Apple reveals iPhone OS 4 with iAd. Great revenue for developers!

[spaceman]

Maybe not, but now you're talking about almost every ad serving model then, not something Apple or iPhone specific. Even Android (remember who made Android!), any OS on any device actually.

Im not sure what you mean. There's no ad-serving mechanism built into Android.

You are joking, right? It's build by Google. Are you honestly saying that Google will never have ad-serving mechanisms in Android? Do you think they build it because they are nice guys who want to give us a free mobile OS?

[headquest]

Nice to see them catch up with multitasking, which my Palm Pre does already, so I can tell you in advance that it's very useful...

I hope that Palm don't reciprocate by allowing their Apps to be interupted by adverts for viagra, etc. iAd looks to me like consumerism and greed at it's ultimate WORST. Not suprising coming from Apple, unfortunately, but I just hope other, better companies don't follow suit.

No reason to suggest they will of course: Apps originally made for iPhone have been ported to Palm Pre with changes made so that they integrate properly with Palm functions like the contacts, calendar, etc in ways that don't happen on the iPhone ... but even so, greed has a way of taking over, so once again, I hope this remains an Apple aberation that doesn't sully the rest of us when using our hand-helds.

[whyterabbyt]

You are joking, right?

Would you like to tell me where to look in the developer SDK, then?

It's build by Google.

And?

Are you honestly saying that Google will never have ad-serving mechanisms in Android?

Given the Android distribution model, it doesnt matter what Google put in; the mobile phone companies can take it out again. You know the Android sourcecode is open sourced as well, dont you?

Do you think they build it because they are nice guys who want to give us a free mobile OS?

So you're saying that there's currently an ad-serving system in Android and saying the proof is that you suspect Google's future intentions?

[Goratrix]

Do you think they build it because they are nice guys who want to give us a free mobile OS?

Yes, that's why they did it. And that's why they did it as open source. There's no way in hell Google can force an ad-serving mechanism into Android the way Apple is doing it.

[egbert]

Steve has sold every iThing-lovin punter's ass to the corporate world and will be pimping it out for 40% of the take. BYO KYJ.

It is only a matter of time before he puts rims on the Merc with no licence plate and trades the jeans and turtle necks in for a calf-length ermine coat and enough bling to blind everyone on the I.S.S.

[spaceman]

So you're saying that there's currently an ad-serving system in Android and saying the proof is that you suspect Google's future intentions?

No I'm not saying there is an ad-serving mechanism in Android. I am saying that Android (and ChromeOS) are Google products, and somehow ads will get them revenue through both of them. It is Google after all, the worlds biggest ad broker.

One the one hand you're envisaging fiendish, intrusive ad covered user experiences in Apple products, because, well, just because it's Apple I guess.. but on the other hand you don't see anything similar will ever happen with Google products.. Google, the WORLD BIGGEST AD BROKER.

Excuse me if I laugh.

And yes, Android is open source. So are you now going to say that no provider will work with Google and Android to get revenue from ads. Are you suggesting that all the providers will be very good boys and only sell Android phone that are 100% free of ads or ad-serving systems because Android is open source?

Excuse me if I laugh again.

Do a search for "google android ad revenue" or "how will android make google money"

[ericj23]

The damn thing that annoys me about apple is the messianic crap that there adds team spews out

Iadds are being sold as something good for the consumer - gimme a break

But the on the made me amd was the nonsense being spwed about the iphone as a gmaing platform - this was done by comapring the number of games available for the ipod compared to the DS. Like number of games ahve anyhting to dow ith anything much

There are mode DS than ianything - the top selling DS game outsells the top iphone guess by approximately 20 time and these games cost about 10 times at much at retail too. Iphone sales are a drop in the bucket comapared to real gaming consoles

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_be ... intendo_DS
http://toucharcade.com/2009/09/08/top-i ... ot-really/
http://curmudgeongamer.com/2007/04/nint ... icing.html
http://www.pocketgamer.co.uk/r/iPhone/news.asp?c=14295

Yet apple are trumpeting this as success

60% of mobile browsers use belong to apple - wtf

If you had the numbers of mobiles with browsers it would be about 10% apple, but seeing as apple are one of the few firms whose phones are always offerred with data plans is it any wonder there phoens are the number one internet browser. I no longer have an iphone because their browser is that bad

More nonsense basically

As for google and ads - i thought they make theirs of web pages - you know with flash - you know like their mobile phones. It could be that they have made a product to promote that business model and apple are making one to promote theirs

[spaceman]

Iadds are being sold as something good for the consumer - gimme a break

No, it's being sold as something good for the developer actually. But as everyone should know, it's actually best for the ad broker.

[whyterabbyt]

No I'm not saying there is an ad-serving mechanism in Android.

then why did you say 'you are joking' when I said there wasnt one? thats kind of confusing.

I am saying that Android (and ChromeOS) are Google products, and somehow ads will get them revenue through both of them. It is Google after all, the worlds biggest ad broker.

Bit of a huge difference between incorporating it into an OS, and embedding them on one's own site and those of affiliates.

One the one hand you're envisaging fiendish, intrusive ad covered user experiences in Apple products, because, well, just because it's Apple I guess.. but on the other hand you don't see anything similar will ever happen with Google products.. Google, the WORLD BIGGEST AD BROKER.

Can't you work out the difference between tying your hardware customers to an ad-delivery system they cant block on the devices you're selling them, and delivering ads passively, then?

Excuse me if I laugh.

Go ahead. No idea why you're laughing at comparing apples to oranges though. Have fun, but it makes no sense in context.

And yes, Android is open source. So are you now going to say that no provider will work with Google and Android to get revenue from ads. Are you suggesting that all the providers will be very good boys and only sell Android phone that are 100% free of ads or ad-serving systems because Android is open source?

So far that's the second time in this that you've relied on speculation as to future intentions. You get pretty pissed off when folk do that about Apple, so why are you relying on it to try and draw some sort of parallel between two disparate things.

If Sony had built a mechanism into their TVs which allowed the TVs to force-deliver Sony-brokered ads, would you seriously claim that was directly comparable to the current system of TV channels showing ads, and that it was justifiable because the channel could make lots of money from ads, so Sony are just doing the same type of thing?

Seriously, that's a completely bogus argument, and I doubt you'd be using it if it weren't Apple.

[Goratrix]

And yes, Android is open source. So are you now going to say that no provider will work with Google and Android to get revenue from ads. Are you suggesting that all the providers will be very good boys and only sell Android phone that are 100% free of ads or ad-serving systems because Android is open source?

You are looking at it from a very US-centric perspective... I'm in Europe, and yesterday I bought the HTC Desire. In a shop, unlocked, directly from HTC, not from a "provider". I already have a voice-and-data plan from my telco provider, not tied to any phone, so I can choose which ever device I like. I will get my Android updates from HTC, which will not force any ads upon me as they already got my money and there is no greedy provider in between. And if they do, I will go to xda-developers and flash my Desire with any of the myriad ad-free alternative ROMs that will be available for it. Can you do that with an Apple product?

[aMUSEd]

We as user have the option of not buying the app! That's pretty strong choice right there and it has already been demonstrated several times how much influence large forums like Toucharcade.com and such have when it comes to apps/games with adds. I'm sure it isn't different with any other app. When the community thinks something is over the top and annoying the developer really can not afford to continue with the obtrusive adds.

Also, several developers that have addware software actually let you, the user, decide if you want to keep the adds turned on or off meaning the software becomes a kind of donation ware.

Doesn't help though when you get developers that sell you an ad free version and then make it ad supported when they have enough people using it. There need to be strong mechanisms to ensure that sort of fraudulent practice is not allowed.

[spaceman]

No I'm not saying there is an ad-serving mechanism in Android.

then why did you say 'you are joking' when I said there wasnt one? thats kind of confusing,

It was a reaction to you saying that things may evolve differently

Do you actually think that will stay that way, then, given how web-based ads have evolved?

You are right, and I'm saying Android phones will develop that way as well

I am saying that Android (and ChromeOS) are Google products, and somehow ads will get them revenue through both of them. It is Google after all, the worlds biggest ad broker.

Bit of a huge difference between incorporating it into an OS, and embedding them on one's own site and those of affiliates.

No, I'm talking about manufactures and operators building their own ad-serving code into Android. It's easy for them, after all, it's open source. You can argue that people can install an ad-free version of android then. Good luck with that! It's probably easier to jail-break an iPhone then.

One the one hand you're envisaging fiendish, intrusive ad covered user experiences in Apple products, because, well, just because it's Apple I guess.. but on the other hand you don't see anything similar will ever happen with Google products.. Google, the WORLD BIGGEST AD BROKER.

Can't you work out the difference between tying your hardware customers to an ad-delivery system they cant block on the devices you're selling them, and delivering ads passively, then?

You can block it easily.. don't install free apps paid for by ad revenue. It's that simple. 99% of the apps on my iPhone are like that.

Excuse me if I laugh.

Go ahead. No idea why you're laughing at comparing apples to oranges though. Have fun, but it makes no sense in context.

Now you're just being silly. We're not comparing apples and oranges.

And yes, Android is open source. So are you now going to say that no provider will work with Google and Android to get revenue from ads. Are you suggesting that all the providers will be very good boys and only sell Android phone that are 100% free of ads or ad-serving systems because Android is open source?

So far that's the second time in this that you've relied on speculation as to future intentions. You get pretty pissed off when folk do that about Apple, so why are you relying on it to try and draw some sort of parallel between two disparate things.

No, I'm somewhat pissed off when people suggest that only Apple does this or is capable of it, when, as I try to argue, they're all the same. And you're wrong.. it's not a reaction I have just because it's Apple. It's my personality. I hate it just as much if people talk crap about anything.. me talking crap included. I usually apologise afterwards.

Apple may be the first one to come up with something like this and make it work. The other, no doubt have been thinking about it for just as long but haven't made it work yet. YET.

If Sony had built a mechanism into their TVs which allowed the TVs to force-deliver Sony-brokered ads, would you seriously claim that was directly comparable to the current system of TV channels showing ads, and that it was justifiable because the channel could make lots of money from ads, so Sony are just doing the same type of thing?

Seriously, that's a completely bogus argument, and I doubt you'd be using it if it weren't Apple.

And that's where the discussion started.. it is not a FORCE DELIVERY at all. Where did you get that? No one is going to be forced to look at ads. That's just nonsense

[spaceman]

And yes, Android is open source. So are you now going to say that no provider will work with Google and Android to get revenue from ads. Are you suggesting that all the providers will be very good boys and only sell Android phone that are 100% free of ads or ad-serving systems because Android is open source?

You are looking at it from a very US-centric perspective... I'm in Europe, and yesterday I bought the HTC Desire. In a shop, unlocked, directly from HTC, not from a "provider". I already have a voice-and-data plan from my telco provider, not tied to any phone, so I can choose which ever device I like. I will get my Android updates from HTC, which will not force any ads upon me as they already got my money and there is no greedy provider in between. And if they do, I will go to xda-developers and flash my Desire with any of the myriad ad-free alternative ROMs that will be available for it. Can you do that with an Apple product?

yes, it's called jail-breaking

[ericj23]

And yes, Android is open source. So are you now going to say that no provider will work with Google and Android to get revenue from ads. Are you suggesting that all the providers will be very good boys and only sell Android phone that are 100% free of ads or ad-serving systems because Android is open source?

You are looking at it from a very US-centric perspective... I'm in Europe, and yesterday I bought the HTC Desire. In a shop, unlocked, directly from HTC, not from a "provider". I already have a voice-and-data plan from my telco provider, not tied to any phone, so I can choose which ever device I like. I will get my Android updates from HTC, which will not force any ads upon me as they already got my money and there is no greedy provider in between. And if they do, I will go to xda-developers and flash my Desire with any of the myriad ad-free alternative ROMs that will be available for it. Can you do that with an Apple product?

yes, it's called jail-breaking

Bye bye warranty - not so handy

[whyterabbyt]

It was a reaction to you saying that things may evolve differently

that wasn't what I said in the post you actually quoted, though. kinda confusing to tell what you're responding to in a case like that.

You are right, and I'm saying Android phones will develop that way as well

erm, what way? im talking about ad-content evolving you're extrapolating that into ad-delivery. two different things.

No, I'm talking about manufactures and operators building their own ad-serving code into Android. It's easy for them, after all, it's open source.

Like I say, more speculation.

You can argue that people can install an ad-free version of android then. Good luck with that! It's probably easier to jail-break an iPhone then.

There's no need to argue against speculation upon speculation.

You can block it easily.. don't install free apps paid for by ad revenue. It's that simple. 99% of the apps on my iPhone are like that.

That's avoidance not blocking. Technoligically, and behaviourally, there's a distinct difference.

Now you're just being silly. We're not comparing apples and oranges.

yes you are. ad-delivery mechanisms in an OS versus ad brokering. I wasnt comparing ad-delivery mechanisms in an OS to anything, but you decided to conflate the two things.

No, I'm somewhat pissed off when people suggest that only Apple does this or is capable of it

Only Apple have done it.

when, as I try to argue, they're all the same.

Except that they're not the same. One is a vendor locked-in mechanism installed on their gear. No-one else has that. AOL and Compuserve are gone, remember?

And that's where the discussion started.. it is not a FORCE DELIVERY at all. Where did you get that? No one is going to be forced to look at ads. That's just nonsense

So the big flash animated panels on Yahoo and the like which lead to website pages with bigger pictures, text, and videos aren't in themselves 'ads' is that what you're saying?
And the 'ads' are actually the bits it gives you after you click on them?
Really?
If there's no content at all being displayed to you, how the hell do you find the 'ad'?

And if there is ANY content being displayed, even if its just some text which says 'click here for more info on the Superspudmo 5000', how does that not count as an 'ad'? And ad that you have no choice in seeing (cf 'forced delivery')