsung’s share price was down by 2.6%.
The latest global smartphone shipment numbers reveal a return to growth for Samsung, a major reduction in growth for Huawei and transition for Apple.
As you can see from the table below, Q2 2019 marked the first quarter in which Samsung registered year-on-year smartphone shipment growth for the first time in almost two years, in an overall market that continues to contract. One of the reasons for this could be the Galaxy S10 being better received than its predecessor as well as it being the main early 5G phone.
“Samsung shipped 76.3 million smartphones worldwide in Q2 2019, jumping 7% annually from 71.5 million units in Q2 2018. Samsung has lifted its global smartphone marketshare from 20% to 22% in the past year,” said Neil Mawston of analyst firm Strategy Analytics. “Strong sales in midrange and entry segments increased Samsung’s shipments, but its profit margin declined due to fierce price competition.”
While Huawei’s smartphone shipments continued to grow, it was at a much slower rate than for the past couple of years, but that was still a considerable achievement all things considered. “Huawei captured a healthy 17 percent global smartphone marketshare in Q2 2019, up from 15 percent a year ago,” said Mawston. “Huawei surged at home in China during the quarter, as the firm sought to offset regulatory uncertainty in other major regions such as North America and Western Europe.”
Apple iPhone shipments declined for the third quarter in a row, as Apple continues to diversify in favour of services such that iPhones accounted for less than half of total Apple revenues for the first quarter ever. “Apple iPhone shipments fell 8 percent annually, making it the worst performer among the world’s big-five smartphone players,” said Woody Oh of SA. “Apple is stabilizing in China due to price adjustments and buoyant trade-ins, but other major markets such as India and Europe remain challenging for the expensive iPhone.”
The rest of the table is all about the Chinese vendors, all of whom saw flat year-on-year growth. “Oppo took fifth position with 9 percent global smartphone marketshare during the quarter, holding steady from 9 percent share a year ago,” said SA’s Lindi Sui. “Oppois expanding hard into Western Europe, with new models like the Reno 5G, but it is coming under pressure at home in China from a resurgent Huawei.” Lucky Western Europe.
Talking of Chinese vendors, Counterpoint Research has identified massive growth from a new brand called Realme, which managed to ship almost five million units, having only started a year ago. Realme seems to specialize in the sub-premium category, in common with OnePlus, which is also owned by Shenzhen-based BBK Electronics, along with Oppo, but the focus of Realme’s hard expansion seems to be India.
When Apple’s famous head of design decided to call it a day last week, there was widespread speculation around what may have caused such a move.
The most Juicy gossip came from the Wall Street Journal, which wrote a piece contending that Jony Ive started the process of clearing off long ago and that it was motivated, at least in part, by CEO Tim Cook’s relative disinterest in the design process. This in turn demoralised Ive who, according to the account, became an increasingly distant figure at Apple Towers.
Tim Cook has always been known as an operations specialist with a particular talent for managing an efficient supply chain. Since he took over from the more creative, mercurial Apple founder Steve Jobs in 2011, these talents have ensured the company has gone from strength to strength in terms of revenue and profitability, but there has always been speculation that this has come at the expense of innovation.
That last truly disruptive move from Apple came with the launch of the iPad in 2010, but it looks like Ive was hoping the Apple Watch launch in 2015 would be a similar inflection point. While Apple has flogged quite a few of them and doubtless trousered a pile of cash in the process, there’s very little that differentiates the Apple Watch from its competitors and the category itself has failed to set the technology world on fire.
So it’s easy to see why a narrative that contends innovation at Apple is being suffocated with him in charge might trouble Cook somewhat, which seems to be confirmed by his response to the WSJ piece. Uncharacteristically he publicly took issue with the story via a statement sent to NBC News, in which he asserted it was at odds with his own perception.
“The story is absurd,” wrote Cook. “A lot of the reporting, and certainly the conclusions, just don’t match with reality. At a base level, it shows a lack of understanding about how the design team works and how Apple works. It distorts relationships, decisions and events to the point that we just don’t recognize the company it claims to describe.”
Grizzled Journalists soon recognised this as the kind of non-specific denial companies often send out when they want to cast doubt on the legitimacy of a story without calling out any specific inaccuracies. Cook is essentially saying he disagrees with the conclusions but then he would, wouldn’t he?
This email is going to fill the turbo meter for a lot of professional Apple apologizers, but it appears Apple didn’t comment to WSJ for the piece, and Cook notably doesn’t say what specifically is inaccurate. Careful now https://t.co/vigFzla0wB
— nilay patel (@reckless) July 1, 2019
Ive’s departure doesn’t seem to have done Apple’s share price any harm, but it does increase the pressure on the company to prove it can still be a consumer technology trailblazer without him. While Apple hasn’t shown much evidence of this for a while, that lack of differentiation was largely put down to the maturity of the smartphone form factor and the openness of the component supply chain. If Apple still hasn’t invented anything revolutionary in a few years’ time, people now might pin the blame on Cook.
Jony Ive, Apple’s Chief Design Officer, has announced that he is leaving the company at the end of the year and will set up LoveFrom, his own creative business, with Apple as its first client.
Sir Jonathan “Jony” Ive has been instrumental in giving the world a string of iconic Apple products over the last two decades. Among them the most influential ones should be the iPod, which turned the recorded music industry upside down, the iPhone, which redefined what mobile handsets are and do, and the iPad, which practically created the tablet market. In addition, he was also behind the Mac computers and the Apple Watch, the success of which has been more muted.
Ive stressed that his departure from the company does not mean he will stop working with Apple. “While I will not be an [Apple] employee, I will still be very involved — I hope for many, many years to come,” Ive told the Financial Times in an interview. “This just seems like a natural and gentle time to make this change.” Tim Cook, Apple’s CEO, believed the company would continue the success of the Ive era, and was looking forward to the collaboration with Ive’s new venture. “We get to continue with the same team that we’ve had for a long time and have the pleasure of continuing to work with Jony,” Cook told the FT. “I can’t imagine a better result.” Apple will not announce a successor to fill Ive’s CDO position immediately. Instead, the managers of the design teams will report to Jeff Williams, Apple’s COO.
Ive’s decision to leave should not appear to have come out of the blue to those that have followed the industry, and the company, closely. He was the late Steve Jobs’ closest ally and, among other things, had been an active presence at product debuts, through video links. After Jobs passed away this patterned continued, up to the point when the Apple Watch was launched. Ive would appear at the events on pre-recorded videos, unveiling the products, in particular talking about the details. That has not happened since. In a 2015 feature by the New Yorker magazine, Ive said he had been “deeply tired”. In May that year he was appointed CDO, a position that would rid him of the day-to-day responsibilities to run the design team.
More recently it appears Ive has expand his interest beyond sleek consumer products. For example, his team were heavily involved in designing Apple’s new headquarters. This is also a vision he gives his new business. “There are products that we have been working on for a number of years,” Ive told the FT. “I’m beyond excited that I get to continue working on those, and there are some new projects as well that I’ll get to develop and contribute to.” He also denied that the weakened appeal of the iPhone, which has not been helped by the trade war with China, is a contributing factor to his decision. To tell from his reduced involvement in products over the last few years, the decision seems to have been long in the making.
Before he was knighted for “services to design and enterprise” by the Queen in 2012, Ive had already been hailed by Stephen Fry as one of the two Englishmen alive to have the most profound impact on people’s lives. The other, according to Fry, is Sir Tim Berners-Lee, the inventor of the World Wide Web.
At its 2019 developer conference Apple introduced new measures to strengthen user privacy protection, as a point of differentiation from other big tech companies.
Apple is hosting its 2019 edition of Worldwide Developer Conference (WWDC) in California. On the first day the company announced a number of new products including the iOS13, new version of MacOS (called “Catalina”), the first version of iPadOS, and WatchOS6. At the same time, iTunes, which has been around for nearly two decades and has been at the vanguard of Apple’s adventure into the music industry, is finally retired. At the event, Apple also unveiled the radically revamped Mac Pro. Instead of looking like a waste basket (as the 2nd generation did), the new top end desktop computer looks more like a cheese grater.
One key feature that stood out when the new software was introduced was Apple’s focus on privacy, in particular the new “Sign in with Apple”. It will be mandatory for apps which support 3rd-party log in to also include this new option, in addition to, or as Apple would like it, instead of, Facebook and Google. Although Tim Cook, in a post-event interview with CBS claimed “we’re not really taking a shot at anybody”, Craig Federighi, Apple’s software chief, was pulling no punch when introducing the feature. After showing the current two options to sign in apps or websites, he declared Apple wanted to offer a better option, which will be “fast, easy sign-in without all the tracking.”
In practice this means Apple will act as a privacy interlocutor. A user can log in to an app or a website with his or her Apple ID. Apple will then verify the email addresses, make dual-factor authentication, then send developers a unique random ID, which Apple asks developers to trust. Users can also choose to use TouchID or FaceID for authentication. In addition to the Apple products (iPhone, iPad, Watch, etc.), and it can also work on browsers built on other platforms (Windows, Chrome, etc.).
In addition to Sign in with Apple, the company also updated its Maps, so that apps that track users’ location would need to ask for permission every time it is activated. On MacOS, all apps need to request permission to access the user’s files on the computer, while Watch users can approve security requests by tapping the button on the side.
Although both Facebook and Google have been talking up about their focus on privacy, these companies have an intrinsic conflict of interest: their business model is built on monetising user data. Apple, on the other hand, makes money by selling products and services. Therefore, it is in Apple’s own interest to guard user privacy as close as possible, to enhance current and future consumers’ trust. By making privacy protection its differentiator, or as TechCrunch called it, delivering “privacy-as-a-service”, Apple is elevating the match to a level Google, Facebook, and other internet companies will be challenged to match.