Apple Leverages App Store Data for iAds

[MacRumors]

As noted by TechCrunch, Apple appears to be leveraging their unique position as App Store curator in their upcoming iAds service.

The above slide shows Apple's ad company Quattro Wireless pushing a program to potential iPhone app advertisers called "Verification of iTunes Purchase" (VIP). The program allows advertisers to track actual App Store purchases to measure an ad's performance. Apple can then use this knowledge to prevent the ad from being displayed to that user again. While this sort of ad conversion tracking is routine on the web, it is a bit more complicated for 3rd parties on the App Store.

Ad companies such as Admob do provide a similar feature but it requires code modification to the target app to track usage. Apple, however, has already taken steps to make this feature difficult for 3rd parties to offer. Apple's latest SDK terms stipulate that Apps may not "collect and send Device Data to a third party for processing or analysis". This restriction is the source of some debate as well as a topic of the FTC investigation into Apple.

Article Link: Apple Leverages App Store Data for iAds

 

[TennisandMusic]

This is just getting freakin' weird.

 

[uaecasher]

This is really great

 

[Cheffy Dave]

My way or the Highway, eh Apple?

 

[MrCrowbar]

I don't like iAds for the sole reason that it almost spells like AIDS.

I don't like targeted advertising anyway, but that's just me I guess. Makes me feel watched. Is there a way to choose between targeted ads and more frequent ads while keeping your privacy?

 

[FrankieTDouglas]

With the new SDK, strangling the means by which other ad companies currently implement themselves?

...add another dick move from Apple to the list.

 

[JackAxe]

GREAT!

I hope that Apple keeps this TRASH away from OS X!

 

[uaecasher]

GREAT!

I hope that Apple keeps this TRASH away from OS X!

I'm pretty sure that iAd will be for developers and will be implemented inside Apps not the iPhone OS/iPhone OS default apps.

 

[talkingfuture]

Looks like a sensible move by apple to leverage iTunes data as they can, but it may court a bit of controversy in some quarters.

 

[adrian.oconnor]

Yeah, that restriction in the new terms, above everything else, seems particularly harsh because clearly they're using those tactics themselves to gain a serious advantage.

It's their platform, I know, but they need to balance being the Gatekeeper with allowing the platform space to breathe and flourish.

 

[mainstreetmark]

The whole iAds thing continues to make me nervous. I fear that easily integrated ads will absolutely saturate all my apps, and create a dangerous precedent for future computing devices in general, including apps on your MBP.

It's gonna suck.

 

[-=XX=-Nephilim]

GREAT!

I hope that Apple keeps this TRASH away from OS X!

Agree 100%

Awesome, as long as they keep it exclusive to iCrap and away from the last decent Apple thing - OS X

Otherwise, I find it really scary :s


EDIT:


By the way - this is one of the main, if not the only reason why SJ is pushing HTML 5 on to you and is in all out war with Adobe over Flash...

 

[jaw04005]

I don't get the conspiracy. According to this article, iAds allows advertisers to know whether or not their ad has been deployed without the application developer having to modify the actual application code. So what?

Currently, developers have to modify their code for services like AdMob.

This should be a good thing.

 

[marksman]

This is a good thing.

I know people see anything that says "ads" and ignorantly over-react and mis-react.

However ad supported content/products are a good choice and option. Having the ability to not have to see ads for things you have already purchased, for example is a good thing.

I wish people would actually take some time to understand what a story is saying before the react.

 

[Quark108]

To me, this doesn't sound any more sketchy then what Google does for their adds. They track user's search habits and use that information to send them tailored ads. At least Apple allows third party ads in their apps but Google does not allow them in search results.

 

[commander.data]

This is a good thing.

I know people see anything that says "ads" and ignorantly over-react and mis-react.

However ad supported content/products are a good choice and option. Having the ability to not have to see ads for things you have already purchased, for example is a good thing.

I wish people would actually take some time to understand what a story is saying before the react.

I think the article is showing how Apple is using their unique position as developer of the hardware, OS, and App Store to offer unique ad services that existing ad agencies will have difficultly emulating and raises the question of how far Apple can go with this policy before becoming anti-competitive. I think it's a legitimate question and one that I'm conflicted over as well. Apple obviously developed and controls the platform, but the App Store was developed as a more open way for developers to reach consumers without the restrictions of carriers and even if Apple's moves are not anti-competitive in the legal sense, they could still generate negative developer sentiment which only harms the platform.

To me, this doesn't sound any more sketchy then what Google does for their adds. They track user's search habits and use that information to send them tailored ads. At least Apple allows third party ads in their apps but Google does not allow them in search results.

I don't think comparisons to Google search are a good one since Google search isn't supposed to be a development platform.

 

[danuff]

Not me

As a developer AND a user of apps, I think ads are annoying. I am going to avoid putting them in my apps for as long as I can.

Dan

 

[AlmostThere]

To me, this doesn't sound any more sketchy then what Google does for their adds. They track user's search habits and use that information to send them tailored ads. At least Apple allows third party ads in their apps but Google does not allow them in search results.

Google doesn't prevent you from adding any tracking code you like to your purchase / confirmation page. This is like Google Adwords stipulating that (Microsoft) AdsCentre conversions cannot be measured rendering MS offering less effective. Google, unlike Apple, believe their ad platform can stand on its own feet.

 

[pdjudd]

Awesome, as long as they keep it exclusive to iCrap and away from the last decent Apple thing - OS X

Honestly, there has never been any evidence, even from the very beginning when it was introduced, that this was not going to be used for anything other than third party apps and only by their choice - Apple is in no way forcing ads on users! They never have hinted that they are doing this.

 

[stockscalper]

When is Apple going to learn that we don't want to pay for an app and be constantly inundated with advertisements. Android Market has promised to keep their apps ad free and they're going to eat the iPhone's lunch.

 

[bommai]

I don't agree with this!

While I am an Apple Fan, this behavior is probably bordering on Microsoft-like tactics. I would like Apple to be prohibited from doing this.

 

[miles01110]

When is Apple going to learn that we don't want to pay for an app and be constantly inundated with advertisements.

You know, if you continue to pay for apps just like you're doing now, odds are you won't see a single iAd. Clearly you have little understanding of how the system will actually work as stated by numerous developers and Apple officials.

However, it would be nice if they didn't use instances of paid apps in their tracking system, although the odds of this are virtually nil.

 

[ChazUK]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.1-update1; en-gb; Nexus One Build/ERE27) AppleWebKit/530.17 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/530.17)

When is Apple going to learn that we don't want to pay for an app and be constantly inundated with advertisements. Android Market has promised to keep their apps ad free and they're going to eat the iPhone's lunch.

What a load of crap. I use ad supported apps on my Nexus one all the time.

 

[Digitalclips]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.1-update1; en-gb; Nexus One Build/ERE27) AppleWebKit/530.17 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/530.17)



What a load of crap. I use ad supported apps on my Nexus one all the time.

Exactly. Did all those screaming "No ad supported apps' refuse to watch TV for the last many decades (before they could wind though them that is)? How about refusing to buy a newspaper or a magazine with any ads in them. The truth is many people actually buy newspapers and magazines for the ads ... looking for a car, a house etc. If Apple can make ads that are both 'skippable' (which SJ said they were) and very well made what is the problem? The current Flash based annoying ads would be absent too so I say 'Go Apple'.

 

[*LTD*]

When is Apple going to learn that we don't want to pay for an app and be constantly inundated with advertisements.

When consumers stop buying Apple gear in droves.

Don't hold your breath.

Apple doesn't have much to learn at all. They seem to have their game down 100%. In fact, it looks like the also-rans can learn a thing or two from Apple.