Quattro purchase, iTunes accounts could give Apple mobile ad advantage

13»

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 51
    sabonsabon Posts: 134member
    When it comes to Bing or ANYTHING Microsoft there is only one word in the dictionary and it needs no explanation.



    NO!



    If Apple goes with Bing or ANYTHING Microsoft, I'll sell my phones and buy Doids. It isn't about better. It's about not having Microsoft in any of my products. PERIOD.
  • Reply 42 of 51
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post


    No offence to Steve Jobs, but there is nothing in the known universe that can stop advertisements from sucking. Ads suck, they always have and always will.



    I disagree. A lot (maybe most) of ads suck... but, not all.



    There was a classic billboard/magazine ad campaign in the1950's or 1960's, where the entire ad content was:



    Coming soon...



    It ran for about 4 weeks and everybody was talking about it-- what was it? what did it mean? As interest grew, the ads were extended to say:



    Coming soon... The Volkswagen (the Beatle)



    Then there was the 1984 Superbowl Ad.



    Or the more recent iPod and Mac vs PC ads.



    Sometimes, you will find a series of TV commercials that are better than the shows they are supporting.



    There are some gems out there!



    *
  • Reply 43 of 51
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dreyfus2 View Post


    Yeah, and all these people would continue to be happy customers, paying the higher iTunes prices, if they are abused like that... I have spent over 5k EUR on iTunes since 2004. One single ad in my face - and I'm gone.



    I have some faith that Apple knows better than these tasseographists.



    If anything, Apple has taste and style! I would bet money that any ads they offer would be "opt in" or "purchase/subscribe at a reduced price with ads".



    I agree that I don't want a lot of unsolicited ads in my face. But, i would consider "opting in" under the right conditions-- my choice, not theirs!



    *
  • Reply 44 of 51
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dreyfus2 View Post


    The iTunes store displays the wares it sells, like absolutely every store. If you can't tell the difference between that and advertisements, I can't help you.



    I don't think you understand advertising... it is more than just a commercial played during a TV show, movie or song album.



    Go into any supermarket, go down the aisles and you will see similar products grouped together-- say Coke and Dr. Pepper. A certain amount of space is allocated to each. You probably don't notice that Dr. Pepper has more space than coke. This allocation is not only based on sales. Companies pay to have more shelf space for their product.



    That's an ad-- shelf space = Dr. Pepper is popular/cool/etc., and handy... pick me, pick me.



    Now, walk along the ends of the aisles... you may be at the end of the snack/chip aisle, but you see that the display on the end of the aisle, the end cap, is loaded with Dr. Pepper. Companies pay a lot of money to get their products featured on end caps.



    That's an ad-- end cap = Dr. Pepper goes with snacks! Dr. Pepper is more popular than the others. Dr. Pepper is handy, why go any further... pick me, pick me.



    These are only 2 examples. The entire design and product placement within a supermarket or retail store is geared to merchandising...



    It is a game you play, every day, everywhere you go!



    *
  • Reply 45 of 51
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Masterz1337 View Post


    Apple should just make their own search engine. Call it iFind and have it integrate with iPhoto and all the OSX varients in ways no other search engine and web browser can.



    ...or, maybe, call it Finder-- or even FTFF!



    *
  • Reply 46 of 51
    x38x38 Posts: 97member
    "Or, he said, Apple could opt to create its own search engine."



    I miss Sherlock. Would be nice if Apple brought it back.
  • Reply 47 of 51
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Just a friendly reminder: Apple submitted a patent back in April 2008 for an advertisements in an OS. Apple is always attributed to the patent but the inventor is usually someone whom we’ve never heard of, but this one has Steve Jobs as the inventor along with some others.
    Among other disclosures, an operating system presents one or more advertisements to a user and disables one or more functions while the advertisement is being presented. At the end of the advertisement, the operating system again enables the function(s). The advertisement can be visual or audible. The presentation of the advertisement(s) can be made as part of an approach where the user obtains a good or service, such as the operating system, for free or at reduced cost.
    Since it’s for an OS and not for a browser or web-based apps I wonder what the theory is behind this. Perhaps it’s to make an ad-supported version of PC OS X Lite so that more people can test Mac OS X, perhaps even running of a DVD or a flash drive, and eventually deciding that they want this over Windows even if it means buying Apple’s HW to get it.



    If that is the game plan then I wonder if this strategy has ever worked well. Besides the inherent problem with trying to get your OS run on pertty much every PC out there limiting features and options doesn’t often make for a good trial, IMO.
  • Reply 48 of 51
    zoolookzoolook Posts: 657member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


    "One analysts believes the rift could even potentially lead the Cupertino, Calif., company to embrace its rival, Microsoft, for Bing search."



    Get the guy a straight jacket now!



    I use Bing on iPhone. Get me one too.
  • Reply 49 of 51
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    I don't know about you guys but one of the reasons iTunes works for me is the lack of adds. I'd be seriously pissed off if they started putting ads in the media I'm BUYING!!! That is kinda the whole point of having a paid for service as it avoids the crappy ads of TV, radio and whatever else you use to use for media enertainment.



    It is not just the media either. The last thing I want to see is my iTunes filled with ads. Maybe this isn't their goal, but rather they want to support ads on web space of the net. This sucks too. Actually it is worst than that because ads cost me significant bandwidth and lost time. If Apple tries to make them better you can equate that with making them larger. Which of course is more bandwidth again.



    Sadly this will lead to even more browser extensions to block ads and to slow down your computer. So I'm repeating what others have already said ADS SUCK!!!!







    Dave
  • Reply 50 of 51
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


    I don't know about you guys but one of the reasons iTunes works for me is the lack of adds. I'd be seriously pissed off if they started putting ads in the media I'm BUYING!!! That is kinda the whole point of having a paid for service as it avoids the crappy ads of TV, radio and whatever else you use to use for media enertainment.



    I think that's a valid fear, in general.



    As an example, it seems (to me) that the media producers aren't looking at how to put their content online and make THE SAME money online as they would have made in their old systems. They want to make MORE money. So as viewership decreases on FTA, they over charge alternative options, piracy increases, they scream that it's not fair (they are partially right, partially wrong).



    The only protection we have against Apple selling us something AND having ads is competition. In theory if we have enough competitors, then one competitor realises they can get by quite nicely even at half the price (if they've got ads), and the others have to follow. Unfortunately there's so many exclusive deals and vertical integration that competition doesn't always succeed in this.



    We had "free" (ad supported) television, and as the net took off the ads were much cheaper and more and more were appearing. Adverts get lost in the sea of adverts, plus advertisers could afford to put more on - so we've seen more and more.



    Hopefully Apple can break that accidental pattern. If they make very few (but prominent) ads on a product they can charge much more for that ad. We don't get as distracted but the content we like still gets paid for by the advertisers.



    Quote:

    It is not just the media either. The last thing I want to see is my iTunes filled with ads. Maybe this isn't their goal, but rather they want to support ads on web space of the net. This sucks too. Actually it is worst than that because ads cost me significant bandwidth and lost time. If Apple tries to make them better you can equate that with making them larger. Which of course is more bandwidth again.



    I definitely don't want my iPhone downloading ads all the time. I have a 500MB quota and then something like $150/GB. By all means sync a pool of ads via wifi (or iTunes) and use that pool when I'm mobile, but please don't download new ones. I don't want slower access either - the last week I've deliberately used 2G because 3G seems to be in its death throws.



    BTW, what makes you equate "better ads" with "larger ads"?



    Quote:

    Sadly this will lead to even more browser extensions to block ads and to slow down your computer. So I'm repeating what others have already said ADS SUCK!!!!



    I do agree ads suck.

    But I really like not having to pay for content too.
  • Reply 51 of 51
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member
    I like the way that the Fusion Network http://fusionads.net/ handles ads; simple elegant, in-line. Very Apple-y, if you can imagine such a thing, see Tweetie for examples. If Apple want to be a major player and alternative to Google then I doubt they can afford to do it the selective Fusion way, but nevertheless there's proof that ads can be done with some class.



    And moreover, I actually read them. The less they are in my way the more attention I'm likely to give them. Who'd have thought it?
Sign In or Register to comment.