What does that stupid question have to do with the point he's making?
Their track record. iTunes for Windows manages a iDevice. It would've been phenomenally stupid of them no not make a windows version and they wouldn't be the company they are today without it, but Safari never gained much traction. A good amount of youtube videos are viewed on a mobile device and seeing as how there's no iTunes for Android I doubt they'd make a video app for it either.
So what stopped YouTube from releasing a Youtube app right from the word go? Did Apple force them to allow an ad free baked in App by saying they would not approve a standalone app? I don't think so. Therefore one might wonder at the egregious error that the Youtube board made and how much money they lost by trying to get their App baked in? They were bound to work it out eventually.
So rather than looking at how much more money they are now making one can look at how much money they lost by waiting. For a company that markets itself as an analytics expert, they got this bit bit of analytics pretty wrong.
Have you had your IQ level recently tested? I'm genuinely serious. Because only a dumb f*** could post a response like that
Well let's see, it's making Google much more money (which is NOT suppose to happen in a thermonuclear war) plus more of the users info is now relayed to Google (which before iOS users were protected by Apple, now it's fend for yourselves), so how am I wrong?
Were these not your words?
Google now has the ability to track, store, and monetize your YouTube experience
Apple did not allow this before in the native app
So how do you feel now that this is the case? Btw there's no need for insults.
So what stopped YouTube from releasing a Youtube app right from the word go? Did Apple force them to allow an ad free baked in App by saying they would not approve a standalone app? I don't think so. Therefore one might wonder at the egregious error that the Youtube board made and how much money they lost by trying to get their App baked in? They were bound to work it out eventually.
So rather than looking at how much more money they are now making one can look at how much money they lost by waiting. For a company that markets itself as an analytics expert, they got this bit bit of analytics pretty wrong.
There was a multi year (5 I think) agreement between Apple and Google. Apple chose not to renew thus Google made it a separate app.
There was a multi year (5 I think) agreement between Apple and Google. Apple chose not to renew thus Google made it a separate app.
Fair enough, but one wonders why google entered into this arrangement, I mean what was in it for them except for (in hindsight) lost revenue. It's not as if YouTube needed promoting.
Fair enough, but one wonders why google entered into this arrangement, I mean what was in it for them except for (in hindsight) lost revenue. It's not as if YouTube be needed promoting.
At the time nobody was watching youtube on a mobile device and ads weren't yet shown before videos. Google had just purchased youtube and I'm sure Apple paid them a nice fee to have it on the iPhone. We all know what happened in those 5 years and the bad blood there is between Apple and Google now, so Apple didn't renew.
To those that are posting that they're upset at Apple for removing the native YouTube app, know that they likely would have been forced to by Google eventually. Google did that to Microsoft and the Windows Phone YouTube app that MS had made (which also bypassed ads). I'm sure that was a factor in the tripling of mobile ad sales as well (though obviously not as huge as traffic from iDevices).
Yeah well, unfortunately, I despise being force-fed video commercials… both YouTube and Hulu have all but lost me. I started paying for Hulu Plus thinking it would remove the ads (Netflix style) but no. Way too many BAD ads that repeat incessantly... So I'm not paying for Hulu anymore, and I've already switched to Vimeo for 90% of my 'indy video' viewing… no commercials there...
Most of what I watch on YouTube now is older stuff anyway, so they don't force ads onto you as much. But that incredibly annoying 5 second "preview" that you can skip… I don't WANT to be forced to interact with the damned interface every time I want to watch a video!
So yeah, I've all but stopped watching vids on YouTube, and head for the alternatives first… their loss I guess.
If I remember correctly you previously predicted Google's doom during the Oracle suit. I don't see how a ad driven radio would hurt Google since Pandora is the same thing and available on both platforms. If that hasn't hurt Google then 'iRadio' won't either.
You mean the Oracle/Google suit that is still ongoing?
At the time nobody was watching youtube on a mobile device and ads weren't yet shown before videos. Google had just purchased youtube and I'm sure Apple paid them a nice fee to have it on the iPhone. We all know what happened in those 5 years and the bad blood there is between Apple and Google now, so Apple didn't renew.
This will keep h.264 content coming for iOS.
No Flash, no WebM but still got YouTube on iPhones.
Does Google want to throw away this revenue with their little games?
iOS users happy, Apple happy, 3rd party developers happy, that's how to manage an ecosystem.
To those that are posting that they're upset at Apple for removing the native YouTube app, know that they likely would have been forced to by Google eventually. Google did that to Microsoft and the Windows Phone YouTube app that MS had made (which also bypassed ads). I'm sure that was a factor in the tripling of mobile ad sales as well (though obviously not as huge as traffic from iDevices).
Google also removed ad blockers from Play, strange I don't recall much of an outcry over this violation of users rights.
Remember when Apple removed a fart App and it was like the end of the world?
Google also removed ad blockers from Play, strange I don't recall much of an outcry over this violation of users rights.
Remember when Apple removed a fart App and it was like the end of the world?
The backlash for removing ad blockers from the Play Store was non-existent because they were free (so no lost revenue to the devs) and side loading apps on Android is a trivial process. That fact is amplified considering ad blockers only work on rooted phones and anyone capable of rooting their phone is capable of finding and installing an ad blocker outside of the Play Store. I think there was more head scratching at the futility then anything.
The backlash for removing ad blockers from the Play Store was non-existent because they were free (so no lost revenue to the devs) and side loading apps on Android is a trivial process. That fact is amplified considering ad blockers only work on rooted phones and anyone capable of rooting their phone is capable of finding and installing an ad blocker outside of the Play Store. I think there was more head scratching at the futility then anything.
Apple removed a fart app from there store? lol
Yep, there was such an outcry they had to put them back.
A good amount of youtube videos are viewed on a mobile device and seeing as how there's no iTunes for Android I doubt they'd make a video app for it either.
Me too, also at work, running it on Windows. Even though it's unsupported now, it's still better than IE. It can open any website, unlike IE, and does it faster as well (IE10 & Safari 5 on a W7 box).
I do not know the nature of the negotiations on YouTube, but like maps I suspect Google wanted more access to people's information including location than Apple was willing to allow. So YouTube like Maps was no longer a pre-installed app. Like Maps Apple certainly did not ban YouTube, but other apps e.g., Vimeo, are not parity.
Now if you want to grant YouTube access to location data or personal information it's in your control when asked by YouTube.
More interesting data would be to know what per cent income does Google earn from iOS vs Android and what percent vs popular of iOS devices have YouTube. This data would expose an entirely different set of data on business strategy progress by Google. I suspect 70% of Google mobile ad revenue comes fom the 50% of iOS devices with YouTube. My guesstimates paint an interesting picture, but I don't know the real facts.
@rob53 Apple has no reason to "fight" Google because Apple did not lose any revenues from this case. Instead, Apple has indirect benefit because the new YouTube app is more functional than the previous native app and that makes user happy -> less reason to switch to other platforms.
Comments
Have you had your IQ level recently tested? I'm genuinely serious. Because only a dumb f*** could post a response like that
Their track record. iTunes for Windows manages a iDevice. It would've been phenomenally stupid of them no not make a windows version and they wouldn't be the company they are today without it, but Safari never gained much traction. A good amount of youtube videos are viewed on a mobile device and seeing as how there's no iTunes for Android I doubt they'd make a video app for it either.
So what stopped YouTube from releasing a Youtube app right from the word go? Did Apple force them to allow an ad free baked in App by saying they would not approve a standalone app? I don't think so. Therefore one might wonder at the egregious error that the Youtube board made and how much money they lost by trying to get their App baked in? They were bound to work it out eventually.
So rather than looking at how much more money they are now making one can look at how much money they lost by waiting. For a company that markets itself as an analytics expert, they got this bit bit of analytics pretty wrong.
Well let's see, it's making Google much more money (which is NOT suppose to happen in a thermonuclear war) plus more of the users info is now relayed to Google (which before iOS users were protected by Apple, now it's fend for yourselves), so how am I wrong?
Were these not your words?
So how do you feel now that this is the case? Btw there's no need for insults.
There was a multi year (5 I think) agreement between Apple and Google. Apple chose not to renew thus Google made it a separate app.
It's the only browser I use.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
There was a multi year (5 I think) agreement between Apple and Google. Apple chose not to renew thus Google made it a separate app.
Fair enough, but one wonders why google entered into this arrangement, I mean what was in it for them except for (in hindsight) lost revenue. It's not as if YouTube needed promoting.
At the time nobody was watching youtube on a mobile device and ads weren't yet shown before videos. Google had just purchased youtube and I'm sure Apple paid them a nice fee to have it on the iPhone. We all know what happened in those 5 years and the bad blood there is between Apple and Google now, so Apple didn't renew.
To those that are posting that they're upset at Apple for removing the native YouTube app, know that they likely would have been forced to by Google eventually. Google did that to Microsoft and the Windows Phone YouTube app that MS had made (which also bypassed ads). I'm sure that was a factor in the tripling of mobile ad sales as well (though obviously not as huge as traffic from iDevices).
Yeah well, unfortunately, I despise being force-fed video commercials… both YouTube and Hulu have all but lost me. I started paying for Hulu Plus thinking it would remove the ads (Netflix style) but no. Way too many BAD ads that repeat incessantly... So I'm not paying for Hulu anymore, and I've already switched to Vimeo for 90% of my 'indy video' viewing… no commercials there...
Most of what I watch on YouTube now is older stuff anyway, so they don't force ads onto you as much. But that incredibly annoying 5 second "preview" that you can skip… I don't WANT to be forced to interact with the damned interface every time I want to watch a video!
So yeah, I've all but stopped watching vids on YouTube, and head for the alternatives first… their loss I guess.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
If I remember correctly you previously predicted Google's doom during the Oracle suit. I don't see how a ad driven radio would hurt Google since Pandora is the same thing and available on both platforms. If that hasn't hurt Google then 'iRadio' won't either.
You mean the Oracle/Google suit that is still ongoing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
And how well did Safari work out?
About as well as Internet Explorer on Macs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69
At the time nobody was watching youtube on a mobile device and ads weren't yet shown before videos. Google had just purchased youtube and I'm sure Apple paid them a nice fee to have it on the iPhone. We all know what happened in those 5 years and the bad blood there is between Apple and Google now, so Apple didn't renew.
This will keep h.264 content coming for iOS.
No Flash, no WebM but still got YouTube on iPhones.
Does Google want to throw away this revenue with their little games?
iOS users happy, Apple happy, 3rd party developers happy, that's how to manage an ecosystem.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DroidFTW
To those that are posting that they're upset at Apple for removing the native YouTube app, know that they likely would have been forced to by Google eventually. Google did that to Microsoft and the Windows Phone YouTube app that MS had made (which also bypassed ads). I'm sure that was a factor in the tripling of mobile ad sales as well (though obviously not as huge as traffic from iDevices).
Google also removed ad blockers from Play, strange I don't recall much of an outcry over this violation of users rights.
Remember when Apple removed a fart App and it was like the end of the world?
Quote:
Originally Posted by hill60
Google also removed ad blockers from Play, strange I don't recall much of an outcry over this violation of users rights.
Remember when Apple removed a fart App and it was like the end of the world?
The backlash for removing ad blockers from the Play Store was non-existent because they were free (so no lost revenue to the devs) and side loading apps on Android is a trivial process. That fact is amplified considering ad blockers only work on rooted phones and anyone capable of rooting their phone is capable of finding and installing an ad blocker outside of the Play Store. I think there was more head scratching at the futility then anything.
Apple removed a fart app from there store? lol
Quote:
Originally Posted by DroidFTW
The backlash for removing ad blockers from the Play Store was non-existent because they were free (so no lost revenue to the devs) and side loading apps on Android is a trivial process. That fact is amplified considering ad blockers only work on rooted phones and anyone capable of rooting their phone is capable of finding and installing an ad blocker outside of the Play Store. I think there was more head scratching at the futility then anything.
Apple removed a fart app from there store? lol
Yep, there was such an outcry they had to put them back.
"Develop for it? I'd rather piss on it"
Me too, also at work, running it on Windows. Even though it's unsupported now, it's still better than IE. It can open any website, unlike IE, and does it faster as well (IE10 & Safari 5 on a W7 box).
I use Jasmine.
Now if you want to grant YouTube access to location data or personal information it's in your control when asked by YouTube.
More interesting data would be to know what per cent income does Google earn from iOS vs Android and what percent vs popular of iOS devices have YouTube. This data would expose an entirely different set of data on business strategy progress by Google. I suspect 70% of Google mobile ad revenue comes fom the 50% of iOS devices with YouTube. My guesstimates paint an interesting picture, but I don't know the real facts.