After abandoning iAd revenue, Apple Inc can reintroduce an ad-free internet

245

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 85
    jkichlinejkichline Posts: 1,332member
    I think what we may be seeing is a high water mark for advertising. Probably one of the most disastrous contributions of advertising in the modern era has been its effect on news reporting. Today nearly ALL news is sensationalized and targeted in order to maximize ad revenue. When your income is based on ads, and you need to produce 24 hours of live content, your value as the fourth estate is diminished. That's why most of the news is heavily editorialized, sensationalized or just plain propaganda to drive a single source of the "truth".

    I've started paying for news content to increase the quality of journalism, but I fear the masses won't. What Apple needs to do is offer a better alternative to ad-driven drivel and show that quality content does cost some money. However they can easily tie this to their hardware for free and make it a value-add to getting an iPhone, Mac, Apple TV, etc. Basically, you buy the phone and you get great content for free. Apple has then shifted the scraps of ad revenue paid for content to hardware subsidation. Think about it this way... If you buy the car, you get fuel and maintenance for free. The value of the fuel is lessened.

    In this scenario, Apple becomes the savior of content and increase its value but irradiated ads by devaluing them and all of this happens because of their superior hardware and software combination.
    lostkiwi
  • Reply 22 of 85
    jkichlinejkichline Posts: 1,332member
    Only Dilger could claim that advertisements were an attempt to "radically enhance" anything. After all these years, he still acts like a douche to anyone who dares go up against Apple. It was and still is quite pathetic. Imagine what a sad company Apple would be if it actually acted like he portrays them in this article, as a company hell bent on "killing" and "destroying" other companies. 
    No, just Google. You didn't think "going thermonuclear" was all about a lawsuit did you?
    lostkiwicalipscooter63
  • Reply 23 of 85
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,563member
    Rayz2016 said:
    I think the main problem is that Apple's stance on privacy doesn't sit well with the needs of advertisers. If Apple hadn't abandoned iAds then it would end up pretty barren a year from now, which would look even worse. They made a choice: privacy or ads – they went with privacy so it best to just throw in the towel now.
    Except iAd isn't going away as a platform; 

    Heh. Give it time. 

    The question I have is will Apple still be able to control the privacy aspect now that they're no longer directly involved?
    As the man wrote, if iAd prevents advertisers from accessing the demographics of the users now, then I don't think this is going to change going forward. In the end, the advertisers will just abandon it, and so will Apple. This is not a money-spinner for them by the sounds of it.
  • Reply 24 of 85
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,563member
    sog35 said:
    IMO Apple should stop being so concerned about privacy.

    They need to think of ways to increase services revenue. And one of the low hanging fruit is search and advertising. They just have to make the ads less intrusive. Most people don't give a crap about ads. Ads/Search alone could add $20-$30 billion in additional services revenue to Apple. 
    Translation: DO ANYTHING! SELL ANYTHING! HAND OVER PICTURES OF OUR CHILDREN TO WHOEVER ASKS FOR THEM, BUT FOR THE LOVE OF GOD PLEASE RECOVER THE MONEY I'VE LOST ON APPLE SHARES!

    I'd have more sympathy for you if… Mmm, no I don't think I would have any sympathy for you. You took a punt, you lost. Get over it.
    edited January 2016 singularitynolamacguyjackansiDeeedsafrodri
  • Reply 25 of 85
    If Apple Insider does move behind a paywall and disables all the Google Trackers and advertising embedded in the site then do not worry. The author of the article has tips on getting past it: https://twitter.com/DanielEran/status/687367766718849024 


    techloverfreshmakersingularityjackansiDeeeds
  • Reply 26 of 85
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 6,954member
    Right on my friend. Every time Mr. Dilger rhetorically eviscerates FUD about Apple a few show up in the thread to ‘complain’ about his so-called bias. Then they pull out the ‘fair and balanced’ argument. What they are really upset about is his ability to call them out on their iHate. Much like the Macalope over at MacWorld Mr. Dilger pulls no punches and consistently exposes their motives and false narratives.

    Robin
    :  It was one of the most well written articles I have read in a while, regarding Google vs Apple.  

    Batman
    :  How well was it Robin?

    Robin
    :  So well I took time to register as a user on Appleinsider so I could tell the author great job, and to keep up the good work, but his name is nowhere to be found.
    To us old-timers the author is well-known by his writing style as D.E.D. 

    He is one of the last of the Apple evangelists, a rare breed these days. However, no one is as good at turning a good phrase at the expense of those who speaks ill of anything Apple or is unethical in competition with Apple. DED can take them out to his editorial woodshed and whup the tar out of them like no other. 

    Now, some readers on this site can't quite stand to see some malcontent get his well-earned comeuppance, so don't be surprised when you read some negative comments about DED's writing style from time to time. 
    edited January 2016 capasicumnolamacguylostkiwiDeeeds
  • Reply 27 of 85
    brucemcbrucemc Posts: 1,527member
    jkichline said:
    I think what we may be seeing is a high water mark for advertising. Probably one of the most disastrous contributions of advertising in the modern era has been its effect on news reporting. Today nearly ALL news is sensationalized and targeted in order to maximize ad revenue. When your income is based on ads, and you need to produce 24 hours of live content, your value as the fourth estate is diminished. That's why most of the news is heavily editorialized, sensationalized or just plain propaganda to drive a single source of the "truth".

    I don't know if we have reached the high watermark yet, but I completely agree on how Internet advertising has altered journalism.  I pay for a few online newspapers and magazines (apps) where the quality warrants it, but even with those publications they are trending down as they are also funded by advertising.

    Given the success of ad-free TV content like Netflix and HBO, perhaps there is reason to hope that things in the journalism space might get better in the future. 

    BTW - I would pay for something like AppleInsider, but the quality of the articles would need to improve greatly.
    edited January 2016
  • Reply 28 of 85
    brakkenbrakken Posts: 677member
    By detaching iAd, doesn't this remove culpability from Apple of any data collection? Still unclear on the facts and consequences. 

    In any caee, if Google suffers, I hope it leads them to reconsider how to treat valuable partners. But then again, I think it's too late for them. Poor, hapless Goog. 

    I can't see how Apple can fail to continue developing its non-search functions. There's still
    huge room for expansion in the smartphone market, and for new markets to open. 

    Even if the smartphrine market froze right now, 100b$ a year is no small amout of money to sit on. 

    Nice work DED, and Apple - BRING IT ON!!
  • Reply 29 of 85
    y2an said:
    Revenue is a misleading measure. Cost of sales for hardware is much more than for search. 
    Far more relevant than the usual hardware units shipped by all vendors using their OS.
  • Reply 30 of 85

    xbit said:
    Only a couple of paragraphs on the interesting question of why iAds failed, buried at the bottom of the article.

    The problem with iAds was the same problem that Apple Maps now suffers - a lack of ubiquity. If I'm an advertiser, I want my campaign to work across the web and mobile. iAds made that less cost-effective. 
    As a Maps user I don't see a lack of ubiquity.  Apple maps is on all of the systems I use.

    What killed iAds early on what that advertisers didn't want to pay several times a much to advertise in an environment with a fraction of the advertising.  And since Apple couldn't in practice keep out the cheap bulk advertising, it was never a flyer.
  • Reply 31 of 85
    sog35 said:
    IMO Apple should stop being so concerned about privacy.

    They need to think of ways to increase services revenue. And one of the low hanging fruit is search and advertising. They just have to make the ads less intrusive. Most people don't give a crap about ads. Ads/Search alone could add $20-$30 billion in additional services revenue to Apple. 
    So Apple should ignore one of its tent pole values as a company just to increase the top and bottom line? What nonsense. The last thing Apple needs to do is waste time on things it's not good at or that run contrary to its values as a company. Thank god investors like you aren't the one making decisions.
    nolamacguysingularitypalominejackansilostkiwipropod
  • Reply 32 of 85

    sog35 said:

    jkichline said:
    I think what we may be seeing is a high water mark for advertising. Probably one of the most disastrous contributions of advertising in the modern era has been its effect on news reporting. Today nearly ALL news is sensationalized and targeted in order to maximize ad revenue. When your income is based on ads, and you need to produce 24 hours of live content, your value as the fourth estate is diminished. That's why most of the news is heavily editorialized, sensationalized or just plain propaganda to drive a single source of the "truth".

    I've started paying for news content to increase the quality of journalism, but I fear the masses won't. What Apple needs to do is offer a better alternative to ad-driven drivel and show that quality content does cost some money. However they can easily tie this to their hardware for free and make it a value-add to getting an iPhone, Mac, Apple TV, etc. Basically, you buy the phone and you get great content for free. Apple has then shifted the scraps of ad revenue paid for content to hardware subsidation. Think about it this way... If you buy the car, you get fuel and maintenance for free. The value of the fuel is lessened.

    In this scenario, Apple becomes the savior of content and increase its value but irradiated ads by devaluing them and all of this happens because of their superior hardware and software combination.
    No one is going to pay for news.

    The toothpaste is out of the tube. The best Apple can do is try to make the ads less intrusive and obnoxious. 

    Tim Cook's misguided quest for privacy needs to end. By going on the internet you are already sacrificing privacy. Cook needs to stop living in dream land and start building Apple's Search and ad networks. 

    We are in the early stages of A.I. 
    And what is needed is DATA. Decades of data. That is what Google has been gathering for DECADES. Apple is so behind its not even funny. They need to get with the program before its too late.

    But that has been the Hallmark of Tim Cook's Apple. Too late.

    1. Too late in bringing out bigger iPhone
    2. Too late with updating AppleTV
    3. Too late with Music streaming
    4. Too late with gathering user data

    Tim Cook's Apple has been lazy and reactive. Unlike Job's Apple that was proactive and clairvoyant.
    Let's see...my guess is this rant is based on GOOGL one year chart up 40%, AAPL one year chart down 9%. You'd tell Tim Cook to disown his own mother if it increased the stock price.
    singularityjackansi
  • Reply 33 of 85
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,655member
    sog35 said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    Translation: DO ANYTHING! SELL ANYTHING! HAND OVER PICTURES OF OUR CHILDREN TO WHOEVER ASKS FOR THEM, BUT FOR THE LOVE OF GOD PLEASE RECOVER THE MONEY I'VE LOST ON APPLE SHARES!

    I'd have more sympathy for you if… Mmm, no I don't think I would have any sympathy for you. You took a punt, you lost. Get over it.
    whatever dude. The fact is most people deal with ads and don't really care. Facts are facts.

    Apple is running a business. The fact they are not willing to share data with adverstisers is costing the company tens of billions of dollars. As a shareholder I have a right to question their lack of monitizing the user base. 

    The problem is Cook thinks he's running a non-Profit organization. IMO, he needs to be replaced by someone who knows how to run a business and maximize strategic moats. Cook is better off running a charity as this point.

    The fact is Apple could easily destroy Google search and advertising if Tim Cook wasn't so stubborn and allowed Apple users data to be shared. But Cook is on some misguided quest to protect people's data. A quest that no one really cares about. I don't care if my data is shared on a HIGH LEVEL with adverstisers if it means better services. This will only get worse with more A.I. built into platforms. Cook and Apple will be left in the dust after being DECADES behind in gathering data. Just so Cook can brag about privacy. Something the user don't really give a crap about.
    What sog said;

    "Tim Cook won't sell your souls to the devil so how ever will I get my money back?
  • Reply 34 of 85

    Robin:  Holy smokes Batman....
      
    Batman:  What is it Robin?

    Robin
    :  Did you see that?

    Batman
    :  No Robin, I didn't...

    Robin
    :  It was one of the most well written articles I have read in a while, regarding Google vs Apple.  

    Batman
    :  How well was it Robin?

    Robin
    :  So well I took time to register as a user on Appleinsider so I could tell the author great job, and to keep up the good work, but his name is nowhere to be found.
    If I hadn't already been registered, I would have done the same.

    The only statement that I would take issue with is "In Search, Google's core competency, ..."

    Google is pretty good at search.  But it's core competency is tracking search and leveraging the results of that tracking to make money from advertisers.

    Search is quite complex but most of the trickier things that Google have done relate to the bulk capture and exploitation of that tracking data.

    The search itself simply isn't that big a job if one doesn't seek to directly exploit the results.

    I strongly believe that Apple could and should produce a search engine that is at least as Good as Google's plus secure and confidential.  And should then give access away for free, initially from any Apple device / OS,  and later, perhaps, from Chrome and Android too.  In conjunction with Ad blocking, this would make the online world a better place.



    palomine
  • Reply 35 of 85
    lkrupp said:
    Right on my friend. Every time Mr. Dilger rhetorically eviscerates FUD about Apple a few show up in the thread to ‘complain’ about his so-called bias. Then they pull out the ‘fair and balanced’ argument. What they are really upset about is his ability to call them out on their iHate. Much like the Macalope over at MacWorld Mr. Dilger pulls no punches and consistently exposes their motives and false narratives.
    To us old-timers the author is well-known by his writing style as D.E.D. 

    He is one of the last of the Apple evangelists, a rare breed these days. However, no one is as good at turning a good phrase at the expense of those who speaks ill of anything Apple or is unethical in competition with Apple. DED can take them out to his editorial woodshed and whup the tar out of them like no other. 

    Now, some readers on this site can't quite stand to see some malcontent get his well-earned comeuppance, so don't be surprised when you read some negative comments about DED's writing style from time to time. 
    IMO the problem is many of these editorials give off a level of insecurity more than anything. Apple stock not performing well, then let's get an editorial out there about how bad it is in Google/Android land to make us all feel better. In the end it all comes back to DEDs obsession with Google. Why does Google need to lose for Apple to win? And why would someone like me that hardly uses Google services at all care at all about Google and whether it's "winning" or not? 
    gatorguylord amhranjackansi
  • Reply 36 of 85
    I can't stand advertisements. It's the main reason I purchase my music, shows and movies. I would gladly pay for ad free news content. Unfortunately, they don't provide that option. When I purchase news content, it still comes with advertising which I resent.

     Hence paying for news content means that the content producers get to double dip so to speak. They gladly take my money then load up on advertisements anyway. 

    If Apple were to adopt the Google approach to advertising, I would abandon the platform. I would just buy a Samsung phone. Why stay on largely inferior hardware when iOS offers nothing of substance over Android? 

    Granted, Apple produces a great SOC, but Samsung's DRAM, flash and panel technology is superior to virtually everyone else. If it weren't for the spyware OS known as Android, I would already have left Apple. So too would many of my own family. 

    Apple's stance on privacy keeps me on their platform. None of my devices uses anything from Google. And I do a considerable amount of online business. 

    As an aside, it makes sense that Google's market valuation is so high and with a fraction of Apple's profits. I am beginning to realize that it isn't all a wallstreet phenomenon. There are a lot of businesses who stand to fail if Google's advertising model comes to ruin. They have to support Google as their very livelihood depends on it. Unfortunately for Google, their model of search driven advertising revenue is coming to an end. 

    I use Amazon's app for most of my online shopping. I left the search engine long ago. I did find that a general purpose search engine did a better job at searching eBay than ebay's own but that is no longer the case.  My wife uses the Nordstrom app and even for appleinsider I use the app.

    Apple can lock Google out of the most lucrative mobile platform on the market. Without the iOS market, Google loses the most important group of users when attempting to utilize their data analytics software. All of the talk about their artificial intelligence will be meaningless. Google will profile the users that have little meaning to the advertisers. 

    I rarely initiate a search on a desktop machine these days. Over 99% of my computing time is now spent on iOS. I don't use a single Google product and abandoned Yahoo search, consequently spending virtually no time on their web portal when Mayer incorporated Google search back into Yahoo. 

    Google search, Google play and Google services in general have no marketshare in China either. Android is forked and Apple devices are doing quite well in China. Cook is doing a lot of things right. 

    It's time to be patient. Apple is going to mop the floor with Google's carcass. It's only a matter of time. 

    palominelostkiwicalipscooter63Deeeds
  • Reply 37 of 85
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,448member

    It's time to be patient. Apple is going to mop the floor with Google's carcass. It's only a matter of time. 

    When that happens who will you use to hate/blame/use as a diversion? Someone has to act the part of the foil.  Maybe MS will rise from the ashes? ;)
    edited January 2016 singularitytechloverrogifan_oldstevie
  • Reply 38 of 85
    croprcropr Posts: 925member

    xbit said:
    Only a couple of paragraphs on the interesting question of why iAds failed, buried at the bottom of the article.

    The problem with iAds was the same problem that Apple Maps now suffers - a lack of ubiquity. If I'm an advertiser, I want my campaign to work across the web and mobile. iAds made that less cost-effective. 
    As a Maps user I don't see a lack of ubiquity.  Apple maps is on all of the systems I use.

    It is the ubiquity for the advertiser that counts.  It does not matter if a advertiser can address all devices of a user, he wants to address all users, irrespective of the device they have. If the iPhone has only 20 % market share than only 20 % of the target population can be addressed.
  • Reply 39 of 85
    I dare AppleInsider to switch to go ad free subscription format..
    stevie
  • Reply 40 of 85
    croprcropr Posts: 925member
    cropr said:
    That is a lot of crap for a single article. The main reason why iAD failed is because it was iOS only.  When an advertiser want to launch  an ad campaign, he wants reach the largest audience possible.  That 's why all other mobile advertisement networks are at least iOS + Android based.  There is not a single reason why an advertiser would go to Apple to launch a campaign.
    Not a single reason... other then iOS users having most of the money and willing to spend it. While being a lesser number of users then the Android rabble, iOS users spend way more time and money shopping and buying products and services with their devices then the greater collective of nitwits toting their malware-laden Android phones around in their sagging pants.

    That is a very common logic mistake. First of all ads are not about app revenue. A lot of ads just want to make people aware of products and brands.  Secondly a lot of advertisers want to a single campaign reaching all smartphones users, also the people with less buying power.  Everybody buys food, so food ads should address everybody .  In most cases the advertiser pays for clicks and not for views, so the interested users are filtered out for free, The advertiser does not care of more if there were  more Android users that don't click.
    gatorguy
Sign In or Register to comment.