Google Web Designer chases market established by Apple's iAd Producer
Three years after Apple launched iAd Producer as a way to build interactive ads and other content using HTML5, JavaScript and CSS web standards, Google has launched a beta development tool of its own, which it calls Web Designer.
Google announced its plans earlier this year, but has now launched its first Web Designer Beta, to "create engaging, interactive HTML5-based designs and motion graphics that can run on any device."
The tool is designed primarily to create advertising "through any platform" the company notes, naming its own DoubleClick Studio and AdMob ad networks, but also providing a "generic option to push content through any other ad network."
That's a clear allusion to Google's previous efforts to push Adobe Flash as a desktop medium for web ads into the mobile space. The company wasted years in a failed attempt to port Flash to Android as a differentiating feature, and spent lots of resources promoting the idea that iOS was lacking support for Flash playback, before being forced to acknowledge that without iOS, there was no market.
Android ended up with experimental Flash support that never worked on most devices, and didn't last for more than a single Android dessert name before it was terminated with the release of Jelly Bean two years ago. The fate of Flash on Android turned out to be very similar to the fate of WebM and NFC.
The company next began targeting interactivity and ads with initiatives and tools designed to replace Flash with open web standards: HTML5, JavaScript and CSS. However, by that time Google had shifted from a key Apple partner to a combative opponent.
After relaunching Android 2.0 as an iPhone clone, Google tried to block Apple from entering the mobile ad market by paying an astronomical $750 million to acquire AdMob, then in talks with Apple, which subsequently paid just $275 million to buy Quattro Wireless instead.
The next year, as Google turned its back on open source and web standards by making Android 3.0 closed source and throwing its support behind Flash rather than HTML5 and H.264, Apple's Steve Jobs outlined plans for iAd in iOS 4, designed to fix the problems in mobile advertising by making ads interactive and unobtrusive, and built using web standards.
By the end of the year, Apple released iAd Producer as a development tool for creating iAd content, as AppleInsider had projected that summer.
Since then, Apple has added support for building other web-standards content to iAd Producer, this spring launching version 4.0 supporting development of interactive iBooks Author widgets, iTunes LP liner notes and iTunes Extra DVD-like bonus content for movies.
And while the media and analysts have tirelessly sought for years to spread the notion that iAd was a huge failure headed for certain doom, Apple itself has been hiring teams of new iAd staff and has expanded the program outside of interactive web ads sponsoring apps to also include audio and video segments that support the new iTunes Radio.
A report by eMarketer in June projected revenue growth for Apple's iAd to reach $213 million this year, increasing to $376 million in 2014 and $623 million in the following year, a compounded annual growth rate of 71.3 percent.
Earlier this month, a report by Ad Age noted that Apple lined up major advertisers for its iTunes Radio launch, including McDonald's, Nissan, Pepsi and Procter & Gamble.
These top brands "paid upwards of $10 million to be exclusive iTunes Radio advertisers within their respective industries through the end of 2013," the magazine reported, adding that Apple is also "readying iTunes Radio -- and its new ad products -- for its wide launch to advertisers at the start of 2014."
Google announced its plans earlier this year, but has now launched its first Web Designer Beta, to "create engaging, interactive HTML5-based designs and motion graphics that can run on any device."
The tool is designed primarily to create advertising "through any platform" the company notes, naming its own DoubleClick Studio and AdMob ad networks, but also providing a "generic option to push content through any other ad network."
Google's Flash gets the pan
The company specifically highlights the new tool's web standards as working on "any screen," noting "it doesn?t matter how brilliant your work is if people can?t see it. Now everything you create is accessible on any screen ? desktop, tablet or mobile ? without compatibility issues."The fate of Flash on Android turned out to be very similar to the fate of WebM and NFC.
That's a clear allusion to Google's previous efforts to push Adobe Flash as a desktop medium for web ads into the mobile space. The company wasted years in a failed attempt to port Flash to Android as a differentiating feature, and spent lots of resources promoting the idea that iOS was lacking support for Flash playback, before being forced to acknowledge that without iOS, there was no market.
Android ended up with experimental Flash support that never worked on most devices, and didn't last for more than a single Android dessert name before it was terminated with the release of Jelly Bean two years ago. The fate of Flash on Android turned out to be very similar to the fate of WebM and NFC.
Apple & iAd Producer
Apple addressed the primary potential use cases of Flash on iOS initially by working with video producers (including Google's YouTube) to support standard H.264 video for mobile playback, rather than continuing to use the proprietary codecs and wrapping of Flash Videos that had become a de facto standard on the web.The company next began targeting interactivity and ads with initiatives and tools designed to replace Flash with open web standards: HTML5, JavaScript and CSS. However, by that time Google had shifted from a key Apple partner to a combative opponent.
After relaunching Android 2.0 as an iPhone clone, Google tried to block Apple from entering the mobile ad market by paying an astronomical $750 million to acquire AdMob, then in talks with Apple, which subsequently paid just $275 million to buy Quattro Wireless instead.
The next year, as Google turned its back on open source and web standards by making Android 3.0 closed source and throwing its support behind Flash rather than HTML5 and H.264, Apple's Steve Jobs outlined plans for iAd in iOS 4, designed to fix the problems in mobile advertising by making ads interactive and unobtrusive, and built using web standards.
By the end of the year, Apple released iAd Producer as a development tool for creating iAd content, as AppleInsider had projected that summer.
Since then, Apple has added support for building other web-standards content to iAd Producer, this spring launching version 4.0 supporting development of interactive iBooks Author widgets, iTunes LP liner notes and iTunes Extra DVD-like bonus content for movies.
And while the media and analysts have tirelessly sought for years to spread the notion that iAd was a huge failure headed for certain doom, Apple itself has been hiring teams of new iAd staff and has expanded the program outside of interactive web ads sponsoring apps to also include audio and video segments that support the new iTunes Radio.
A report by eMarketer in June projected revenue growth for Apple's iAd to reach $213 million this year, increasing to $376 million in 2014 and $623 million in the following year, a compounded annual growth rate of 71.3 percent.
Earlier this month, a report by Ad Age noted that Apple lined up major advertisers for its iTunes Radio launch, including McDonald's, Nissan, Pepsi and Procter & Gamble.
These top brands "paid upwards of $10 million to be exclusive iTunes Radio advertisers within their respective industries through the end of 2013," the magazine reported, adding that Apple is also "readying iTunes Radio -- and its new ad products -- for its wide launch to advertisers at the start of 2014."
Comments
How do you think they've survived until now? With their stupid Ads $1 per click?!!!
They've been copying Apple all along and those idiots at wall street thank them and jack up their stock price.
Wow that is really sweet. I'm totally impressed. This is sort of what we were expecting from Adobe. GWD rocks!
Check out the YouTube channel for tutorials.
Thanks for the heads up, DED. I'll be sure to check out Google Web Designer.
Wah!? WebM and NFC are both alive and kicking. What are you talking about?
Please edit your articles. Repeated sentences, question marks, and so much more. Why do you even take the time to write, if you don't take the time to proofread?
"The fate of Flash on Android turned out to be very similar to the fate of WebM and NFC."
Wah!? WebM and NFC are both alive and kicking. What are you talking about?
It's a DED article so you have to look past the FUD and hyperbole. He also takes a jab at Android 3.0 as turning its back on the open source community when the source code has been available for almost 2 years. In the end I think GWD looks like it may be a solid program. That's the takeaway from the article. I'm a little surprised to see DED advertising a Google program, but it looks like it can certainly help out some of the developers who read AI.
Please edit your articles. Repeated sentences, question marks, and so much more. Why do you even take the time to write, if you don't take the time to proofread?
He explained it in an earlier article. Kasper's Automatic Slave is the culprit. The double sentences are a result of there actually being double sentences in the original article. The fist occurrence is a classic pull-quote where some text from the article is placed larger, usually italic, in an aside box to draw attention to it. The second is in the body copy. The automation does not copy the HTML properly so both instances are included as body copy.
The question marks come from conflicting document declarations and mismatched character set configurations between the main site and the forum site. Again it is the Automatic Slave to blame. It can be edited by an Admin but other than that it needs to be fixed in the script.
He explained it in an earlier article. Kasper's Automatic Slave is the culprit. The double sentences are a result of there actually being double sentences in the original article. The fist occurrence is a classic pull-quote where some text from the article is placed larger, usually italic, in an aside box to draw attention to it. The second is in the body copy. The automation does not copy the HTML properly so both instances are included as body copy.
The question marks come from conflicting document declarations and mismatched character set configurations between the main site and the forum site. Again it is the Automatic Slave to blame. It can be edited by an Admin but other than that it needs to be fixed in the script.
Right, so back to my point, proof read the articles. Not hard.
Right, so back to my point, proof read the articles. Not hard.
No silly the article got discombobulated during the automatic transfer from the main site to the forum site and DED is not an admin so he can't fix it.
No silly the article got discombobulated during the automatic transfer from the main site to the forum site and DED is not an admin so he can't fix it.
Very simple information 101. If you want to be taken seriously, you have to post articles better than this. If you just want to sell ad space due to click-bait, AI is doing great!
Very simple information 101. If you want to be taken seriously, you have to post articles better than this. If you just want to sell ad space due to click-bait, AI is doing great!
Perhaps a volunteer Admin will step up to the plate and fix the text? We used to have an admin who took personal interest in fixing typos but he is no longer doing administration hence we have typos. Personally I can live with the typos rather than the former admin. I simply view the story repeated in forum site as a free courtesy to AI's enthusiastic fans so they don't have to linger on the home page or revisit it to copy out quoted text. I doubt it makes any ad revenue because the typical forum user here is probably running ad blockers unless they are on iOS but either way they wouldn't click on ads anyway. The main site does not have any typos and that is where the ad revenue comes from.
Very simple information 101. If you want to be taken seriously, you have to post articles better than this. If you just want to sell ad space due to click-bait, AI is doing great!
If you're reading articles on the Forums, there are no ads, so it should all work out for you.
The alternative is to post just the titles in the Forums that you have to go to the actual page to read it.
It's a DED article so you have to look past the FUD and hyperbole. He also takes a jab at Android 3.0 as turning its back on the open source community when the source code has been available for almost 2 years. In the end I think GWD looks like it may be a solid program. That's the takeaway from the article. I'm a little surprised to see DED advertising a Google program, but it looks like it can certainly help out some of the developers who read AI.
Don't mistake your own nonsense for what the article states. It does not say Google was "turning its back on the open source community."
Google "turned its back on open source and web standards" by closing Android 3.0 for over a year and devoting its attention to promoting Flash proprietary plugins over H.264 and HTML5. So while Apple was successfully promoting H.264 and HTML5, Google was backing a failed web platform to deliver its ads. Which failed as miserably as NFC/secure element Google Wallet and WebM, which even Mozilla abandoned as a video strategy against H.264.
I don't see how you work so hard to twist words and hide facts when all you complain about is what you're twisting. Surely you know you're being disingenuous, and that makes your trolling even more hypocritical.
If you're reading articles on the Forums, there are no ads, so it should all work out for you.
You must be running ad blockers because there are a few ads on the forum pages.
WebM is still causing a lot of issues for developers. Google removed support for H.264 from Chrome so now developers need to save a minimum four different versions of each movie - WebM, H.264, Ogg, and FLV. Then double that if you want to deliver a cellular data version. That is a strategy that Google likes because it drives developers to host their video on YouTube to avoid that multiple copy BS, where it generates ad revenue for Google instead of the developers keeping it on their own servers.
Mozilla bailed on WebM and H.264 due to potential patent issues not because of any quality issues.
If it were not for iOS, the videos wars would end up with Flash as a universal wrapper again, which frankly was a lot easier for developers.
If you're reading articles on the Forums, there are no ads, so it should all work out for you.
The alternative is to post just the titles in the Forums that you have to go to the actual page to read it.
No alternative to proofread?
Don't mistake your own nonsense for what the article states. It does not say Google was "turning its back on the open source community."
Google "turned its back on open source and web standards" by closing Android 3.0 for over a year and devoting its attention to promoting Flash proprietary plugins over H.264 and HTML5. So while Apple was successfully promoting H.264 and HTML5, Google was backing a failed web platform to deliver its ads. Which failed as miserably as NFC/secure element Google Wallet and WebM, which even Mozilla abandoned as a video strategy against H.264.
I don't see how you work so hard to twist words and hide facts when all you complain about is what you're twisting. Surely you know you're being disingenuous, and that makes your trolling even more hypocritical.
As written, your article implies that Android 3.0 is closed source. This isn't the case and hasn't been for almost 2 years. Your post quoted above adds the addendum of "for over a year" which is missing in the original article. I'm sure it's just an oversight and that you didn't intentionally leave that part out to make it easy for those who are less informed to misinterpret.
If you're reading articles on the Forums, there are no ads, so it should all work out for you.
The alternative is to post just the titles in the Forums that you have to go to the actual page to read it.
No alternative to proofread?
Are you really that dense? Why don't you write to Kasper? No one here on the forum, aside from a few volunteer Admins, has any ability to correct the typos and they have nothing to do with the website policies, programming or development projects.
Are you really that dense? Why don't you write to Kasper? No one here on the forum, aside from a few volunteer Admins, has any ability to correct the typos and they have nothing to do with the website policies, programming or development projects.
And why do you respond then? I replied to the article asking about proofreading. If you are not one that can help, why are you so dense as to reply to something you have no control over?