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.
U.S. Government Still Considering Antitrust Investigation of Apple's iAd
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
So there are zero ads on Google products now? Are you saying that there never will be? With Google, Ad's are a guarenteed certainty - it's the reality of things.I don't think that there's going to be ads everywhere... but if there is I may switch to android (*dies a little again*)
As long as ads are profitable to developers, they will be used - that is not particular to any one platform.
I don't think that there's going to be ads everywhere... but if there is I may switch to android (*dies a little again*
How does this even make sense? Let's look at the facts:
1. Ads exist today in App Store applications. Many of those are free apps.
2. Apple is introducing an alternative to the current ads integrate better and provide the user with a overall better experience.
So, ads exist now and Apple is giving an alternative. What possibly makes you think that there may be "ads everywhere?" I do agree that they may increase given the simplicity of adding them. However, you will likely not see ads in paid apps, only free apps. For those that do add ads to paid apps, the developers will quickly learn based on feedback and lost sales.
Now, what I find even more hilarious is that you think you will be safe switching to Android. Did you happen to miss the fact that Google just bought AdMob? Do you not think Google will also make it easy for developers to include advertisements?
It sounds like you are saying: "If I see a lot of ads, I am switching to another platform that will probably have lots of ads too! And I am doing this against my better judgement!"
Where is the bad if they were. Seriously.
Developers don't put ads in apps to make a political statement. This isn't a bunch of tweens with their Team Edward/Team Jacob stuff. It's about money. So all else being equal, it isn't going to matter to them if the nickel each time someone opens the app comes from Google or Apple.
And for the user, we have privacy concerns not to mention it is hella annoying when an ad cuts off an app to send you to Safari, especially when there's not yet multitasking.
And the companies buying the ads will go where the most money can be made, sometimes even with more than one company.So they won't be worried.
Not really a great example. Because the Microsoft thing was about using one power to play games in a different market.
Apple isn't really playing in a mobile ads market because iAds is tied to Apple's devices.
If there was iAds for Android etc then you might be able to make a market claim.
And that's not a problem. Monopolies are not illegal. Only how you got there and what you do afterwards. That's where Microsoft got tripped. They used power in one market to try to strong arm another for their advantage
Not at all. If a developer really doesn't want to use iAds they don't have to. So long as they stay within certain guidelines. Which seem to be rather clear.
No. A singular store for a singular device is not a monopoly. Like with the ads, if the store was for all devices then you could claim a market.
Then that's false advertising. Whole different ball game.
The trouble for many is that they view this as a 'buying a house' game. You bought the house so you can do what you want with it. You can paint it. You can tear it down in the middle of the night etc.
Well no you can't. There are rules. There are laws about noise during certain periods, permits you have to get to tear it down. If it is in a historical neighborhood there might be laws about painting or changing the exterior. Sure you could go ahead and do it (just like you jailbreak or unlock your phone) but you will potentially face penalties and "It's my house" won't get you out of them.
Or if you want to take it a step further, a cell phone etc is not a house but a Condo. When you buy it you agree to certain rules, certain fees etc. You are given them to read before you go ahead. If you continue the sale, you agree contractually to following the rules. If you don't like the rules, go buy a different Condo.
When you buy a cell phone etc you sign certain rules. When you buy software, you agree to certain rules. When you sign up to develop apps, you agree to certain rules.
It's the nature of the game and whining won't change that.
Again, SO many clueless people in this forum trying to spread false information because of their (truly unfounded) Apple hate. Here's the truth:
Most American CEO of major companies like Exxon and GM have a yearly salary of $2 Million dollars PLUS a yearly bonus of $20 Million, regardless of if they make a profit or not (and in GM's case, they went bankrupt becasue of it, they had no incentive to make a good product when their CEO knew he would get paid his huge salary and bonus anyway.)
Steve Job's yearly salary is $1 a year. Yes, that's One Dollar a year, plus stock options based on if his company makes a profit (if they don't make a profit, he doesn't get a bonus) this is why Apple strives to make innovative products each year and they do, if they didn't, people wouldn't buy them (case in point, the Cube.)
And why isn't anyone bashing on Exxon, the most profitable American company who, thanks to their shady deals with the U.S. government, doesn't have to pay one cent in taxes to America!? None of the American Oil Companies pay taxes. Yet, when you fill up your car, for example, here in Los Angeles at $3.50 per gallon, that includes a sales tax, a state regulatory tax (for the oil refineries) a federal tax (for who knows what) and pure profit for Exxon who doesn't pay ANY tax to the U.S. (Apple pays their taxes, so does Google and Microsoft and every other American Company.) Their [Exxon] excuse is since they "manufacturer" their oil overseas, they shouldn't have to pay taxes here in America! Really? Since Apple "manufacturers" their products overseas (China) they shouldn't either, but they do.
So yes, Exxon is PURE and illegal greed because every U.S. politician has been paid off by the oil companies (they call it "lobbying" and it should be illegal) THAT's where people's anger should be directed at, oil companies that are destroying the environment, creating wars world wide and illegally profiting from it.... and instead you whining Apple hating trolls want to throw a fit about Apple not wanting to let your private user data (and their private device data) go to any advertiser!?
Pathetic.
Exactly. Please... Everyone read this. It's not even interpretation.
Would it be alright for Windows to leverage their PC market share to create BingAds and not allow you to install any programs that use any other advertising service? No way. The smartphone market is one that Apple has a very large control over.
I believe they're being looked into for the way iTunes works too. Good there too. This is all important for consumers.
Apple started kinda small so it never was a big deal, but with a bigger company you have much more responsibility. Apple needs to accept that.
You are completely wrong. You can use other ad services - it is about data mining.
First off, Apple isn't blocking AdMob ads, just them culling information and giving it back to Google. Secondly MS is intentionally blocking PS3 games because they develop their proprietary system. They only want games developed for their system played on it, all the gaming companies are like that.
Thank you for showing and proving you have no clue about how Antitrust works.
A company does no need to have a monopoly to be anticompetitive, nor be busted by the FCC.
All they need is enough power to heavily influence the market. Either to force players out of the market or prevent new ones from entering. Apple has that kind of power with what it welds with the app store, iphone ect.
This action they are doing is clearly to take power they hold in one market and force players out of another. Apple is an example of a company that is to chicken to fight on even footing. They are to afraid to see if iAd could stand on its own merit. So what do they do. They block the other big players from entering.
That is what they are getting busted for. Remember the rules on a major player are different than the rules applied to a minor player. Minor player can not effect the a market like a major player can.
Trust that the goverment has busted before for example was the oil railroad companies up. They used one market to effect another and they got busted for it big time.
Microsoft is intentionally designing their console so only 360 compatible games can be played on it. So yes, they're actively pursuing a path to lock out the competition.
Again, SO many clueless people in this forum trying to spread false information because of their (truly unfounded) Apple hate. Here's the truth:
Most American CEO of major companies like Exxon and GM have a yearly salary of $2 Million dollars PLUS a yearly bonus of $20 Million, regardless of if they make a profit or not (and in GM's case, they went bankrupt becasue of it, they had no incentive to make a good product when their CEO knew he would get paid his huge salary and bonus anyway.)
Steve Job's yearly salary is $1 a year. Yes, that's One Dollar a year, plus stock options based on if his company makes a profit (if they don't make a profit, he doesn't get a bonus) this is why Apple strives to make innovative products each year and they do, if they didn't, people wouldn't buy them (case in point, the Cube.)
And why isn't anyone bashing on Exxon, the most profitable American company who, thanks to their shady deals with the U.S. government, doesn't have to pay one cent in taxes to America!? None of the American Oil Companies pay taxes. Yet, when you fill up your car, for example, here in Los Angeles at $3.50 per gallon, that includes a sales tax, a state regulatory tax (for the oil refineries) a federal tax (for who knows what) and pure profit for Exxon who doesn't pay ANY tax to the U.S. (Apple pays their taxes, so does Google and Microsoft and every other American Company.) Their [Exxon] excuse is since they "manufacturer" their oil overseas, they shouldn't have to pay taxes here in America! Really? Since Apple "manufacturers" their products overseas (China) they shouldn't either, but they do.
So yes, Exxon is PURE and illegal greed because every U.S. politician has been paid off by the oil companies (they call it "lobbying" and it should be illegal) THAT's where people's anger should be directed at, oil companies that are destroying the environment, creating wars world wide and illegally profiting from it.... and instead you whining Apple hating trolls want to throw a fit about Apple not wanting to let your private user data (and their private device data) go to any advertiser!?
Your pathetic.
Over the past 25 years, oil companies directly paid or remitted more than $2.2 trillion in taxes, after adjusting for inflation, to federal and state governments—including excise taxes, royalty payments and state and federal corporate income taxes. That amounts to more than three times what they earned in profits during the same period, according to the latest numbers from the Bureau of Economic Analysis and U.S. Department of Energy.
These figures do not include local property taxes, state sales and severance taxes and on-shore royalty payments.
Oil Industry Taxes Have Outpaced Oil Industry Profits Since 1977.
Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Energy Information Administration.
copied from http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/1168.html
Attachments
ads are pretty worthless if there is no data to back them up. Ads need to be targeted and they need to know about clicks, what they got and so on.
That isn't what the terms are saying. The terms say you can't collect analytics. It doesn't say "We are blocking ads from competing companies."
Now, analytics are obviously important, but Apple is simply saying you can't collect this data if you are X or Y. AdMob ads can still be included (hell they still are in apps right now and presumably working, right?) they simply can't collect certain kinds of data.
But please, show me where Apple is explicitly blocking ads from competing agencies.
How are these terms affecting ads that are on the platform today. Have they been rendered useless?
Why should they be investigated. If Apple is ingenious enough to cause us to want to pay $300, or more, for a portable Billboard......
If we're dumb enough to do that, why should the Government care? Apple is just trying to make more money.
If we're dumb enough to do that, why should the Government care? Apple is just trying to make more money.
But the analytics are by far more important to those companies than ads themselves. With out analytics to back up the ads it is really hard to sell them and show that they are working. It is useful for targeted data and to know how often the ads are click on and so on.
You are turning into the biggest troll, or, you are just a dumb 14 year old kid that doesn't have an understanding of what this is all about, but let me try to explain in simple terms (not that it will do any good with you it seems):
1. Developers have the choice to put ads in their apps or not. Many of them (that make free apps) have already been putting ads in their apps, since day one.
2. Most of those ads suck because when you click on them, the ad takes you out of your app and to the browser, ruining your gaming experience.
3. On top of that, Apple found that a analytical company called Flurry who paid developers to use their collection tool in their apps, was taking private user data and device data from the apps without YOUR permission or without you even knowing it! Strictly against Apple's terms of use. In otherwords, you ALREADY were using an app that had [crappy] ads that took you to a browser and in some cases, whether you used the ad or not, the app itself was sending data back to Flurry, like who you are, where you are, what device you were using, etc.
So Apple stepped in and did two things:
a) Created iAds as a CHOICE for developers to use IF THEY WANT (they don't have to, they can still use whatever other ad company they want) and iAds promises to be a better user experience because it won't take you out of your app and it's built into the iOS so you don't need to use a seperate tool to create the ad.
b) They are limiting what data gets sent to the advertisers from any ads, including their own iAds so the advertisers will know your general demographics (i.e., what app you are using) but not private, personal information about you or your device.
How hard is this for you trolls to understand? Nothing "anti-Trust" at all about any of this! If you don't get this by now, then you are all purposely spreading FUD and you need to get out and get a life instead!
I keep seeing this and this is only caused by issues with iPhone OS (of old might I add).
On Android you can click on an ad which will start the browser, view it's content and simply hit the back button to go straight back to the app.
How this is Admob's fault I have no idea.
Nope, you're wrong. Don't believe that site (it's false misinformation for the public) my brother happens to work on the inside with the oil companies and he tells me what really has been going on behind closed doors.... for example, regardless of whatever "green" initiative the Government here talks about or slowly rolls out, they have "undisclosed" contracts with the Oil Companies to continue to drill until the year 2023, regardless of anything else... you'll see (I don't expect most people to know this so I won't call you pathetic in this case.)
The real question is what type of data can't they get and what data they need to sell the ads.
They can get clicks. Apple can't block the recognition of click events.
In addition, the current ads that are in apps take you to a browser. A lot of data can be collected here and I would imagine that is where they are collecting most of the data. Can Apple stop this data? No.
In reality, I think this just gets Admob/Google from building a solution like iAds for the iPhone. They will simply have to rely on the current system.
Now, without knowing what type of data they can't get to, no one here can really speak to how the terms truly affect companies like AdMob. And since the AdMob CEO did not discuss specifics, we don't have enough information to make a judgment.
But based on what I have read, this really just stops them from creating an iAd like system for the iOS platform. But again, I would need to know what data they are collecting that they can't get from elsewhere.
Well, how isn't it? Why are they not using UIWebView? Tons of apps are able to display web content in app and allow you to switch back to the app with no disruption.
They can achieve this today without the "multitasking" of iOS 4.
You are missing the point, every one here is complaining "ads suck" (in general.) One of the reasons ads suck on ANY platform, is because it takes you away from your app to a browser (regardless of who is serving the ads to you.) Period. Apple's solution is to come out with a ad engine (iAd) that is slick and interactive and doesn't disrupt your app experience (as much) and now all of a sudden the trolls are coming out saying "zOmG, Apple is going to have ads everywhere and no other advertiser is going to be allowed on ipHone, AntiTrust! AntiTrust!" It's all bullsh*t!
nearly useless then. It would be like putting random ads out in hopes some one from your target audience would see it. For example why would you put an ad for.
It would be like showing an ad targeted for 10 year boys are the 10 o'clock news. Now they might get some 10 year old boys who might see the ad but they will mostly be wasting money on the fact that really no one is watching of the group that the ad is targeting. But if they show the same ad during afternoon cartoons they would hit a lot of their target.
In everything like TV, magazines ect they look at what that group of people is normally interested in and puts ads that get their attention and applies to them. You need data and alalitizes to know that information. That data mining ins many ways is very important.
The clicks are what tells them that the ads are working.