Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 8th Jun 2010 22:07 UTC
Apple When Apple announced its iAd mobile advertising initiative, many of us wondered how this would effect other mobile advertising agencies on the iPhone, and more specifically, Google's AdMob. Well, now we know: Apple has revised its iOS developer agreement to specifically lock out Google's AdMod. And then people wonder why Apple is no longer the darling of the geek world.
Thread beginning with comment 429030
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Can we say..
by umccullough on Tue 8th Jun 2010 23:31 UTC in reply to "RE: Can we say.."
umccullough
Member since:
2006-01-26

Whats anticompetitive is having Google glean all the information about your latest and greatest platform in-order to compete with their own product.


Wow, your definition of "anti-competitive" is prett much completely backwards there...

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[3]: Can we say..
by apoclypse on Wed 9th Jun 2010 01:56 in reply to "RE[2]: Can we say.."
apoclypse Member since:
2007-02-17

Had you read my post fully, you would know what I was getting at. Basically letting AdMob on the iphone is tantamount to someone putting a hidden camera in your retail store to see what your customers are buying so that I can sell it cheaper at my store down the street.

You are basically saying its okay for Google to learn about Apple's hardware, and track their customers, even though Google itself is a competitor? And you don't think that's anti-competitive or at least an unfair advantage to Google?

Fanboi much? I know people think Google shits gold sometimes, just like most Apple fanboys think Apple shits platinum, but at the end of the day they are both businesses and they have to protect their profits. Giving one of your biggest competitor access to your platform isn't very smart. Its like the Airforce opening up its doors saying hey guys you can take a look at how we build our jets and how to use them and then being surprised when China builds one just like it.

AdMob gives Google too much power in the mobile space as a platform maker themselves. If Android didn't exist, there wouldn't be an issue. Apple is not blocking other ad services from the platform, just those that have their own mobile OS. As large as the user base of the iPhone is compared to Android, I find it hard to believe that Google wouldn't use the stats form AdMob to try to steal customers from Apple or glean information about Apple' hardware and divulge it to their hardware partners to beat them to market.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[4]: Can we say..
by umccullough on Wed 9th Jun 2010 02:22 in reply to "RE[3]: Can we say.."
umccullough Member since:
2006-01-26

Had you read my post fully, you would know what I was getting at. Basically letting AdMob on the iphone is tantamount to someone putting a hidden camera in your retail store to see what your customers are buying so that I can sell it cheaper at my store down the street.


It doesn't matter what you meant to say - you still have an incorrect definition of "anti-competitive".

You are basically saying its okay for Google to learn about Apple's hardware, and track their customers, even though Google itself is a competitor? And you don't think that's anti-competitive or at least an unfair advantage to Google?


Well, that's certainly a competitive action. It's not like Google "infiltrated" the iPhone platform through some backdoor. They did it through perfectly legitimate, competitive means, with iPhone developers supporting them. By definition, what Apple is doing *after the fact* is anti-competitive because Apple doesn't want Google to compete with them on their platform, even if the developers would rather use AdMob then iAd, Apple has made the choice for them.

Fanboi much?


Seriously...I only pointed out that your definition of anti-competitive was pretty much backwards, and you still insist that it's not.

It doesn't matter who is big and who is little, who is more powerful and who is less powerful, who respects privacy and who doesn't - you can't just change the definition of the word to suit your needs.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[4]: Can we say..
by vivainio on Wed 9th Jun 2010 05:26 in reply to "RE[3]: Can we say.."
vivainio Member since:
2008-12-26

Giving one of your biggest competitor access to your platform isn't very smart. Its like the Airforce opening up its doors saying hey guys you can take a look at how we build our jets and how to use them and then being surprised when China builds one just like it.

Why hasn't google blocked iPhone from gmail yet, then?

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[3]: Can we say..
by dharknes on Wed 9th Jun 2010 02:33 in reply to "RE[2]: Can we say.."
dharknes Member since:
2009-03-01

"Whats anticompetitive is having Google glean all the information about your latest and greatest platform in-order to compete with their own product.


Wow, your definition of "anti-competitive" is prett much completely backwards there...
"

So letting your competition have access to all your customers is a good thing and should be encouraged? Business is general is anticompetitive, Apple isn't in business to promote competition.

The other thing to remember here is the new rule doesn't apply to independent ad networks. It only applies to ad networks owned by mobile hardware or OS manufactures.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: Can we say..
by umccullough on Wed 9th Jun 2010 02:39 in reply to "RE[3]: Can we say.."
umccullough Member since:
2006-01-26

So letting your competition have access to all your customers is a good thing and should be encouraged? Business is general is anticompetitive, Apple isn't in business to promote competition.


Why is everyone so tied up in "good" or "bad" when discussing whether something is anti-competitive or not. What I'm claiming is that Google scoping out the competition is not anti-competitive by definition (gathering statistics does not preventing Apple from doing something)... whereas Apple blocking Google's ad software on their phone is anti-competitive (They're actively preventing Google from doing something).

If Google prevented iPhone from accessing YouTube while allowing other mobile devices, that would be another example of anti-competitive behavior.

It's that simple folks...

It's similar to the difference between a feature and an anti-feature (look it up).

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[4]: Can we say..
by Manish on Wed 9th Jun 2010 09:24 in reply to "RE[3]: Can we say.."
Manish Member since:
2009-12-18

Whats anticompetitive is having Google glean all the information about your latest and greatest platform in-order to compete with their own product.

If Apple wants to put iAd on ANdroid, I don't think Google will stop them. They can't They don't control the platform like with an Iron Fist like Apple. iAd will succeed in Android, if it's good.

So letting your competition have access to all your customers is a good thing and should be encouraged? Business is general is anticompetitive, Apple isn't in business to promote competition.

You seem to promote anti-competitive behavior saying that "It was always the same". Apple says "It is different". Why can't they be different this time when there is a chance?

The other thing to remember here is the new rule doesn't apply to independent ad networks. It only applies to ad networks owned by mobile hardware or OS manufactures.


Are you in your own world? We are talking about Apple specially blocking out Google. Everyone who doesn't live under a rock knows that "independent ad networks" are allowed. Don't say the same shit million times.

Reply Parent Score: 1