Why are people looking at this as an all-or-nothing solution? People did the same thing with iPhone OS/iOS, iPhone, iPod, stating that Apple will just drop Mac altogether. The only way this could possibly work and keep the very profitably Mac business taking ⅓ of the PC industries profits is if Macs are not being bombarded with an ad-supported OS. Apple doesn?t have any shovel ware on their Macs now, so you have no reason to think that will change with your future Mac purchase.
Like Apple needs more money. I'm sure this is all BS. I'm kind of getting sick of a lot of Apple's business practices. The inly thing that keeps me coming back is their OS. So if they **** that up I don't see much reason to stay a user. Google, step it up.
LOL they just want to patent the idea before Google puts it into Chrome OS
Uh, it appears this idea was hatched before Google even dreamed of Chrome OS. Apple filed for the patent in April 2008. Google announced Chrome OS 15 months later, in July 2009. That's about the right amount of time for Eric Schmidt to report back his insider information to Goople HQ and for the company to produce a minimalistic Chrome OS demo.
i will gladly pay for OS upgrade. This is a bad idea as far as I can see.
It appears the ad-supported approach is optional, doesn't it? I don't see this idea affecting traditional Mac users at all. It's more for public kiosks and cheapskates.
Like Apple needs more money. I'm sure this is all BS. I'm kind of getting sick of a lot of Apple's business practices. The inly thing that keeps me coming back is their OS. So if they fuck that up I don't see much reason to stay a user. Google, step it up.
This patent is more about broadening the company's reach into areas where it would otherwise be unprofitable or impractical for anyone to do business, like public kiosks. By the way, Google's revenue is pretty much all about ads, you know. It's beyond me why you would think Goople would be a better option, when the company already has its tentacles into so much of what we do.
[...]I will most likely go with Linux and one Windows machine for gaming and photos/video processing (since Windows took the lead in multimedia production long time ago anyway).
Yup, there's only one way for Windows to go, and Ballmer has been pretty good at taking them there.
Maybe the "next" Apple TV is a cable box, and the distribution deals are with cable providers? Instead of junk boxes by scientific atlanta or whatever you would get a small, cool-looking thing made by apple that would work with cable and stream all your music/movies/etc?
If so, embedding ads into the OS would be just part of the product pitch for the cable providers: the ads could be very very highly targeted (location, viewing habits, age, etc) and would run regardless of whether the user was watching "tv" or his/her personal content (though probably less likely/often with the latter).
It meets the Steve Jobs "form+function" test, and it replaces an existing clunky box that many people already have in their house. If the "appletv" is bought by the cable company and "rented" to the subscriber this OSad patent could partially/wholly subsidize that arrangement.
What if Apple were preparing to sell their OS to the MASSES. Everyone knows that being ad supported becomes more lucrative based on your audience and its size. IF Apple were to sell their OS to the masses it seems to me (from their history) that they would exert very little effort on piracy protection. So instead of letting everyone with a hackintosh in mind pirate their software they could make it easier to get a copy from apple. With peace of mind that what you are downloading is not infected with viruses ready to record your bank account you would be much more inclined to get it free (albeit ad supported) with the option to purchase add free in the future if you so opted (that last bit is just more conjecture assuming apple was trying to get revenue).
Why should I worry that ads could be coming to Mac OSX? People, as you can see here, would be totally against such an idea. Consumers would never tolerate it! I can go to Ubunta! etc etc.
These are the same basic sentiments made about cable TV, which duped us as commercial free paid TV. How did that go? When you ask people to not partake in something they love, such as Mac OSX, they become submissive and become apologist for why it happens. With cable TV, it was they have a monopoly. My voice won't count!
Well folks, Apple does have a monopoly! It's a monopoly to all us Mac OSX lovers who want to continue enjoying it. I can see corporate Apple eventually going down this road. If you give a mouse a cookie, it going to want milk! I hope this never comes to my desktop, and if it does, that there will be enough like me to fight it.
That's hardly an invention. There are computers in public places that already do that.
Whether you consider it to be an invention or not, it matters not one iota whether the technology looks like an "invention" today. This patent was filed more than 2 years ago. The patent examiner needs to consider what existed at the time of filing, not what exists today.
Apple filed its patent application for "multitouch on a capacitive display" in 2004, 2-1/2 years before the iPhone was unveiled and a year or more before Google bought Android.
It's exactly the shit like this that prevents me from making further investment into Apple platform and come time for upgrades, I will most likely go with Linux and one Windows machine for gaming and photos/video processing (since Windows took the lead in multimedia production long time ago anyway).
I just can't believe the greed and stupidity of corporations these days.
To offer you up a different perspective, I moved back to the Mac Platform in early 2008 after spending years with Linux machines as my primary computers. Linux is no bed of Roses and the longer you use it the more you wish for something that just works. At least for user machines, it is a different story if you want to do interesting things with the machine as that is where Linux shines.
In any event what you posted here is a knee jerk reaction if you ask me. I say that because you simply don't know what OS Apple would be targeting with this feature. On a Mac it would certainly be a joke. However we don't know what Apples goals are here. So why not be more reasonable and simply wait and see what Apple comes up with?
People here are automatically assuming that Apple is targeting the normal distribution of Mac OS here. I do not believe this is the case even though details are thin to say the least. Instead this appears to be a plan to focus on consumers with iOS like devices.
As to paying for OSes and upgrades I consider the money I spend on Mac OS/X to be money well spent. As you will note from a previous post I'm a former desktop Linux user and as such have what might be a different perspective on the value of an OS, let me tell you straight the cost to maintain Mac OS/X on a laptop is a bargain. It amounts to what, maybe ten bucks a month. That is money well spent if you ask me. I still run Linux on some of my hardware where it is needed but Apple gives me a far better user experience with massively less input from me.
In any event I think what Apple is shooting for is a way to lower the cost barriers for consumer devices running iOS. This is an entirely different situation in my mind. The first consideration is that this would be a big NO NO on my iPhone. The whole point of having an iPhone is to have those services you are paying for available when you need them. Where it might get very interesting is with iPad and iPod like devices where some people might have issues with the upfront or other costs.
So let's look at a possible IPad example. Let's say that Apple finds a way to sell the iPad for $100 bucks with free 3G access with the knowledge that you had to deal with ads! Considering how iPad is used as a consumptive device would this be all that objectionable? Especially if future upgrades that disable advertising are easy to purchase? As an iPhone owner not wanting to pay for another 3G contract but not seeing the point of an iPad without 3G I have to think long and hard. Obviously if the advertising is overdone it will become unbearable.
I use the iPad above because it is a different sort of device which with people have developed different usage patterns. I could not see ads working well on my iPhone as the usage is so different and very much on demand. Likewise a Mac is often used for the creation of things where ads would be objectionable. IPad however fills a niche that is by nature consumptive. Plus for many it represents an additional computing expense that they rather not shell out for every month (the 3G plan). So this is the thing if I'm getting something in return for those ads and those ads aren't unbearable is this a bad thing? If I'm paying the same price for hardware and I have to buy a 3G plan, it is a very bad thing indeed.
I mention iPad above because everybody knows what that is. But let's say for example that Apple has a seven inch iPad in the works to go after the E-Book reader market. Amazon builds the cost of the networking into the books price which works out pretty good for everybody. Apple would obviously have trouble with that approach due to the more general nature of iOS. So let's imagine that 3G gets paid for with advertising would that make sense to people? The most obvious thing here is that ads have to be implemented in such a way as to avoid interrupting media being viewed at the time. As I see it it is all about Apple finding a way to compete with the likes of Kindle in a more general way.
In any event I'm of the let's see what they are actually trying to implement mindset right now. Depending upon what is up Apples sleeve this can range from a mildly frustrating feature to something the would cause one to boil with hostility. Sort of like spell correction on iPhone. As I've said shoving advertising onto the user with nothing in return would be really bad, we need to get something in return. Free unlimited 3G, on an iPad like device, would likely do it for me if the specifics where right.
It's exactly the shit like this that prevents me from making further investment into Apple platform and come time for upgrades, I will most likely go with Linux and one Windows machine for gaming and photos/video processing (since Windows took the lead in multimedia production long time ago anyway).
I just can't believe the greed and stupidity of corporations these days.
Most PC OEM's already sort of do this; load shovelware to subsidize the cost of Windows and HW.
When I got my Toshiba laptop 3 years ago, it took about a half hour to remove all the Wild Tangent and McAffee trialware apps. However, when I upgraded to 7, it was a clean install, albeit I paid the upgrade price for it; Apple uses the cost of the HW to partially subsidize the cost of their OS too IMO, and Apple does ship with some trialware as well.
My only real concern with an ad-supported OS, is security. If the OS is pulling ad updates online, that's an opening for malware and phishing attacks right there, especially on public computers with people downloading this or that. (although, if you could install a custom hosts file, it would be possible to block the ad servers outright)
People here are automatically assuming that Apple is targeting the normal distribution of Mac OS here. I do not believe this is the case even though details are thin to say the least. Instead this appears to be a plan to focus on consumers with iOS like devices. ....
....
Dave
+1! Wow! A voice (keyboard) of reason, finally!
The thread was going to all sorts of Hell-&-Back, where I was thinking "Apple-iAd-Gate" already!
Do people think into the future at all anymore? AppleTV and actual Apple-branded TVs have been discussed here before. Perfect situation for this Patent.
Does no one realize the reason for ads in the first place anymore? Two words: Affordable. Content.
Without ads, there is no web as we know it; there are no free or 99 cent apps; there is no free radio; there is no public TV, or even cable or satellite. You have your choice: ads, or subscriptions. Imagine having to have a subscription to every website you visit a day. And yet people complain about a "possible" 2-minute ad every 15 minutes, or to view it at their leisure (see the patent)?
So at what point do people think everything tech should be free, including the box the "free" software and content is running on. How can a Western-world citizen support his/her family with "work for free" jobs? I guess it will be up to the commune whether ya get that new car or not, or whether your sickness is worth curing, and your children are smart enough to go school.
Bunch of Commies writin' and spewing a lot of "Red @#$%^" around here!
Pure Capitalism surely needs a "reality check" every once in awhile, but it's still far better than any other alternative at the moment. Make it better be respecting the privileges you have today, and being fair to your neighbor(s)... who just might be the ones providing that content you're consuming I might add.
And if any of your "ad-free-world" wishes come true.... don't expect a neighborly beer and hot-dog when chatting over the fence. More like the "dog" will be attached to the word "food" and it will be in a can like the beer! Welcome to Red-Russia!
1. Will I need to tape my eyelids back while using it?
2. Anyone filing a patent so as to prevent others from doing something should have a red hot poker swiftly inserted up their back vestibule. It is an obscenity, an outrage and stifles innovation and progress.
I see this in several ways. Right now there are TVs in bus stations and airports that operate on quarters and dollars. A free OS computer there would make sense if it were supported by ads.
In the 80s when I got cable TV for the first time I was extremely annoyed that I was paying to view shows and was still getting advertising. The extra cost channels didn't have ads for products. They just showed promotions for other shows. That was OK in my eyes. I gave up cable TV long ago because of advertising and the cost of the service.
On the internet I watch some TV shows and most of them do have advertisements during the show. I'm OK with that if there aren't too many of them.
If I paid for a computer I totally expect to be able to do anything I want with it unfettered by advertisements. I don't want to be forced to watch beverage ads before opening a word processor or accessing a browser. Most large web sites and blogs have paid ads. All search engines I've used have ads too. Does that equate to my cable TV experience where there were ads all the time? I think it does. The difference is I can click to another place if I so choose.
Anybody who bought a non-Apple computer knows that it came full of free offers from vendors. Those are advertisements. Free anti-virus trial, free MS Office trial, and a few others.
I've just begun to use Linux and it takes me to the same internet full of ads. Ubuntu Linux was free from Canonical. As LInux gets easier and easier to use through its evolution, I don't think ad supported OSs will succeed anywhere but in libraries, bus stations, airports, or even airplanes. The idea of being forced to pay a small fee or watch the ads won't work for any product sold to an individual.
Comments
Like Apple needs more money. I'm sure this is all BS. I'm kind of getting sick of a lot of Apple's business practices. The inly thing that keeps me coming back is their OS. So if they **** that up I don't see much reason to stay a user. Google, step it up.
It's likely a preemptive strike against Google.
LOL they just want to patent the idea before Google puts it into Chrome OS
Uh, it appears this idea was hatched before Google even dreamed of Chrome OS. Apple filed for the patent in April 2008. Google announced Chrome OS 15 months later, in July 2009. That's about the right amount of time for Eric Schmidt to report back his insider information to Goople HQ and for the company to produce a minimalistic Chrome OS demo.
i will gladly pay for OS upgrade. This is a bad idea as far as I can see.
It appears the ad-supported approach is optional, doesn't it? I don't see this idea affecting traditional Mac users at all. It's more for public kiosks and cheapskates.
Like Apple needs more money. I'm sure this is all BS. I'm kind of getting sick of a lot of Apple's business practices. The inly thing that keeps me coming back is their OS. So if they fuck that up I don't see much reason to stay a user. Google, step it up.
This patent is more about broadening the company's reach into areas where it would otherwise be unprofitable or impractical for anyone to do business, like public kiosks. By the way, Google's revenue is pretty much all about ads, you know. It's beyond me why you would think Goople would be a better option, when the company already has its tentacles into so much of what we do.
[...]I will most likely go with Linux and one Windows machine for gaming and photos/video processing (since Windows took the lead in multimedia production long time ago anyway).
Yup, there's only one way for Windows to go, and Ballmer has been pretty good at taking them there.
If so, embedding ads into the OS would be just part of the product pitch for the cable providers: the ads could be very very highly targeted (location, viewing habits, age, etc) and would run regardless of whether the user was watching "tv" or his/her personal content (though probably less likely/often with the latter).
It meets the Steve Jobs "form+function" test, and it replaces an existing clunky box that many people already have in their house. If the "appletv" is bought by the cable company and "rented" to the subscriber this OSad patent could partially/wholly subsidize that arrangement.
These are the same basic sentiments made about cable TV, which duped us as commercial free paid TV. How did that go? When you ask people to not partake in something they love, such as Mac OSX, they become submissive and become apologist for why it happens. With cable TV, it was they have a monopoly. My voice won't count!
Well folks, Apple does have a monopoly! It's a monopoly to all us Mac OSX lovers who want to continue enjoying it. I can see corporate Apple eventually going down this road. If you give a mouse a cookie, it going to want milk! I hope this never comes to my desktop, and if it does, that there will be enough like me to fight it.
That's hardly an invention. There are computers in public places that already do that.
Whether you consider it to be an invention or not, it matters not one iota whether the technology looks like an "invention" today. This patent was filed more than 2 years ago. The patent examiner needs to consider what existed at the time of filing, not what exists today.
Apple filed its patent application for "multitouch on a capacitive display" in 2004, 2-1/2 years before the iPhone was unveiled and a year or more before Google bought Android.
It's exactly the shit like this that prevents me from making further investment into Apple platform and come time for upgrades, I will most likely go with Linux and one Windows machine for gaming and photos/video processing (since Windows took the lead in multimedia production long time ago anyway).
I just can't believe the greed and stupidity of corporations these days.
To offer you up a different perspective, I moved back to the Mac Platform in early 2008 after spending years with Linux machines as my primary computers. Linux is no bed of Roses and the longer you use it the more you wish for something that just works. At least for user machines, it is a different story if you want to do interesting things with the machine as that is where Linux shines.
In any event what you posted here is a knee jerk reaction if you ask me. I say that because you simply don't know what OS Apple would be targeting with this feature. On a Mac it would certainly be a joke. However we don't know what Apples goals are here. So why not be more reasonable and simply wait and see what Apple comes up with?
Dave
As to paying for OSes and upgrades I consider the money I spend on Mac OS/X to be money well spent. As you will note from a previous post I'm a former desktop Linux user and as such have what might be a different perspective on the value of an OS, let me tell you straight the cost to maintain Mac OS/X on a laptop is a bargain. It amounts to what, maybe ten bucks a month. That is money well spent if you ask me. I still run Linux on some of my hardware where it is needed but Apple gives me a far better user experience with massively less input from me.
In any event I think what Apple is shooting for is a way to lower the cost barriers for consumer devices running iOS. This is an entirely different situation in my mind. The first consideration is that this would be a big NO NO on my iPhone. The whole point of having an iPhone is to have those services you are paying for available when you need them. Where it might get very interesting is with iPad and iPod like devices where some people might have issues with the upfront or other costs.
So let's look at a possible IPad example. Let's say that Apple finds a way to sell the iPad for $100 bucks with free 3G access with the knowledge that you had to deal with ads! Considering how iPad is used as a consumptive device would this be all that objectionable? Especially if future upgrades that disable advertising are easy to purchase? As an iPhone owner not wanting to pay for another 3G contract but not seeing the point of an iPad without 3G I have to think long and hard. Obviously if the advertising is overdone it will become unbearable.
I use the iPad above because it is a different sort of device which with people have developed different usage patterns. I could not see ads working well on my iPhone as the usage is so different and very much on demand. Likewise a Mac is often used for the creation of things where ads would be objectionable. IPad however fills a niche that is by nature consumptive. Plus for many it represents an additional computing expense that they rather not shell out for every month (the 3G plan). So this is the thing if I'm getting something in return for those ads and those ads aren't unbearable is this a bad thing? If I'm paying the same price for hardware and I have to buy a 3G plan, it is a very bad thing indeed.
I mention iPad above because everybody knows what that is. But let's say for example that Apple has a seven inch iPad in the works to go after the E-Book reader market. Amazon builds the cost of the networking into the books price which works out pretty good for everybody. Apple would obviously have trouble with that approach due to the more general nature of iOS. So let's imagine that 3G gets paid for with advertising would that make sense to people? The most obvious thing here is that ads have to be implemented in such a way as to avoid interrupting media being viewed at the time. As I see it it is all about Apple finding a way to compete with the likes of Kindle in a more general way.
In any event I'm of the let's see what they are actually trying to implement mindset right now. Depending upon what is up Apples sleeve this can range from a mildly frustrating feature to something the would cause one to boil with hostility. Sort of like spell correction on iPhone. As I've said shoving advertising onto the user with nothing in return would be really bad, we need to get something in return. Free unlimited 3G, on an iPad like device, would likely do it for me if the specifics where right.
Dave
It's exactly the shit like this that prevents me from making further investment into Apple platform and come time for upgrades, I will most likely go with Linux and one Windows machine for gaming and photos/video processing (since Windows took the lead in multimedia production long time ago anyway).
I just can't believe the greed and stupidity of corporations these days.
Most PC OEM's already sort of do this; load shovelware to subsidize the cost of Windows and HW.
When I got my Toshiba laptop 3 years ago, it took about a half hour to remove all the Wild Tangent and McAffee trialware apps. However, when I upgraded to 7, it was a clean install, albeit I paid the upgrade price for it; Apple uses the cost of the HW to partially subsidize the cost of their OS too IMO, and Apple does ship with some trialware as well.
My only real concern with an ad-supported OS, is security. If the OS is pulling ad updates online, that's an opening for malware and phishing attacks right there, especially on public computers with people downloading this or that. (although, if you could install a custom hosts file, it would be possible to block the ad servers outright)
People here are automatically assuming that Apple is targeting the normal distribution of Mac OS here. I do not believe this is the case even though details are thin to say the least. Instead this appears to be a plan to focus on consumers with iOS like devices. ....
....
Dave
+1! Wow! A voice (keyboard) of reason, finally!
The thread was going to all sorts of Hell-&-Back, where I was thinking "Apple-iAd-Gate" already!
Do people think into the future at all anymore? AppleTV and actual Apple-branded TVs have been discussed here before. Perfect situation for this Patent.
Does no one realize the reason for ads in the first place anymore? Two words: Affordable. Content.
Without ads, there is no web as we know it; there are no free or 99 cent apps; there is no free radio; there is no public TV, or even cable or satellite. You have your choice: ads, or subscriptions. Imagine having to have a subscription to every website you visit a day. And yet people complain about a "possible" 2-minute ad every 15 minutes, or to view it at their leisure (see the patent)?
So at what point do people think everything tech should be free, including the box the "free" software and content is running on. How can a Western-world citizen support his/her family with "work for free" jobs? I guess it will be up to the commune whether ya get that new car or not, or whether your sickness is worth curing, and your children are smart enough to go school.
Bunch of Commies writin' and spewing a lot of "Red @#$%^" around here!
Pure Capitalism surely needs a "reality check" every once in awhile, but it's still far better than any other alternative at the moment. Make it better be respecting the privileges you have today, and being fair to your neighbor(s)... who just might be the ones providing that content you're consuming I might add.
And if any of your "ad-free-world" wishes come true.... don't expect a neighborly beer and hot-dog when chatting over the fence. More like the "dog" will be attached to the word "food" and it will be in a can like the beer! Welcome to Red-Russia!
Two points
1. Will I need to tape my eyelids back while using it?
2. Anyone filing a patent so as to prevent others from doing something should have a red hot poker swiftly inserted up their back vestibule. It is an obscenity, an outrage and stifles innovation and progress.
I see this in several ways. Right now there are TVs in bus stations and airports that operate on quarters and dollars. A free OS computer there would make sense if it were supported by ads.
In the 80s when I got cable TV for the first time I was extremely annoyed that I was paying to view shows and was still getting advertising. The extra cost channels didn't have ads for products. They just showed promotions for other shows. That was OK in my eyes. I gave up cable TV long ago because of advertising and the cost of the service.
On the internet I watch some TV shows and most of them do have advertisements during the show. I'm OK with that if there aren't too many of them.
If I paid for a computer I totally expect to be able to do anything I want with it unfettered by advertisements. I don't want to be forced to watch beverage ads before opening a word processor or accessing a browser. Most large web sites and blogs have paid ads. All search engines I've used have ads too. Does that equate to my cable TV experience where there were ads all the time? I think it does. The difference is I can click to another place if I so choose.
Anybody who bought a non-Apple computer knows that it came full of free offers from vendors. Those are advertisements. Free anti-virus trial, free MS Office trial, and a few others.
I've just begun to use Linux and it takes me to the same internet full of ads. Ubuntu Linux was free from Canonical. As LInux gets easier and easier to use through its evolution, I don't think ad supported OSs will succeed anywhere but in libraries, bus stations, airports, or even airplanes. The idea of being forced to pay a small fee or watch the ads won't work for any product sold to an individual.