or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Tulkas

Not at all. Apple does some great things. But I don't my being a fan blind me to the fact that they are capable of behaving the same as any other company, in some cases. Actually, my being a fan leads me to expect better of them. If I thought they were out to get me, I wouldn't have been purchasing and using their products for 3 decades and I wouldn't have actively 'evangelized' their products to many friends and family that ended up 'converting'. Being an Apple fan...
Actually, a closer analogy would be MS using legalese or technical barriers to hobble Apple software on Windows. If MS were to allow any media software on Windows from any vendor except Apple, who would be required to disable iPhone/iPod/iPad syncing and online media purchases. If MS were able to do that (they really couldn't), it would be illegal only because they are a monopoly. To make your analogy fit, it would be closer to Target allowing anyone to place ads on their...
If they did, do you think it would be approved? Although Google Earth and Google Mobile were approved early on, no recent Google apps have been approved. Latitude and Google Voice were denied. You honestly think their free nav app would be approved? Keep dreaming.
Anonymouse has and shows a tainted/skewed/bitter/paranoid view. You have to learn to take his posts with a gigantic grain of salt. He is, however, a very intelligent person. But he has a huge chip on his shoulder and it seems to distort his perception. If you use the following assumptions with his posts, you will better understand: Apple is always in the right, Google is the earthly embodiment of evil and is actively out to get him.
I guess you are right. They have different names so there must be no similarities. That is the gist of your argument, right? Or is it back to 'nuh uh'. You say there are no parallels. But that really simply shows a willingness to avoid reality.
Actually, there are huge parallels. Putting up barriers to competition instead of competing on merit was something MS was famous for. "____ attempts to bar _____ from their platform to avoid competing with them" and "____ using their clout to pressure partners not to deal with ____" could be headlines from 1995. Instead we see them today. I didn't like it was MS was the one in the headlines, but that sort of behavior was expected of them. Apple was and is better than...
Correct. By definition, it is anti-competitive. Does that mean it is illegal? Probably not. It seems strange that so many people are so disingenuously trying to make this a privacy issue, when Apple's own statements show that it is not. Yes, things like user acknowledgement is for user privacy. Barring AdMob is obviously not. Remember before all the iPod kids came into the Apple world? Apple fans then were all about demanding companies not erect artificial barriers to...
Sorry, I thought your implication was that AdMod was doing it (collecting info without consent) on the iPhone. There hasn't been any claim of this, that I know of..Jobs mentioned only Flurry. If that is the standard on Android, then all ad services are guilty, not just AdMob. But only AdMob is barred from the iPhone (from using device/user info).
I don't think Apple could say they weren't indy anymore, just because they were selling data. They could ban them for inappropriately using the data, since it was specified to only be used for serving/targeting ads and selling it would violate this. Of course, they could do the same to AdMob/google if they used it outside of the stated scope.Right, and then those ads served by competitors would not have access to this info and would be much less valuable. What this means...
I don't think they do. They do have mobile advertising sales, but I think it is mainly web ads targeted at mobile browsers. But, if Apple and Google are in the space, it is a safe bet that MS will want to get in too. This would prohibit them as well, if and when the make a play.
New Posts  All Forums: