x2.
There are 2 ways to get rid of adverts on MR. Pay, or something else that breaks both rules 1 and 2.
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.
Apple's 'iAd' Mobile Advertising Platform Set for Introduction Tomorrow as Google Sweats AdMob Purchase Approval?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
x2.
Ads are like Taxes--you will NEVER get rid of them. Likewise, Apple is ummm a COMPANY? They make uhmmmm MONEY? Just deal with it already--I think as a shareholder that it's great but also as a developer it's incredibly cool if they create another profit-share model as it means we'll see more incredible work done by normal people (which is always where innovation comes) and they can sell it for free knowing they can recoup costs.
This is a win for those who understand economics.
Doesn't seem that crazy. Apple and Google look like they are competing so the Feds step back a bit. It motivates the user bases to rally around the product core. Apple is under attack from Google. Rally Apple Army, Rally! O crap, Apple is suing HTC over Android...Rally, Googlites, rally! So the faithful jump on messages boards and flame one another. But the part that becomes most important is that this re-evangelized faithful goes out and buys more product and pulls new customers to the "cause."
Yes you can. I could take a screenshot of this site without adverts, I turn on and watch TV or my iPlayer downloads and no adverts. I get my news from BBC News. I live in the country with no billboards.
All's good here
.
1. Good content is never free to create. Some people like free content and apps, and that means ads. Take them away and your favorite free app, or TV show, or web site is simply gone.
2. This is nothing new. There have always been ads, on iPhone and on the web.
3. Apple is highly unlikely to make the existing ad experience worse for users.
4. Apple is highly likely to make the ad experience better for developers.
5. I suspect OS 4.0 will include some things that are a lot more interesting than this. The developer in me cares a little about some ad service, but the user in me sees it as a boring footnote.
2. This is nothing new. There have always been ads, on iPhone and on the web.
3. Apple is highly unlikely to make the existing ad experience worse for users.
4. Apple is highly likely to make the ad experience better for developers.
5. I suspect OS 4.0 will include some things that are a lot more interesting than this. The developer in me cares a little about some ad service, but the user in me sees it as a boring footnote.
Wirelessly posted (Opera/9.50 (Nintendo DSi; Opera/507; U; en-US))
I find it awsome that ads are most of the time flash, and therefore on my iPhone they are replaced by a GIF image or nothing at all. Flash ads are CPU hogs, and I am glad they are not on my device.
Now if Apple's idea of ads are HTML5, then I love them already. I hope Apple can do better ads than a company that has been doing them for years (“The evil G”).
I find it awsome that ads are most of the time flash, and therefore on my iPhone they are replaced by a GIF image or nothing at all. Flash ads are CPU hogs, and I am glad they are not on my device.
Now if Apple's idea of ads are HTML5, then I love them already. I hope Apple can do better ads than a company that has been doing them for years (“The evil G”).
Iphones will blend, but you'd need some honking industrial blender to chop up a 'book!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAl28d6tbko
Some people just vote negative on anything about Apple.
Was the original iPhone even considered a smartphone?
No, but it became a definition of one.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)
I believe this is for Apple to make money from ads in free apps, not ads for iPhone OS itself. As long as you don't doenloa ad supported apps you should be fine.
zioxide said:
I believe this is for Apple to make money from ads in free apps, not ads for iPhone OS itself. As long as you don't doenloa ad supported apps you should be fine.
You are in disagreement with your own position and I can prove it. (annoying eh?)
You object to paying more money.
You object to unnecessary ads.
Ads reduce the PRICE of the monthly service fee you pay for your device about 50%.
So to put it another way, would you pay DOUBLE the current monthly cost to not see ads?
I suspect your rational, reasonable, answer is "no".
To put it yet another way, if Apple gets the ad revenue Google is capturing, or a significant portion of it, they, your supplier, can lower hardware and service fees given they have a margin target they are already meeting successfully.
One that meets the goal of the corporation of increasing rankings in total and relative market cap, and revenue growth.
Rocketman
iAd just seems like a stupid name to me. Maybe Apple will "revolutionize" ads on handhelds. Unfortunately, ads on handhelds don't perform as well as search-related ads from industries I've advertised for. They might get higher click-through rates, but not as many conversions. My guess is it's because people accidentally click the ads with fat fingers.
Was the original iPhone even considered a smartphone?
... it became one after the app store opened.
The only problem with that is that you made up all your 'facts'.
Who says that my current fee is reduced by 50% because of ads? There are no ads involved in my current cell phone use. When I download data, there are some ads, but revenues from those ads go to the web page, not to the cell phone service. So just how is my service rate reduced by 50%?
Furthermore, let's say Apple is successful in creating a new revenue source from ads. Why would you assume that they'll pass those savings on to cell phone purchasers?
You really think they're not able to track this? Enter SEO. When you place Google analytics onto a website, for example, the site owner is able to see where traffic comes from, what OS the visitor is using, what their screen resolution is, how long they were on the site, and what they ate for dinner last night. Trust me, BigTroll's concerns are valid and in place as I type this. I'm betting Google can track which app pulls in which ad. That's to say they know what apps iPhone users are running. They may not be able to tell they're geographic location, though. I think that's something they would need to ask for, you've seen the notification where it asks to use your location. This brings another thought to mind, websites don't permission for this. Hmmm... Don't know the legal implications here but now I'm going off on a tangent.
I think that the key word is "after" - it was the ability for the user to select and download apps that transformed it from a feature phone to a smart phone. It wasn't a hardware change - a software upgrade turned the original Iphone into a smart phone.
Minor point, though.
Loved that video!
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)
My response was more in line with how Google were going to have the more popular apps appearing on Android simply by knowing what was popular.
If a developer sees fit to develop for Android, why should anyone have any concerns for the iPhone?
I really don't care what platform an app is available for be it iPhone OS, Android l, Symbian, WebOS or WinMo and can't see the logic in denying another platform any app it is capable of running.
END3R said:
My response was more in line with how Google were going to have the more popular apps appearing on Android simply by knowing what was popular.
If a developer sees fit to develop for Android, why should anyone have any concerns for the iPhone?
I really don't care what platform an app is available for be it iPhone OS, Android l, Symbian, WebOS or WinMo and can't see the logic in denying another platform any app it is capable of running.
This is true. Android is up and coming and making a good go at it so it makes sense for developers to develop for more than one platform. This is unlike Apple's computer market share and video games. Developer's don't see a real bonus to creating the game to run on OS X. We're lucky if they come out for Mac, though.
But back to ads, we may not like them but it does allow others to pay for the development of the apps we use, however annoying they are.
The term cell phone is so passe. You have a wireless IP device. One option for voice is cellular, one is VoIP, and one is none of the above. Cellular voice will soon be dead.
The monthly fee the carrier collects is partly offset against the hardware such as the iPhone. The iPhone is supported by revenue sharing for music, videos and apps. Soon a layer of ad revenue will be added to that.
The iPad has a slightly different model. You pay full price for the hardware and get a discounted carrier subscription. The hardware price accounts for expected revenue from sales of music, video and apps from the usage of the device in a semi-exclusive distribution environment.
The iPad of the not-so-distant future will have far less Google centric advertising and far more iAd centric advertising and as a result shift some of the fees through the semi-exclusive distribution environment.
This evolution will lower the total cost of ownership for the device and network and garden for the lowest end users, while premium users will generate the revenues to provide that user base easy access.
The goal is to get low end users to migrate up.
Rocketman