The battle between Apple and Facebook isn't really about privacy or tracking. This is the real reason Facebook is so concerned.

The Apple and Facebook spat are not really about privacy or tracking. This is the real reason Facebook is so concerned.

The real reason Facebook is so concerned? Transparency is a much bigger threat to his business.

It's no secret that Facebook has feelings about the upcoming changes that Apple plans to bring in iOS 14.5. Apple said it would require developers to ask users for permission before collecting data or tracking it while using their apps. This comes after Apple previously required developers to disclose what information they collect, introducing privacy labels in the iOS App Store.

These changes apply to all developers, but Facebook seems to be taking it personally. And the company was open about these feelings.

Facebook removed full-page ads back in December, saying Apple posed a threat to both small businesses and the open Internet as we know it. Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg then aimed at Apple during his statements during its most recent financial report in February, claiming that the iPhone maker is pursuing anti-competitive practices.

It would be easy to accept a privacy or tracking struggle, but I don't think this is a real issue. Apple is not going to stop developers from tracking you. It's also okay with personalized ads, as Facebook links to targeted ads that it shows you based on your internet activity. If you want to share everything you do online with Facebook, Apple will not stop you. In this case, the developer can still collect IDFA for ad targeting or conversion tracking.

Apple will require developers to be transparent about what data they want to collect and how they want to use it. Then they must ask your permission.

This is where the real fight ended - transparency. This is why Facebook is so concerned.

Gallery: If you have this popular app on your phone, uninstall it now (Best Life)

The problem with Facebook is that if they have a choice, many people will choose not to allow tracking. A recent survey by AppsFlyer, an attribution data platform, shows that nearly half of all users (47 percent) are likely to opt-out of tracking.

This is a dirty little secret that we would rather not talk about. Facebook doesn't want you to think about tracking, and it certainly doesn't want you to have a choice.

Plus, and I've said this before if your business model breaks down by giving people the choice of whether you can track them or not, your problem isn't Apple. Your problem is the business model.

But Facebook's transparency issue isn't just about users. Tracking not only allows you to serve targeted ads based on your activity, but it also allows advertisers to determine which customers came to their site and made a purchase based on the ad.

If you click on an ad for a shoe and then buy a pair, the seller might say you came to the site for the ad they paid for. This is important because it allows advertisers to track conversions and justify the money they spent on advertising.

If Facebook cannot track users, advertisers will not be able to use IDFA to match your purchase to the ad you clicked on. This makes Facebook's ad platform much less valuable. If you're an advertiser, you can transfer your money to another platform, say Google Ads.

The only thing that would be worse than many people giving up on tracking and suffering from Facebook's ad business is a lot of people giving up, and nothing has changed except that advertisers can no longer track conversions.

I know this sounds counterintuitive, but if advertisers are still getting the same number of conversions but cannot track them, it is much more likely that they will switch to another platform where the CPA is similar but where they can better track how their efforts work.

Facebook's business model won't fall apart over privacy or even tracking. On the other hand, transparency is the real reason Facebook is so concerned.

When it comes to inventory, Apple runs a spring-cleaning mode. In recent weeks, he has not only said "mmm bye" to the iMac Pro and the original HomePod but now the company is targeting two configurations of the 21.5-inch iMac with its ax.

MacRumors discovered that 512GB and 1TB SSD storage options for the 21.5-inch iMac with 4K display are no longer available on Apple's website. This is not the first time that these configurations are not available. In February, the store said they were unavailable for several days, although it was speculated at the time that this was due to a lack of components. However, at the time, the options were still listed on the website. Now they are gone.

Apple product page for 21.5-inch iMac with Retina 4K display. Screenshot: Apple / Gizmodo

Gizmodo has confirmed to Apple that the two configurations are no longer being released. Apple noted that a 256GB SSD option is still available as a standard option, and a 1TB Fusion Drive remains available. The latter combines the speed of an SSD with a larger hard drive. The company also added that the 27-inch iMac offers a wide range of SSD storage options from 256GB to 8TB to increase storage capacity.

Apple's latest spring cleaning sacrifice is likely to spark rumors that we will see a redesigned iMac lineup with 21.5-inch and 27-inch devices later this year. This redesign will be the first iMac to see in nine years and the first with Apple Silicon. However, this means the 27-inch iMac from 2020 will be the last of the Intel iMac. Intel is unhappy that Apple has ditched its chips and expresses its quirkiness in various ways, to put it mildly.

Besides, it is reported that the new iMacs say goodbye to the iMac's signature design. You know, the one with thick black bezels around the display and an aluminum chin with a big Apple logo. The new iMacs also supposedly won't have a curved back.

Only time will tell if this is true. And since time passes so strangely during a pandemic, it may happen sooner than you think. Damn it, it's already March.

OnePlus surprise watch could disrupt Apple and Samsung

My Samsung Galaxy Watch 3 is a serious wearable device that you'd expect to be priced at $ 399. Samsung justifies this price tag with a set of features that take as much time to read as the Watch's battery.

This list includes blood oxygen monitoring, running gait measurement, accurate heart rate, and ECG measurements. It records a very wide range of rhythmic gymnastics exercises along with other add-ons such as PowerPoint controls. It's all a little overwhelming, it's all a little Samsung.

I have questions about the accuracy of the blood oxygen readings on a Samsung device and how accurate the rhythmic gymnastics measurements are. Could you read about it here? Where it works, it works well. The automatic exercise detection is excellent, especially the running trainer who improves your fitness to prevent injury. Battery life is decent too, and sleep details help someone like me struggling to get a little kip on.

According to new leaks, this is the core functionality that the new OnePlus Watch appears to be focusing on. Tipster Ishan Agarwal says the new 46mm Watch will record "sleep, stress, blood oxygen saturation [and] heart rate monitoring," along with automatic exercise detection. It will feature OnePlus charge warp technology to give the wearable a week's worth of power. 20 minutes.

I'm sure there are some reservations about this charging statement, but it's very promising for a newbie who supposedly has the same functionality as a Samsung device but with twice the battery life. The accuracy will ultimately determine how useful these condition monitoring features are, but the list is interesting. If only because OnePlus wearables have been very affordable today. The OnePlus Buds debuted at $ 80 with hyper-specific features like low latency mode for gaming and a 30-hour battery. A couple of months later, the Chinese company released another, even cheaper, pair of headphones called OnePlus Buds Z.

Both had significant drawbacks in sound quality and comfort, but they excelled in areas where the Chinese company focused its efforts: battery life, features, and price. I suspect new watches are treated the same way. If the device also looks the way it looks, and an early teaser from OnePlus' Pete Lau suggests it will, most of the work is done.

Automation will also be key. What and how many exercises are recorded automatically? Is sleep measured correctly (there is a huge difference between my Fitbit and Galaxy Watch 3)? Unlike its more expensive competitors, which are promising a lot, can OnePlus be able to keep things simple and offer the benefits of health monitoring, navigation, and other core features without having users fiddling with dozens of new features across multiple menus on a tiny screen?

The OnePlus Buds trade-off noise cancellation and comfort, two pretty important headphone features, even at a lower price point. I hope this time the Chinese company can find a better balance. I'm happy to lose features like hand curvature measurement, which wasn't accurate in my experience with Samsung watches or PowerPoint controls if that means the Watch is a third of the price and has other features.

Smartwatches are harder than headphones, and there is more room for things to go wrong, but giving up nonsensical things that sound good in spec but are never used in real life while drastically dropping the price in the process. It may be the perfect antidote to ultra-expensive, hyper-functional Samsung and Apple wearables.