If you dont understand the HUGE difference between what Android devices did and this nothingburger, then there is no use explaining it further. You have made your mind up that Apple is this and that prior to today anyway and dont care about the facts.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
New iPhones Access Location Info When Settings are Disabled Due to Ultra Wideband, Toggle Coming in Future Update
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If you dont understand the HUGE difference between what Android devices did and this nothingburger, then there is no use explaining it further. You have made your mind up that Apple is this and that prior to today anyway and dont care about the facts.
Airplane mode doesn't turn off Bluetooth or WiFi only cellular.
Tell me what the legit privacy concern is if google knows I searched for peanut butter last week.
Apple is a hypocrite.
If I'm reading this right, if you turn off location services entirely then it doesn't continue to track location. This is only if you disable all location services for every app? If that's the case then it's a non issue. All they are doing is adding a toggle for the wideband as if it were an app. If you're that concerned then just turn off location service entirely.
Or perhaps could simply (mis)interpreted as something like that, if desired.
Gee, even when the haters and misinformed are proven wrong, they just double-down instead of admitting they were wrong. Anyone surprised?
Google is on the open internet. This is ON DEVICE (actually read the article); never leaves your device.
Im not so sure what is so hard to understand about the clear and obvious differences.
If it's a legal requirement, they can't offer a toggle.
I think the best they could do is to offer a UWB toggle. And/or offer a toggle to turn it off when overall wiFi setting is off.
There are already similar restrictions in place for 5gHz wiFi, and WiFi devices - whether in a phone, your home WiFi router, etc. But it doesn't work using GPS, and it is not ideal. 5gHz channels are restricted in the vicinity of airports. The way it works is the router/phone/whatever checks to see if it "hears" the airport navigation signals. If it does, then the channels that might interfere are disabled.
Using GPS as an additional factor would be better.
This is a public safety issue, so please consider before using a work-around (which is possible with some open-source router software, for instance).
I realize 5gHz is a separate concern, but I'd imagine similar reasoning. The spectrum space is shared with other uses, and some of those I imagine are critical for public safety and/or defense. blocking out part of that spectrum in specific places - whether by listening for signals for by geographic "redlining" using GPS, etc. increases availability to consumers - otherwise, it wouldn't be possible to make this spectrum available for consumer UWB at all.
Apple and others do need to communicate more clearly, and offer options. Just know that they won't be able to offer any "toggle" that allows your device to operate outside of legal requirements.
Apple think it's good design to pop up a box of text when disabling WiFi so why not the same with Location Services?
As usual Apple invades user privacy until explicitly told not to and then they put out an update a month later to stop.
Hmmm so they say now they are caught that they will provide a toggle for turning it off for one use
But not what other uses of functions it may or may not have
it seems to me that this embedded tracking can easily be used to stop delivery of content or apps that VPN would otherwise allow to be delivered
Typical drip feed of disclosure after the event by Apple
But not what other uses of functions it may or may not have
it seems to me that this embedded tracking can easily be used to stop delivery of content or apps that VPN would otherwise allow to be delivered
Typical drip feed of disclosure after the event by Apple
This is hardly an invasion of user privacy. Stop being dramatic.
The toggle should have been provided as soon as the feature required location services. It's obviously not necessary for the phone to work (turning off Location Services completely disables it for UWB too) but saying "we have system services that we don't tell you about that collect location data" isn't very smart or useful to us users.
I'm an independent app developer and I find this absurd. Clearly, Apple needs to do some things that I do not. If Apple never broke App Store rules, several very important Apple apps wouldn't be able to function (like the App Store itself, most likely).
If you can't see where Tim goes next with "overriding user preferences to check user location and enforce local regulations" then you haven't been paying attention.
Right but the VAST majority of the public has no idea what UWB is, let alone where their location setting are for the system at all. Making a toggle doesnt change the fact that UWB is on by default to help with Airdrop (and other features like tags yet to be released). If users have to figure out what it is to turn it on then there is no point in it being there at all. That is not Apple's userbase.
And when on there is a legal issue in some countries with the spectrum bands the UWB chip uses. It is not an issue everywhere (the US obviously is fine) but since the same phone is basically sold everywhere there has to be a way to disable the chip from transmitting and receiving in that country no matter what the user wants. It is a legal requirement of that country.
There HAS to be a way to know what country the user is in and disable the chip by law to not interfere with whatever that country uses that spectrum for. As you cannot ask the user to determine what the laws in that county are or are not.
Even if there is a toggle, this current way still HAS to exist. There is no way around it. Or Apple has to sell neutered phones there or not at all (like the Pixel 4 with its radar tech and regions like India). Its purely a legal issue here despite the few tin foil hat arguments without any factual backing.
So yes, it is a requirement for the phone to work in other some countries yes- we cant get pigeon holed into the US ways as the only way things are.
Last edited:
I'm actually quite technical-minded and certainly do understand the difference; my comment was tongue-in-cheek.
That being said, as per the last paragraph in my comment, I do have an issue with Apple. They only address privacy concerns when those concerns become public knowledge. This shows privacy is a marketing ploy and not a true concern for them.
Edit: Further to that... some parts of the Settings app let the user know the consequences of disabling things. If I turn off Bluetooth it states location services may be limited. There is absolutely no reason to toggle Location Services off but still have them be on. If I toggle them off, I want them off. If it's going to impact usability, then put a little note in there letting me know UWB will be disabled as a consequence; that would be fine and consistent with the rest of the operating system.
We’re paying attention, we’re just not positing speculation as fact.
Thank you! I believe you are right. This should be reiterated. This isn’t apple stealing your data, just a weird quirk. It should be corrected but there is nothing nefarious here.
Sorry but still an incredibly poor example/analogy and I stand by that.
If you want to compare something done solely on device (regardless of personal feelings about a toggle) and a company BLATANTLY and openly stealing your data for advertising/metrics/etc sending it back to home base as their whole business model and reason the OS is given out for free to get more users and more data; well they are not even on the same planet of levels of abuse.
It would be like saying tapping someone on the back of the hand with 1 finger and cracking someone upside the head with a bat are both battery. Technically yes both wrong by the strict rules, but not even close to the same realm of severity.
That is if data that doesnt even leave your device could even be considered a privacy violation since it never left your possession.
Last edited:
That’s because they tried to write a title that didn’t sound too negative for Apple.
If Apple are correct and this is all being done on-device, there is no legitimate privacy concern.
location services are still disabled. That means - any other App that may want to know your location and sends that data to 3rd parties still gets zero information. The one App that is still allowed to request your location is known not to store it or send it off-device to any server - not Apple's server, and not any 3rd-party server. It has a list of locations where UWB is not allowed, and turns it off if you're in one of them. That's all it does.
Privacy is all about other people; you can't have privacy from yourself - that's nonsensical. So privacy concerns require that your data is either stored (for others to maybe find) or sent directly to others for storage or processing. This does neither. Possibly a battery-life concern (I'm guessing low-power mode turns UWB off), but no privacy concern.
Interesting. A clear explanation of the need to monitor location in regards to a function with legal restrictions. It is monitoring that happens strictly on the phone. And the tin foil hat set still keeps posting about "evil Apple" and "evil Tim". More and more I understand how the flat earthers are gaining new followers.
If you seriously think this is an issue I encourage you not to use electronic devices, not to allow others to use electronic devices near you, nor vote. That last one in particular.
If you seriously think this is an issue I encourage you not to use electronic devices, not to allow others to use electronic devices near you, nor vote. That last one in particular.