Apple Inc. released the iOS 14.5 version system on the 27th. Its biggest feature is that it allows iPhone users to clearly choose whether or not to let the mobile phone software (ie App) track and analyze their own information and data. This is huge bad news for Facebook, another American technology giant. The British “Guardian” stated on the 29th that Facebook’s business model is advertising based on data collection. According to the New York Times, the confrontation between Facebook CEO Zuckerberg and Apple CEO Cook has escalated into a “total war.” Experts said that Apple and Facebook have heated up the battle for control of the industry.
The New York Times said on the 28th that one of the secrets of the digital advertising industry is that companies like Facebook track people’s surfing habits when they click on other programs such as Amazon on their smartphones. Such data can help advertisers accurately find users’ interests, and better push carefully planned advertisements to target users. Many people now hope to say no to this tracking. iOS 14.5 can protect user privacy, but it will deal a heavy blow to online advertising and Facebook’s $70 billion business. According to Facebook, Apple’s new policy has had an impact on many small businesses that need Facebook’s help in advertising. Apple has used its control of the app store to make “anti-competitive” behaviors. Facebook has prepared a lawsuit against Apple.
Zuckerberg and Cook have had many disputes in recent years, and they have “tipped each other”. The topics are about consumer privacy, Apple’s app store policy and the profit model of the two companies which is better.
The two began to deal with each other to discuss cooperation. According to former Apple executives, around 2010, Cook was Apple’s No. 2 figure, and Facebook was still a start-up company. At that time, Cook, who was the director of Apple’s digital services, approached Zuckerberg and wanted to establish a software partnership. Zuckerberg allegedly said at the time that if Apple wants to cooperate, it must come up with good conditions, otherwise Facebook is willing to do its own thing. This makes the Apple executives have a bad impression of Zuckerberg, thinking that he is an “arrogant” person.
According to reports, this friction set the tone for the confrontation between the two companies. The key figures at the core of the conflict, Cook and Zuckerberg, have been at odds since at least 2014, diametrically opposed to each other in their products and business models. In 2014, Cook publicly criticized “tech companies that profit from collecting user data” and condemned the business models of Facebook and Google. He said that consumers have reason to worry about their personal data being misused. Zuckerberg responded immediately, calling Cook’s remarks “ridiculous.” In an interview with Time magazine, Zuckerberg called Cook, saying that everyone makes money by their own ability. Why do you think that Apple’s business model is more noble than Facebook? If Apple really feels that it is a community of interests with consumers, then Apple’s products should not be sold so expensive.
According to the US “Business Insider” news network, in 2017, a Washington political organization funded by Facebook and other Apple competitors published an anonymous article criticizing Cook. The conflict between Cook and Zuckerberg further intensified in 2018. After the “Cambridge Analytica scandal” incident (referring to the improper disclosure of 87 million Facebook user data to the political consulting firm-Cambridge Analytica, used to support Trump in the 2016 presidential election) was exposed, Cook accepted Microsoft NBC When asked what he would do if he was in Zuckerberg’s position, he replied, “I won’t let myself fall into such a situation at all,” and said that Facebook should strengthen the issue of user data.” Self-regulation”. Zuckerberg quickly fought back. In an interview with the media, he said that Cook would only be “slick.” According to reports, angered by Cook’s remarks, Zach Burke privately requested that all Facebook management team members not use iPhones, and suggested that ordinary employees also use Android phones.
In July 2019, at a forum of tech and media giants in Sun Valley, Idaho, Cook and Zuckerberg sat down to mend the friction between the two. The aftermath of the “Cambridge Analytica scandal” is still unresolved. Zuckerberg is under investigation by lawmakers and regulators. According to people who know the content of the meeting, Zuckerberg asked Cook how he would deal with the consequences of this controversy. Cook replied sharply, “Facebook should delete all user information it collects outside of its core applications.” Zuckerberg was stunned. To do so would be tantamount to breaking Facebook’s money. Zuckerberg ignored Cook’s suggestion.
Last year, at a hearing in the US Congress on antitrust issues, Cook and Zuckerberg complained to each other. In August 2020, Zuckerberg said in a live webcast that Apple “as the gatekeeper on the phone, has a unique control.” He also claimed that Apple’s app store charges generous commissions, hindering innovation and competition, and stifling the economy.
Jennifer King, a researcher at the Institute of Artificial Intelligence at Stanford University, stated on the 28th that it is important to notice the rift between Facebook and Apple in the context of US legislators promoting antitrust and regulating large technology companies. The “New York Times” commented that Cook, 60, is a well-versed corporate executive who has stepped up to his current position by creating an efficient supply chain for Apple. Zuckerberg, 36, a Harvard dropout, built a social media empire with an attitude of unscrupulous freedom. The two people’s heterogeneous thinking about the digital future exacerbated this contrast. Cook hopes that people can increase prices-often by paying Apple-in exchange for a more “secure” Internet, and Apple is relying on this strategy to firmly control the situation. But what Zuckerberg advocates is to “open” the Internet, allowing services like Facebook to have substantial freedom. In this case, advertisers pay the bill.