Well, first of all I think if something is open source it will tend to be more privacy-focused since it will disclose what it tracks. People will either find that acceptable or fork and change.
> Does this mean that open source is more important than privacy to people of this mindset?
Not exactly, but I think the questions should really be something like "who is the guarantor of your privacy?"
If you are happy with it being a corporation like apple then you're fine. I'm not, and what we consider more secure would have to be a much deeper conversation in which we actually define our threat models.
True, I’m very interested in understanding how secure the open source alternative is, I struggle to believe it is as secure as there are so many layers, and the surface seems much bigger. I guess if you are worried about being hacked then the open source method is likely less secure, but if you are worried about being monitored then Apple is more of a risk as you don’t know what goes on behind their servers etc.
> Does this mean that open source is more important than privacy to people of this mindset?
Not exactly, but I think the questions should really be something like "who is the guarantor of your privacy?"
If you are happy with it being a corporation like apple then you're fine. I'm not, and what we consider more secure would have to be a much deeper conversation in which we actually define our threat models.