Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple's new mottos:

- When you can't innovate, duplicate
- When you can't innovate, litigate
- When you can't compete on your own merits, use your muscle to destroy competitors

Apple IS the new MS.

This scans like good bad hip hop.

A+++ would imitate rhythm again.
 
Is it even LEGAL for Apple to do such a thing?

iOS ads are in the end software that runs on your iOS device. iOS ads could crash, or do nasty things. Therefore there is quality control, just as for iOS applications. If an iAd doesn't pass the quality control, then Apple is fully justified in rejecting it.

Of course we are not told _why_ this advertisement is blocked.

----------

Good. I support this decision as I don't think bloom.fm is a good experience compared to iTunes Radio. Apple cares passionately about the user experience, and they probably don't want people advertising products and services that deliver poor experiences to consumers.

That shouldn't be a reason for rejecting an advertisement. If Apple thinks cars of Brand A are better than cars of Brand B, that shouldn't be a reason to reject ads for Brand B.

----------

Does this bloom.fm have an app that is being banned from the App Store? Or a website that iOS/Mac users are banned from listening to music on? Is iTunes Radio considered to be a monopoly in streaming music services?

They have a bloom.fm app on the App Store that you can download for free.
 
Apple are still allowing the Bloom.fm app in the App Store (and taking their 30% cut from In-App Purchases) so it seems like an odd decision to block their adverts.

It _could_ be a technical reason, like users experiencing crashes when the ad runs.
 
No amount of opinions on macrumors is going to affect any decisions made at Apple; they consult themselves on their own product's design, not the public with a view to be aired. Long may it continue this way; if Apple were swayed by every single person's view on what they did, they wouldn't be Apple - calm, focused and designing products according to *their* vision - a vision I trust infinitely more than Joe Public's.
 
So, Apple used to allow advertisements for Microsoft and IBM on their Macs in the 80s and 90s? I didn't realize that. :rolleyes:

how does this work. you pick a comment and try to give a nonsense answer totally unrelated to the original comment?
 
They have some of the best lawyers in the world.... yes, it's legal, until a court says otherwise.
Based on your logic, Apple never broke the law? Never settled and never been fined hundreds of millions of dollars?
 
Bash is hyperbole. People are discussing whether or not they agree with Apple's decision.

Are you taking the debate too personally?

I don't get what you mean by hyperbole. Doesn't make sense given the context.

In the normal, everyday world, a business does not help their competitors. It would be unreasonable to expect Apple to advertise for a rival. But if Apple doesn't do this, they are Big Brother? This is confounding.

If Apple would invent the cure for cancer, they'd be bashed for it. 'They knew about it 2 months ago and waited for a press release to announce it. Look at all the people who died in the past 2 months!' It's beyond ridiculous.

----------

how does this work. you pick a comment and try to give a nonsense answer totally unrelated to the original comment?

You can't respond since what you said made no sense given the context. So you attack the person who responded, real mature there.
 
I don't get what you mean by hyperbole. Doesn't make sense given the context.

In the normal, everyday world, a business does not help their competitors. It would be unreasonable to expect Apple to advertise for a rival. But if Apple doesn't do this, they are Big Brother? This is confounding.

If Apple would invent the cure for cancer, they'd be bashed for it. 'They knew about it 2 months ago and waited for a press release to announce it. Look at all the people who died in the past 2 months!' It's beyond ridiculous.

----------



You can't respond since what you said made no sense given the context. So you attack the person who responded, real mature there.

You answered my question. You're taking this too personally.
 
No amount of opinions on macrumors is going to affect any decisions made at Apple; they consult themselves on their own product's design, not the public with a view to be aired. Long may it continue this way; if Apple were swayed by every single person's view on what they did, they wouldn't be Apple - calm, focused and designing products according to *their* vision - a vision I trust infinitely more than Joe Public's.

My father's brother's best friend's Uncle's half-son knows someone who worked as a janitor at Apple and she said they all are told to spend at least 30 minutes a day looking for inspiration and direction on Internet forums! :p
 
Wow - this is a pathetically sad move on Apple's part. They're counting on customers not knowing about better services so that they'll use Apple's.

Personally, I love Spotify. I briefly tried iTunes Radio before Spotify became free on iOS, but as soon as Spotify offered that, it was a no-brainer.

I'm a bit interested in this Bloom.fm… I've never heard of it before. It sounds cheaper than Spotify… is it basically the same thing at a lower price? How is their library? I've been quite impressed with how much Spotify has… the biggest name I have wanted and not been able to get on Spotify is Rammstein.

LOL, the day has come that people are defending the right to show ads. :p
 
Of course it's LEGAL. CBS won't run ABC or NBC promotion ads either. Coca Cola won't advertise Pepsi on it's website.

I don't understand the POINT of this article at all except to get anti-Apple people who don't want to think riled up.

I think Google have gotten into legal trouble for promoting their own services in search results. Then again Apple isn't really much of a player in advertising.
 
I do wish all the people who claim MacRumors is full of biased Apple fanatics would read threads like this. This really is nothing but an unsubstantiated rumor based on a tweet by an Apple competitor and everyone has jumped in assuming it's true, and wondering if it might even be criminal.

Who knows what to believe on this, but even if true I'm not sure why this is so upsetting to people...
 
I do wish all the people who claim MacRumors is full of biased Apple fanatics would read threads like this. This really is nothing but an unsubstantiated rumor based on a tweet by an Apple competitor and everyone has jumped in assuming it's true, and wondering if it might even be criminal.

Who knows what to believe on this, but even if true I'm not sure why this is so upsetting to people...

People shouldn't find it upsetting or surprising.

But that has nothing to do with whether or not this site is full of biased people in either direction. They aren't mutually exclusive nor related in any way.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.