or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple's iOS most effective mobile advertising platform, report says
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple's iOS most effective mobile advertising platform, report says

post #1 of 41
Thread Starter 
A recent study from Opera Software, makers of the popular Opera web browser, released a study on Friday quantifying advertising effectiveness across the gamut of mobile operating systems and found Apple's iOS to lead the pack.

According to the first edition of Opera's State of Mobile Advertising report, during the second quarter of 2012 iOS devices averaged an effective cost per mille (eCPM) of $2.85, managing to edge out handsets running Google's Android OS which came in second with an average $2.10 eCPM.

Marketing reports usually use the eCPM standard to measure the effectiveness of an ad or campaign by calculating ad impressions versus click-throughs.

The report looks at ad monetization from multiple perspectives within what the company calls the "ad delivery value chain" including devices, publishers, ad networks and advertisers.

As iOS and Android dominate the market, other platforms like RIM's BlackBerry and Nokia's now-defunct Symbian OS are left far behind with $0.64 eCPM and $0.59 eCPM, respectively. Coming in last among the branded platforms is Microsoft's Windows Phone which managed an eCPM of $0.20. The Java-based J2ME platform was combined with all other operating systems to average a $1.01 eCPM.

The results are unsurprising given the amount of marketshare owned by the two top mobile platforms, which equated to a combined 83 percent of the sector in the three months ending in May. Android continues to outnumber iPhones, however, and accounts for over half of the U.S. smartphone market.

Opera Ad Stats by OS
Average eCPM by platform. | Source: Opera Software


Devices with larger screens with touch capabilites unsurprisingly performed better in the study while interactive ads saw more click-throughs than their static banner-type counterparts. Opera gave the example of ads built using HTML5 Canvas, which requires a mobile version of Safari 3.2 and Android 2.1 or higher to run.

Apple's iPhone garnered the highest amount of revenue for the quarter with a 43.54 percent share and also saw the most traffic with 29.88 percent. Following Apple's smartphone was all Android devices which together accounted for 26.56 percent of revenue and 24.43 percent of traffic.

The iPad stood out as the most profitable device and achieved the highest eCPM on Opera's network, averaging $3.96 which accounted for 14.26 percent of revenue and 6.86 of traffic.

Opera Ad Stats
Source: Opera Software


The U.S. came as the most lucrative country for ad publishers and joined forces with Canada to take a market-dominating 73 percent of all ad impressions. America's average eCPM came out to $1.98, slightly higher than the global average of $1.90.

Interestingly, the Business and Finance category of ads brings in the most revenue per impression and more than doubles profits from runner-up News and Information.

Opera Software's mobile ad platform serves over 9,000 customers worldwide and tallies more than 35 billion ad impressions per month. The company's network delivered some $240 million of revenue to mobile publishers in 2011.
post #2 of 41
Android is winning¡

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #3 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Android is winning¡
Not surprising. iSheep are obviously more susceptible to advertising. /s
Edited by muppetry - 7/21/12 at 9:56am
post #4 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Android is winning¡

 

Don't forget the "/s"...

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #5 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post


Not surprising. iSheep are obviously more susceptible to advertising.

You are so right because I, for one, am totally gullible, do not have a mind of my own and click on any ad that shows up on my screen¡

 

 

/sarcasm.

Why does Apple bashing and trolling make people feel so good?

Reply

Why does Apple bashing and trolling make people feel so good?

Reply
post #6 of 41

Interesting, since Google's main business is ads. 

 

It would appear that Apple is beating them in their core competency. 

post #7 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post


Not surprising. iSheep are obviously more susceptible to advertising.

 

I think it's just that iOS users actually spend money on things. You know, like . . . apps. That are made by people who are interested in providing a product in exchange for money. Because they'd like to eat. And because they have an expectation that they'd get something in return for all their work. 

 

Weird, huh?

post #8 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

Not surprising. iSheep are obviously more susceptible to advertising.

I think it's just that iOS users actually spend money on things. You know, like . . . apps. That are made by people who are interested in providing a product in exchange for money. Because they'd like to eat. And because they have an expectation that they'd get something in return for all their work. 

Weird, huh?

Well probably a combination of that and also the huge lead that iOS has in web traffic. Even if all other things were equal, if many more iOS users are seeing the ads then the click through rate will almost inevitably be higher.
post #9 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post


Well probably a combination of that and also the huge lead that iOS has in web traffic.

 

 

This is true. 

post #10 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Don't forget the "/s"...

I'd hope by now my use of the sarcmark (irony mark) would be well known.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Interesting, since Google's main business is ads. 

It would appear that Apple is beating them in their core competency. 

Apple is beating them at attracting users who want smartphones to be smartphones. Note this is for iOS, not iAds. Google is clearly winning with mobile ads and the iOS paltform is where they most of their mobile ad revenue despite Android winning¡

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

I think it's just that iOS users actually spend money on things. You know, like . . . apps. That are made by people who are interested in providing a product in exchange for money. Because they'd like to eat. And because they have an expectation that they'd get something in return for all their work. 

Weird, huh?

I think that plays a part but I think what I said in the previous comment is most powerful reason. Most Android-based devices are not being used as smartphones and aren't being sold in the more wealthy nations. I think I saw a chart this week, perhaps by Horace Deidu, showing that the iPhone is dominating on the MNOs. Remember when some people said "Yeah, well, the iPhone sales are high on AT&T because it's the only carrier selling the it."
Edited by SolipsismX - 7/20/12 at 11:17pm

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #11 of 41

The main graphic shows "Android" vs "iPhone"… *sigh*  there it is again. That inability to meaningfully differentiate between a platform (OS) and a device.

 

The second graphic with "iOS" summarized is the one that's the most meaningful. The breakout of the iPhone or iPad should be of secondary interest (and along with that, why not show something like the Samsung Galaxy S3 broken out? What are the numbers like on that phone vs the iPhone, a more valid comparison?)...

 

A recap of the platform performance:

iOS is outperforming Android significantly across the board, and doing so with a smaller overall market share. iOS has almost double the traffic (46% vs 24%) bringing 2.5 times the revenue (61% vs 26%) of Android, with a 20% higher eCPM ($2.49 vs $2.10).

 

That's the really stand out news here.

post #12 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

The iPad stood out as the most profitable device and achieved the highest eCPM on Opera's network, averaging $3.96 which accounted for 14.26 percent of revenue and 6.86 of traffic.
Opera Ad Stats
Source: Opera Software

Can anyone explain how the iPad generates $3.96 and the iPhone generates $2.85, but iOS only averages $2.49?

Their numbers suggest that iOS devices other than the iPad and iPhone account for almost 10% of the total traffic. First, I find it hard to believe that iPod Touch amounts for 1.5 times the traffic of the iPad. Second, if you do the math, iPod Touch revenues would have to be under $0.10 for the iOS total to be correct (far lower than anything else out there except Windows Phone) which doesn't seem plausible.

I'm skeptical about believing much of anything from someone who can't even get the basic math right.
Edited by jragosta - 7/21/12 at 5:03am
"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 #13 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

The iPad stood out as the most profitable device and achieved the highest eCPM on Opera's network, averaging $3.96 which accounted for 14.26 percent of revenue and 6.86 of traffic.
Opera Ad Stats
Source: Opera Software

Can anyone explain how the iPad generates $3.96 and the iPhone generates $2.85, but iOS only averages $2.49?

Their numbers suggest that iOS devices other than the iPad and iPhone account for almost 10% of the total traffic. First, I find it hard to believe that iPod Touch amounts for 1.5 times the traffic of the iPad. Second, if you do the math, iPod Touch revenues would have to be under $0.10 for the iOS total to be correct (far lower than anything else out there except Windows Phone) which doesn't seem plausible.

I'm skeptical about believing much of anything from someone who can't even get the basic math right.

From those figures, the remaining unaccounted for 9.79% of traffic from iOS devices would have to have an eCPM of 0.36 to make that add up. I guess that would have to be iPods, but if there really is more traffic from iPods than iPads, why would they not explicitly list them? I agree - seems wrong.
post #14 of 41

I see that a delusional Android cult member has gotten everybody's goat with two short sentences. Why is that? 

post #15 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post

I see that a delusional Android cult member has gotten everybody's goat with two short sentences. Why is that? 

If you are referring to #3, I apologize for omitting the /s. Seemed obvious at the time, but, of course, was not.
post #16 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Android is winning¡

Fandroids rule¡
post #17 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Can anyone explain how the iPad generates $3.96 and the iPhone generates $2.85, but iOS only averages $2.49?

Maybe they are accounting for Apple TV? It does run a version of iOS. As someone stated above, measure the entire platform. I'm not sure I'd subscribe to that theory though and I'm just throwing it out there. 1smile.gif
post #18 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Can anyone explain how the iPad generates $3.96 and the iPhone generates $2.85, but iOS only averages $2.49?
Their numbers suggest that iOS devices other than the iPad and iPhone account for almost 10% of the total traffic. First, I find it hard to believe that iPod Touch amounts for 1.5 times the traffic of the iPad. Second, if you do the math, iPod Touch revenues would have to be under $0.10 for the iOS total to be correct (far lower than anything else out there except Windows Phone) which doesn't seem plausible.
I'm skeptical about believing much of anything from someone who can't even get the basic math right.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vadania View Post

Maybe they are accounting for Apple TV? It does run a version of iOS. As someone stated above, measure the entire platform. I'm not sure I'd subscribe to that theory though and I'm just throwing it out there. 1smile.gif

Apple TV is a relatively tiny portion of the total - and when you look at the number of Apple TVs that access the Internet, the number is even smaller.
"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 #19 of 41

People really click on the adverts in free apps. I have only ever done so in error.

 

Maybe these are the people that made "pump and dump", nigerian 401s, etc., viable..

post #20 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by hungover View Post

People really click on the adverts in free apps. I have only ever done so in error.

Maybe these are the people that made "pump and dump", nigerian 401s, etc., viable..

Sometimes I tap on the ads for iStuff. Like cases and such for example. I always wonder why this site predominantly features ads for android devices. I've only tapped on them occasionally, and mostly just to learn, no intent to purchase anything.
post #21 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Interesting, since Google's main business is ads. 

 

It would appear that Apple is beating them in their core competency. 


Which is interesting as to why Google alienated themselves from Apple.

They could have gone hand-in-hand with Apple down the yellow brick road right to the bank but instead decided to compete with Android.

Google could of had it all.

post #22 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patranus View Post


Which is interesting as to why Google alienated themselves from Apple.
They could have gone hand-in-hand with Apple down the yellow brick road right to the bank but instead decided to compete with Android.
Google could of had it all.

Could 'have' had it all.

The point is that Google makes more on each iPhone than they do on Android phones so they might make MORE if they had never introduced Android.
"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 #23 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post


Not surprising. iSheep are obviously more susceptible to advertising.

 

And we have more money to spend.

 

I wonder what Android's eCPM is in China.  I hear they like cheap smart phones there.

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply
post #24 of 41

From an end-user perspective... Apple (iOS) doesn't allow for plugins that alter or block content, such as AdBlock, et al.   In addition, some of the app designers cleverly place the ads close to menu options, resulting in frequent mis-click of the ads (which I find annoying).   That has to account for a part of this.

 

I realize I could set up a passive filtering proxy on my LAN to block the ads, but I'm too lazy -- ;-)   Most end-users would not know what that means.

post #25 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by SockRolid View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

Not surprising. iSheep are obviously more susceptible to advertising.

And we have more money to spend.

I wonder what Android's eCPM is in China.  I hear they like cheap smart phones there.

It seems to be fairly universally accepted that a large proportion of the Android installed base is on devices that are smartphones in name only, especially in less developed countries. I'd expect the associated eCPM values to be approximately zero.
post #26 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

It seems to be fairly universally accepted that a large proportion of the Android installed base is on devices that are smartphones in name only, especially in less developed countries. I'd expect the associated eCPM values to be approximately zero.

Fairly universally accepted - except by the Android shills who hang out here.

In another thread, several of them jumped all over me for even suggesting that some Android phones are actually feature phones.
"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 #27 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

It seems to be fairly universally accepted that a large proportion of the Android installed base is on devices that are smartphones in name only, especially in less developed countries. I'd expect the associated eCPM values to be approximately zero.

Yeah, I'd guess that people in the US buying an iPhone 4S and Samsung Galaxy S III's are going to average about the same. I'd even hypothesis that you could probably make a correlation between your month bill for service and the add revenue you generate for a given country.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #28 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

It seems to be fairly universally accepted that a large proportion of the Android installed base is on devices that are smartphones in name only, especially in less developed countries. I'd expect the associated eCPM values to be approximately zero.

Fairly universally accepted - except by the Android shills who hang out here.

In another thread, several of them jumped all over me for even suggesting that some Android phones are actually feature phones.

IMO, a common element to many of the anti-Apple arguments that appear on these threads is the attempt to derail the fundamentals of a discussion by focussing instead on debatable minutia. So yes, technically they probably are smartphones if they are running some version of Android, and voilà - you give the trolls the opening to display their skills.
post #29 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

It seems to be fairly universally accepted that a large proportion of the Android installed base is on devices that are smartphones in name only, especially in less developed countries. I'd expect the associated eCPM values to be approximately zero.

Yeah, I'd guess that people in the US buying an iPhone 4S and Samsung Galaxy S III's are going to average about the same. I'd even hypothesis that you could probably make a correlation between your month bill for service and the add revenue you generate for a given country.

Comparable phones, comparable costs - yes - that seems like a reasonable hypothesis.
post #30 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patranus View Post


Which is interesting as to why Google alienated themselves from Apple.

They could have gone hand-in-hand with Apple down the yellow brick road right to the bank but instead decided to compete with Android.

Google could of had it all.

Apple would only partner with other companies if it's advantageous. If there's lots of money to be made and Apple can figure out how to cut out the middleman, I imagine they would. So it's questionable whether Apple and Google would have a long-term intimate relationship with or without Android.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #31 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Patranus View Post

Which is interesting as to why Google alienated themselves from Apple.
They could have gone hand-in-hand with Apple down the yellow brick road right to the bank but instead decided to compete with Android.
Google could of had it all.
Apple would only partner with other companies if it's advantageous. If there's lots of money to be made and Apple can figure out how to cut out the middleman, I imagine they would. So it's questionable whether Apple and Google would have a long-term intimate relationship with or without Android.

I'm not sure about that. Google makes more advertising revenue via iOS anyway. What, exactly, has Android bought them? Would Apple have felt the need to pursue search, maps, ads etc. as aggressively if Google had played nice with them?
post #32 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

I'd hope by now my use of the sarcmark (irony mark) would be well known."

The problem is it is virtually impossible to see for those of us older than 50 and have not wiped their glasses in the last few minutes. /self pity moan
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
Been using Apple since Apple ][ - Long on AAPL so biased
nMac Pro 6 Core, MacBookPro i7, MacBookPro i5, iPhones 5 and 5s, iPad Air, 2013 Mac mini, SE30, IIFx, Towers; G4 & G3.
Reply
post #33 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post
The problem is it is virtually impossible to see for those of us older than 50 and have not wiped their glasses in the last few minutes. /self pity moan

 

Another problem is that in some fonts it doesn't have a descender at all! It just becomes a lower-case I.

 

So viewing the forums on some devices makes Solipsism look like an Android apologist.

👅

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already fucked.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already fucked.

 

Reply
post #34 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Apple would only partner with other companies if it's advantageous. If there's lots of money to be made and Apple can figure out how to cut out the middleman, I imagine they would. So it's questionable whether Apple and Google would have a long-term intimate relationship with or without Android.

Replace Google with Apple in your post and it reads the same.
post #35 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Apple would only partner with other companies if it's advantageous. If there's lots of money to be made and Apple can figure out how to cut out the middleman, I imagine they would. So it's questionable whether Apple and Google would have a long-term intimate relationship with or without Android.

That's true. Google has proven themselves to be untrustworthy across the board. Apple would have been ripped off no matter what they trusted Google with.
"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 #36 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post


I'm not sure about that. Google makes more advertising revenue via iOS anyway. What, exactly, has Android bought them? Would Apple have felt the need to pursue search, maps, ads etc. as aggressively if Google had played nice with them?

I imagine you remember that Android wasn't about Apple anyway. In the beginning it was reported as Google's "protection" against being locked out of search revenue by Microsoft. In fact Apple's interest in partnering with Google in the first place had to do in part with negating Microsoft didn't it? No doubt Apple and Steve Jobs knew all about Android before they ever brought Google into the circle of trust and apparently weren't all that concerned....

 

Or maybe it was just keeping your (potential) enemies closer?? I don't know.

melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #37 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by muppetry View Post

I'm not sure about that. Google makes more advertising revenue via iOS anyway. What, exactly, has Android bought them? Would Apple have felt the need to pursue search, maps, ads etc. as aggressively if Google had played nice with them?
I imagine you remember that Android wasn't about Apple anyway. In the beginning it was reported as Google's "protection" against being locked out of search revenue by Microsoft. In fact Apple's interest in partnering with Google in the first place had to do in part with negating Microsoft didn't it? No doubt Apple and Steve Jobs knew all about Android before they ever brought Google into the circle of trust and apparently weren't all that concerned....

Or maybe it was just keeping your (potential) enemies closer?? I don't know.

Yes - I wasn't trying to imply that Google created Android for any particular reason. They started the program well before iOS took off, and redirected it when the direction that iOS was taking became apparent. While they presumably recognized the merits of iOS, they cannot have known just how successful it would be in redefining the smartphone. But MS became largely irrelevant, and so now the questions stand - how has Android actually benefitted Google, and what would have been the Google / Apple relationship if they had not pursued it?
post #38 of 41

Googlestan Information Minister Eric Schmidt had the following comment:

 

 

Quote:
In six months, everyone will advertise on Android first. Android is winning!
post #39 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post

Interesting, since Google's main business is ads. 

 

It would appear that Apple is beating them in their core competency. 

 

Could be a factor of the math. 

 

Companies report sales but not returns. So who knows how many of those android phones were sold, returned by the customer and replaced with something else. a 10-25% of those Android sales could be duplications which mean that the actual units in use are less than they seem. 

 

It's also possible that many of those Android phones were bought for reasons that don't involve going on line or even more important, games. Games are probably the top source of smart phone ads. If folks aren't gaming, they aren't seeing ads. Or at least not as many ads. thus the numbers shaking out the way they do. 

 

And of course keep in mind that this was the results from one browser not an independent combined survey. I'm sure that Opera is very popular but something tells me that with Android users Google's own Chrome is equal to perhaps a bit more popular as it is likely the one that comes on the phones natively. Between that and that those in game/app ads aren't counted in this 'report', well it's easy to see the math is likely very skewed. The truth is probably a tad different. And what about the companies that are serving up the ads. I bet that Google's Adsense is still the most popular service network, particularly over iAds. It has the reputation and when you sign up for it you get into the whole thing of being on all platforms mobile and desktop. If you are going to spend money on an ad you want the most return for the investment and that's not iAds but Adsense (at least of those two) so what Google lacks on the user side with Android being the lower figure they will more than make up for with Adsense being used on websites viewed on iOS devices and ads in iOS apps. 

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #40 of 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by tribalogical View Post

The main graphic shows "Android" vs "iPhone"… *sigh*  there it is again. That inability to meaningfully differentiate between a platform (OS) and a device.

 

Given that they also include the iPad they are covering the platform v platform issue. Although they should also include the iPod Touch just to show that they are covering the whole platform even if the results will be like 0.001%

 

And they report it as 'iPhone' because it helps to prove the point that a single phone lineup by a single company is, in their sketchy math, beating a whole platform with dozens of players. 

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple's iOS most effective mobile advertising platform, report says