or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Flurry modifies data collection after being called out by Steve Jobs
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Flurry modifies data collection after being called out by Steve Jobs - Page 2

post #41 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetz View Post

The only reason they didn't get into it was because it was too far from their core business. But now that they control the hardware, the operating system, and the applications that go on there, advertising to such a captive audience is just too easy to pass up.

Nothing wrong with making a profit of course. But people should stop trying to portray this like iTunes. This is not meant to sell more iPhones. Or even make life easier for the user (that would be no ads). This is meant to make Apple money, plain and simple.

iTunes also exists to make Apple money, even if more indirectly.
I also disagree: removing ads wouldn't make life easier for users; it would make it more expensive as free apps would now cost money.
Apple will probably make money, but I don't know if they'll make lots of money on it. Either way, it's not as if they ever dishonestly claimed to be doing this for altruistic reasons. They aren't Google!
post #42 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qualia View Post

iTunes also exists to make Apple money, even if more indirectly.
I also disagree: removing ads wouldn't make life easier for users; it would make it more expensive as free apps would now cost money.
Apple will probably make money, but I don't know if they'll make lots of money on it. Either way, it's not as if they ever dishonestly claimed to be doing this for altruistic reasons. They aren't Google!

Remember that even without iAd yet implemented, the iPhone platform's (as a whole) profit margin is above 60%. iAd while yes costing an initial investment to develop, will only increase that.

40% is high, but by no means is it sinister. Despite Apples little hatred for Flash and cross platform development, they see where the industry is going. Apple really does agree with most that web based apps/cloud computing is the future of mobile devices. The Apps store won't be as profitable for much longer, thats why they are implementing iAd.

A popular product is nothing if you can't make money. Apple's just thinking ahead, setting up iAd and sort of "double dipping" for profit off the iPhone platform. It won't really affect end users, maybe apps will cost a little more but not that big of a deal.
post #43 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Babaloo View Post

[…] Apple really does agree with most that web based apps/cloud computing is the future of mobile devices. […]

Would you expand upon that? Is there a particular reason why you think Apple is on the cloud bandwagon? I think I can see it happening in terms of content (Lala), but not apps particularly.
post #44 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by sgnq View Post

Would you expand upon that? Is there a particular reason why you think Apple is on the cloud bandwagon? I think I can see it happening in terms of content (Lala), but not apps particularly.

In the far far future. But imagine for now that all flash web games were playable on your phone, it would be pretty sweet. And if you were to develop an HTML 5 or Flash based App, your App will look the same on every phone OS, browser, or device. Now of course there are some limitations right now, namely speed, but mobile hardware is evolving very fast. Another big limitation is battery life, which these cloud based apps would improve. I think is Apple is successful with the iAd platform, they may be able to embrace flash, or at least full html 5.
post #45 of 51
...with AdMob?

They won't be putting that money into R&D for new iPhone's, it will go toward subsidising their competing free Android platform.

Enter iAd, nothing personal it's business, Apple iPhone OS users shouldn't be expected to pick up the tab for Android users..
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
post #46 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster View Post

That's interesting. I figured the source code is submitted with the app though. Wouldn't that sort of thing be found if it was?

We just submit a signed, zipped compiled binary (or a fat binary if it's two apps for pad and phone). No source code.

After approval, Apple signs the code with their certificate and posts it up.
--Johnny
Reply
--Johnny
Reply
post #47 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Babaloo View Post

Remember that even without iAd yet implemented, the iPhone platform's (as a whole) profit margin is above 60%. iAd while yes costing an initial investment to develop, will only increase that.

Baloney. Where do you trolls come up with these ridiculous figures?

Apple's average GROSS margin is in the 40% range. PROFIT margin is around 21-23%, IIRC.

There is absolutely no plausible information suggesting a 60% profit on iPhone sales. None.

(There are two pieces of data that are widely misinterpreted by trolls who have no concept of business finances, but that's irrelevant).
"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 #48 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetz View Post

If it's industry standard then it's not about breaking-even. It's about Apple making money.

And that's a problem because...?
post #49 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

And that's a problem because...?

Never said it was. But it's rather foolish for people to believe that Apple is somehow being altruistic here. They are just as greedy as other ad firms in the market.
post #50 of 51
I find this whole think pretty hilarious

People say Android's unmonitored market place is risky because of potential security risk. As if the system of unmonitored Apps wasn't successful on every modern computer operating system ever created. And at least they have a way to restrict what data Applications can access.

Then they say the App Store is absolutely immune to security threats because Apple "works" real hard to keep it clean. LOL Then we have a 3rd party analytical company get access to millions of iPhone's user's geological location, hardware configuration, and who knows what else they could of stolen. And Apple is so clueless about this massive security breach, a bunch of prototype iPads are located on Apple's campus. Now you think they would figure it out there, but it takes the Firm to publish their "findings" until Apple figures out what happens. LOL

And then instead of spending money to tightening security on App Approval and the system in general, they just ban any sort of data collection on hardware and geological location (to a degree). As if thats going to protect any other [more] private data from unknowingly being accessed.

I'm sorry I do respect Steve Job's "genius" but is it a one man show here, surly there are people in place to second guess Jobs (gasp!) to prevent idiotic blunders like this! And how is Apple "pissed off" LOL what a stupid comment!
post #51 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jetz View Post

Never said it was. But it's rather foolish for people to believe that Apple is somehow being altruistic here. They are just as greedy as other ad firms in the market.

I doubt anyone here thinks Apple is altruistic, and what evidence do you have that they are "greedy"?

Both positions are pretty extreme.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Flurry modifies data collection after being called out by Steve Jobs