U.S. Government Still Considering Antitrust Investigation of Apple's iAd

[NoSmokingBandit]

This is one of the most tired arguments out there. I own an XBox 360, PS3, Mac Mini, and plenty of other proprietary devices.

Guess what, I can't run a PS3 game on my 360, I can't play Crysis on my Mac, I can't play my Dreamcast games on the PS3. I can't run whatever I want on the devices. When I buy a device I know its limitations, I don't whine about it. People need to come up with something better than, I want to run what I want on what I own.

Theres a substiantial flaw in your argument. You cant run a dreamcast game on a PS3 because its not physically possible. You send a line of Dreamcast code through the Cell and its not going to know what to do with it. On the other hand, if an app is specifially created for the i<device> and the only thing keeping it from running is a sythetic block from apple, there is a whole new debate.

Its not like Sony put measures in place to specifically stop Marvel vs Capcom from running on the ps3. It doesnt run because its not possible. The only thing keeping apps off the iPhone is Steve's hatred for whatever he chooses to hate that day.

Huge difference.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

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.

Some data the would need would be how often is the ad displayed to the number of clicks. They can get the click information but they can not get the displayed information. They will want to know which devises it is appearing on. (again clicks do not feed that infomation)
Location if it is just down to zip codes or just city level so ads can be more targeted. Why would i want to see an ad for a store in maine where i live in Texas. not like it is any use to me.

That is lot of information take can be collected to help make better targetted ads later on.

All of that with out any private information because they use it to form demographics. I know on my iPod I tend to block location data from being given out but that is me. It has to request your permission to send it out every time.
It is lots of little pieces of information that add up when they have large numbers of them and it forms a pattern.

 

[infowarfare]

The only thing keeping apps off the iPhone is Steve's hatred for whatever he chooses to hate that day.

Huge difference.

You are missing the point of whats going on or purposely spreading FUD. I'll state it again in case any one missed it (since most of you people don't bother reading the truth):

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 or have been using all along) 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 separate 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.

Simple as that.

 

[ChazUK]

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!

I do understand what you are saying and I do think that Apple have come up with a good solution for advertising on the iPhone.

I'll use the it sucks because it closes your app ruse in a different example.

In the past, people have criticized the iPhone's notification system for taking you out of your app to reply to emails/SMS's. Do you know what people's defence of this was? "If the app[/url] was developed properly the app should save its state and lt you jump back in after replying" blaming the developer.

Now all of a sudden, being kicked out of your app for to benefit a developer is the most evil thing ever and people are blaming AdMob for the less than stellar solution for advertising.

I genuinely hope whatever happens, developers aren't made to suffer by reduced ad click-throughs on whichever ad platform they chose to go with because it's those developers who deserve the most support for what they do for our entertainment.

 

[calderone]

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.

You haven't responded to me yet, but you are assuming that they are getting their data in the way Apple is now blocking.

And while data mining is important, it is in many ways absolutely unnecessary. You mention demographics, that data is already available in the sales demographics of the iPhone.

You already know who is buying them and you know what ads should be put out there.

The same is true for online ads. They don't know anything about me (unless they are grabbing stuff from my cookies). But they do know that I am on this website and that I like technology. So I see technology ads or ads that relate to keywords in the currently displayed page.

The current ads works in the same way. They know I am playing this game or using this recipe app so they give me ads related to those things because they can assume that I may be interested in these other things.

Now, the question is can they still get this information? Such as what app the ad is being displayed in? Honestly, I can't see who they couldn't. But again, this is all based on assumption. Until AdMob or someone else gives us specifics of what they cannot get, we can't say they are now incapable of doing what they have been.

Some data the would need would be how often is the ad displayed to the number of clicks. They can get the click information but they can not get the displayed information. They will want to know which devises it is appearing on. (again clicks do not feed that infomation)
Location if it is just down to zip codes or just city level so ads can be more targeted. Why would i want to see an ad for a store in maine where i live in Texas. not like it is any use to me.

That is lot of information take can be collected to help make better targetted ads later on.

All of that with out any private information because they use it to form demographics. I know on my iPod I tend to block location data from being given out but that is me. It has to request your permission to send it out every time.
It is lots of little pieces of information that add up when they have large numbers of them and it forms a pattern.

I see you responded now.

Again, we don't know what information the can't get, but they can get data in other ways.

Device info? They can get this from the User agent of the browser. If they click, they are headed to the browser, so we know they clicked and we can get data from the browser.

Location information? IP addresses can often give that information. Which is why I often see adds for Chicago and IL based businesses when browsing the web. When I can't determine where they are (maybe because they are using cell data) I can display something else.

Your assumption seems to be that they can get all of this data upfront and target the ads. Quite the contrary. You often don't have enough data, but from the data you do have you can target ads, then with the data you collect you can target further.

I again contend that we simply don't have enough information to make a judgment. However, Apple is not blocking ads from competitors, they are blocking certain analytics. In addition, we are making the assumption that Apple is collecting the data that they stopping others from collecting.

Given that Apple has sold millions of dollars in advertising, I think it is safe to guess that they don't need that data as the data they do have (the demographics of iPhone buyers) is enough to sell advertising.

 

[capsfan1978]

p.s. Apple is turning into a bunch of goofs. Its funny how they try and brainwash us into thinking ads are going to be 'cool'......and 'interesting'......since when is watching ad a luxury? haha I have never enjoyed watching ads during a tv show I am watching...not even once. Why would it be enjoyable on a phone?

What about trailers before the feature? Sometimes that's the best part of going to the movies.

 

[infowarfare]

You are missing the point of whats going on or purposely spreading FUD. I'll state it again in case any one missed it (since most of you people don't bother reading the truth):

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 or have been using all along) 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 separate 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.

Simple as that.

I do understand what you are saying and I do think that Apple have come up with a good solution for advertising on the iPhone.

I'll use the it sucks because it closes your app ruse in a different example.

In the past, people have criticized the iPhone's notification system for taking you out of your app to reply to emails/SMS's. Do you know what people's defence of this was? "If the app[/url] was developed properly the app should save its state and lt you jump back in after replying" blaming the developer.

Now all of a sudden, being kicked out of your app for to benefit a developer is the most evil thing ever and people are blaming AdMob for the less than stellar solution for advertising.

I genuinely hope whatever happens, developers aren't made to suffer by reduced ad click-throughs on whichever ad platform they chose to go with because it's those developers who deserve the most support for what they do for our entertainment.

But Steve (at the D8) conference readily admits, they're only human, they make mistakes and if the market says something isn't working right, they'll change it. That's why they are adding multitasking, that's why they hired back Rick Dillinger from Palm (who created the better notification system for WebOS) they are making changes, moving forward, they always do.

And it does seem this iAd model will benefit the developer greatly (with 60% revenue!) Did you see the companies they got lined up for iAd? Developers (myself included) will be VERY happy. Who's not happy? Google of course, hence them paying off a Government agency (sorry, "lobbying") to investigate, knowing nothing will be found but hoping the publicity will "tarnish" Apple's reputation in the media and with the public... that's pretty dirty pool. But typical of companies like Google and Adobe, which is why Apple is finally fighting back.

 

[WilliamLondon]

Exactly. Apple desperately appears to want to be the new ****** on the block ala Microsoft years ago. Good. Go after them and go after them hard.

And as a consumer, I despise Apple for wasting time on something as stupid as iAds and a high res screen when the iPhone is lacking in so many other areas that customers would use.

By customers, you mean *you*. Customers are lining up for this device, I don't think they're as worried about the lack of features you claim the device has as *you* are. I'm just saying.

 

[NoSmokingBandit]

You are missing the point of whats going on or purposely spreading FUD. I'll state it again in case any one missed it (since most of you people don't bother reading the truth):

You completely missed the point of what i was saying, so lets all just chill for a few. I was simply countering the BS that Apple can do whatever they want because PS3 games wont run on my pc. Thats a comparison that is inherently flawed. I am fully aware that iAds is a choice for devs, and i never implied otherwise. Try reading my posts before you get all jumpy and overprotective.

 

[ChazUK]

And it does seem this iAd model will benefit the developer greatly (with 60% revenue!) Did you see the companies they got lined up for iAd? Developers (myself included) will be VERY happy.

I could never disagree with that.

If developers (yourself included) get more reward for your work then screw both Apple and Google. Those big cats make enough money to waste fighting each other.

 

[WilliamLondon]

This is one of the most tired arguments out there. I own an XBox 360, PS3, Mac Mini, and plenty of other proprietary devices.

Guess what, I can't run a PS3 game on my 360, I can't play Crysis on my Mac, I can't play my Dreamcast games on the PS3. I can't run whatever I want on the devices. When I buy a device I know its limitations, I don't whine about it. People need to come up with something better than, I want to run what I want on what I own.

All the ranting is just a bunch of willy waving done by a bunch of techies who actually want these devices so badly. I mean, why would you get upset about a device you didn't want not supporting features you really wanted? What would be the point in that?

 

[infowarfare]

You completely missed the point of what i was saying, so lets all just chill for a few. I was simply countering the BS that Apple can do whatever they want because PS3 games wont run on my pc. Thats a comparison that is inherently flawed. I am fully aware that iAds is a choice for devs, and i never implied otherwise. Try reading my posts before you get all jumpy and overprotective.

Sorry, I was jumpy and on a roll... but seriously, people are making way more of this than what it really is. I listed my bullet points of exactly what is going on and I hope people take the time to read it as it should put an end to this debate (unless people are purposely spreading FUD, not saying you this time, again, I apologize.)

For posterity's sake, I'll list again what exactly is going on so people can understand:

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 other words, 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.

It is as simple as that.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

You haven't responded to me yet, but you are assuming that they are getting their data in the way Apple is now blocking.

And while data mining is important, it is in many ways absolutely unnecessary. You mention demographics, that data is already available in the sales demographics of the iPhone.

You already know who is buying them and you know what ads should be put out there.

The same is true for online ads. They don't know anything about me (unless they are grabbing stuff from my cookies). But they do know that I am on this website and that I like technology. So I see technology ads or ads that relate to keywords in the currently displayed page.

The current ads works in the same way. They know I am playing this game or using this recipe app so they give me ads related to those things because they can assume that I may be interested in these other things.

Now, the question is can they still get this information? Such as what app the ad is being displayed in? Honestly, I can't see who they couldn't. But again, this is all based on assumption. Until AdMob or someone else gives us specifics of what they cannot get, we can't say they are now incapable of doing what they have been.

Here is information off your computer that is useful when browsing the web that they want.
What browser are you running?
What OS are you running?
What is your screen Resolution? (old enough useful)
What is your CPU?
What is your location? (based off IP they can get your down to city level)
That is just some example. Now all that information can also be spoofed. I know on blackberries for example it is possible to have the name of the device and model numbers be fake to what ever you want.
On the stuff flurry got Apple screwed up big time. They should of spoof the info for the prototype devices to be that of ones currently on the market. Apple screwed up on that one and they are mad that they got caught.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

I see you responded now.

Again, we don't know what information the can't get, but they can get data in other ways.

Device info? They can get this from the User agent of the browser. If they click, they are headed to the browser, so we know they clicked and we can get data from the browser.

Location information? IP addresses can often give that information. Which is why I often see adds for Chicago and IL based businesses when browsing the web. When I can't determine where they are (maybe because they are using cell data) I can display something else.

Your assumption seems to be that they can get all of this data upfront and target the ads. Quite the contrary. You often don't have enough data, but from the data you do have you can target ads, then with the data you collect you can target further.

I again contend that we simply don't have enough information to make a judgment. However, Apple is not blocking ads from competitors, they are blocking certain analytics. In addition, we are making the assumption that Apple is collecting the data that they stopping others from collecting.

Given that Apple has sold millions of dollars in advertising, I think it is safe to guess that they don't need that data as the data they do have (the demographics of iPhone buyers) is enough to sell advertising.

Missed you response.

They can collect that infomation on a click but only on that.
The other information ad companies would want to pull from the ads being displayed in aps they can not get unless it is clicked threw. They need information when it is displayed, how often is the ad display to when it is click.

All the same information they collect on click they need when it is displayed to compare the 2. From what I am reading apple is blocking the display part of it for analitics which is just as important if not more important than the click data. click data is easy to grab. Display data is harder and it is needed to compare with clicked data.

 

[tkingart]

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.

It is not technically impossible to run a PS3 game on an XBOX 360, they are both created on a Windows PC and targeted to their respectful platforms; using libraries with the assistance of a developers version of the systems- known simply as bricks, which are hooked up to Windows PC's and connect via a launch daemon. A lot of game development studios have their nightly builds setup to target multiple platforms using software automation processes, while others share their resources and have different studios focus on each platform. XB360 and PS3 usually at the same studio, and Nintendo Wii outsourced.

XBox360 games and PS3 are more likely to be made to work on each others platform, than say either of them on a Nintendo Wii. So a better comparison would be to say, a PS3 game to work on a Nintendo Wii (though not the other way around.)

As for the investigations, they aren't out to prevent competition, they are to prevent anti-competitive behavior. Using a TOS to block out specific competition regardless of the reason(s), is anti-competitive behavior no matter what you call it. Apple Headquarters is in the United States of America, and is subject to US Antitrust Law. If Apple is doing nothing wrong, then it doesn't matter, and there is no reason to get upset over it. Google was just put through the same scrutiny.

By the way, I hate ads whatever the case may be. This post made me think of one thing though, when is the iAd blocker going to be out?

 

[pdjudd]

when is the iAd blocker going to be out?

That won't stop ads in people's apps - Apps are sand-boxed.

 

[NoSmokingBandit]

Sorry, I was jumpy and on a roll... but seriously, people are making way more of this than what it really is. I listed my bullet points of exactly what is going on and I hope people take the time to read it as it should put an end to this debate (unless people are purposely spreading FUD, not saying you this time, again, I apologize.)

I understand, happens to me all the time

 

[calderone]

Here is information off your computer that is useful when browsing the web that they want.
What browser are you running?
What OS are you running?
What is your screen Resolution? (old enough useful)
What is your CPU?
What is your location? (based off IP they can get your down to city level)
That is just some example. Now all that information can also be spoofed. I know on blackberries for example it is possible to have the name of the device and model numbers be fake to what ever you want.
On the stuff flurry got Apple screwed up big time. They should of spoof the info for the prototype devices to be that of ones currently on the market. Apple screwed up on that one and they are mad that they got caught.

Well no. The analytics were coming from apps, not the browser.

The quote from D8:

They were getting this info by getting developers to put software in their apps that sent info back to this company!

http://www.engadget.com/2010/06/01/steve-jobs-live-from-d8/

Missed you response.

They can collect that infomation on a click but only on that.
The other information ad companies would want to pull from the ads being displayed in aps they can not get unless it is clicked threw. They need information when it is displayed, how often is the ad display to when it is click.

All the same information they collect on click they need when it is displayed to compare the 2. From what I am reading apple is blocking the display part of it for analitics which is just as important if not more important than the click data. click data is easy to grab. Display data is harder and it is needed to compare with clicked data.

Display data, as you have shown above, can be grabbed from the browser which I how I would assume they are getting their data now. But again, how useful is that data when you are already targeting a platform where much of the data is known?

 

[wreckshop]

No, they made it so that you can only run their games on their system. It's simply not possible because they made it this way. If they wanted to, they could make it so that each of their systems could run the same games and still compete, like how different PC's do. How has this "anti-competitive" behavior stifled competition in the gaming market?

Simply not possible? ever hear of multiplatform games? exclusive are that way because of developer choice

 

[tkatz]

Coke owns the trucks. You own the iPhone. You should be allowed to run whatever you want on it.

Wouldn't this be more like Pepsi running an Ad for some one elses product on a Coke can, and then gathering information about where you bought the drink, which lot number it came from, which model can it is, what type of metal the can is made of, the molecular structure of the can and various other Coke can specific stats?

Am I missing something, because it's my understanding that AdMob is still allowed to run ads on the iDevices, they're just not aloud to gather certain device specifics?

 

[macsmurf]

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.

It is as simple as that.

Except it is not. If this was all Apple did, iAd would compete on pretty much equal terms with everybody else.

However, they are also preventing Google and Microsoft from profiling the users which hampers their ability to target ads. In other words, ads will be clicked less often which means the ads will be less valuable to advertisers which mean they won't pay as much for them.

Apple, on the other hand, are free to profile the users, thereby making their product more attractive to advertisers which means $$$.

So besides making what seems to be a slick product, they are also stacking the deck heavily in their favor. Therein lies the grub.

 

[calderone]

Wouldn't this be more like Pepsi running an Ad for some one elses product on a Coke can, and then gathering information about where you bought the drink, which lot number it came from, which model can it is, what type of metal the can is made of, the molecular structure of the can and various other Coke can specific stats?

Am I missing something, because it's my understanding that AdMob is still allowed to run ads on the iDevices, they're just not aloud to gather certain device specifics?

No, you are correct.

The question is now what data do they need that they won't be able to get.

And is Apple using this data that they are not allowing others to get?

Except it is not. If this was all Apple did, iAd would compete on pretty much equal terms with everybody else.

However, they are also preventing Google and Microsoft from profiling the users which hampers their ability to target ads. In other words, ads will be clicked less often which means the will be less valuable to advertisers which mean they won't pay as much for them.

Apple, on the other hand, is free to profile the users, thereby making their product more attractive to advertisers which means $$$.

So besides making what seems to be a slick product, they are also stacking the deck heavily in their favor. Therein lies the grub.

What profiling can they really do? I simply don't see what kind of data they need that they cannot get or don't already have.

We know it is an iPhone. We know the demographics of iPhone buyers. That is all you need to know to target your ads. You know the typical age, sex and possibly income.

Going one step further, if you know the type of app the ad is being displayed in, you can use that to bring up specific ads.

I really want to know what data you think they need that they can't get. This is a genuine question, because they haven't really said how this affects them. Until we know that, I don't see how we can say this hinders them in any way.

 

[WilliamLondon]

There simply is no approval process for Android.

That's not true. They screen for malicious apps and even remove apps from the app store when they discover something they didn't catch up front. Some draw the line in one location, Apple in another, but the lines are drawn by both.

 

[capsfan1978]

That's not true. They screen for malicious apps and even remove apps from the app store when they discover something they didn't catch up front. Some draw the line in one location, Apple in another, but the lines are drawn by both.

Android Market has a limited approval process. 3rd party unsigned apps do not and can be installed on an Android device by checking a box on a preference/settings menu. No jailbreaking or other manipulation required.

 

[ChazUK]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_0 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8A293 Safari/6531.22.7)

There simply is no approval process for Android.

That's not true. They screen for malicious apps and even remove apps from the app store when they discover something they didn't catch up front. Some draw the line in one location, Apple in another, but the lines are drawn by both.

All nice but you aren't restricted to distribute apps through Android Market.

Please try to think outside of Apple's way of doing things.