or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Tulkas

Actually, it doesn't sound like AdMob was doing this ad all. It sounds like, as you say, they will be able to capture and transmit this data, once you confirm that they can. The 'bitching and moaning' is about the change that allows any ad firm to collect and transmit this data, as longs as they are not google. As written by Apple, anyone is able to do it, as longs as they do not compete with Apple in the mobile OS space, a la google (or MS).
Strictly speaking, they wouldn't be allowed to collect it for anything other than "serving ads". If they are doing post-analysis on the data, then they are on the honour system for using it strictly for ad targeting. If they are using it for anything else, they are in violation, regardless of if it is Google or flurry or anyone else. If for instance, they use the analyzed data for their sales pitches to potential advertising clients, that is not using it to serve an ad.
Then that would mean that AdMob/Google could still serve the ads, but they would be inferior in terms of being targeted to the end user. iAd, Flurry, etc would be able to, for instance, target an ad at iPad users, but AdMob/Google wouldn't know what ads would be most appropriate for what users/devices.
If the information that Apple allows is useful to Google, outside of serving the ads, what is to stop google from buying it from the independents?
People said the same thing about mobile web browsers. They were around for years. Some people used them, but they never really became primary browsers. Apple changed that. Browsing on a phone is now so commonplace, it seems like everyone has been doing it forever. Same with 'music' phones. There were tonnes of these around before the iPhone, but who really used their phones as their primary MP3 player? Again, Apple changed that. Just because no one else has implemented it...
I would not be surprised to see AT&T roll out new plans some day that limited your 'included' MBs to certain times of time, identically to their daytime/evening minutes for voice and charging you more for 'daytime' data. They could use the identical justification they have used for tethering. What wouldn't surprise me are the people that would accept their explanation as reasonable.
I hope so. One of the things I was looking forward to most was this feature, as I hoped it would allow me to video chat with my kids at home. They are 30 months and 11 months, so they interact much better when it is video than just a phone call. Other than iAd, the rest of the 8/9 feature were pretty aswesome.
You are right they didn't mention it. They did say it would be iPhone 4 to iPhone 4. I hope it will work with iChatAV on the Mac. At the very least, the open sourced it, so as long as the approve apps that are based on it and the standard they are using is compatible with iChat AV, then I imagine someone will release a third party app to address it...or a Mac app that goes the other way.
Looks nice, but sort of surprised it doesn't support iPhone to Mac chatting. That seemed like it would a no brainer. Wifi only is disappointing but is understandable when they have to use AT&T as the standard against which to set the bar for network capability.
I have no doubt in the world that your teacher felt it necessary to have that conversation with you. Things don't seem to have changed much for you since. I am honoured to be your first ignore list entry. I won't add you to mine yet, you are simply too amusing and wouldn't want to miss your gems.Stay classy, Hiro and continue to never let bothersome things like facts get in the ways of your posts(oh wait, you can't read this can you?)
New Posts  All Forums: