6 ms·

Apple should wind down their ads system (iAd) entirely. Advertisements are antithetical to what Apple stands for - privacy, premium experience, doing the right

Apple should wind down their ads system (iAd) entirely. Advertisements are antithetical to what Apple stands for - privacy, premium experience, doing the right thing for users. They should lower their cut to 10% (not to 20, as the article states) and start offering curated experience bundles like they do with AppleTV.

saagarjha 6y ago
iAd is dead. These are search ads.
fossuser 6y ago
Yeah I agree (at least on the ads piece, not sure about the rest of your comment) - I think the ads are an unnecessary dilution of their brand. They can help developers with ad discovery in a bunch of different and better ways that are less hostile for devs and users.
- thunderrabbit 6y ago
  *app discovery Thank you for the funny typo "ad discovery" "We curate the finest ads for your consumer experience.."
  - fossuser 6y ago
    Ah yes - my bad, too late to edit :) Ad discovery is more Facebook and Google’s business.
pvg 6y ago
iAd was shut down years ago. Tracking ads might not align with some of the values Apple espouses but it seems a bit of a stretch to say a company famous for its ads (and often lowbrow-dismissed as 'just marketing' entirely) and advertising are 'antithetical'.
- intopieces 6y ago
  I'd say ads inside apps is antithetical to Apple's brand. Does anyone like those?
  - manigandham 6y ago
    Inside apps? That's not up to them.
    - happymellon 6y ago
      The app store is an app.
AtlasBarfed 6y ago
Apple exists to make money, first and foremost. Don't forget that.
- lostlogin 6y ago
  Not like this they don’t. Traditionally they hit you pocket upfront then left you alone. Maybe it’s a minority that still want this, I definitely do.
  - duncanawoods 6y ago
    The level of control they maintain over the devices after you have paid means I don't feel I am left alone. I feel I only have the rights of renter not an owner. They do eventually use this power to force you to buy a new house. They use it to mark perfectly capable devices as obsolete e.g. why is a MPB i7/retina/ssd with discrete graphics now being marked as obsolete? Why is an iPad4 not allowed ad blocking with no chance to install an alternative open OS?
wolco 6y ago
Lowering their cut is antithetical Apple. Apple should remain at 20% and perhaps go as high as google adsense. You agree it is a premium experience that comes at a cost.
- normalnorm 6y ago
  Premium experience comes at a cost because it is expensive to produce. You need good materials, you need to hire the best people, you need to take your time, etc. And you need to be free from cheap "feature factory" thinking. The above has nothing to do with Apple's cut on other people's work. That is just exploitation and is unrelated to increasing the quality of the experience for users. On the contrary, it makes life harder for developers wanting to bet on quality and instead encourages shovleware and deception. And this is exactly the outcome one sees. The app store experience is what is antithetical to Apple. There is nothing premium about it.
  - ooobit2 6y ago
    The entire dev process with Apple is hardly ethical. No flexibility with payment options, the constant review and redevelop process even on apps that have already established a strong history. And the upfront and continuing costs... You'd have to buy every available iPhone version on market, a Mac, the programming license, the app store license, and hope Apple doesn't just rip off your idea for a future iOS feature then kick your app out of the store entirely. I may be off on some of this, but any of it is too much.
gear54rus 6y ago
They do not stand for any of those things and the fact that you believe it is just another win for their brainwashing machine. They've been known to lick China's boot any time they throw a tantrum (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21210678 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21210678). That alone proves they only stand for their own greed.
- lawik 6y ago
  I think it would be naive to think that their stance is more than a marketing strategy. But it does mean they take a stronger stance on user data than others. They at least have incentives to protect user data so they can bash Google about privacy invasion in their marketing. China and other oppressive regimes tend to be where the marketing gets in conflict with the law and China has a lot of leverage on any major electronics manufacturer. Still a capitalist business so ideology or ethics don't really factor into it. I think it is correct that Apple could benefit in amrketing from having no ad systems on their platforms. Not convinced it would be net positive for them though.
  - gear54rus 6y ago
    What stronger incentive? Their shit is closed top to bottom, it's not like you can check their statements. The best cause of action for the greedy bastards is to bash google AND do the same things themselves Stop lying to yourself lol.

saagarjha 6y ago

iAd is dead. These are search ads.

fossuser 6y ago

Yeah I agree (at least on the ads piece, not sure about the rest of your comment) - I think the ads are an unnecessary dilution of their brand. They can help developers with ad discovery in a bunch of different and better ways that are less hostile for devs and users.

thunderrabbit 6y ago
*app discovery Thank you for the funny typo "ad discovery" "We curate the finest ads for your consumer experience.."
- fossuser 6y ago
  Ah yes - my bad, too late to edit :) Ad discovery is more Facebook and Google’s business.

pvg 6y ago

iAd was shut down years ago. Tracking ads might not align with some of the values Apple espouses but it seems a bit of a stretch to say a company famous for its ads (and often lowbrow-dismissed as 'just marketing' entirely) and advertising are 'antithetical'.

intopieces 6y ago
I'd say ads inside apps is antithetical to Apple's brand. Does anyone like those?
- manigandham 6y ago
  Inside apps? That's not up to them.
  - happymellon 6y ago
    The app store is an app.

AtlasBarfed 6y ago

Apple exists to make money, first and foremost. Don't forget that.

lostlogin 6y ago
Not like this they don’t. Traditionally they hit you pocket upfront then left you alone. Maybe it’s a minority that still want this, I definitely do.
- duncanawoods 6y ago
  The level of control they maintain over the devices after you have paid means I don't feel I am left alone. I feel I only have the rights of renter not an owner. They do eventually use this power to force you to buy a new house. They use it to mark perfectly capable devices as obsolete e.g. why is a MPB i7/retina/ssd with discrete graphics now being marked as obsolete? Why is an iPad4 not allowed ad blocking with no chance to install an alternative open OS?

wolco 6y ago

Lowering their cut is antithetical Apple. Apple should remain at 20% and perhaps go as high as google adsense. You agree it is a premium experience that comes at a cost.

normalnorm 6y ago
Premium experience comes at a cost because it is expensive to produce. You need good materials, you need to hire the best people, you need to take your time, etc. And you need to be free from cheap "feature factory" thinking. The above has nothing to do with Apple's cut on other people's work. That is just exploitation and is unrelated to increasing the quality of the experience for users. On the contrary, it makes life harder for developers wanting to bet on quality and instead encourages shovleware and deception. And this is exactly the outcome one sees. The app store experience is what is antithetical to Apple. There is nothing premium about it.
- ooobit2 6y ago
  The entire dev process with Apple is hardly ethical. No flexibility with payment options, the constant review and redevelop process even on apps that have already established a strong history. And the upfront and continuing costs... You'd have to buy every available iPhone version on market, a Mac, the programming license, the app store license, and hope Apple doesn't just rip off your idea for a future iOS feature then kick your app out of the store entirely. I may be off on some of this, but any of it is too much.

gear54rus 6y ago

They do not stand for any of those things and the fact that you believe it is just another win for their brainwashing machine. They've been known to lick China's boot any time they throw a tantrum (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21210678 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21210678). That alone proves they only stand for their own greed.

lawik 6y ago
I think it would be naive to think that their stance is more than a marketing strategy. But it does mean they take a stronger stance on user data than others. They at least have incentives to protect user data so they can bash Google about privacy invasion in their marketing. China and other oppressive regimes tend to be where the marketing gets in conflict with the law and China has a lot of leverage on any major electronics manufacturer. Still a capitalist business so ideology or ethics don't really factor into it. I think it is correct that Apple could benefit in amrketing from having no ad systems on their platforms. Not convinced it would be net positive for them though.
- gear54rus 6y ago
  What stronger incentive? Their shit is closed top to bottom, it's not like you can check their statements. The best cause of action for the greedy bastards is to bash google AND do the same things themselves Stop lying to yourself lol.