Personally I wish Apple would stop inserting advertisements into iOS. I remember how disgusted I was the first time iTunes/Music pushed an ad onto my lock screen, and the first time that I ran into an advertisement in the Settings app. It felt like someone at Apple had said "Hey wouldn't it be great if we started abusing our users by pushing advertising to them that they never asked for? We'd make so much money! How come we never thought about crapping on the iPhone in this way before 2012?"
Just advertise them the normal way, with TV/web/print ads, demos for the media, promotions at Apple events, etc. If Apple's services are so bad that nobody will use them unless they leverage the OS to deliver obnoxious advertisements, maybe they should make better services.
And it's also probably the sort of thing that anti-trust regulators really don't like, leveraging power in one market to get a (possibly unfair) advantage over the competition in another.
Here's a good article that goes into the all details behind the Microsoft $150M investment. It's a good read and will probably take longer to read than watching the YouTube video. But for sure, you shouldn't have any doubt after reading this, that Microsoft saving Apple with their $150M investment, is just a myth. And this article was written in 2007. Over 15 years ago.
BTW- is it my imagination or was it once possible to "Quote" my own comment? I kind of remember being able to reply to or supply more info, on a comment I already posted (after the 4 hour editing time is up), by clicking on "Quote". But "Quote" is no longer there on my own comment. Or am I just imagining that I was able to do that?
Are EU consumers taking advantage of the bludgeoning of the "evil gatekeepers" and suddenly basking in the glory of being able to purchase EU made products and services at more affordable prices? That is the goal, improving choice and driving lower prices, isn't it?
Mac-users as a group have gained most from regulation (though from US). At one point 95% of all users were on the Microsoft IE browser with sites demanding ActiveX that only worked on Windows. It forced consumers to Windows as Mac browsers including IE for Mac didn't work with their banks or other basic systems. I had to switch bank to stay on Mac, but most didn't.
US regulation forced the unbundling of IE from Windows and it opened the web + made Mac a platform that could be used on the level as Windows for most people. And the fear of regulation forced Microsoft to make a deal with Apple to producing MS Office for "at least 5 years" + made a huge investment (+3% of Apple). At that time Apple was 90 days from going bankrupt. Microsoft needed Apple to stay alive to keep US authorities at bay. Thanks to US regulation we still have Apple and competition.
This is the first I've heard that most Mac users were forced to switch to WinPCs to use financial websites. I certainly never had this problem. Would you please post some links showing how widespread this was as I am unable to find any sources myself?
I remember this was a problem with a whole range of businesses, including financial institutions, and government organisations. I remember IE was a poor performer because there was no pressure on Microsoft to improve.
Getting an American visa through the US State Department requires using a restricted set of browsers and Safari is not one of those approved by the Department. No reason is available but maybe something to do with Apple’s encryption system.
Are EU consumers taking advantage of the bludgeoning of the "evil gatekeepers" and suddenly basking in the glory of being able to purchase EU made products and services at more affordable prices? That is the goal, improving choice and driving lower prices, isn't it?
Mac-users as a group have gained most from regulation (though from US). At one point 95% of all users were on the Microsoft IE browser with sites demanding ActiveX that only worked on Windows. It forced consumers to Windows as Mac browsers including IE for Mac didn't work with their banks or other basic systems. I had to switch bank to stay on Mac, but most didn't.
US regulation forced the unbundling of IE from Windows and it opened the web + made Mac a platform that could be used on the level as Windows for most people. And the fear of regulation forced Microsoft to make a deal with Apple to producing MS Office for "at least 5 years" + made a huge investment (+3% of Apple). At that time Apple was 90 days from going bankrupt. Microsoft needed Apple to stay alive to keep US authorities at bay. Thanks to US regulation we still have Apple and competition.
This is the first I've heard that most Mac users were forced to switch to WinPCs to use financial websites. I certainly never had this problem. Would you please post some links showing how widespread this was as I am unable to find any sources myself?
I remember this was a problem with a whole range of businesses, including financial institutions, and government organisations. I remember IE was a poor performer because there was no pressure on Microsoft to improve.
Getting an American visa through the US State Department requires using a restricted set of browsers and Safari is not one of those approved by the Department. No reason is available but maybe something to do with Apple’s encryption system.
Government websites were definitely a problem. Even today the cheap bastards will not design for (or not test for) WebKit-based engines so I will sometimes need to open up an alternative browser when something doesn't seem to work correctly. I had to do this just the other day for two websites: One was a state government to finalize camping reservations and the other was to finalize an order at a publicly owned national restaurant chain. What I never saw was it being impossible to do any online banking or the OP's claim that it caused a mass exodus from Macs to Windows.
Safari had a great run for more than a decade after the iPhone was introduced, especially after Chrome adopted WebKit. Even after Alphabet's fork of WebKit the momentum was still there, but every year I see evidence that websites aren't being tested for WebKit. It's not nearly as bad it was and probably never will be because alternatives are easily had. Part of the problem is probably from wanting to get users to adopt apps where they can record more data about the user, but I personally hate being forced to use my iPhone when I'd rather just use a web browser on my Mac. Last year Amazon removed alexa.amazon.com access for adjusting your Echo home set up.
Comments
Just advertise them the normal way, with TV/web/print ads, demos for the media, promotions at Apple events, etc. If Apple's services are so bad that nobody will use them unless they leverage the OS to deliver obnoxious advertisements, maybe they should make better services.
And it's also probably the sort of thing that anti-trust regulators really don't like, leveraging power in one market to get a (possibly unfair) advantage over the competition in another.
Safari had a great run for more than a decade after the iPhone was introduced, especially after Chrome adopted WebKit. Even after Alphabet's fork of WebKit the momentum was still there, but every year I see evidence that websites aren't being tested for WebKit. It's not nearly as bad it was and probably never will be because alternatives are easily had. Part of the problem is probably from wanting to get users to adopt apps where they can record more data about the user, but I personally hate being forced to use my iPhone when I'd rather just use a web browser on my Mac. Last year Amazon removed alexa.amazon.com access for adjusting your Echo home set up.