or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › AdMob CEO says Apple's iOS terms are not in best interest of consumers
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

AdMob CEO says Apple's iOS terms are not in best interest of consumers - Page 3

post #81 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by fattychance View Post

In all seriousness, I think they are literally giving the bird to the FTC antitrust division.

There can be no doubt that iOS is a computer operating system of which Apple has 100% market share.


Thats like saying Ford should be under FTC investigation because it has 100% share of Mustang sales.
post #82 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

On Monday, section 3.3.9 was modified again, this time to state that applications "may not collect, use, or disclose to any third party, user or device data without prior consent."

That to me speaks directly to consumer privacy. I definitely want to be notified when my location and other data are being transmitted to an outside entity. That kind of transfer should never happen without the consumers direct permission.

Thanks Apple.
post #83 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


"This change threatens to decrease -- or even eliminate -- revenue that helps to support tens of thousands of developers," Hamoui wrote. "The terms hurt both large and small developers by severely limiting their choice of how best to make money. And because advertising funds a huge number of free and low cost apps, these terms are bad for consumers as well."


Yes. ISTM that Apple is using its market power in the app market in order to unfairly compete in the ad market.
post #84 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by ncee View Post

Hey, I don't want ANY information about me, my phone, my life, me in general going to anyone, when I make a phone call.

I'm not making the phone call so that every focking tom dick and harry can get information and then bombard me with fockin ad's and telling me, that based on the information they took from me, I SHOULD be interested in this that of the other thing, and that based on this information I might be interested in buying this or that.

Let ME decided what I want for information, what I want to look at, what I want to buy!

This is NOT matter of Big Brother looking for my should (at least not only this), but damn folks, are we really all fine with everyone knowing way to MUCH about us!

Hell, if I watch or download porn, I don't want or need anyone else knowing this!
If I purchase certain kinds of books, or movies, I don't want or need anyone else knowing this!
If I purchase a grill, the last god damn thing I want, is to now get a ton of ad's telling me how good Rachel Raye BBQ sauces are, or to use Kingsford charcoal, or that swiss cheese is great with that kind of hamburger!

Folks, I think we're ALL taking this a bit to lightly.

Folks, don't forget, we're giving away for FREE, information, that in turn, others will use to SELL US something! If you are using MY information, then PAY me for it! Why should these folks be allowed to take all this information they collect, for free, and then turn around and sell it to others, who in turn, want to sell us shit we either already have, or currently have no need for, or no cash for.

Sorry folks, this is just getting a bit scary for me.

Skip

I agree, if ad companies want my information then they should pay me for it.
post #85 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by manfrommars View Post

...

This is equally as slimy in that this guy is in a twist that he can't secretly gather private info anymore.

...

Undoubtedly, upon acquisition by Google, his bonus and stock options were tied to an increase in ad revenue, competitive data, and a post-acquisition period of stock value increase. His earnings potential has just been seriously eroded by Apple's action. His is a desperate plea, i.e., distortion, to the court of public opinion.
Blindness is a condition as well as a state of mind.

Reply
Blindness is a condition as well as a state of mind.

Reply
post #86 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elian Gonzalez View Post

The sentiment is understandable, but ultimately, this is probably not true, UNLESS customers want to pay higher prices for goods because there's no money coming in to manufacturers to promote and sell their products.

What? What about the model where manufacturers make money from the purchase price?

If an app can't make money by any other means than annoying me, then it's almost certainly not worth having. How many well-designed, useful apps are adware?

Yes, I would and do absolutely pay more for ad-free apps that are truly useful. Losing the ads would let the cream rise to the top, IMO. Having the ads simply provides a crutch for talentless hacks to still make a buck off their junk.
post #87 of 187
I think my exact thought after reading the article was 'of course he'd say that'.
post #88 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

HAHAHA, you look like a total Google tool when you write things like that.

You look like a general tool for not being able to discern sarcasm
post #89 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

Nonsense! AdMob can still place ads, they just can't use their ad service to do market research on the iPhone for Android and violate user privacy. And there are plenty of other ad options for developers as well. This won't hurt consumers or developers in any way.

So, given that the new provision does not prohibit Apple or most other mobile ad companies from collecting the data, are they all violating user privacy?
post #90 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevetim View Post

This is bull ... the revenue is diverted to apple instead of google. Who is to say if Apple will pay out more or they will? There is no way to know that this early in the game.


Without competition, there is no real reason to "pay out more". That is why we have antitrust laws; to preserve competition.
post #91 of 187
I want money I spend on iTunes and generated by my using advertising services to go into Apple's R&D and to App store developers not towards competitors products.

If Android can't afford to maintain a vibrant development community why should Apple users pay for it?

Apple shouldn't be expected to subsidise competitors development costs via the back door of milking revenue from users.

Bring it on Google, it's time your information collecting activities were brought under the spotlight of the FCC, let's see how deep your tentacles really reach.
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 #92 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by fattychance View Post

In all seriousness, I think they are literally giving the bird to the FTC antitrust division.

There can be no doubt that iOS is a computer operating system of which Apple has 100% market share.

Excuse me!!!!

Are you saying that Apple has 100% market share in computer operating systems? I think Microsoft would disagree.

Or are you actually making the most ridiculous point ever made? i.e.:

Apple has 100% market share of iOS

Cos, by that twisted logic:

Microsoft has 100% market share of Windows
Be Inc. had/has 100% market share of BeOS
HP has 100% market share of webOS
Commodore had 100% market share of Amiga OS
etc., etc.

If your point is as I laid out above, you don't have a clue!

iOS is not a market, it as Operating System. Operating Systems is a market, and I believe Microsoft pretty much dominates that market.
post #93 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevetim View Post

On iPhones i think iAd has potential to pay out much more than other services.


Without having competition? How would that work? Are you positing some radical new economic phenomenon here?

Apple is saying "You want ad revenue from your app? Take our deal, or take no deal."

Likely this would be fine if Apple did not have such a large, dominating position in the mobile app market. Don't they sell billions of them? Does anybody else?

First Apple said that if devs want to sell apps at the dominant store, they have to be written so that they cannot be sold in any other store. Then they tell devs that if they want ad revenue, they cannot shop for the best deal, because Apple has hamstrung the competition from offering advertisers the info they want - so iAds is the only way to make ad money with mobile apps.

If Apple doesn't get slapped for this, it will be because despite these moves, apple is unsuccessful in shutting down other manufacturers from adopting Android OS, and that will be because of there being lots and lots of competing app stores selling apps for other platforms.

But I think that if Apple is successful in stifling competition in the ad market, they will get slapped badly.
post #94 of 187
Sour Grapes
post #95 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by iansilv View Post

Isn't it like, really easy to implement iAds?

Exactly. If a developer can't utilize iAds, then what quality of app are they developing?

Poor Googie
post #96 of 187
Coca-Cola CEO says Coke tastes better than Pepsi.
post #97 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevie View Post

Without having competition? How would that work? Are you positing some radical new economic phenomenon here?

Apple is saying "You want ad revenue from your app? Take our deal, or take no deal."

Likely this would be fine if Apple did not have such a large, dominating position in the mobile app market. Don't they sell billions of them? Does anybody else?

First Apple said that if devs want to sell apps at the dominant store, they have to be written so that they cannot be sold in any other store. Then they tell devs that if they want ad revenue, they cannot shop for the best deal, because Apple has hamstrung the competition from offering advertisers the info they want - so iAds is the only way to make ad money with mobile apps.

If Apple doesn't get slapped for this, it will be because despite these moves, apple is unsuccessful in shutting down other manufacturers from adopting Android OS, and that will be because of there being lots and lots of competing app stores selling apps for other platforms.

But I think that if Apple is successful in stifling competition in the ad market, they will get slapped badly.

Who says there is no competition? There is plenty of competition.
post #98 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacHead75 View Post

Google is starting to realize that competing with Apple isn't as easy as they thought!

Well they are a telemarketing company, Apple makes stuff.

Google even with all their self inflating yammering, is still just a website.
And if there's one thing you always be certain of... bookmarks change.
post #99 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post

They can still sell ads through apps, just not collect private information.

"They" can still collect all the private information they want, and "they" can use that information for the most nefarious sort of stuff that they can dream up. Unless they happen to be owned by a handset or OS maker.

This move by Apple (letting any sleazy ad agency have the info, but not if they are owned by a competitor in other markets) does nothing to protect private information.
post #100 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by shubidua View Post

Why? They just don't want their direct competition to gather information on how to beat them. Seems reasonable to me. Hope FTC isn't that stupid.

Hmm, no. They don't want any "non-independent" competitor to collection ad performance data, i.e. statistics on their OWN ad campaigns.
If the new wording actually bares the "non-independent" AdMob from the iOs, the FTC will certainly see it -being not stupid- as an obvious anti-competitive behavior.
post #101 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xian Zhu Xuande View Post

Pretty much.

Argument 1: "They're robbing developers of t3h monies!"
Only if the developers don't have an equal or better alternative to AdMob. As it stands, it seems they'll have that in iAds, so that's not true. It could be argued that they're robbing developers of choice, but developers will be happy to use the easier/more profitable option.

Argument 2: "They're robbing the users by robbing the developers of ad revenue!"
Only if the developers can't make as much from ad revenue,...


Generally, when there is less competition, prices are higher than if there is more competition.

For one to assume that devs will get more ad dollars with fewer firms competing for their business is to believe that Apple will charge less than the market will bear. That strikes me as very unlikely.
post #102 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by alandail View Post

apple will pay developers more, they are going after the high profile/high revenue ads, charge both per impression and per click, and will have ads people are more likely to click on.


Apple will charge no more or less than the price which will maximize total profits. With less competition, that price is higher. Apple will not pay one penny more than is necessary to maximize total profits. They are rational.
post #103 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by sflocal View Post

With all the Android evangelists preaching how Android will take over the world, why would AdMob even be concerned with what Apple does with their own product/ecosystem? At least until the end of June 23, I expect Android will be the most prolific OS in the world. AdMob will make so much money that they can then give the finger to Apple.

He must have ate too much cheese with his whine.

Yeah, problem with the Android evangelists is like that BS stat of Q4 2009 US mobile phone sales growth where Android got 25% increase to Apple's 20% which allegedly says Android is winning.

The reality (going by Nielsen's total sales of US mobile for Q1 2010, I imagine Q4 2009 won't have too different) is Apple sold 28% of the handsets, and Android sold 9%. So they have absolutely miles to go before catching up to Apple.
post #104 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post

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).


Actually I would have agreed with you except I know from using an android phone that if you wish to use the GPS or any locations dependent application you grant Google the right to collect personal information. This is new on the recent android update (1.5 to 2.1), I suspected they were doing it all along in the past due to the uncanny ability to provide information which was specific to my location. They now just tell you they plan to collect this if you enable GPS location feature on the Android phone.

You can not opt out or op in, if you wish to use the GPS feature in the phone with an application like maps you automatically allow google to collect information about you. Unlike the iphone you can use the GPS chip or the Cell network to determine your location without having to give your rights away to share personal information. What apple found was that ads placed in free apps were in fact sharing that information to ad companies and companies like google. So yes apple is blocking google form personal information, and only allowing the information to be shared with mobile analytical companies to do market analysis and the apps has to allow you to op in not op out, which is good for us.

Google has made it very clear they made Android as a means to collect mobile user information and to place ads in front of you as often as they can. Apple obviously does not want that to be an iphone experience. Google whole business model is on their ability to place ad which are user specific so they get to charge advertisers more for this service. Apple obviously is not going to make that much.

I said this before, people are too willing to give out personal information in exchange to get someone free or what they think is free. I do not know for sure, but I willing to bet that Verizon and the other service provides are getting a cut of the ads fee for any Android phone in their networks. In the meant time Google knows everywhere that phone has been and what you have done with it.
post #105 of 187
deleted
post #106 of 187
Reading too much FUD today Stevie? Please read the article, and more importantly the clause carefully. That's not what it says. It only bars ad companies associated with directly competing companies. Independent ad companies can advertise.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevie View Post

Without having competition? How would that work? Are you positing some radical new economic phenomenon here?

Apple is saying "You want ad revenue from your app? Take our deal, or take no deal."


.
post #107 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post

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.

I'm going to make the bold prediction that iAd will be on WinPhone 7 as a tit-for-tat for having Bing on the iPhone. It's not like Apple needs money from MS and that whole Windows Live/Bing stuff has not been a huge winner for MS in terms of either revenue or mind share.

And it would piss off Google which probably plays a bit into Redmond thinking. Android is more of a competitor to WinPhone than iOS. iPhone sales are customers picking Apple over MS but an Android sale is a partner picking Google over Microsoft.
post #108 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by manfrommars View Post


I loathe cheap apps with annoying ads. If a couple more bucks dumps the ads, I'm all in. If the ads are also secretly snaring my personal info, I'm even less sympathetic to the advertisers and their facilitators.


Apps will still have ads. A couple more bucks ain't got nothing to do with it.

iAds can snare personal information in exactly the same way, and under exactly the same rules as any other ad.

Nobody can secretly snare your personal info: every app must ask permission.
post #109 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna View Post

[Tulkas: what is to stop google from buying it from the independents?]

In essence, nothing. However if Apple finds out they will find a way to say that said company is no longer independent and will ban their use from apps. And few folks are large enough or diverse enough to risk that.

Actually, I don't think it matters. Google is in the business of selling data and making money because the value of the data is greater than the cost of collecting it.

If Google has to buy the data from someone else, their value proposition dries up. Why should I buy data from Google if I can just as easily buy the data from the people who actually collected it?
"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 #110 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevie View Post

Yes. ISTM that Apple is using its market power in the app market in order to unfairly compete in the ad market.

How does Apple unfairly compete for ads? Creatively yeah, they've been leading segments of the ad business since the 1984 commercial. But Apple is limiting AdMob's ability to be in the ad business? They can always rent one of those flying banners behind a plane! You can't break off cell ads into a separate subset and call it a monopoly, advertising is a much bigger industry than the hopes and dreams of iAd or Admob. Maybe it's all those huge opportunities for AdMob on Android and Verizon that's causing them confusion about the iPhone?

Why do those who lack talent, always whine about those who do? Destroying your competition is not unfair, and welcome to planet Earth in our Solar System of Universe A otherwise known as reality.

I refuse to work with you, you can't be on my dodgeball team. I won't let you use any of your skills or services on my team.

Your options are:
1. Run home and cry.
2. Shut up and go start your own team.
3. Whine that you weren't liked enough to be picked, start the tearworks, and hope somebody's Mom forces all the other kids to let you play, which will always backfire because you become sole target of the ball, learn nothing and develop an attitude that encourages failure & resentment of other's abilities and success.
4. Get really good at chess or join the speech & debate team.
post #111 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by tribalogical View Post

And if I "delete" an account anywhere, that has to equal a complete erasure of any and all stored data specific to the account. Again, especially when it's "identifying" data.

Sure. But keep in mind that prior to deleting your account, the info may have benn sold and resold multiple times, and at the time of deletion, may exist in multiple third-party locations.
post #112 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post

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).

And in turn, that stifling of competition in the mobile OS market is perhaps intended to lessen Apple's competition in the handset market.
post #113 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60 View Post


Apple shouldn't be expected to subsidise competitors development costs via the back door of milking revenue from users.


If you really believe that, then you also must believe that Microsoft shouln't be selling Office for Mac, because they milk revenue from Mac users, using that as a back door way to pay development costs.

But I'm confident that you don't really believe that. Because all sorts of companies make money off their competitor's products.

For example, every company that makes a case for the iPad, and every company that makes cables for Apple products compete with Apple for the accessory sales. Every one of them makes money off of Apple's customers in competition with Apple.

And all of that is perfectly OK.
post #114 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post

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?

I'd imagine numerous laws would probably prevent the sale of that data without it being explicitly spelt out to consumers that this was being done, at least in some countries anyway.
post #115 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevetim View Post

Who says there is no competition?


IIRC, nobody.
post #116 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgmpowers View Post

One thing I've learned in my years of business and marketing... Never, ever, ever trust what ONE marketer or advertiser says about another advertiser or marketer....period.

Christopher Powers

p.s. Ever hear Coke say Pepsi's tastes good? Hell would freeze over first.

Well, let's be honest. That's because Pepsi sucks and Coke is awesome!
post #117 of 187
A good explanation of the changes to the licence agreement:

http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/2010...er%3Cbr%20/%3E
post #118 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by oxygenhose View Post

You can't break off cell ads into a separate subset

That is up to the feds. They may or may not decide it is the right course of action.
post #119 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzysatsuma View Post

That part of what he said is true. Until iAd has comparative revenue--- it is more difficult for devs to release free games.

As Jobs pointed out in the keynote, iAds already will provide comparable revenue to developers: Apple has about half the total ad revenue for the second half of 2011.

BTW, Apple provides 60% of ad revenue to the developers of the host apps. Are AdMob's terms as generous?
post #120 of 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by fattychance View Post

There can be no doubt that iOS is a computer operating system of which Apple has 100% market share. That market share is used to limit competition in Apps and Advertising

Oh, I see. Well, in that case I think Apple should change its mind when Google allows Apple to do the same on its platforms.

Sheesh...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › AdMob CEO says Apple's iOS terms are not in best interest of consumers