or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › FTC approves Google-AdMob deal, cites competition from Apple's iAd
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

FTC approves Google-AdMob deal, cites competition from Apple's iAd - Page 2

post #41 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

That is one of the most amazing thing about today's marketplace. Vaporware is just as good as the real thing.

Google was able to use vaporware to convince the FTC that there is competition in the market today.

Adobe has convinced 90% of the press that Apple is being evil by banning a product that doesn't even exist.

When the iPad came out, people were talking about how much better the HP slate or Courier were.

What ever happened to people talking about REAL products?

it's only vapourware if the product doesn't exist. iAd has been demoed as a product and apple has shopped it around to clients. NOT vapourware.
post #42 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tofino View Post

it's only vapourware if the product doesn't exist. iAd has been demoed as a product and apple has shopped it around to clients. NOT vapourware.

Is there anyone using it in the real world? No.

FTC just made a major decision based on a vendor promise - which is what I said.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #43 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by ilogic View Post

Have no fear, Google turns everything it touches into mediocrity. The fact that it will compete with Apple is a very good thing in this case.

So many people today settle for mediocrity and fake impersonations that a free or lower-cost substitute is greatly considered by them. It's like Walmart's Great Value brand. They make mostly bad-tasting fakes of brand-name products that are most of the time cheaper, but far worse tasting. People first buy it because it's cheaper, and then they buy it just because it's Walmart brand. I've seen people realize that the GV product is more expensive than a brand name product and just chose the GV one because they assume either they made a mistake in calculation, or they're now more comfortable trusting GV for inexpensive products. I can't stand their foods and shy away at the white and blue packaging, but it still sells--lowering other people's expectations of what "good food" is at the same time. I recognize Google is largely mediocre (or rather always in Beta to me--lots of glitches), it still scares me that they are putting so much stuff out there that people continue to gobble up. That said, being on a family plan on Verizon, my next phone (this Sept.) will probably be an Android phone; because the iPhone is not on Verizon, I cannot afford the extra cost for AT&T, I could either get a dumbphone or a smartphone, and only Android handsets have a few versions that don't require a data plan, unlike Blackberry, Palm, and some others.
GIGO. The truth in all of life.
Reply
GIGO. The truth in all of life.
Reply
post #44 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Is there anyone using it in the real world? No.

FTC just made a major decision based on a vendor promise - which is what I said.

FTC didn't base their decision just based on a vendor promise or vaporware. They contacted some developers and talked to us about what we are doing with advertising in the marketplace. I had a 30-45 minute phone conference with two FTC representatives about this a few weeks ago.

Good or bad, the internet is the freest market we have and stepping in by preventing Google from buying AdMod would be wrong. Just as the FTC forcing Apple to implement Flash on their iPhone platform would be wrong. Let the market work it out. If you don't like Google you have other choices out there.
PocketMoney for your iPhone
www.catamount.com
Reply
PocketMoney for your iPhone
www.catamount.com
Reply
post #45 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by HardyNH View Post

Good or bad, the internet is the freest market we have and stepping in by preventing Google from buying AdMod would be wrong. Just as the FTC forcing Apple to implement Flash on their iPhone platform would be wrong. Let the market work it out. If you don't like Google you have other choices out there.

There's a huge difference. Apple doesn't have monopoly control of anything. If you don't want Apple products, it's easy enough to avoid them.

Google, OTOH, has a lock on advertising on the Internet - and is well on its way to controlling the entire Internet. They've shown an incredible lack of respect for others' intellectual property and for privacy rights. Allowing Google to swallow a competitor is a huge, huge mistake.

Claiming that iAds will somehow prevent any harm is a huge mistake and based on nothing more than speculation. Even if they did talk with developers, it's still speculation until people start using it and it gains significant market share.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #46 of 58
I understand the concept of iAd...but I'm worried about how this will work once it's in use. For free apps, it makes sense but also in paid apps? Developers will want to make as much money as possible, and include ads in paid apps. My fear is that once this goes live, your going to see something like this in a paid app reviews..."I paid $1.99 for this and the ads are obtrusive" or "I paid $1.99 for this and its littered with ads" and so on...Granted, $1.99 or whatever isn't a lot of money but I worry about the perception this may bring about...
post #47 of 58
So something that doesn't even exist yet can compete with Google who has 70% of the market?
post #48 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by OnePotato View Post

I eagerly await the day when I can buy the Googleos brand breakfast cereal. I, for one, welcome our Google overlords.

Google the flamethrower!
post #49 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by shapesNforms View Post

I understand the concept of iAd...but I'm worried about how this will work once it's in use. For free apps, it makes sense but also in paid apps? Developers will want to make as much money as possible, and include ads in paid apps. My fear is that once this goes live, your going to see something like this in a paid app reviews..."I paid $1.99 for this and the ads are obtrusive" or "I paid $1.99 for this and its littered with ads" and so on...Granted, $1.99 or whatever isn't a lot of money but I worry about the perception this may bring about...

That's entirely up to the developer.

Your best guide is the way things work today. Many apps come with a free version that is supported by ads or a paid version without ads. While it's POSSIBLE that people will start putting ads into their paid apps, I don't think it's all that likely - at least not for the foreseeable future.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #50 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


The commission issued a statement Friday saying that Apple's move to launch its own advertising network "overshadowed" concerns of antitrust issues in Google's acquisition of AdMob.



Wow. What a blunder by apple. They usually think strategically, but with 20/20 hindsight, they would have waited several seeks before announcing iAd.

Oops.
post #51 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damn_Its_Hot View Post

Didn't realize that Adobe was in the advertising biz.

It doesn't matter. An enemy is an enemy. At least in some people's view, apparently.
post #52 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post

Yup -- the market is evolving very quickly and I think Apple is a very credible competitor. Plus Microsoft is waiting in the wings, and even though they are incredibly late to the party, I'm sure they will have an ad component to their mobile strategy, and I think their mobile strategy isn't the completely lost cause that it might appear (just because IT loves MS the way Homer loves donuts).

So than, are you predicting great success for WinPhone 7?

I'm trying to keep an open mind, but I see no big advantages yet, and the usual disadvantages of a new platform (lack of software and other ecosystem niceties, more bugs than mature software, etc).

But you think it will be a hit in the Enterprise market? Interesting. I've kind of written off Microsoft's mobile efforts, and I have little interest in their new stuff.
post #53 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macadamias View Post

The problem is that they seem to use their near monopoly in search and the revenue it brings to bring disruptive change to other markets. When you can offer a free version of something because your business model is based off of taking advantage of it to feed your cash generators, your competitors can't compete on equal terms. Reminds me of other browser vendors trying to compete with a free Internet Explorer.


Very interesting observation. It seems accurate, and it seems to be the correct antitrust analysis.

I wonder if we'll see inquiries into these practices.
post #54 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

But Google started their search as free and all the popular searches at the time were free. Google was just better at it and won a legal monopoly. What MS did with IE to crush Netscape wasn't legal.

He's not saying that their position in the search market is illegal. He's saying that they are using their position (in search, and more likely, ads) to stifle competition in other markets.

ISTM he's got something there. For example, they give away for free software that provided turn-by-turn directions. This makes it much hard for others to sell such software. It also makes it mucho hard for anybody else to enter that market.

They lose money in Nav Software as a means to block competitors from feeding ads. Google wants to feed the ads, and is able to lose money getting market share in Nav due to their monopoly position in advertising.

I don't know if this is specifically illegal, but it may well be.
post #55 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Huber View Post

Let me get this straight. A company (Google) that already dominates the ad market buys up a competitor to become even more dominant. This is okay because there is a newbie start-up ad company (Apple). Looks the like FTC is a ball-less as the former Wall Street regulators. Time for Obama to clean another house.


It is OK to be dominant, and OK to be more dominant. I'm not sure what the standard was that they evaluated, but clearly, "becoming more dominant" is not it.
post #56 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwdav View Post

If Google was ever to become a convicted monopolist like Microsoft, then their behaviour of using a monopoly in one market (say advertising or search) to choke other markets by offering "free" products would certainly cause them problems.

Maybe, maybe not.

Take Picassa for example. They give it away for free, and thereby choke off stuff like Photoshop Elements and other commercial photo editing software.

But given that there are plenty of other free photo editor programs available, it is not an antitrust violation.
post #57 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


Claiming that iAds will somehow prevent any harm is a huge mistake and based on nothing more than speculation.


I doubt that the threshold analysis was that iAds "will somehow prevent any harm". Indeed, I doubt such a standard was in any way considered.

I don't know what standard they used. But clearly, it was not what you say was claimed. Indeed, I never heard anyone make that claim, much less rely on it as the linchpin in their analysis.
post #58 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevie View Post

I doubt that the threshold analysis was that iAds "will somehow prevent any harm". Indeed, I doubt such a standard was in any way considered.

I don't know what standard they used. But clearly, it was not what you say was claimed. Indeed, I never heard anyone make that claim, much less rely on it as the linchpin in their analysis.

Just what do you think the entire competitive analysis is about? They're attempting to determine if there's competition in a market - so that one player can't control the market. Wouldn't you consider that to be harmful?

Sheesh.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › FTC approves Google-AdMob deal, cites competition from Apple's iAd