Apple doesn’t want AirTag 2 tracking pets. Why not?

Midway through the seventh paragraph of its press release about the new AirTag, Apple reiterates its surprisingly unambiguous stance on the device’s intended use. “Designed exclusively for object tracking,” the company writes, “not people or petsThe new AirTag features a suite of industry-leading protections against unwanted tracking…” It may have a louder speaker and a longer effective tracking range, but the updated AirTag still doesn’t have “track anything with a pulse” on its feature list.

The first half of this italicized section makes sense because Apple wants to distance itself from criminals and abusers who misuse the AirTag to stalk their victims. This was particularly prevalent in the early days of the device, before privacy measures were introduced to make it beep when separated from its owner and send alerts to unknown smartphones detected nearby, but it still remains a concern to this day. And so, while a parent could, quite ethically, place an AirTag in their child’s school bag for added peace of mind, it’s understandable that Apple would refuse to accommodate this use case.

But the second part is rather mysterious. What’s the problem with using an AirTag to track your pet? A dog or cat won’t bother you, and an AirTag in the collar would be just as useful if your pet is stolen or you just want to know where they’re going for a second dinner. Indeed, the only people I know who get significant use from their AirTags use them to track the movements of their wander-prone cats.

I guess the answer is not ethical but practical.

As I’ve written elsewhere, solving privacy concerns comes at a price, namely that the AirTag is now pretty useless at preventing theft. Hiding an AirTag in the case of your expensive musical instrument may seem like a great way to see where it’s being taken by thieves, but they’ll soon be alerted to its presence thanks to anti-harassment measures.

Likewise, the privacy features create headaches every time you use the AirTag to track a living creature. You’re obviously not stalking your own child, but their teacher might not appreciate the AirTag beeping in the classroom because it’s been out of range of your iPhone for too long. (There are ways around this, but they don’t get official approval from Apple.) And while most cats I know reappear for food, sleep, or attention frequently enough to prevent the AirTag from beeping in distress, I suspect this feature could become annoying to passersby if your pet tends to stay away from the house for long periods of time. And even less so if it’s stolen and thieves start receiving alerts on their phones. I don’t think it takes much time to search a cat.

Ultimately, Apple isn’t trying to control how we use a product we own, but simply to warn us about one of its limitations, which, unlike the AirTag 1, is present from the start in the AirTag 2. AirTags just aren’t very good at tracking people. They are designed this way: it’s a feature, not a bug.

The pet issue seems less clear to me, partly because cats don’t carry smartphones and partly because they are less likely than your kids to have a reason to go outside all day. There’s absolutely still a use case for owners curious about where their pets like to hang out, and I’m sure compatible AirTag collars and Find My trackers will continue to sell. But if you’re expecting the device to help you in case of theft, you’ll probably be disappointed and wish you’d paid attention to Apple’s warning.