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.
Ad Agencies Receiving iAd Details as Apple Looks to Hinder Rival Ad Networks
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Go back up a few posts. Apple is explicitly preventing them from individually targeting you or your data. This ad model will actually thwart the kind of analytics that you are complaining about. And App Store apps are already prohibited from doing this.
Come'on guys, think for a moment and read the whole post...
Ads are part of everyday life. That's just it. It's how a company can make money and afford to produce a program for free. I am sure that the free ones will have ads and the paid ones not, its how it works now.
But there is a MUCH bigger problem that the last half of the article points to.
Apple is making changes to their terms that will in effect over time lock everyone out of the iPhone development process except them.
First it was 3rd party applications that made creating Apps easier and opened the possibility for a developer to create an App to be cross-platform and not having to create a separate program for the different Phone OSes. That's huge, gave more developers even more incentive to start to create Apps. (Notably, the biggest to gain from that ability is everyone but Apple, so I kinda get where they are coming from).
Now, they are not allowing enough information to be relayed about a device to analytics platforms. Effectively, as the article mentions, they aren't able to target ads to the user. This will SEVERELY limit the effectiveness of advertising on the iPhone, and essentially forces developers that want to use ads for revenue to turn to iAds...
I see two huge issues with iAds, and actually both are cost-related. First, you have to go through Apple, and while little is known publicly about their pricing model, it sounds that its more of a premium service. Secondly, because iAds is trying to make advertisements that are more interactive and more creative, that then requires the developer to put in more time and money into those Ads. Today, they only need to add some code here and there and AdMob and company fill the space with more-or-less targeted ads.
I see this as yet another instance of Apple creating this platform, leaving it fairly open and then swooping in and locking everyone down.
Will they still be successful? Immeasurably. But I don't like the precedent.
Ads are part of everyday life. That's just it. It's how a company can make money and afford to produce a program for free. I am sure that the free ones will have ads and the paid ones not, its how it works now.
But there is a MUCH bigger problem that the last half of the article points to.
Apple is making changes to their terms that will in effect over time lock everyone out of the iPhone development process except them.
First it was 3rd party applications that made creating Apps easier and opened the possibility for a developer to create an App to be cross-platform and not having to create a separate program for the different Phone OSes. That's huge, gave more developers even more incentive to start to create Apps. (Notably, the biggest to gain from that ability is everyone but Apple, so I kinda get where they are coming from).
Now, they are not allowing enough information to be relayed about a device to analytics platforms. Effectively, as the article mentions, they aren't able to target ads to the user. This will SEVERELY limit the effectiveness of advertising on the iPhone, and essentially forces developers that want to use ads for revenue to turn to iAds...
I see two huge issues with iAds, and actually both are cost-related. First, you have to go through Apple, and while little is known publicly about their pricing model, it sounds that its more of a premium service. Secondly, because iAds is trying to make advertisements that are more interactive and more creative, that then requires the developer to put in more time and money into those Ads. Today, they only need to add some code here and there and AdMob and company fill the space with more-or-less targeted ads.
I see this as yet another instance of Apple creating this platform, leaving it fairly open and then swooping in and locking everyone down.
Will they still be successful? Immeasurably. But I don't like the precedent.
Will these ads be stagnant, traditional ads? Or will they be more interactive, so to speak. If video ads are an option this will lead to many more business endeavors for someone like myself.
Because it's a good thing?
I LIKE that Amazon tries to sell me Batman comics and iPhone accessories.
Why would I want to see ads for dog food or tampons or some other thing I don't need? Yeah, yeah, I know everything's too commercial these days...but if I gotta see an ads I sure as heck prefer to see ones that relate to me in some way.
No, it states that only non-iAds ad companies are prohibited from that information. Apple will, this change opened that door for only their Ad platform.
Yeah, everyone's ignoring this.
This is actually a MUCH bigger deal than whether or not flash is on the iPhone. That whole thing is nothing compared to this.
But people understand that more, so don't expect to see nearly as much yapping about this issue.
Nuff Said, no reason to be negative.
Sure it sounds like Apple is looking to "control" advertising on its mobile platform and share the revenue but at the end of the day the move works out best for the user and marginally for Apple.
1. The user gets a more controlled ad experience without having to leave an App.
2. Advertisers likewise can deliver richer content that because users are not leaving the App is more likely to be viewed.
3. Apple shares in the revenue in such a way that they make some money on it, probably slightly better than iTunes and App Store revenue so that their advertising division sees a slight profit.
But don't be fooled, critics will point to Apple's greed. Apple makes almost all their money off hardware, a fraction of that off software, and the iTunes Store and App Store while generating "income" is inconsequential and marginal in relation to their hardware revenue and profit. It is merely an means to selling more product (hardware: phones, pads, Macs).
Sure it sounds like Apple is looking to "control" advertising on its mobile platform and share the revenue but at the end of the day the move works out best for the user and marginally for Apple.
1. The user gets a more controlled ad experience without having to leave an App.
2. Advertisers likewise can deliver richer content that because users are not leaving the App is more likely to be viewed.
3. Apple shares in the revenue in such a way that they make some money on it, probably slightly better than iTunes and App Store revenue so that their advertising division sees a slight profit.
But don't be fooled, critics will point to Apple's greed. Apple makes almost all their money off hardware, a fraction of that off software, and the iTunes Store and App Store while generating "income" is inconsequential and marginal in relation to their hardware revenue and profit. It is merely an means to selling more product (hardware: phones, pads, Macs).
I really can't see these ads being intrusive like some are expecting. The ads will be in apps at the request of the app's developer. Also as an Apple product I'm sure there will be user control of the ads of some sort. Apple would never be so thick as to think people are forking out good money to buy a mobile billboard, but there is value to free add supported apps.
On another note this is exactly the type of thing that may make a NY Times or Atlantic Monthly free (or cheaper) to the subscriber. Apple wanting to add their touch is probably a good idea since it's tough to support a large company with $0.00005 click ads from Google.
Best of all, it isn't so much a direct competitor to Google the "basement discounter" of the advertising world. Just like Apple doesn't compete with the Dells and Acers of the world. Unless of course Google has higher aspirations.
On another note this is exactly the type of thing that may make a NY Times or Atlantic Monthly free (or cheaper) to the subscriber. Apple wanting to add their touch is probably a good idea since it's tough to support a large company with $0.00005 click ads from Google.
Best of all, it isn't so much a direct competitor to Google the "basement discounter" of the advertising world. Just like Apple doesn't compete with the Dells and Acers of the world. Unless of course Google has higher aspirations.
And I don't like the current options. In this case, "fairly open" is an advantage for Google and the analytics folks that sell targeted ads. This is a lose for them, not the user. And developers can always use AdMob or whoever instead, so there is zero lock in on that front.
I would probably elect to have the AdMob adds. These are just flashing banners. iAds are going to be a much more complicated beast: perhaps taping into your iPod playlist and playing your favorite song, a movie or animation popping up. What all this means is more processes to inundate your CPU and use up your precious RAM. And what happens when these iAds start running in the background? Given their model, it is entirely possible for intrusive ads to pop up anytime.
This will probably just end up being another reason to jailbreak; to block iAds.
Correct....to a point. I think Apple is "helping protect users privacy" by not allowing that data to 3rd party analytics platforms.....while at the same time leveraging that to drive people to use iAd, since that data remains Apple's only.
It's interesting, and does give Apple a competitive advantage which I'm not sure will hold up over time. I think at some point Apple will need to allow users to make the choice on whether they want their data to be used with 3rd parties.
As for the people thinking iAds in general is bad.....get over it. The market will determine what level of acceptance people are willing to have over ads. If it's a free app, no doubt people will be accepting (just as they are today). If you paid for it and suddenly there are ads in it....trust me, that developer won't be selling many more copies with the reviews posted.
And trust me, Apple isn't going to start putting ads on things like the calculator....or a phone call!
-Kevin
Why? I don't understand how adverts benefit anyone but the lazy who are also prepared to put undue weight on the claims of the seller. What's wrong with word of mouth? Reviews? Studying specs? Trying products out in a store?
If I'm going to see an advert, I'd rather it not be targeted to me, so I have no doubt that it's an advert. Otherwise it takes a few milliseconds' more cognitive effort to ignore it.
Hello. The ads are created by the advertiser/Apple's iAd Quattro division creating ads. Developers looking to place ads in their free Apps simply choose to do so. Apple will do the rest. And the developer gets their share from Apple for their "free" App by allowing advertising, giving them a 60% revenue of the ads. Win-win.
Between a choice of Apple/iAd and Google/AdMob, when it comes to looking out for my privacy interests (as an iPhone user) I'm far more inclined to trust Apple. I could be wrong, but I doubt it.
In my view, this is how Apple is going to differentiate themselves from the wild, wild west that is internet advertising today. Stay on the classy, upscale end and let everyone else duke it out for the low-end commodity space. Not just in the ad market, but in the iPhone/iPad App Store market. Let the "openness" of ads in the Android ad market drag that platform down into the mud.
If I'm seeing this right, this is pure genius on the part of Apple.
I agree, it is not black and white. In my case, all my clients want to charge for their apps. My goal is to help them make money, which starts with a well designed app that people will want to use. To that end, offering a free version with iAds allows my clients to supplement their lost income from giving away the app. Even with the free version, we work very hard to keep things clean and ads should be subtle.
We did a study on app users and found that their was a huge negative perception of any paid app that had advertising. We found practically no negativity associated with advertising contained within a free app (so long the ads aren't too intrusive).
I was shown a targeted ad on Facebook last year for the Film Racing 24-hour film contest. I run a Student Film Club, and I signed up a team for the event (which I wouldn't have discovered without the ad). The event was a blast, and the kids gained a ton of real-world experience.
I would choose targeted ads over random advertising any day. Ads are part of life. They might as well be relevant.
I would choose targeted ads over random advertising any day. Ads are part of life. They might as well be relevant.
What is a "classy, upscale" advert? Whether it's Apple selling iPhones, Las Vegas selling Gambling, Mom selling Teeth Whitening or MS selling Windows 7, they're all doing precisely the same thing: trying to convince you that you want something which you wouldn't have wanted otherwise so that they make a profit from you. Whether this is right or wrong is not under question, but it's no more right when Apple does it than when Microsoft or Mom do it.
Say what? It’s just an API. If anything it should be easier to implement. Advertisers will be coding the iAds (and possibly Apple itself for fee I’m sure).
In fact, some iPhone OS developers could probably have a lucrative career coding iAds for advertising agencies.
It just feels like, at some point, with Apple's shady business practices since they went into the phone business, a BIG lawsuit will go down eventually against them.
My phone sits in my personal space - no ads thanks.
Mobile operators know the quickest way to cause churn on the network is to invade that space without permission. I've spent over 12 years in the global mobile industry - including mobile advertising.
Additionally it's against some country laws to data mine or export personal data outside the country. So what Apple are attempting to do varies in legislation around the globe.
Mobile operators know the quickest way to cause churn on the network is to invade that space without permission. I've spent over 12 years in the global mobile industry - including mobile advertising.
Additionally it's against some country laws to data mine or export personal data outside the country. So what Apple are attempting to do varies in legislation around the globe.