You're Getting More Ads, and You're Gonna Like It

[Lionel Mandrake]

Source: Slate

Why is Steve Jobs trying to convince us that iPhone ads are a good thing?

By Farhad Manjoo

Posted Friday, April 9, 2010, at 5:08 PM ET

You know what I want on my iPhone? Bigger ads. Every time I load up an app from Slate or the New York Times, I'm always bummed about the quality of the commercial messages. A typical in-app ad consists of a tiny graphic and some text. Some days I don't even notice they're there. I use the Epicurious recipe app several times a week, but I honestly can't remember if it carries any ads. I've long been hoping that someone would address this obvious flaw. Wouldn't it be great if marketers could insert huge, full-screen spots inside our favorite mobile apps? Even better, what if there were ads that required me to type in my name, play a game, answer some trivia questions about laundry detergents, or otherwise interact with the marketer's pitch before I could go on to use the app?

On Thursday, Apple made my wildest dreams come true. At a press event introducing the iPhone's new operating system, Steve Jobs unveiled iAd, a system that will allow app developers to insert ads that "combine the emotion of TV ads with the interactivity of Web ads." Jobs showed off a few examples of spots we'll soon start seeing in iPhone apps: One Nike ad took over the screen with a video. A Target ad asked users to design a dorm room with furniture from the store. A spot for Toy Story 3 lets you play a movie-themed game. When it places one of these ads in an app, Apple will get 40 percent of the revenue from the ad; the developer takes 60 percent.

Jobs says that iAds will fix what he considers the main problem with today's mobile ads—people don't like to click on them because the ads usually load up the Web browser, taking you out of the app you're using. Apple's iAds don't take users out of their favorite apps. Instead, iAds place the full-screen ad inside the app; when you're done "interacting" with the ad, you can go back to the app. To recap: Apple has solved the problem of users finding today's small ads too annoying to click on by making it easier for developers to create bigger, more-interactive ads that we'll likely have no choice but to click on.

Read more: http://www.slate.com/id/2250234/?from=rss

---

Same goes for the iPad. I can hardly wait to plunk down my money and see all the ads on a larger screen.

[DJ13]

1. Whats in it for your customers Mr. Jobs?

Can they expect cut rate phone plans, or lower cost iPhones/Pads out of this?

Typical US corporation, everything for them with nothing of value for their customers.

[Name removed]

4. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dem mba]

19. wtf?

yea corporations always do well by producing products no one wants, and adds no value to their lives and that no customer buys.

if you don't like iAds don't buy a stupid iphone.

[DJ13]

20. if you don't like iAds don't buy a stupid iphone

Im sure that could become the prevailing view.

Where would that put the status of Apple?

[dem mba]

26. im skeptical the ads will that be intrusive

and if they are, I think the backlash would push Apple to do something about it. I don't see this becoming a big deal.

[Lionel Mandrake]

32. Intrusive or not, we can look forward to many more ads,

and not just on Apple products.

A recent story in the Financial Times states:

"Less than $400m was spent on US mobile advertising last year, according to JPMorgan, but that was an 80 per cent increase on the year before. Rapid growth will continue as smartphones become more widespread."

On the possibility of a backlash, the story states:

"Apple faces dangers too, the biggest of which is irritating its customers. Steve Jobs thinks he can teach people to love ads."

Is Steve Jobs out of his f***ing mind?

read more:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/3/37cd10d6-43b3-11df-b474-00144feab49a.html?catid=66&SID=google

[dem mba]

35. of course, ubiquitous mobile advertising is inevitable

they'll find a balance that users will accept and it will become the new norm. across all brands too.

[hobbit709]

33. You got it.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

2. Oh, that's wonderful...

Not.

Time to avoid all those i machines...

I hope it backfires on them.

Good grief.

:eyes:

[Fumesucker]

3. Apple Files Patent for OS Embedded Advertising

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/news/apple_files_patent_os_embedded_advertising

Steve Jobs has submitted one of the most devious patents of all time: operating system advertising. That’s right, according to the patent, Jobs wants you looking at ads embedded right into your operating system.

To take it one-step further, the patent attorneys who filed the application did their due diligence making sure every aspect and use of the "innovation" was outlined in detail. This passage sheds a little light on just how invasive and annoying this could be:

“The operating system is configured to present one or more of the advertisements to users of the computer device. In some implementations, the operating system can disable one or more functions during the presentation of the advertisements and then enable the function(s) in response to the advertisements ending. That is, the operating system can disable some aspect of its operation to prompt the operator to pay attention to the advertisement.”

Not only are they going to put ads in front of your face, they are going to do everything in their power to make you pay attention to them. This basically says they would go as far as crippling the device while the ad is displaying. Further, in the application they talk about measures to verify user presence, such as user confirmations throughout the ad.

The application makes careful notation not to distinguish its platform so that this technology could be used on any device, i.e. “portable and desktop computers, servers, electronics, media players, game devices, mobile phones, wireless devices, email devices, personal digital assistants (PDAs), embedded devices, televisions, set top boxes, etc” per the filing.

[Lionel Mandrake]

5. Thank you for a very informative post.

I'm beginning to think that Steve Jobs is evil.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Touchdown]

6. Apple hater posts a screed from "voting machine hacking is a hoax" pundit.

and the other haters eat it up!:rofl:

[anigbrowl]

10. Laugh all you like...

...then look at the actual patent application. Stupid pundit or not, the story is accurate.

http://ipwatchdog.com/patents/US20090265214.pdf

I particularly direct your attention to paragraph 63.

I'm not entirely sure what's up with Apple. they just introduced some radical changes in the developer licenses for IPhone (and by extension the iPad) which has almost the entire programming community up in arms, with several well-known developers already announcing they're leaving the platform.

In a nutshell, the new agreements forbid iPhone software to be created with any languages other than C, C++, Objective C, or webkit-compatible javascript, as well as forbidding the use of cross-compilers and such like. Also, by signing the agreement developers are forbidden from talking about it or their experience with Apple unless they have written permission from the company to do so.

Right now I am quite relieved that when I bought a new phone last month I opted for a competitor's product. As a bonus the SDK is free and I don't need permission to sell anything I code for it.

Enjoy. Or else.

[Touchdown]

14. Do you know why? No you don't, and the pundit didn't give it to you.

Think now. Why would Apple (flash) need to program a new dev kit (flash) specifically so their 3rd parties can make ads (flash) to support their efforts on Apple's portable (without flash) hardware?

Any other possible reason come up?

And if you are coder, like you say you are, then you would know what paragraph 63 says. It's to keep Flash, and apps made with Flash, and Flash translated code off of Apple's platform. It's to prevent Adobe's new end run around iPhone OS's flash embargo.

[DJ13]

21. Its not the technology Apple uses to circumvent Flash

Its the ads themselves people are objecting to.

[Touchdown]

22. They why are the same people objecting to the omission of Flash, which is used to create ads?

Hmmm? It can't really be the crappy flash games made for mouse clicks they think will magically work on a touch screen, do they?

And... Get real here. It's not because of the ads themselves. That is a lie. It's because it's Apple, and Apple only.
If an Apple employee discovered the cure for Cancer and decided that vaccinations would be free, then some on this thread would still find fault because "It isn't an OPEN SOURCE CURE FOR CANCER!!!!!" and you know it.

[DJ13]

23. Because many online videos now use Flash

Without Flash the Apple users cant view those videos.

This doesnt do anything to correct that situation.

[Touchdown]

24. Wrong.

Not buying it. It's an emotional obsession with Apple on the level of Steve Jobs stealing their wives, and nothing more.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

40. Flash already works on Palm's phones.

Granted it's not 100% perfect, but the mouse thing isn't the insurmountable obstacle people are making it out to be.

[Lionel Mandrake]

43. Paragraph 63 has nothing to do with Apple's war on Adobe.

Paragraph 63 is all about forcing the user to pay attention to an ad.

An ad typically runs for a fixed amount of time. The user can do nothing to make the ad run more quickly. Furthermore, if s/he doesn't pay proper attention and follow instructions, s/he will be punished by having the ad start all over again.

According to Paragraph 63, "in an attempt to ensure that the user is actually watching and/or listening to the advertisement ... the advertisement ... can prompt the user"

For example, "the user may be prompted to press a certain button."

What happens if the user fails a "test" such as this?

"The approaches ... can be made progressively more aggressive if the user has failed a previous test", in which case "the entire advertisement can be played again while the operating system maintains the function(s) in a disabled state."

How do you suppose the user will feel when this happens?

[IDemo]

7. What in the world can be done about this?

Oh, that's right:

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

9. I'm more of a Fedora person myself. -nt

[NashVegas]

11. You Didn't Really Think New Media Was Going to Give You Everything For Free, With No Ads, Did You?

[Lionel Mandrake]

12. You're kidding, right?

The hardware is expensive, some of the apps cost money, and there is a monthly fee for internet access.

An infestation of virulent ads is unacceptable under these circumstances.

[Touchdown]

15. And you think it's going into everything.

Not just into magazines, newspapers, non-flash websites, and free apps. :rofl:

Here's another scoop. Apple is behind the Illuminati, faking the Moon landing, the war on Christmas, and The Kennedy Assassination! Shocker! I know!

[Lionel Mandrake]

25. We'll have to wait and see

whether the virulent ads show up only in free apps or in all kinds of apps. I wouldn't be surprised either way.

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[walldude]

13. So lemme guess. someone from the Genius Bar came up with this one..

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Egnever]

16. A perfect example of why apple is not an option for me

[Touchdown]

17. This is what was also announced for the new OS, just for the record...

OS4 has multi-tasking, a much less battery draining one than competitors. "iPad don't have it!!! *sniff*" It does now. Let it go!

also... create playlists, 5x digital zoom on the iphone camera, gift apps, tap to focus video, geotagging, and like 90 others.

On top of that, there's VoiP, folder creations.
multiple e-mail accounts on one inbox.
Better data protection for enterprise users.
Gaming social community network.


Also for the record, there are 7 ads, two of them Flash ads, on the very article you linked to bemoaning ads. I guess ads are wonderful if Slate has them, the end of the world if Apple does.

[christx30]

27. The difference is

the flash ads on the Slate article are there, but you can ignore them if you want to. If I choose not to look at the ads, I don't have to.
The ads they are talking about will interrupt what you are doing and force you to pay attention to them. Its like a telemarketer that you can't hang up on. You have to talk to them before you can get back to your dinner.
If I spend a bunch of money on a product I don't what that product to interrupt what I'm doing and force me to pay attention to advertisements.
One of many reasons why I won't buy any apple product

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Lionel Mandrake]

28. Nice smoke screen.

Funny how the ads for iPhone and iPad don't mention the iAd feature.

Also for the record:

1. I am running OS X on a Power Mac G5. (So much for your assertion that I am a life-long Apple hater.)

2. The ads on the Slate website are easily circumvented. They don't take control of my machine.

3. If worst comes to worst, I can always Force Quit my web browser. Nothing like that option will be available to the victims of iAd.

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MattBaggins]

31. Someone needs to get adbuster for the iphone.

[Lionel Mandrake]

34. If the fascist OS works as advertised, that will be impossible. nt

[Heywood J]

18. Yet another reason to take the money I saved by not buying a Mac

and use it to buy an Android phone.

[superduperfarleft]

29. Um, the Android has ads embedded in free apps already. n/t

[Lionel Mandrake]

30. That's good to know.

Before buying an Android, I'd want to take a hard look at those ads.

Are they innocuous (like Google ads)?

Or are they truly obnoxious (like what iAd will make possible)?

[superduperfarleft]

36. most are text only

Some have images. It's really not that bad.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

39. There should be no ads on the iPad

Just like there are no ads on the internet. Or on TV. Or in newspapers. Or magazines.

[Lionel Mandrake]

41. Of course there will be ads.

The issue is what kind of ads. Some ads are more obnoxious than others.

[ThatsMyBarack]

44. If you HATE ads....

Join me at THIS site!:

http://forums.commercialsihate.com/default.asp

;)

[bridgit]

45. "the emotion of TV ads with the interactivity of Web ads" welcome to the purple pill