In an interview with TIME, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has described Tim Cook’s comments on ad-supported businesses as “ridiculous,” and suggested that Apple’s products are over-priced.
Zuckerberg was referring to comments Cook made back in September about Apple’s approach to security and privacy, when Cook said:
A few years ago, users of Internet services began to realize that when an online service is free, you’re not the customer. You’re the product.
While Cook was taking a shot at Google without specifically naming the company, the comment could apply equally well to Facebook, which has the same need to monetize its subscribers …
Zuckerberg did not share Cook’s reluctance to name names.
A frustration I have is that a lot of people increasingly seem to equate an advertising business model with somehow being out of alignment with your customers,” Zuckerberg says. “I think it’s the most ridiculous concept. What, you think because you’re paying Apple that you’re somehow in alignment with them? If you were in alignment with them, then they’d make their products a lot cheaper!”
The Facebook chief contrasted Apple’s premium pricing with its desire to be accessible to everyone.
Our mission is to connect every person in the world. You don’t do that by having a service people pay for.
Tim Cook made his comments on security after the leaked celebrity nudes were attributed to an iCloud hack. Apple responded by advising that the accounts in question were accessed using login credentials obtained from a phishing scam in conjunction with weak security questions, switching on two-factor authentication for iCloud.com and sending email notifications when an iCloud account was accessed on the web.
Photo credit: Robert Galbraith/Reuters
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Zuck is obviously a homophobe!
I would rather pay for a good service than use a really awful free service. Facebook used to be good but has lost its way now.
I would also rather pay for a good service that maintains my privacy and rights to my data. If Google and Facebook offered their services for a fee, that had different terms of service that did ensure my privacy, I would support them where I felt their products were superior or had utility. I would pay .99 a year for Facebook privacy with no adds. As it stands, very little stands between me deactivating my account. So why can’t Facebook and Google have both worlds at the same time? Free services that can, in Mark’s words, “connect the world” and the same services that users pay for that still allow connectivity and where the subscriber funds their use as a customer to ensure their privacy and free users like they have now, where the user is the product?
Zuck not respond to what Tim says: users are the product services Google and Facebook ?. Obviously: Yes.
That kid is such a …can’t find the word for it. But he understands nothing about Apple, or good business practises for that matter. The world would be better off without him in it.
I suspect he understands Apple well enough. However, he has his own business model to defend.
He’s not wrong when he says “Our mission is to connect every person in the world. You don’t do that by having a service people pay for.”
However, Tim Cook is also right about “[…] when an online service is free, you’re not the customer. You’re the product.”
However, Zuckerberg is (knowingly, I suspect) wrong when he says: “If you were in alignment with [Apple], then they’d make their products a lot cheaper!”. A company “is in alignment with” me when it provides me products I want under conditions I appreciate: For me, that means a quality product at a price that I can easily justify and yet gives the company sufficient financial security to continue being “in alignment with” me. Apple’s model works just right there.
I do use Facebook, but also an ad blocker. I don’t think Facebook is “in alignment with” me if I feel compelled to “fight” their product that way.
You forgot to yell at those damn kids to get off your lawn.
Who knows whether or not he “understands” Apple, but to say that the man who created one of the biggest game changers in technology and society in the last 10 years (that is also one of the highest valued companies in the world) does not understand good business practices is simply ignorant. Pull your head out of the ground – you’re not getting enough oxygen.
You seem to be equating “good business practices” with “making a lot of money,” which is myopic and short-sighted. By that measure, drug kingpins have good business practices. Good business practices should and do include things like honesty, transparency, giving back to the community, etc.
I am going to reserve judgement of just how business savvy Zuckerberg is for a few more years. I don’t know how many of you have kids, but I do, and they do not use Facebook. Facebook is the “old people’s” technology.
That is not a good place for a social media company to be. How intelligent the purchase of Whatsapp ends up being is also up in the air. At this time I don’t see any plans to monetize it, and depending upon how they try can determine how quickly people jump ship.
I’m sure Zuck really cares that you are going to reserve your opinion on how he runs a billion dollar business. When you run your own billion dollar business, then maybe your opinion may actually be worth something, as it stands, it’s worth nothing.
Oh, please. Facebook one of the biggest game changers in technology? By what metric? It’s a freaking web service.
“Highest valued companies in the world”?????
I think you meant to say one of the Highest OVER-Valued companies in the world which trades at a P/E of over 70.
IMO, Apple is seriously over-priced.
The fact is that Facebook makes its money by trafficking in personal data. That said, they are a lot less problematic than Google. Google manages to get their person-tracking code on nearly every website (AdWords, Analytics, DoubleClick, and Google+).
Facebook’s dossier building capability is large, but Google is nearly comprehensive.
So we’re supposed to believe Google and Facebook want to connect every person in the world just out of the goodness of their hearts? Of course not. They make money off eyeballs so it’s in their interest to get as many people on the Internet as possible. It’s not altruism it’s business. As far as Apple products being overpriced, people are willing we paying for them when there are cheaper alternatives then they’re not overpriced.nobody is forced to buy Apple products and nowhere does Apple have a monopoly.
Google’s free services and advertising are just the tip of the iceberg. Their connections to the state and intelligence departments of government, intelligence/military contracts… There’s more value in knowing everything about everyone than just selling products (or ostensibly “connecting people”)
https://wikileaks.org/google-is-not-what-it-seems/
At least Tim can make a phone that sells…
*Steve Jobs can make a phone that sells. Love it or loathe it, Tim Cook is an extremely adept pen pusher, not a creative genius.
I think the appropriate correction would be:
*Steve Jobs can make a phone that wows
Tim Cook knows how to make and sell phones…
Ha, still taking shots at Tim Cook. Funny how Steve has been dead two years yet the iPhone lives on. The man who really deserves all the credit for the iPhone is Jony Ives.
*Jonny Ive can make a phone that sells. Steve Jobs was many things, but a creative genius he was not.
Believe that and you will believe anything. Jonny Ives is a good designer, but that doesn’t make him responsible for much more than the case and art. The logical stuff takes a lot more actual technological knowhow. Ive spends his spare time designing forests; he’s an artist.
While I understand the sentiment, the flip could be: At least Zuck can make reliable web services.
Two completely separate philosophies:
1- I will pay for my products and yes, I will pay more than the sum of the components cost because I want the company to continue making those products, I want this company to be able to R&D new products.
2- Products should be free and it is up to the company to find a way to make money without the end user’s being affected/bothered.
And both philosophies are perfectly legitimate too. Just like nobody is forced to purchase something from Apple, nobody is forced to use Google.
However, it is very difficult to not be tracked by Google across the Internet.
I am going to amend your 2nd option:
2- Products should be free and it is up to the company to find a way to make money without the end user’s *knowing it will cost them*
FB and Google services users are trading their privacy and personal data (including personally identifying data) to pay for these services.
And Apple use your personal data to allow advertisers to target your demographic with adverts. What’s the difference?
Why does this come across so angrily? It either hit a nerve or he has an issue that has nothing to do with Cook’s comments.
Perhaps we can clarify Cook’s comments? That the PRIMARY customers of the ad based model businesses are the advertisers, while the secondary customers are the product?
As far as over-priced, it sickens me that someone in his position propagates that myth. Time and again it has been proven false.
Zuck is pissed because nobody is willing to pay for what he offers… every attempt by Facebook to get money from users directly has come to nothing
Yet they still had a net income of $1.5b in 2013. It’s odd isn’t it.
The price of a base model of an Apple product is usually pretty decently priced, but add any component while customizing it, and the price drastically increases beyond that of competitors. That’s fine, though, because lots of people still pay it because they don’t know better, or because they can’t be bothered to know better.
Yes… It definitely can’t be because they do know better and, through experience, have come to find the cost completely reasonable for what they get.
This is one of those rare times when I agree with the “Zuck” – its seems almost childish for folks to expect all of the “freebies” they get from Facebook and Googles host of services without expecting a “marketing cost” – to their data they share with them. Do people really think life is free – that’s why you get CBS for “free” but pay dearly for HBO, etc….
That wasn’t Tim Cook’s point. His point is at Apple YOU are not the product. Apple isn’t selling you to anyone. Ad supported businesses are.
Have you heard of iAd? It’s Apple’s version of targeted advertising which businesses can sign up to and pay for, so that their adverts can appear on iPad/iPods/iPhones when your in your apps.
But your right, Apple isn’t selling you to anyone.
Aunty Troll, where is it stated that iAd is target by mining customer data?
There is targeted advertising like TV commercials and iAds which target based upon the media that they are shown with (ie they don’t show beer commercials during kid’s cartoons and they don’t show barbie commercials during football games).
Then there are “targeted” ads like Facebook and Google. Where if I do a search for comparisons of cordless drills I am inundated on virtually every website with ads for cordless drills, or if I like a post on Facebook mentioning a friend’s trip to Germany I am inundated with ads for trips to Germany.
The first type of targeted advertising isn’t any sort of invasion of privacy. The second? Well, that is up to the person to decide. Me, I find it creepy and don’t like it at all. That is why I have stopped using any Google services whenever possible, and I have shutdown my Facebook account.
I would rather pay Apple and be the customer.
Mike:
If you go onto the iAd page, you can specifically see that when someone creates an app which can include adverts which target certain demographics. That information can ONLY come from the information which Apple holds.
Ever been recommended apps? That comes from data about your previous habits.
Your exactly right – do a search in google for something, and the adverts in Facebook magically appear. Annoying to some people yes but as you say, if folk don’t like it it’s easy enough to prevent.
To people like him, when Apple does it, it’s OK but anyone else, on no! They are eval!
Aunty Troll:
I am unclear on what you mean by “you can specifically see that when someone creates an app which can include adverts which target certain demographics”. I am curious to know how Apple is targeting their demographic, and would like any information that you are willing to share. I typically avoid ad supported apps and thus don’t see very many iAds.
I do realize that Apple tracks which apps I purchase and makes recommendations based upon this. I guess it doesn’t bother me as much since it is only on Apple’s app store and I don’t put any other personal information on the app store. However, if they are sharing that information with their advertisers then that is different. I don’t want to start seeing car ads simply because I download a used car shopping app. Then Apple no better than Facebook or Google.
To the sad, pathetic person who lets Apple run their life by forcing them to come to a news site for a product they hate because they can’t get attention anywhere else. Which is even more sad if he isn’t a liar and actually has daughters he should be doting attention on instead of trolling the internet.
Never wrestle with a pig. You will both get muddy, but the pig will love it.
Go away piggy. Find another place to find attention.
From Apple’s own iAd page telling advertisers why they’d want to work with Apple:
A wealth of insights.
Better understand and identify your audience with rich consumer insights available exclusively from Apple. Use any combination of our 400 targeting options to find the people you’re looking for, or create a custom segment to re-engage groups of your own customers.
Over
400
targeting
options
Up to
135
iTunes Store targeting options
If Apple didn’t have a wealth of user information to share with advertisers how would they be able to honestly claim they have upwards of 400 distinct and unique categories of Apple users for sale, 135 from iTunes user data alone.
Cry a little more Mike, your little pathetic insults are, well, quite frankly, worthless. What’s truly sad is the need to go on sites and rant about Samsung and how they run their business and letting what Samsung does control your life. As for my daughters, they do get attention, when I am home, but I’ll let you assume you have a clue what happens in my life outside of some blog that you seem hell bent on screaming at the top of your lungs about Samsung, and on an Apple site none the less. Pathetic.
Funny how you talk about me needing attention, that’s pathetically ironic. OMG, SAMSUNG IS EVIL!!!!!!!!! WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
Grow up loser and enjoy that mud you love so much.
GATORGUY2:
Well that is troubling. Although, I wonder what information they have or could have. From iTunes the only thing that they could track is what songs, movie, apps, and books I might buy from them. I might have to start looking into it. Although, if Apple is doing it, I am not sure what choices there are left. Are we all at that point simply stuck with the lesser of the evils? Is there any option that doesn’t track and advertise? Does anyone know if Microsoft does this? I would guess so since the own Bing.
sircheese:
Go away piggy. You will not find validation here.
sircheese:
I have to apologize about my prior behavior. I was a bit harsh to a person who is obviously as troubled as you are.
Although, I do refuse to facility your obviously unhealthy need to seek so much negative attention.
The number for the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline is 1-800-273-8255. Please get some help.
That was NOT Cook’s point…
Mike: Many thanks for your personal insults in response to a perfectly valid comment I made. That’s not how you win a healthy debate I’m afraid. Have I specifically criticised Apple whilst singing the praises of Facebook or Google? No. Have I said that Apple have similar business practices to Google and Facebook? Yes – and I said that because they do. The fact is you know it, and because you are incapable of handling anyone criticising Apple you resorted to mud-slinging. I didn’t. Say’s it all really doesn’t it?
Not everyone who loves Apple gear has to bow to their every whim. I don’t, you do, get over it. If you can’t handle a decent conversation about your beloved Apple don’t drag it down to your level.
“The fact is you know it, and because you are incapable of handling anyone criticising Apple you resorted to mud-slinging. I didn’t. Say’s it all really doesn’t it?”
Bingo, he is the worst kind of Apple defender, and it’s a shame that this site, and more specifically the type of comment system they use, they can’t ban people. Mike certainly needs to be removed from commenting.
How can he call that ridiculous? It’s so obvisouly true !
Zuck is full of it! Google and Facebook have been two of the biggest violators of stealing peoples information, and then trying to push ads on them they think are appropriate, and they never are! Two years ago I made an application with SSDI using google chrome as my browser and the very next day i was pummeled with ads on my facebook page! Facestalker could only have been given that info by Google! and in doing so for the record here, that contained health information and was clearly marked confidential, so Google and Facebook both violated the national HIPPA law in doing so!
Zuckerberg is the luckiest guy the planet. He just happened to fall into Facebook. The guy is neither brilliant nor eloquent.
If Facebook tried to start charging money for access he’d quickly realize that Cook’s comments were correct and that Facebook fans aren’t that loyal.
Zuck….shutup. Take your success and try to stay relevant. Apple’s doing just fine charging a premium.
Your exactly right – the guy is the luckiest guy on the planet. He’s also one of the richest. I suspect you and I aren’t.
Doesn’t really cut the mustard does it when we are trying to tell him that what he says is garbage.
“Doesn’t really cut the mustard does it when we are trying to tell him that what he says is garbage”
I have no idea what would “cut the mustard” here. If we’re talking about the proper context of how a company derives their profit then it’s clear. Apple charges appropriate amount for their product to allow them to forgo on extensive data collection. Google gives away a free product to collect data and target advertising.
Their relative success does not change the face that both companies have diametrically opposed profit centers. Neither is wrong or right that’s for each individual to decide. Cheers.
hmurchison: Listen I have an iPhone and and iMac. I love them – especially the iMac. I also know how much profit margin make on each of those products – and it’s an unbelievable amount and to be honest I don’t begrudge paying it. So much so it has allowed Apple to become the richest tech company on the planet despite not having the biggest market share of everything.
Apple may well charge the appropriate amount for their product, but to say that that allows them to forgo extensive data collection is completely wrong. You need an Apple ID to use Apple products don’t you. This Apple ID is linked with your credit card details, home address etc. Now, when you log in to the App Store those Apps are targeted towards you the consumer so that you purchase that App. When you purchase that App, 30% goes directly towards Apple, the rest to the developer. Secondly, some of those apps (especially the free ones), use iAd, which is Apple’s version of Google’s targeted adverts. When those developers create an app they can use iAd to target a specific demographic so that YOU get an advert which is targeted at you by the developer, using data which Apple hold. That is no different to what people who use Google, Gmail or anything else use. Google may well give away a free product for that purpose, but with Apple you actually PAY a premium to have targeted ads.
As you say, neither is right or wrong, but to say Apple don’t do it is completely incorrect I’m afraid.
Who said 30% go to apple? 25% go to resellers of iTunes Cards…. so only 5% left for apple. Given they have also mastercard/visa charging 2,8%, only 2,2% are actually left to keep all the huge server infrastructure alive…
Apple gets 30 percent on everything, it’s just common knowledge.
I would say he is a hell of a coder…. However, if I remember correctly the Facebook idea came from and probably should belong to a pair of rich twins and their friend.
And then the post will descend into an argument about how most good ideas have been stolen – and with the partisan readers of 9to5mac it’s best to stay clear ;)
There was a response that hit it on the head earlier that stated no one is forced to buy Apple. I was not an Apple customer for the longest time, and for better or worse now I am. The biggest reason I feel that people buy Apple products is simply quality and customer service. If a company can be exceptional in those categories then the prices almost don’t matter because I know I’m not only buying a product I’m also buying the peace of mind that if anything were to be faulty or I were to have any issues than I would receive great customer service. Also Apple is not so greatly overpriced as people seem to claim. I know because I used to think that way too, but when you actually look into it you may find that the prices range from a bit higher to a bit lower depending on what you are looking for.
I think your click batting a bit (or stretching a bit) on both fronts.
He is right about one thing, if Apple cared about you they wouldn’t have the highest margin of any PC or mobile device maker (by a large margin).
If you got them to put self serving comments aside both would say they have the same idea in mind… make money, they just have different models.
grrr… should be “you’re”, guess that is what I get for clicking post too soon.
“[…] if Apple cared about you they wouldn’t have the highest margin of any PC or mobile device maker (by a large margin).”
That’s a non sequitur, IMO. I don’t expect Apple to care about me “as a family member” or “as a friend”. I do expect them (and any company I deal with) to care for me “as a customer”: Show me respect through the quality of their products and services, including support, practical & unambiguous descriptions of service agreements, etc.
Apple is pretty good in that department (not close to perfect though). Facebook isn’t horrible, but they change the terms of agreement a bit too often, and I do feel like I’m the product rather than the customer (but I do like the user-facing service proper too).
I agree with that. My point was more that they are really doing the same thing with different models. Companies that care about their product will treat the customer right but that doesn’t mean they really care about you per se (which is exactly as you put it).
I think Zuckerberg is pointing out that the overwhelming majority of humans on Earth can not afford an Apple product. That doesn’t make Apple wrong for selling only to the more well-to-do (as a world average), but it shows that if you want to bring a product or service to the most people in the world, it has to be affordable to them. The average income for humans all over the world is only $12,000 a year. So that excludes most people from being Apple customers.
Making it an expensive product – not an overpriced one. Duh …
Face it: both businesses exploit their customers.
Cook is right about the consumer being the product. Zuckerberg is right about Apple’s products being overpriced.
All businesses want something from you.
Wrong. An overpriced product does not make you suck up 80% of a sector’s profit.
80 percent of the smartphone profits going to Apple and you claim it’s not overpriced? SMFH
@sircheese69, Yes, if you understand economics and price demand curves, then Apple’s domination of the industry profits means the iPhone is priced at what users want to pay for it.
Otherwise, they’d be forced to lower their price to compete. Clearly that’s not the case. People are willing to pay more for Apple products, and buy them in vast quantities, thus Apple’s massive profit share.
iPhones are priced at “what users want to pay for it”? LOL.
Sure, in a perfect market that would be true. I’d also be able to purchase a unicorn in that mystical free market you speak of.
Back in the real world, many of us buy Apple products because they are the only choice if you want something that doesn’t suck. My first Apple product was an Apple ][ and I have never purchased a Windows computer in my entire life. Still, I only buy used Macs to get around overpaying for Apple hardware. Lately I’ve been overpaying for an iPhone with a monthly data plan, but I’ve never deluded myself into believing I get my money’s worth. Android Lollipop finally provides a viable alternative but iPhones still offer superior integration with my Macs, so I’ll likely stay with Apple. That’s my choice, it’s one of the few luxuries I permit myself and I admit I’m letting Apple take advantage of me in some ways.
I guess that’s the difference between using Apple computers and being Apple’s little bitch.
Mr. Cook’s comments seem reasonable to me. Many, many people do not mind that info about them is being sold. It is simply a matter of choice. But choice requires knowledge of what the no-charge services truly represent.
Apple too is in the “you are the product” game, putting you up for bid just as assuredly as Facebook does. Apple just doesn’t (yet) do in on the same scale, but they don’t disclose it as clearly either. You may or may not be aware that Apple IS “selling you”, putting you up for bid to advertisers thru their ad xchange service in conjunction with iAd as soon as you log in to Apple services. The potentila advertisers are notified that you ahve arrived, and bids can be made for the opprotunity to present you with ads that may interst you.
Apple claims to have about 400 different ad-user groups you might be a part of, so they apparently know quite a lot of details about you including but not limited to your income, what you do for a living and your neighborhood demographics. . They may know whether you are married. your age and your partners name, and the names/ages of your children if you have any. They may know if you travel, how often and where..They know many of your interests and leisure activities. All those details and more are used to better allow marketers to target you and your potential purchasing decisions. Noteworthy is that unlike Facebook or some other ad-supported services Apple doesn’t appear to give you anything in return for your advertising profile.
I don’t have an issue really with ad-supported services when they give me some value in return. Noteworthy is that as far as I know Apple is giving you nothing in return. You’re simply a product when it comes to iAd.
I’ve made a very similar point on here too. Your exactly right. Folk must seriously think those App developers are working around the clock to being out free apps out of the goodness of their hearts.
Is it just me or have I not seen a single iAd? Maybe it’s about buying the right apps (and paying for it)? If you pay for your phone and your apps, you’re the customer and where you don’t pay, you’re not.
It’s not Apple proffering those free apps, it’s the developers. If the devs did not write free apps with iAd included, you would never see those ads.
At least on iOS I have that choice, and it’s respected. On the Android world you have much less choice as less Android users are willing to pay for apps (I remember seeing user advice to android games to turn off internet to play Angry Birds so the ads don’t show anything).
Aunty Troll:
It isn’t that I think they are doing it out of the goodness of their hearts. I realize that there are ads and that is how they make money.
What I am concerned about is what data exactly is used to target the ads and who it is shared with.
Facebook is a data mining operation for the federal government. Whether it started that way, or started innocently, that is what it is.
That people like this shit without any facts is, well, sad.
Common sense is about all you need
Common sense doesn’t negate unsubstantiated facts. So, if you want to claim such stupid shit, either prove it or just….stop.
Zuckerberg is just butt hurt because he doesn’t want the stock to go down.
“Apple products are over priced.” – If this is the case, the Mark Zuckerberg needs to create an iMac, iPhone, and iPad competitor at a lower costs and beat Apple at it’s own game… But somehow I have my doubts. In the mean time, how is it that Facebook can build up several thousand pages of personal information on a person who doesn’t even have a photo or a wall post on Facebook? And why does Facebook track people who don’t have facebook accounts? Seems awfully voyeuristic to me…
Ha,ha! look who’s talking. Facebook is all about ad-supported business. Without ads there would be no Facebook. Apple’s products have been proven several times to be competitive in price for the features that there products provide. Not only that but what you get after the sale is even more important. Free support at any Apple store with a Genius appointment. Software support is free. Try that at your local Microsoft, or Best Buy. It costs you money just to talk with them. Need software support and you will pay through the nose. Major OS upgrades are free. Constant updates to keep your Macs and IOS devices with the latest features and security are free. Zuckerberg argument is old and outdated from the 90’s.
You are aware that free genius bar appointments, free software support and free OS upgrades aren’t actually “free’, and are actually the reason why both you, I, and every other Apple user out there pays more for their phones and PC’s aren’t you?
Obviously not, or you wouldn’t of typed such a totally naive comment.
Zuckerberg thinks Facebook is free? that its users don’t pay for the service somehow, even if indirectly?
I much prefer knowing what I’m buying, when I’m buying, and not giving up my privacy in the process.
Zuckerberg comes out of this looking even more of a greedy idiot than ever.
Facebook Phone = FAIL…just sayin’…
Of course you are still a customer when you are using a free online service. Anyone say otherwise either doesn’t understand economy, or has he own agenda.
A free online service like Google or Facebook is just like any other paid service: you bring something to the table, and the company give you back something in return. The only difference is that in this case you are using your personal data as the payment. If your personal data has a value of $5 to Google, then you are just as valuable as someone who pay $5 for the same service.
The company will still have to design their service with you in mind, in order to attract you to use the service. Tim made it sounded like you are solely a product and therefore Google isn’t working for you. That can’t be further away from truth. If you think offering 2nd class free service will get you anywhere then you need to take a look at all the failed online free service.
When a service is free the company has to work EXTRA hard to attract you, because usually the competitors are also free and the customers usually have no loyalty at all.
I am definitely making for Facebook even though I don’t “buy” things thru the site. Monetize the members. Everyone does it.
IMO – The only thing Zuckerberg and FaceCrook are in alingment with is your wallet!
I have never had (nor will I ever have) anythng associated with FaceCrook. They are worse than Google as far as data mining and selling their user’s information: either directly or indirectly!
If Zukerberg’s mother had only said NO all those many years ago – the world would be a better place.
I still think that FaceCrook is a front for the NSA! Just tap into FaceCrook and scan those photos and names.
;)
It’s a shame your mother didn’t say no as well.
It’s a shame your daughters don’t love you and you are forced to come to a site for a product you hate for any sort of validation. Then again you could be a liar and you don’t have any daughters. I am not sure which is sadder.
Go away piggy.
You really are stretching to try to seem intelligent but you are looking quite pathetic, but I wouldn’t expect anything less from an Apple sheep. The only sad thing is your pathetic little life and the need to scream at the top of your lungs about Samsung on an Apple site.
As for me going away, make me…oh wait. You can’t.
You are like….cancer. Sad.
Oh joy, another moron who thinks mom jokes are cool.
Dude, no one should be saying Zuck wasn’t born, but perhaps Facebook should never have been born. It’s like a wet dream for the FBI/CIA/Stazi/Mossad.
Serious question: has anybody ever actually clicked on a Facebook ad? It’s all sub-infomercial trash. I find it hard to believe the advertisers are getting their money’s worth.
Maybe Zuck is lashing out in a classical projection – he knows he’s overpriced his ad rates for the benefits they offer to his customers (advertisers), so he thinks Apple is overpricing their laptops.
The saying goes “with age comes wisdom”. Zuck may be pretty darn bright, but sure does a good job of proving he’s still a young pecker head! Cook and AAPL, and Apple get my money every day. I canceled my Facebook account and sold all my FB stock.
“Our mission is to connect every person in the world. ”
No you idiot, the mission of your organisation is to make money – you’re a business, that is the reason for you existing. Honestly, for a person with such a punchable face he seems to make himself even more punchable with each passing day. Oh, and btw, harvesting peoples personal information to on sell to third parties to then have advertisements targeted back at the consumers doesn’t make your mission any more noble by claim that “Our mission is to connect every person in the world” – there is a reason why many equate ‘an advertising business model with somehow being out of alignment with your customers’.
Zuckerberg’s response shows his ignorance. He doesn’t even know who is customers are. His customers are the advertisers. For Apple we are the users and customers. So if Zuckerberg did what he says Apple should do, then he should drop his advertising rates dramatically.
now can Apple remove that stupid Facebook and other social media buttons from my phone
I don’t think anyone could accuse Apple of being cheap.
Facebook is the biggest blight on the internet! Zuckerberg is just as creepy as his service.
I’m disgusted by the number of times Facebook appears in my apps and on the internet (Twitter too) – You can’t even login to the huffington post-menepausal without it! This is too fvcking creepy for words! Someone really could make a bundle by writing an App that deletes all references to Facebook entirely. PLEASE!
Their mission is to make money. The amount of ads on Facebook is absolutely ridiculous! Thats probably why Zuckerberg felt offended. I couldn’t have said it better, Cook!
How many Apple Watches does anyone think he’ll buy?
Must be a slow day over at the Billionaires Babies Club… Whine..Whine..Whine… Go away, you’re boring me to death…
r00fus1 says:
December 5, 2014 at 1:02 pm
I am going to amend your 2nd option:
2- Products should be free and it is up to the company to find a way to make money without the end user’s *knowing it will cost them*
FB and Google services users are trading their privacy and personal data (including personally identifying data) to pay for these services.
Like
Reply
Aunty Troll (@AuntyTroll) says:
December 5, 2014 at 3:25 pm
And Apple use your personal data to allow advertisers to target your demographic with adverts. What’s the difference?
The difference is that Apple keeps its info INHOUSE and Google and FB takes YOUR info to the OUTHOUSE!!!
Don’t worry, be happy.
I love Apple products but I do feel they are overpriced when compared to other similar products out there.
Less so when you consider total cost of ownership: http://9to5mac.com/2014/03/21/opinion-why-the-upgrade-cycle-means-the-apple-tax-is-lower-than-it-seems/
There’s so many things wrong with his way of thinking not to mention the contradiction from things that should be cheap to things that should be free.
I know he’s a billionaire and all but this was not a smart thing to say.
He’s just mad cause Tim won’t let him take over the iPhone with Facebook Home. Also, he clearly doesn’t understand Apple at all.
Just fyi for you all talking about targeted Apple ads.
There is an option in the Settings to turn it off. Easy as pie. ^_^
Mark Zuckerberg uses an iPhone… so, umm yeah…