The interesting thing is that you think this behaviour is evil. From Apple's (or Google's, for that matter) POV, they're streamlining your life and removing some of the pain of shopping by suggesting stores and products that you might like, deals you can benefit from when you're shopping for something specific, and the like. In the case of Google, their ability to target ads to your interests allows them to provide free applications like Search, Maps, GMail, etc. For Apple, although giving customers price relief would be highly out of character, new revenue streams open new possibilities for future devices and services to take the annoyance out of life.
By using these services, we are implicitly (or explicitly) agreeing to hand over our personal information. It might make us uncomfortable that Apple knows our wife's shoe size and favorite brands, but if we happen to be out to lunch next to a shoe store that's having a 40% off sale and our phone lets us know, is it really that bad?
I'm not saying I'm entirely comfortable with the proposition, but I can see why it might end up coming about. It won't be because Apple/Google?Facebook are Evil; it will be because consumers respond to it. For enough people, it will be a worthwhile trade off to forego some privacy in exchange for a useful service.
>> but if we happen to be out to lunch next to a shoe store that's having a 40% off sale and our phone lets us know, is it really that bad?
For me, yes, because it interrupts what I'm doing and breaks my focus. If I really need shoes, then show me the best deal on shoes when I've expressed intent and I'm not otherwise occupied. Otherwise, I don't want to hear about it. That's why Google's ads are great, and I hate the rest - it's a high bar, and most companies just don't care about you enough to hold back from imposing their ads at times when it doesn't make sense.
Perhaps more interesting is that you see an equivalence between what Google does and what it is proposed Apple might do.
As you say, with Google, the proposition is clear: You get free email and other Google services; Google monetizes them with contextual advertising. With Apple, the proposition is also clear: You pay upfront; Apple supplies you with integrated hardware and software. This is a proposition that Apple upset that balance.
By using these services, we are implicitly (or explicitly) agreeing to hand over our personal information. It might make us uncomfortable that Apple knows our wife's shoe size and favorite brands, but if we happen to be out to lunch next to a shoe store that's having a 40% off sale and our phone lets us know, is it really that bad?
I'm not saying I'm entirely comfortable with the proposition, but I can see why it might end up coming about. It won't be because Apple/Google?Facebook are Evil; it will be because consumers respond to it. For enough people, it will be a worthwhile trade off to forego some privacy in exchange for a useful service.