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 429033
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: ....
by fgrasset on Tue 8th Jun 2010 23:33 UTC in reply to "...."
fgrasset
Member since:
2005-12-02

Woa.. this is just ridiculous...

Apple enter in the Ad business and you expect that they give their key differentiator to their concurrent that are actually bigger (adMob)??

But... wait where are you when Google launch Android?? I didn’t read you complaining that every Android user *Have* to create a google account in order to use it!!! Too bad I already have a Yahoo account...
Sure there is technical impossibility (... well no but let say...) so what about a mail client allowing to use every type of mail account??? yes there is one but limited
And what about synchronization? MobileMe? ActiveSync (ah wait in 2.2 seem that you finally can...)?
Why can’t I use googleMap but with Microsoft service? no? It’s about choice no?

Strange that in the core business services google are not so open!!!
But you expect that other company give access to their own software...

Apple is a big player in the open-source world, and not only for Webkit but also for lot of other software... the condition is that these software are not strategic ones. That simple and that true for every company.

And aside I’m not happy that any company can get some of my data without my authorization... (and that why I don’t really use Google Mail, even if I’m forced to have one... vendor locking... again...)

When (and if) iAd is ported to Android we’ll see how google will react... I’m sure that then, privacy will become an important matter...


But what means the restriction made by Apple? It means that collecting data from apps must be done by a third-party company (not in ad business)... so that probably what adMob will do and then... business as usual... but direct competitors will not have direct access to these data (well we have to believe in that...)
I don’t even see how Google and its adMob are getting out... eventually there will have to spend more money... oh how I’m sad... poor Google... poor Microsoft...

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: ....
by scofmb on Wed 9th Jun 2010 01:11 in reply to "RE: ...."
scofmb Member since:
2010-02-20

Another apple fanboy... sigh...

All their comment have been in apple related post and only praising the "think like big brother" company...

Edited 2010-06-09 01:12 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: ....
by fgrasset on Wed 9th Jun 2010 01:51 in reply to "RE[2]: ...."
fgrasset Member since:
2005-12-02

Another apple fanboy... sigh...

All their comment have been in apple related post and only praising the "think like big brother" company...


Lol, sure the « not think like me, should be banished » is a better attitude... the content of the arguments don’t matter....

And for sure Apple related post are *strangely* the one with the more disinformation, you know like saying something wrong and pretend to be true... like the fact that Apple did block adMob where in fact adMob will just have to get data via a third-party...

Or even pretending that adMob have a legitimate right to access to data of other platform... (so why Google is making a me-too platform??? but sure good people should not ask, google is THE good guy and Apple is big brother...)

So to be clear: in the light of your argument, and as not saying crap on Apple mean be an Apple « fanboy » thus I’m then proud to be such a fanboy... after 10 years of working on Linux, it’s cool to not be only an « open-source Geek ». But I’m being sick of this world... Remind me the story about the 60’s and how it end...
Who is the fanboy indeed...

Reply Parent Score: -1

RE[2]: ....
by poundsmack on Wed 9th Jun 2010 03:39 in reply to "RE: ...."
poundsmack Member since:
2005-07-13

actually i rather laoth google, and it's practices (in some areas). if you read my posts you would know that. ;)

you do have some good points though, that aside i am not a hypocrite. ;)

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: ....
by Manish on Wed 9th Jun 2010 09:15 in reply to "RE: ...."
Manish Member since:
2009-12-18

Apple is a big player in the open-source world, and not only for Webkit but also for lot of other software... the condition is that these software are not strategic ones. That simple and that true for every company.


Another post of misinformation. You know the history of Webkit-KHTML? Apple was forced to open the source to Webkit. They didn't do it on their own. They are not big players in open source world. RedHat is. Novell is. Collabora is. Google is. Intel is.
Secondly, these days Google invests more resources in Webkit development. The commits to webkit is the highest of all.

And aside I’m not happy that any company can get some of my data without my authorization... (and that why I don’t really use Google Mail, even if I’m forced to have one... vendor locking... again...)

Isn't it anonymous data? Or they specifically track you? Anonymous data is not termed *your* data. Next, you will cry that website foo has it's website traffic stats available and also tells what % of users came by which browser. You can also cry on that since it's your data made available to everyone? HYPOCRISY!

When (and if) iAd is ported to Android we’ll see how google will react... I’m sure that then, privacy will become an important matter...

Google won't react. This is the prime difference. I am not a Google supporter, but I know they won't and can't since Android is an open platform. Plus, since you can sideload apps, iAd can be made available for many Apps stores and not just Android Marketplace.


But what means the restriction made by Apple? It means that collecting data from apps must be done by a third-party company (not in ad business)... so that probably what adMob will do and then... business as usual...

It simply means locking out competitors ruthlessly. Specifically Google.

but direct competitors will not have direct access to these data (well we have to believe in that...)
I don’t even see how Google and its adMob are getting out... eventually there will have to spend more money...

You are an Apple apologist. I think one day google will add a clause that independent firms cannot hand over data to competitors to fully lock out competitors.

Apple motto - "Think different, as long as you agree with me"

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE[3]: ....
by Timmmm on Wed 9th Jun 2010 13:16 in reply to "RE[2]: ...."
Timmmm Member since:
2006-07-25

"Apple is a big player in the open-source world, and not only for Webkit but also for lot of other software...


They are not big players in open source world.
"

I beg to differ. Aside from webkit, there is also LLVM which is a *massive* improvement on gcc. There are also several minor projects such as libdispatch, launchd, darwin and so on that they have released as open source, even though they didn't have to.

They may be more evil than Microsoft in some respects (i.e. they're control freaks), but they tend to be very good on the developer side of things.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: ....
by molnarcs on Wed 9th Jun 2010 16:43 in reply to "RE: ...."
molnarcs Member since:
2005-09-10

You just don't get it... The difference between the two companies and their actions is night and day.

First, the Android platform is Open, and it creates competition between mobile manufacturers (HTC vs Motorola for example).

And now we have an open alliance of hardware manufacturers working on the hardware driver stack of the android platform. In other words, anyone is welcome to modify how Android works, provide a software stack on top of ie: an email client, a sync service, an interface to MobileMe or any other services, etc. It shouldn't be too difficult either, I mean the barrier of entering this market for any major manufacturer is pretty low. HTC writes it's own UI on top of Android, and so can Samsung, Motorola, LG, etc..

This alone is a major difference between the two companies and their offerings, I'm just stunned that you don't see it.

Second, Google also went out of its way to make it easy to switch from their online services if you can find something better. It made it ridiculously easy to export your data into a portable format that can be imported to any other service provider that offers better solutions. Are there any? Well, that's another issue, but the point is, they don't prevent competition, in fact, they welcome it.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: ....
by DavidSan on Wed 9th Jun 2010 18:04 in reply to "RE[2]: ...."
DavidSan Member since:
2008-11-18

You just don't get it... The difference between the two companies and their actions is night and day.

First, the Android platform is Open, and it creates competition between mobile manufacturers (HTC vs Motorola for example).

And now we have an open alliance of hardware manufacturers working on the hardware driver stack of the android platform. In other words, anyone is welcome to modify how Android works, provide a software stack on top of ie: an email client, a sync service, an interface to MobileMe or any other services, etc. It shouldn't be too difficult either, I mean the barrier of entering this market for any major manufacturer is pretty low. HTC writes it's own UI on top of Android, and so can Samsung, Motorola, LG, etc..

This alone is a major difference between the two companies and their offerings, I'm just stunned that you don't see it.

Second, Google also went out of its way to make it easy to switch from their online services if you can find something better. It made it ridiculously easy to export your data into a portable format that can be imported to any other service provider that offers better solutions. Are there any? Well, that's another issue, but the point is, they don't prevent competition, in fact, they welcome it.


Sadly no. Google created Android in order to sell Advertisement and provide a platform for Admob. Mobile advertising. Don't be so naive. That's the Google's business. Because of that, and because they have piles of money they do not care at all about opensource, helping the industry or open aynthing.

Google cares about money.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: ....
by aent on Fri 11th Jun 2010 14:23 in reply to "RE: ...."
aent Member since:
2006-01-25

Android does NOT require a Google account, AT&T has stripped Google off of some Androids they offer. It will work with any email account you have, with Exchange/LDAP servers in place of Google for contact/calendar/email syncing, or anyone can write a plugin with the Android SDK to create their own datasources to sync any and all of the data that Google syncs with the phone. No Google account is required, and, infact, while the phone obviously is designed for users who like syncing with the web, its still not a requirement for it, you can use the phone with no accounts added to it whatsoever.

Reply Parent Score: 2