iad/other ads cost the consumer

Discussion in 'iPad' started by gjbaxter, Dec 14, 2010.

  1. gjbaxter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2010
    Location:
    Los Altos, CA
    #1
    Does the data downloaded for iads or google ads or any ad platform count against the monthly limit? I.e, are we paying for ad content?
     
  2. Matthew Yohe macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2006
    #2
    Huh, interesting question. I would imagine you are certainly paying for google ads, but it would be nice to hear from Apple on the iAd point.
     
  3. el-John-o, Dec 14, 2010
    Last edited: Dec 14, 2010

    el-John-o macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2010
    Location:
    Missouri
    #3
    After using an iAd supported game that has two iAd banners (slot machine game) on 3G for about 10 minutes, I had a very minute increase in data usage. It was the only app open, all others were closed and I disabled auto-download of e-mail and etc.

    I checked via settings, since there is a delay with the AT&T app. I don't remember the usage but it was minimal.

    In essence, my conclusion was yes, you are charged for it, in the sense that it uses your data your paying for, but it is so minimal I think it's a non-issue. I too, would like to hear Apples comment on it, but it's nothing I would worry about, personally.

    I'm going to re-do my little "trial" here and post exact numbers (previous I did it out of my own curiosity and didn't record the usage)

    -John

    Edit: Using an app called "dataman lite", and closing all other apps, and resetting it to zero, I got 382.2KB of usage after opening, spinning once, and subsequently closing the slots app. This app opens two banner ads, but doesn't appear to ever change them, I didn't tap any ads. That tells me that a banner uses 200KB-ish of data, which is actually more than I thought, which means roughly 5,000 ads per GB, or that each ad is 0.01% of your monthly allotment (assuming the 2GB plan, with the 200MB plan it's 0.1%).

    Still not entirely significant, in my opinion, but all users combined it probably adds up to a significant amount of data. I doubt any of it would change.
     
  4. BaldiMac macrumors 604

    BaldiMac

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2008
    #4
    Of course any data transfer counts toward your limit if you aren't using an unlimited plan on 3G (or wifi for that matter). :confused: What's your point?
     
  5. PBG4 Dude macrumors 68000

    PBG4 Dude

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2007
    #5
    Some things don't count against your quota, like texts from AT&T, etc.
     
  6. el-John-o macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2010
    Location:
    Missouri
    #6
    With the older versions of Windows Mobile, sending crash reports to Microsoft or downloading updates from Microsoft didn't count towards data usage, but I don't think the same situations are true with the iPhone. Text messages don't use data, nor do multimedia messages if you have a messaging plan. It's true, though, if you don't have a messaging plan and pay-per-text, or have a limited number of texts available, a message from AT&T will not count towards that.
     
  7. BaldiMac macrumors 604

    BaldiMac

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2008
    #7
    Okay?

    The OP seemed to be implying that it was unreasonable for AT&T to charge for a data transfer between Apple (or whatever ad provider) and the consumer. I thought maybe I was inferring something that the OP did not intend, so I asked the OP to clarify.
     
  8. Matthew Yohe macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2006
    #8
    Well, for some of the size of the content loaded up in these ads, I can definitely see a push for Apple to somehow subsidize the data on these ads being transferred. It would at least be interesting to see that model at work.
     
  9. HiRez macrumors 603

    HiRez

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    Location:
    Western US
    #9
    For just the normal iAd banners, it should be an extremely minimal amount of data. You're talking about something like 320x40 pixels on the iPhone, compressed that's probably less than 2k (2,000 bytes), and updated at most a few dozen times an hour (probably less, and many of those ads are cached and rotated back in). Now if you actually click on the ad, then you might start getting a significant data hit depending on what's in there (movies, games, etc.). Probably would be good if Apple worked out a way with the carriers to not charge the consumer for that (the advertiser, or Apple, could pay the carrier to cover the costs).
     
  10. maturola macrumors 68040

    maturola

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #10
    Yes

    Yes, it counted, it is DATA, so it does count for your cap. SMS are totally different since they are not transmitted over the data channel. (as like for examples txt send using Google Voice which are data)

    LOL, you think they don't know that??? AT&T is the happiest participant of the whole Ads on App era. Wouldn't wait standing up for a deal like that
     
  11. HiRez macrumors 603

    HiRez

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    Location:
    Western US
    #11
    Well, the point is, if people catch on that their data rates are going up because of ads, they will stop buying ad-supported apps, and stop clicking on ads, Apple hears it from consumers and developers, which eventually comes back to hurt AT&T anyway (they won't get the "secret" revenue anymore and ultimately Apple would put pressure on them to work out a deal). Meaning, it sours the whole operation and no one wins in the end.
     
  12. gjbaxter thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2010
    Location:
    Los Altos, CA
    #12
    Thanks for this investigation and to all the responses. My question popped up due to a news story about the first 'iPad iAd'.. Tron Legacy advertisement, full screen. While I wasn't too worried about the banner ads, this one ain't gonna be so tiny.. they're touting interactivity, etc. Sounds interesting, but expensive.

    AT&T could certainly 'not bill' for data coming from iAd requests, Apple could revenue share with the carriers, etc. They, by default, probably will continue to 'bill the customer' as most of you have pointed out... at least until it becomes a noticeable expense and someone sues them.

    Thanks for all the comments.

     
  13. gjbaxter thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2010
    Location:
    Los Altos, CA
    #13
    As discussed, I don't think 'of course' should necessarily apply. The iAd platform has a framework for full iPad screen and interactive content. I personally don't think that I should be billed for un-requested data content. It's like someone sending you junk mail postage-due.

    But then, I guess that's what TV is, no? It's worth discussing.
     
  14. BaldiMac macrumors 604

    BaldiMac

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2008
    #14
    How is it unrequested? iAds are only present in third party apps that you choose to install. And the full screen ad is only shown if you choose to click on the minimal banner ad.
     
  15. shen macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2003
    #15
    Yeah, I know I never surf to sites that have ads anymore, cause I pay for that data too.... :rolleyes:

    We can't even get a major backlash against AT&T for teathering, he'll we can't get a confessed war criminal to stop wandering the country selling a book he didn't write about a presidency he doesn't remember! You think 2k of some ad for a movie they likely want to go see will get people up in arms? On what planet?

    Sorry, but people are sheep over important issues, and this seems pretty unimportant. I have a hard time seeing that happen.
     

Share This Page