5 ms·

I suddenly reflected on the absurdity of a. paying for hardware b. paying for apps c. paying for airtime ... in order to see ads.

by ojbyrne 16y ago

sjwright 16y ago
Fortunately, you probably won't be seeing ads if (b) is true. Or if you are, demand a refund.
- leviathant 16y ago
  The probability of not seeing ads if (b) is true will drop throughout the years, if cable television is any indicator.
  - cmelbye 16y ago
    There will always be the "high quality app" sector, and ads are simply too ugly to fit in with the carefully tailored user interfaces of the high end apps, even if Apple does make a few changes to make the ads look at least a little bit more aesthetically pleasing.
dlsspy 16y ago
This is why I canceled cable many years ago. I was paying for it, as well as TiVo service and getting lots of ads, including ads on the shows I was watching.
- RyanMcGreal 16y ago
  In fairness, when you pay for cable you're paying for the distribution of the TV channels you watch. The programming itself is funded through ad revenue. (Disclosure: I haven't had cable in about ten years.)
  - dlsspy 16y ago
    I understand what they thought they were selling me. It had no bearing on how frustrated I was sitting there thinking ``Really? I'm paying money to see this?''
    - alttab 16y ago
      I can't remember the last time i paid a cable tv bill.
    - RyanMcGreal 16y ago
      I would consider signing up for a TV service if it were 100% pay-per-view with no commercials and no minimum fee.
pwim 16y ago
Newspapers, magazines, cable television, DVDs, movies in the theatre, all of these you pay for and yet still see ads. Why should a product just have one revenue model? If it weren't for advertising, these products would have to charge more to generate the same revenue.
- jpdbaugh 16y ago
  I don't buy that much shit so I would be more than happy to pay a premium to have something without having more shit I don't need sold to me.
mawhidby 16y ago
Just to clarify - are iAds only supposed to be implemented on free apps? Or, in other words, is there anything stopping an app developer from including iAds in a paid app? Also, do you think a developer would make more money with a free, iAd version over a paid app? If so, developers would obviously be more enticed to offer a free, iAd version, which would also make Apple more money (40% of iAd revenue versus 30% for paid apps).
ahoyhere 16y ago
You pay for your car, your parking, your highway taxes, and your gas... only to have your view of the roadside covered by billboards. The alternative? Pay for your software, too. There's no reason it should be free.
- doron 16y ago
  If the software crashes, can i get cash back from the developer?
- jpdbaugh 16y ago
  Agreed. I am so tired of this notion that software (and other things too) need to be free and supported by ads. What the hell is wrong with with just paying for something so that you don't have to get bombarded by psychological warfare designed to cause you to purchase shit you don't need? I am worried that this is direction the internet is going. Its starting to just be a huge system to drive consumerism. Really though everything is being designed around designed around better advertising. Even the holy grail of the internet, real time search, is really just about better ads.
  - ahoyhere 16y ago
    Don't worry, it's cyclical. Don't remember the advertising crash of 2000/2001? It was going the same way: banners will support everything! FREEEEEEE! Then the bottom fell out of the banner market, because it trackable, very clear how little the banners returned. Then those businesses all went out of business. A year or two later we small-time "Average Joes" (eg. not customers of SAP) saw the first true SaaS aimed at us. The main reason Google ads worked so well for so long is because they are topical and their format was new. Word on the vine is that the click-through rates for most text ads is falling... History repeats. The prevailing popular opinion? Doesn't matter. Everybody's a poker player. A BAD poker player. They say they won't pay, but they will. I'm sure if you told people they could have free food, they would turn around and tell the next restaurant that they wouldn't pay. But when they got hungry outside of the free food hours, or they really felt like indian tonight instead of food caplets, they would. I think geeks, having a slightly better than average ability to get software for free, BELIEVE their own poker-playing, but of course, they will also pay. The proof is there.

I suddenly reflected on the absurdity of a. paying for hardware b. paying for apps c. paying for airtime ... in order to see ads.

by ojbyrne 16y ago

I suddenly reflected on the absurdity of a. paying for hardware b. paying for apps c. paying for airtime ... in order to see ads.

sjwright 16y ago

Fortunately, you probably won't be seeing ads if (b) is true. Or if you are, demand a refund.

leviathant 16y ago
The probability of not seeing ads if (b) is true will drop throughout the years, if cable television is any indicator.
- cmelbye 16y ago
  There will always be the "high quality app" sector, and ads are simply too ugly to fit in with the carefully tailored user interfaces of the high end apps, even if Apple does make a few changes to make the ads look at least a little bit more aesthetically pleasing.

dlsspy 16y ago

This is why I canceled cable many years ago. I was paying for it, as well as TiVo service and getting lots of ads, including ads on the shows I was watching.

RyanMcGreal 16y ago
In fairness, when you pay for cable you're paying for the distribution of the TV channels you watch. The programming itself is funded through ad revenue. (Disclosure: I haven't had cable in about ten years.)
- dlsspy 16y ago
  I understand what they thought they were selling me. It had no bearing on how frustrated I was sitting there thinking ``Really? I'm paying money to see this?''
  - alttab 16y ago
    I can't remember the last time i paid a cable tv bill.
  - RyanMcGreal 16y ago
    I would consider signing up for a TV service if it were 100% pay-per-view with no commercials and no minimum fee.

pwim 16y ago

Newspapers, magazines, cable television, DVDs, movies in the theatre, all of these you pay for and yet still see ads. Why should a product just have one revenue model? If it weren't for advertising, these products would have to charge more to generate the same revenue.

jpdbaugh 16y ago
I don't buy that much shit so I would be more than happy to pay a premium to have something without having more shit I don't need sold to me.

mawhidby 16y ago

Just to clarify - are iAds only supposed to be implemented on free apps? Or, in other words, is there anything stopping an app developer from including iAds in a paid app? Also, do you think a developer would make more money with a free, iAd version over a paid app? If so, developers would obviously be more enticed to offer a free, iAd version, which would also make Apple more money (40% of iAd revenue versus 30% for paid apps).

ahoyhere 16y ago

You pay for your car, your parking, your highway taxes, and your gas... only to have your view of the roadside covered by billboards. The alternative? Pay for your software, too. There's no reason it should be free.

doron 16y ago
If the software crashes, can i get cash back from the developer?
jpdbaugh 16y ago
Agreed. I am so tired of this notion that software (and other things too) need to be free and supported by ads. What the hell is wrong with with just paying for something so that you don't have to get bombarded by psychological warfare designed to cause you to purchase shit you don't need? I am worried that this is direction the internet is going. Its starting to just be a huge system to drive consumerism. Really though everything is being designed around designed around better advertising. Even the holy grail of the internet, real time search, is really just about better ads.
- ahoyhere 16y ago
  Don't worry, it's cyclical. Don't remember the advertising crash of 2000/2001? It was going the same way: banners will support everything! FREEEEEEE! Then the bottom fell out of the banner market, because it trackable, very clear how little the banners returned. Then those businesses all went out of business. A year or two later we small-time "Average Joes" (eg. not customers of SAP) saw the first true SaaS aimed at us. The main reason Google ads worked so well for so long is because they are topical and their format was new. Word on the vine is that the click-through rates for most text ads is falling... History repeats. The prevailing popular opinion? Doesn't matter. Everybody's a poker player. A BAD poker player. They say they won't pay, but they will. I'm sure if you told people they could have free food, they would turn around and tell the next restaurant that they wouldn't pay. But when they got hungry outside of the free food hours, or they really felt like indian tonight instead of food caplets, they would. I think geeks, having a slightly better than average ability to get software for free, BELIEVE their own poker-playing, but of course, they will also pay. The proof is there.