ok people we all know that Google's worth is solely in online ad sales and anything that disrupts that spells trouble for the big G!
I told yall before that the online ad biz had plateaued and that Google better watch its back. Apple and MS are coming for that pie....And fast!!!
And when the tech magazines finally get their ba**s back between their legs and tell the public that Google's bread and butter is being nibbled on like locust on a fresh batch of vegetation, Wall Street will have no choice but to be concerned about that stock price.
It always bemused(ten dollar word) me that Google could buy a company for a zillion dollars and then give away that bought company's stuff for FREE(?).
Hell, Google even gives Apple(not for long I figure) 100 million a year to carry Google search. WTF!
How do you compete with the competition and then tun around and put mega bucks in their pockets? OMFG!!!
Connect the dots people. Eric Schimdt is about to get that a** beat down!!!!!
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.
The way it reads, this clause is for the collection, use or disclosure of information, not for putting ads, admob can still put ads, just not collecting user data.
Then that would mean that AdMob/Google could still serve the ads, but they would be inferior in terms of being targeted to the end user. iAd, Flurry, etc would be able to, for instance, target an ad at iPad users, but AdMob/Google wouldn't know what ads would be most appropriate for what users/devices.
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. That market share is used to limit competition in Apps and Advertising to the detriment of their competitors and at the expense of consumers/advertisers who pay in the form of decreased competition reflecting less innovation and/or higher prices.
Considering they are being looked at from several angles, I am surprised they would open another front.
Particularly at a time when the compare/contrast with other platforms makes them look really bad. (AT&T just launched an Android phone tied to Yahoo)
Go back to OSNews where they love this sort of fallacious rhetoric.
Then that would mean that AdMob/Google could still serve the ads, but they would be inferior in terms of being targeted to the end user. iAd, Flurry, etc would be able to, for instance, target an ad at iPad users, but AdMob/Google wouldn't know what ads would be most appropriate for what users/devices.
Too bad for Google/AdMob. Nice for promoting competition in the mobile ad industry.
Selling it wouldn't exactly constitute "advertising purposes".
Strictly speaking, they wouldn't be allowed to collect it for anything other than "serving ads". If they are doing post-analysis on the data, then they are on the honour system for using it strictly for ad targeting. If they are using it for anything else, they are in violation, regardless of if it is Google or flurry or anyone else. If for instance, they use the analyzed data for their sales pitches to potential advertising clients, that is not using it to serve an ad.
All the bitching and moaning about the simple fact that apple will require the developer to ask you if they can capture and transmit personal information (i.e. you present location and maybe other interesting thing about you) so they can better place ads in front of you which you might be interested in or better yet specific to your location like "hey store down the street is having a sale right now"
This has nothing to do with competition or technology, any developer can use any service to provide ads, as long as they give you the choose. Sounds like AdMob has been doing this behind everyone back and been using this data to their advantage, so now they my not know your personal information and how is this bad for you and me.
All the bitching and moaning about the simple fact that apple will require the developer to ask you if they can capture and transmit personal information (i.e. you present location and maybe other interesting thing about you) so they can better place ads in front of you which you might be interested in or better yet specific to your location like "hey store down the street is having a sale right now"
This has nothing to do with competition or technology, any developer can use any service to provide ads, as long as they give you the choose. Sounds like AdMob has been doing this behind everyone back and been using this data to their advantage, so now they my not know your personal information and how is this bad for you and me.
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).
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. That market share is used to limit competition in Apps and Advertising to the detriment of their competitors and at the expense of consumers/advertisers who pay in the form of decreased competition reflecting less innovation and/or higher prices.
Considering they are being looked at from several angles, I am surprised they would open another front.
Particularly at a time when the compare/contrast with other platforms makes them look really bad. (AT&T just launched an Android phone tied to Yahoo)
You're a total idiot. No way this is an antitrust issue. Try using a dictionary, and read some history books to educate yourself on the subject.
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. That market share is used to limit competition in Apps and Advertising to the detriment of their competitors and at the expense of consumers/advertisers who pay in the form of decreased competition reflecting less innovation and/or higher prices.
Considering they are being looked at from several angles, I am surprised they would open another front.
Particularly at a time when the compare/contrast with other platforms makes them look really bad. (AT&T just launched an Android phone tied to Yahoo)
Please tell us exactly what Apple as a monopoly over. And don't say 'Apps on their own platform.' That ain't a monopoly.
Of course what he means by that is: "Apple's new terms are not in our best interests."
That's what I was thinking. Because developers can use iAds and get money from them same as AdMob, so what's the loss there. I don't have you collecting my private info without my knowledge etc.
so where's the loss. oh yeah, Google's cut of the ad money
Google is starting to realize that competing with Apple isn't as easy as they thought!
Competing with your customers is often not a great idea unless you can crush them.
This is why Apple probably won't own a studio even if its warchest is big enough to buy one and start a few indies in the bargain.
In one sense, Google had no choice given MS was hostile and was already competing with Bing/Live/whatever the heck it was called then. So it was natural to want to make sure they also had their own mobile entry against WinMo as to not be shut out.
Remember that Android started before the iPhone came out and looked like a Blackberry. In pre-iPhone 2007, Android was a smart strategic move by Google since Linux was fragmenting quickly. If MS started dominating the smart phone world and locked Google into second class citizenship for ad revenue it would really suck. Blackberry, I think was still using whatever search the mobile provider offered. Symbian probably the same given the locked nature of phones back then. MS was the only serious competitor despite the iPhone launch in Jan.
In 2010, it doesn't look like such a bright move in pissing Apple off enough that Apple entered the ad market itself and is willing to partner with MS for search/map/etc infrastructure that MS has been building for a decade to combat google. And Android isn't a revenue stream...it's an enabler for a revenue stream. One that Apple doesn't really care about so is willing to share more of to partners.
They sell elegant hardware/software at huge profits that also happen to enable Jobs' vision of computing. By threatening both with Android, Apple is going to respond by attacking the foundations of Google's income in turn...ads.
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?
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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas
Then that would mean that AdMob/Google could still serve the ads, but they would be inferior in terms of being targeted to the end user. iAd, Flurry, etc would be able to, for instance, target an ad at iPad users, but AdMob/Google wouldn't know what ads would be most appropriate for what users/devices.
I suspect that the ads will be more oriented to the app than to the user. Adding in perhaps GPS info.
So lets say that the Publishers of "what to expect when you are expecting" created an app. An interactive, digital version of the books. You could enter your expecting date and it would back track so each day you could see what should be going on at that point, give you checklists of things to get and do, a place to track details from appointments etc. then you could add on 'the first year' and have baby weights blah blah. You get the idea.
So the ads would be baby and mommy focused. Formula, diapers, cribs, strollers. With GPS perhaps they could focus in and see that there's a maternity store near you have a huge sale.
A movie app would have amazon sales ads, ticketmaster and such.
A sports app, perhaps sporting goods, tickets, pay per view of the big game.
MS doesn't own an ad service like admob or quattro does it? There's ads built into Bing of course and their adCenter analytics stuff.
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.
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.
I don't think Apple could say they weren't indy anymore, just because they were selling data. They could ban them for inappropriately using the data, since it was specified to only be used for serving/targeting ads and selling it would violate this. Of course, they could do the same to AdMob/google if they used it outside of the stated scope.
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlituna
I suspect that the ads will be more oriented to the app than to the user. Adding in perhaps GPS info.
So lets say that the Publishers of "what to expect when you are expecting" created an app. An interactive, digital version of the books. You could enter your expecting date and it would back track so each day you could see what should be going on at that point, give you checklists of things to get and do, a place to track details from appointments etc. then you could add on 'the first year' and have baby weights blah blah. You get the idea.
So the ads would be baby and mommy focused. Formula, diapers, cribs, strollers. With GPS perhaps they could focus in and see that there's a maternity store near you have a huge sale.
A movie app would have amazon sales ads, ticketmaster and such.
A sports app, perhaps sporting goods, tickets, pay per view of the big game.
and so on
Right, and then those ads served by competitors would not have access to this info and would be much less valuable.
What this means for developers is that when they are choosing which ad platform gives them the best set of terms that meet their individual needs, they will have an least one major option that is essentially a non-starter as their product is handicapped.
Comments
I told yall before that the online ad biz had plateaued and that Google better watch its back. Apple and MS are coming for that pie....And fast!!!
And when the tech magazines finally get their ba**s back between their legs and tell the public that Google's bread and butter is being nibbled on like locust on a fresh batch of vegetation, Wall Street will have no choice but to be concerned about that stock price.
It always bemused(ten dollar word) me that Google could buy a company for a zillion dollars and then give away that bought company's stuff for FREE(?).
Hell, Google even gives Apple(not for long I figure) 100 million a year to carry Google search. WTF!
How do you compete with the competition and then tun around and put mega bucks in their pockets? OMFG!!!
Connect the dots people. Eric Schimdt is about to get that a** beat down!!!!!
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
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?
... and other data specifically designated by Apple as available for advertising purposes.
Selling it wouldn't exactly constitute "advertising purposes".
The way it reads, this clause is for the collection, use or disclosure of information, not for putting ads, admob can still put ads, just not collecting user data.
Then that would mean that AdMob/Google could still serve the ads, but they would be inferior in terms of being targeted to the end user. iAd, Flurry, etc would be able to, for instance, target an ad at iPad users, but AdMob/Google wouldn't know what ads would be most appropriate for what users/devices.
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. That market share is used to limit competition in Apps and Advertising to the detriment of their competitors and at the expense of consumers/advertisers who pay in the form of decreased competition reflecting less innovation and/or higher prices.
Considering they are being looked at from several angles, I am surprised they would open another front.
Particularly at a time when the compare/contrast with other platforms makes them look really bad. (AT&T just launched an Android phone tied to Yahoo)
Go back to OSNews where they love this sort of fallacious rhetoric.
Then that would mean that AdMob/Google could still serve the ads, but they would be inferior in terms of being targeted to the end user. iAd, Flurry, etc would be able to, for instance, target an ad at iPad users, but AdMob/Google wouldn't know what ads would be most appropriate for what users/devices.
Too bad for Google/AdMob. Nice for promoting competition in the mobile ad industry.
Selling it wouldn't exactly constitute "advertising purposes".
Strictly speaking, they wouldn't be allowed to collect it for anything other than "serving ads". If they are doing post-analysis on the data, then they are on the honour system for using it strictly for ad targeting. If they are using it for anything else, they are in violation, regardless of if it is Google or flurry or anyone else. If for instance, they use the analyzed data for their sales pitches to potential advertising clients, that is not using it to serve an ad.
This has nothing to do with competition or technology, any developer can use any service to provide ads, as long as they give you the choose. Sounds like AdMob has been doing this behind everyone back and been using this data to their advantage, so now they my not know your personal information and how is this bad for you and me.
And you should have taken a clue from clueless Verizon when it comes to partnering up with someone.
All the bitching and moaning about the simple fact that apple will require the developer to ask you if they can capture and transmit personal information (i.e. you present location and maybe other interesting thing about you) so they can better place ads in front of you which you might be interested in or better yet specific to your location like "hey store down the street is having a sale right now"
This has nothing to do with competition or technology, any developer can use any service to provide ads, as long as they give you the choose. Sounds like AdMob has been doing this behind everyone back and been using this data to their advantage, so now they my not know your personal information and how is this bad for you and me.
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).
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. That market share is used to limit competition in Apps and Advertising to the detriment of their competitors and at the expense of consumers/advertisers who pay in the form of decreased competition reflecting less innovation and/or higher prices.
Considering they are being looked at from several angles, I am surprised they would open another front.
Particularly at a time when the compare/contrast with other platforms makes them look really bad. (AT&T just launched an Android phone tied to Yahoo)
You're a total idiot. No way this is an antitrust issue. Try using a dictionary, and read some history books to educate yourself on the subject.
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. That market share is used to limit competition in Apps and Advertising to the detriment of their competitors and at the expense of consumers/advertisers who pay in the form of decreased competition reflecting less innovation and/or higher prices.
Considering they are being looked at from several angles, I am surprised they would open another front.
Particularly at a time when the compare/contrast with other platforms makes them look really bad. (AT&T just launched an Android phone tied to Yahoo)
Please tell us exactly what Apple as a monopoly over. And don't say 'Apps on their own platform.' That ain't a monopoly.
Of course what he means by that is: "Apple's new terms are not in our best interests."
That's what I was thinking. Because developers can use iAds and get money from them same as AdMob, so what's the loss there. I don't have you collecting my private info without my knowledge etc.
so where's the loss. oh yeah, Google's cut of the ad money
I must have missed something - when did AdMob start caring about consumers?
It was right after ants started caring about aphids.
Google is starting to realize that competing with Apple isn't as easy as they thought!
Competing with your customers is often not a great idea unless you can crush them.
This is why Apple probably won't own a studio even if its warchest is big enough to buy one and start a few indies in the bargain.
In one sense, Google had no choice given MS was hostile and was already competing with Bing/Live/whatever the heck it was called then. So it was natural to want to make sure they also had their own mobile entry against WinMo as to not be shut out.
Remember that Android started before the iPhone came out and looked like a Blackberry. In pre-iPhone 2007, Android was a smart strategic move by Google since Linux was fragmenting quickly. If MS started dominating the smart phone world and locked Google into second class citizenship for ad revenue it would really suck. Blackberry, I think was still using whatever search the mobile provider offered. Symbian probably the same given the locked nature of phones back then. MS was the only serious competitor despite the iPhone launch in Jan.
In 2010, it doesn't look like such a bright move in pissing Apple off enough that Apple entered the ad market itself and is willing to partner with MS for search/map/etc infrastructure that MS has been building for a decade to combat google. And Android isn't a revenue stream...it's an enabler for a revenue stream. One that Apple doesn't really care about so is willing to share more of to partners.
They sell elegant hardware/software at huge profits that also happen to enable Jobs' vision of computing. By threatening both with Android, Apple is going to respond by attacking the foundations of Google's income in turn...ads.
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?
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.
Then that would mean that AdMob/Google could still serve the ads, but they would be inferior in terms of being targeted to the end user. iAd, Flurry, etc would be able to, for instance, target an ad at iPad users, but AdMob/Google wouldn't know what ads would be most appropriate for what users/devices.
I suspect that the ads will be more oriented to the app than to the user. Adding in perhaps GPS info.
So lets say that the Publishers of "what to expect when you are expecting" created an app. An interactive, digital version of the books. You could enter your expecting date and it would back track so each day you could see what should be going on at that point, give you checklists of things to get and do, a place to track details from appointments etc. then you could add on 'the first year' and have baby weights blah blah. You get the idea.
So the ads would be baby and mommy focused. Formula, diapers, cribs, strollers. With GPS perhaps they could focus in and see that there's a maternity store near you have a huge sale.
A movie app would have amazon sales ads, ticketmaster and such.
A sports app, perhaps sporting goods, tickets, pay per view of the big game.
and so on
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).
MS doesn't own an ad service like admob or quattro does it? There's ads built into Bing of course and their adCenter analytics stuff.
MS doesn't own an ad service like admob or quattro does it? There's ads built into Bing of course and their adCenter analytics stuff.
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.
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.
I don't think Apple could say they weren't indy anymore, just because they were selling data. They could ban them for inappropriately using the data, since it was specified to only be used for serving/targeting ads and selling it would violate this. Of course, they could do the same to AdMob/google if they used it outside of the stated scope.
I suspect that the ads will be more oriented to the app than to the user. Adding in perhaps GPS info.
So lets say that the Publishers of "what to expect when you are expecting" created an app. An interactive, digital version of the books. You could enter your expecting date and it would back track so each day you could see what should be going on at that point, give you checklists of things to get and do, a place to track details from appointments etc. then you could add on 'the first year' and have baby weights blah blah. You get the idea.
So the ads would be baby and mommy focused. Formula, diapers, cribs, strollers. With GPS perhaps they could focus in and see that there's a maternity store near you have a huge sale.
A movie app would have amazon sales ads, ticketmaster and such.
A sports app, perhaps sporting goods, tickets, pay per view of the big game.
and so on
Right, and then those ads served by competitors would not have access to this info and would be much less valuable.
What this means for developers is that when they are choosing which ad platform gives them the best set of terms that meet their individual needs, they will have an least one major option that is essentially a non-starter as their product is handicapped.