28 ms·

Apple is building a demand-side platform

201 points by helij 4y ago

echelon 4y ago
I'm so sick of big tech. They own the platform. Keep us locked in the platform. Then sell our minds to advertisers. Incumbents can't grow any larger without eating their users eventually. Maybe with proper antitrust action we would see a new generation of healthy upstarts. New search engines, new devices, new everything. The forest needs a fire.
- pjmlp 4y ago
  Usually when the soil is fertile, a new set of trees replace the former forest and everything is old again.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- josho 4y ago
  While I agree with your sentiment, in this case what Apple is rumoured to be planning is no different than what happens in retail today. For example, your grocer sells their 'end cap' shelving space (end of aisle--highly visible product placement). Not only that, grocers have moved to stocking their inventory in a highly inefficient approach so that average consumers need to walk every aisle to fill their cart (the Apple comparable is a bad search experience, to lead consumers to paid placement instead). Apple is doing what we already experience in the physical world. If you dislike Apple's changes then the fix is going to have to be general consumer protection laws that apply in real world spaces as well as digital.
  - AlexandrB 4y ago
    The analogy here breaks down because the App Store is not a physical space with "aisles" and "endcaps". The only realistic way to navigate the App Store's millions of apps is with search. It's ok to place paid results for searches like "todo list" or "calendar". But if I search for "Fantastical", I better get "Fantastical.app" as my first result. Not some unrelated bullshit that a competitor has placed there. The latter is the equivalent of me reaching for the Corn Flakes at the store and some guy popping up and shoving Cheerios in my hand instead.
    - pjmlp 4y ago
      It would be the same as having Cheerios to pay more, thus Corn Flakes gets demoted to the lower rows, knie level.
      - echelon 4y ago
        Not when you're searching for Cheerios. This type of behavior is new and the patterns were developed by the advertising giants to favor their revenue streams. It's trademark disparagement. It lets platform monopolies take even more revenue from disenfranchised businesses. Businesses that in turn have to cede more control over their storefronts, brands, and operations to these hitherto unrelated tech companies.
        pjmlp 4y ago
        You will be searching for them alright, and find them, on the bottom row on the supermarket aisle.
- AlexandrB 4y ago
  Because of the dominance of advertising as a revenue model, new entrants may actually be worse than what we already have. Before the forest gets a fire we need to make more room for software business models besides "ad-funded". My favoured approach is regulation that would make tracking mandatory "opt-in", but anything that makes collecting and selling user data less lucrative would be good.
lloydatkinson 4y ago
I do not understand what a demand-side platform is and the article does a terrible job of explaining it. Something to do with ads? Pretty sure they just made this phrase up for the article.
- JLCarveth 4y ago
  It's definitely an established term, Apple is using it in their job posts https://jobs.apple.com/en-us/privacy?returnUrl=/en-us/details/200369598/senior-product-manager-demand-side-platform-ad-platforms https://jobs.apple.com/en-us/privacy?returnUrl=/en-us/detail...
- jaywalk 4y ago
  Definitely not made up. It's basically a platform to allow advertisers to manage bidding on ad impressions in real-time, among other aspects of their ad campaigns. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demand-side_platform https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demand-side_platform
- secondcoming 4y ago
  DSPs are the part of adtech that match your data to an advertising campaign and then bid to serve you that ad.
- ikiris 4y ago
  Its always weird when people jump from "I don't understand something" to "no one understands something, they must have made it up" without any effort to verify that its not just you. Like is it arrogance? You can clearly find the term almost immediately defined here for example https://bfy.tw/TOgI https://bfy.tw/TOgI Like any basic search will do so.
  - metadat 4y ago
    You've hidden a LMGTFY link behind a URL shortener. Please don't do this, there are better (and gentler, kinder) ways to get your point across other than tricking people other than the parent poster into clicking the link.
  - 4y ago
ohgodplsno 4y ago
- 5350-uiop-1130 4y ago
  you WILL be surprised, and you WILL be delighted
- Nextgrid 4y ago
  The good thing about ads is that it's a cancer that nobody wants so even anticompetitive actions such as pushing all the other players out of business is beneficial as it just leaves one adtech company to block as opposed to dozens/hundreds.
  - ohgodplsno 4y ago
    Unfortunately, in app data collection and in OS data collection in a completely uncustomizable OS is unavoidable. Watch as they cripple Safari to no longer be able to block their own services (or collect it in the background)
    - Nextgrid 4y ago
      I don't disagree, but my point was that if Apple switches to ads and pushes all other adtech vendors out of the market, all you'd need to do is to switch to literally any other manufacturer than Apple. In a way they'd be doing you a favour by killing off this disgusting industry.
- juve1996 4y ago
  This has nothing to do with a "walled-garden" approach. Removing the walled garden essentially allows what you're so smugly against. Of course, this can be abused. But the problem isn't having a walled garden. The problem is monopoly and duopoly. There aren't any real options. We keep beating around the bush of the reality - anti-trust is what's needed. Not squabbling over details and feeling good about arguing with kids about apple. I mean, go ahead, pat yourself on the back, but we're still in the same place. The EU can add a selector for a browser or tell apple to change their input jack but that still doesn't solve the problem - the market is anti-competitive because there is no competition. Walled garden or not doesn't matter if there are only 2 competitors.
AlexandrB 4y ago
> Sources within Apple, a company notoriously shy of making public statements, have briefed media outlets with news of more advertising opportunities for those eager to promote their wares in the App Store. > The planned ad placements include two additional slots in the App Store with a promotional placement on its “Today” tab where the paid-for slots will feature alongside editorialized content. The other planned ad placement will feature on app product pages where ads will be served under a tab that reads “You Might Also Like.” We'll see if Apple's ad efforts extend beyond the App Store but even so, the incentives here are all fucked up. Why bother making App Store search better and cleaning up spam/scam apps when these problems enable a new revenue stream in the form of paid placements? Incidentally, is the App Store yet another venue where you need to buy ad placement for your own product's name lest it be taken over by your competitors?
- api 4y ago
  > We'll see if Apple's ad efforts extend beyond the App Store but even so, the incentives here are all fucked up. Why bother making App Store search better and cleaning up spam/scam apps when these problems enable a new revenue stream in the form of paid placements? All commercial vendor app stores are trash fires. We need anti-trust action to force the ability to subscribe to alternative app stores. There's just no incentive to improve them once users are locked in and as you say there are often perverse incentives to do the opposite. I'm really glad both power users and developers on the Mac roundly rejected the Mac App Store. I actually do use it for things like communicator apps and other limited-scope apps since auto-updates are nice, but if Apple pushed app-store-only for Mac or even made installing apps outside the store too hard (pushing via dark pattern) it's one of the things that would drive me off the platform. I realize there are security benefits but like I said the App Store is a trash fire. They all are.
  - jhenkens 4y ago
    I don't think I've relied on the app store search for anything except exact matches in half a decade. The greatest feature of the app store is that it handles app links. I just use search engines to discover apps then click the links to open in the app store. I still do wish they weren't quite so abusive in other ways of their monopoly - their pricing, and dev tooling fees, are pretty outrageous.
Yhippa 4y ago
So was Apple being disingenuous this whole time about privacy? Presuming they plan on using all the data they capture from their users iDevices for their ad platform. Is there a way to opt out of that?
- candiddevmike 4y ago
  Gotta chase growth to keep the shareholders happy. Don't be surprised when App Store ads come to your home screen or Finder.
  - Ro93 4y ago
    You sound like such a typical HN user it's hilarious . Not everything is so cynical. Apple has a history of putting users first. Do you really think they're going to jeopardize the likability of their own OS to the masses?
    - MobiusHorizons 4y ago
      Apple has a history of making choices that jeopardize the likability of their platforms with the masses (eg headphone jack, removing Touch ID) They also have a history of getting away with it.
      - threeseed 4y ago
        > jeopardize the likability of their platforms with the masses You don't represent the opinions of the masses. The fact that Apple iPhone sales continue unabated factually and objectively indicates that Headphone jacks and TouchID are not significant issues to warrant customers switching platforms.
      - askafriend 4y ago
        Everyone I know primarily use wireless headphones and love FaceID. If they don't have wireless headphones, they just pop the little adapter onto the end and go on with their day.
joshstrange 4y ago
I'm a little confused by this author feeling like they are pulling back the curtain on Apple & Ads. Apple hasn't been anti-ad (though their products have way fewer ads than the competition. I installed Windows on a new machine yesterday and oh boy I was not prepared) but rather they are pro-privacy. Their recent crackdown on ad networks wasn't "we hate ads so we are going it make harder" but instead it was "you all are leaking customer data like a sieve and that's not ok". The problem with most all the ad networks out there is they are not good stewards of their data and will sell it (directly or indirectly) to anyone with the money to buy it. Personally I hate ads but I understand their place in the world and if I have to see ads I trust Apple way more than Google or whatever fly-by-night ad tracking company is out there. The problem has always been that the advertisers had way more access to the info about the customer (and sometimes the customer's PII/unique id) than I was comfortable with and they would share that indiscriminately. If Apple is the one holding that info and if they design their system in a way that protects it then I don't personally see this as a problem.
- bombcar 4y ago
  I'm a bit of cynic and I think part of Apple's privacy push is that they see the writing on the wall - advertising is way less valuable than the current customers of advertising think it is, and by removing a bunch of the "targetability" of said advertising they can get closer to the more profitable advertising of yore (where you couldn't directly track all metrics all the time).
  - avalys 4y ago
    Have you ever run a business that relied on advertising to drive revenue or are you just relying on what you've read online? Anyone running a small business in a niche space knows that targeted advertising works. The other aspect of it is that targeted advertising allows you to make money from niche advertisers even if you operate a general-interest website.
    - dwaite 4y ago
      Third party general interest websites generally don’t care where their advertising dollars come from, which is why they outsourced it all in the first place. If anything, they would probably prefer advertisements at least tangentially related to the content so that their readers don’t get creeped out by some Amazon product following them around the internet.
thefz 4y ago
> “Our platform runs and delivers advertising auctions to match supply (customers) with demand (advertisers), focusing on technical components including Campaign Management, Bidding, Incrementality, Dynamic Creative Optimization, Matching, Auctions, and Experimentation Silly me, I thought that in a supply/demand scenario you are meant to pay your suppliers, not just harvest what you need from them without spending a cent. Monetization of everything.
- soared 4y ago
  Users are “paid” in the sense that they use apps for free. App developers instead of charging a user a download fee, show users ads. You’re also taking industry words and using them in weird ways. Supply is available ad slots, demand is advertiser dollars wanting to fill those slots. Demand pays suppliers but it goes through tons of intermediaries (brand, agency, agency, dsp, exchange, ssp, agency, app/website) plus a bunch of vendors get tiny percentages during the dsp/exchange/ssp phase
swayvil 4y ago
We will deliver your cheeseburger momentarily, but first we will flap this prostitute's filthy junk in your face. How did the toxic apocalypse of ubiquitous advertising become so normal? I can only blame the slowly boiled frog.
- saimiam 4y ago
  Yeah, it’s unbelievable how much we have accepted being constantly marketed to. Our brains don’t ever get any downtime to just be. Sometimes, it is insidious - e.g., in my apartment building’s WhatsApp group, we have a neighbor who regularly posts content by dairy brand called Country Delight promoting contests for kids. I feel she’s getting paid to do this because she’s the only one who puts out this content. Our HOA has monetized us residents by entering into an MOU with MyGate to allow promo events by brands inside the community on Sundays. In return, they get a discount on their yearly MyGate charges. It’s all pervasive now and there’s no escaping.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
navi0 4y ago
I, for one, would welcome an Apple attempt to create a better digital advertising paradigm focused on users and that respects/protects privacy as much as possible. As an optimistic college freshman in 2000 (dating myself, I know), I had the privilege of taking a class where once a week, a successful business entrepreneur would come in and expand our minds about a company/product/vision they had created. Being the height of dot com frenzy, I still remember one class where a guy described how the Internet offered the potential to revolutionize advertising in a way that would be a win-win for everyone. He described a world where ads might even be enjoyable to watch because of the Internet’s potential to show each viewer/user ads relevant to them: because every beard trimmer ad shown to a woman was wasted time for her and money for the advertiser. So far, his predictions have broadly become true, but stick with me. The coolest part of his vision to my 18yo self was that each of us would have a personal ad software agent running on our PC/TV (the most personal devices at the time) that learned our desires and went out and found ads for stuff we might want. It was a completely different paradigm to the ad model of the day and one that was potentially privacy protecting because your personal ad agent would be the automated broker for your time and attention, and everyone would want this because a good agent would delight you with new services and products that you found useful and maybe didn’t know you wanted. There would be a healthy market of personal agents to choose from, too, because the costs of switching were minimal and companies would complete to create the best personal agents. Alas, the optimism of the early Internet morphed into magic Google and Facebook/Meta pixels, and we got personal ad agents, but they are oligopolies with extreme network effects that are incompatible with privacy. The Brave browser has come closest to the vision described by the dot com entrepreneur who spoke to my class, but I’ve always wondered whether anyone else would create personal ad agents, and of all the candidates, Apple is probably best positioned. I’m curious to see how they do it.
- duxup 4y ago
  I wish I could tell them what I want to see. Amazon thinks I’m a woman, and wants to sell me things I already bought / don’t want to buy anymore. Google is convinced I’m a Cornhuskers super fan (I’m a fan of a rival team). I got an ad once to “sign melania trump’s virtual birthday card”….
- 4y ago
smm11 4y ago
I thought this was a DATA demand-side platform. Since we're living a dumb client-terminal life now anyway, only nobody realizes it.
avalys 4y ago
Apple is using their dominant (monopoly) position in mobile devices to shut down competitors in another industry (advertising) in order to drive growth in their own advertising platform, got it.
- macintux 4y ago
  Under what definition of monopoly does Apple possess one? Even in their best market, the U.S., iPhone holds just a smidge over 50%.
  - dragonwriter 4y ago
    > Under what definition of monopoly does Apple possess one? Market power is defined by pricing power (empirical absence of substitution effect), not share of some descriptive market (where you could always get any result you wanted just by changing the way you divide market descriptions.)
    - celeritascelery 4y ago
      That isn’t the definition of monopoly as stated by Wikipedia[1]: “a market with the "absence of competition", creating a situation where a specific person or enterprise is the only supplier of a particular thing.” I think calling them a monopoly is a real stretch. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly
      - Apocryphon 4y ago
        That is how the FTC defines one. > Courts do not require a literal monopoly before applying rules for single firm conduct; that term is used as shorthand for a firm with significant and durable market power — that is, the long term ability to raise price or exclude competitors. That is how that term is used here: a "monopolist" is a firm with significant and durable market power. Courts look at the firm's market share, but typically do not find monopoly power if the firm (or a group of firms acting in concert) has less than 50 percent of the sales of a particular product or service within a certain geographic area. Some courts have required much higher percentages. In addition, that leading position must be sustainable over time: if competitive forces or the entry of new firms could discipline the conduct of the leading firm, courts are unlikely to find that the firm has lasting market power. > Obtaining a monopoly by superior products, innovation, or business acumen is legal; however, the same result achieved by exclusionary or predatory acts may raise antitrust concerns. https://www.ftc.gov/advice-guidance/competition-guidance/guide-antitrust-laws/single-firm-conduct/monopolization-defined https://www.ftc.gov/advice-guidance/competition-guidance/gui...
mark_l_watson 4y ago
To some degree, I trust both Apple and Google but for different reasons. Apple is pushing privacy tools, and within limits of government suponenas they do a reasonable job. Google has a business of using your data to advise advertisers how to sell you stuff, but if you go on Google’s privacy settings page you have a fair amount of control. Personally, I let Google track my YouTube use for 90 days in order to make good suggestions and turn almost everything else off (Google makes money from me from buying content, paying for YouTube, and GCP). I really respect people who self-host their own data platforms, etc. but I don’t have time for that.
- okdood64 4y ago
  > I really respect people who self-host their own data platforms, etc. but I don’t have time for that. Exactly how I feel when I see the myriad amounts of threads/comments from people here who are self-hosting things in the name of privacy, control, "stick it to the man", etc.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
seydor 4y ago
> Whoever gets the job will be asked to “drive the design of the most privacy-forward, sophisticated demand side platform possible,” per the post. Why would someone who can do that go to apple, instead of launching her own company? Has it become impossible to build new things on the internet independently now?
fariszr 4y ago
If you think Apple cares about privacy after the CSAM thing, I really don't understand why, yes they are a bit better than other big tech companies, but they are in no way "Privacy-respecting". This video might help. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r38Epj6ldKU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r38Epj6ldKU
whywhywhywhy 4y ago
I feel the Apple I used to like would say "Why would we bother making an ad platform? It's a boring problem and ads only make the experience worse"
- ggregoire 4y ago
  > It's a boring problem When you start digging into it, it's actually a pretty complex and interesting topic. Lots of engineering and infra/scalability problems to tackle.
- post_break 4y ago
  And now Apple is like Mr Krabs. "Money"
- mattlondon 4y ago
  Because it is hugely profitable? Look at Facebook and Google - billions and billions in profits from selling ads. Now Amazon is following suit too. Apple are well poised to do this (some might say well poised to abuse their position...) so it would be almost irresponsible to Apple shareholders not to pursue this, since they have a responsibility to their shareholders.
  - Apocryphon 4y ago
    There was a time where Apple's m.o. was responsibility to the users, this shareholder talk sounds like John Sculley talk.
  - whywhywhywhy 4y ago
    “You can sell sugar water for the rest of your life or come with us and change the world” Jobs quote comes to mind.
nonrandomstring 4y ago
As an actual DSP (Digital Signal Processing) person I can only manage a weary sigh at what looks like dog poop all over the tidy lawn of my acronym space.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- Macha 4y ago
  Unfortunately you're about 15 years past the get off my lawn time for the demand side platforms.
dismalpedigree 4y ago
Damnit Apple. Focus on user. Remove distractions and noise. Don’t go down the path of everyone else.
- Rackedup 4y ago
  The only thing different about Apple is their speech.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
SnowHill9902 4y ago
Can someone explain the difference with “standard” advertisement?
MrWiffles 4y ago
So, how long before iOS becomes another unusable ad-infested hellscape as bad as Android? One year? Two?
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
6841iam 4y ago
Listen to Mike Munger on Econtalk https://www.econtalk.org/michael-munger-on-antitrust/ https://www.econtalk.org/michael-munger-on-antitrust/
pkaler 4y ago
This is an excellent 3-part series on Apple, ATT, and how they robbed the ad mob: - https://mobiledevmemo.com/apple-robbed-the-mobs-bank/ - https://mobiledevmemo.com/apple-robbed-the-mobs-bank-part-2/ - https://mobiledevmemo.com/apple-robbed-the-mobs-bank-part-3/ Also the job posting for Senior Manager for DSP (Demand-Side Platform) was probably supposed to be Antonio Garica Martinez before he got hired/fired/offer rescinded. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio_Garc%C3%ADa_Mart%C3%ADnez_%28author%29
solarkraft 4y ago
Apple is already advertising on the App Store, significantly hurting the experience. Excited to see how they're going to kill their biggest advantage over other platforms (basic respect for the user in certain areas).
- noncoml 4y ago
  This need to be heard loud and clear. The main reason to use iProducts is the non-ad experience. App Store is already a horrible experience with their ads. If this expands, I don't see why one shouldn't move to Google.
  - jjtheblunt 4y ago
    because Google is all ads all the time, and you're the ad?
    - vkou 4y ago
      For those of us old enough to remember television, cable TV also started out as a premium experience that you pay for, that did not have ads. Fast foward to the present, and cable TV is nothing but ads, you are the product, and you get to pay $XYZ/month for the privilege of being advertised to. It's just a matter of time until Apple will be the cable TV of tech. Just because you pay, or even pay a premium doesn't mean you aren't the product. When quarterly growth expected by shareholders cannot be met by getting new users, it will be met by squeezing existing ones.
      - jjtheblunt 4y ago
        i hope you're wrong about it being a matter of time until Apple advertises us to oblivion, but i know what you mean!
      - scarface74 4y ago
        Why does this false meme keep coming up? Basic cable was never a premium experience. Cable was first introduced to bring network TV - with ads - to areas that couldn’t get over the air reception, The only stations that were add free were the same premium channels that you have today like HBO. Some of the earliest cable “superstations” were just rebroadcast of local channels with ads like TBS and WGzn.
cutler 4y ago
I wish journalists would define their terms. I had to dig deep into the article just to find out what a "demand-side platform" is.
- pantulis 4y ago
  To be fair to the journo, I'd say the target audience of Digiday should be pretty acquainted to the term.
Animats 4y ago
So Apple has turned to the dark side. Sad.
cletus 4y ago
So I like Apple a lot. Given there are only two choices of phone (iOS or Android), IMHO Apple is way better than Google in terms of privacy. Apple sent shockwaves through the ad industry by making third-party ad cookies opt-in [1]. This has a material impact on, for example, Facebook's business, arguably to tune of $10 billion [2]. So a demand-side platform ("DSP") would be an incredibly significant move by Apple. A DSP is really one side of the coin of programmatic or real-time bidding ("RTB"). The other side is the exchange of supply side platform ("SSP"). RTB exchanges started as a way of selling remnant inventory in the display advertising space but have grown significantly since then. But why this is significant is that the big player in display advertising is Google and the centerpiece for that is the Doubleclick Ad Exchange. So Apple could be positioning itself to take a shot at Google's dominance of this space just like they have been doing to Facebook. If so, Apple needs to be incredibly careful here because if they offer advantages to their own DSP or exchange they may well run afoul of anticompetitive behaviour. Disclaimer: Ex-Googler (and I worked on the Doubleclick Ad Exchange many, many years ago). [1]: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-04-26/how-apple-google-are-killing-the-advertising-cookie-quicktake https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-04-26/how-apple... [2]: https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/02/facebook-says-apple-ios-privacy-change-will-cost-10-billion-this-year.html https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/02/facebook-says-apple-ios-priv...
- aerique 4y ago
  SailfishOS is continually improving and might be becoming an option for the US (assuming you're there, I haven't checked). There's also degoogled Android options like GrapheneOS. Both of these give you better privacy options than Android or iOS.
peanut_worm 4y ago
Unrelated but this site says they charge 160 dollars for a 3 month subscription that seems insane for a newspaper
madrox 4y ago
There are two outcomes: 1. It isn't terribly successful and dies a quiet death as do a lot of non-consumer Apple initiatives 2. It's wildly successful and Apple shifts its focus to the pursuit of ad revenue...which will gradually erode privacy controls and the pristine experience Apple is known for. This may sound like hyperbole, but if this takes off, then we'll look back on this as where it all went wrong for Apple.
- freeplay 4y ago
  It's already shifting. Look at their latest earnings report. Behind the iPhone, their second largest income stream by far is services.
foxbee 4y ago
I feel Apple have tried this numerous times in different flavors before. Just stick to what you do best. Let Google and social networks poison our minds with ads.
SergeAx 4y ago
I don't know about you, but for me it was obvious from day one. Amassing a huge heap of personal data, bar access to it for all competitors and not to exploit it themselves means to leave a tremendous pile of cache on the table. Shareholders won't understand that. Apple just badly needs revenue to justify its' 10 years exponential growth.
apatheticonion 4y ago
If Apple is forced to allow 3rd party app stores or the installation of unsigned IPAs, does that mean browsers running different engines can be developed for iOS?
porknubbins 4y ago
I wish someone would explain in simple terms what a demand-side platform is. If you are assumed to be fluent in ad business speak to work in the technology field that is kind of a depressing commentary.
- nl 4y ago
  A demand side platform (DSP) is a platform where you as an ad buyer can buy advertising space on one or more platforms. The ad spaces are standardized. There are also supply-side platforms (SSP) where media companies sell space to advertisers. In this case the ad inventory is already there on the platform looking for places to get deployed.
  - alberth 4y ago
    Is Google search a DSP or SSP? Can you give examples of each? Thanks.
    - shostack 4y ago
      Eh, not really. Google's DV360 platform (formerly known as DBM) is their DSP. Google Search is their platform for buying search inventory. Some of the display/video buying capabilities that exist in Google Ads exist in a much more advanced version in Dv360 via Search Ads 360. The stack can get a bit convoluted. If you want a high signal overview to various components of the ecosystem, I often point people to the Jounce "little black book" series as I find it does a decent job of summarizing the components and their use, as well as how data flows between and within them. https://jouncemedia.com/little-black-book https://jouncemedia.com/little-black-book
    - ing33k 4y ago
      Google search is closely linked with Google Ads, Google’s own advertising service which allows advertisers to place search results for their website on search engine results. Google also allows Advertisers to let the ads be displayed on their Search partners as well. Technically speaking, Google Ads is a DSP. Google search is a place where ads shown along with Search results.
DevKoala 4y ago
It was obvious that Apple’s push for privacy was to create a walled garden.
etempleton 4y ago
It is wild that Apple even slightly risks their platforms with ads. They have always been tasteful with the small amount of ads they allow, but why even risk it? I wonder if this is to offer a free tier of AppleTV and Apple Music. whole DSP would not really be required if it was just for something like the App Store. Typically a DSP is for something like TV and radio.

201 points by helij 4y ago

I'm so sick of big tech. They own the platform. Keep us locked in the platform. Then sell our minds to advertisers. Incumbents can't grow any larger without eating their users eventually. Maybe with proper antitrust action we would see a new generation of healthy upstarts. New search engines, new devices, new everything. The forest needs a fire.

pjmlp 4y ago
Usually when the soil is fertile, a new set of trees replace the former forest and everything is old again.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
josho 4y ago
While I agree with your sentiment, in this case what Apple is rumoured to be planning is no different than what happens in retail today. For example, your grocer sells their 'end cap' shelving space (end of aisle--highly visible product placement). Not only that, grocers have moved to stocking their inventory in a highly inefficient approach so that average consumers need to walk every aisle to fill their cart (the Apple comparable is a bad search experience, to lead consumers to paid placement instead). Apple is doing what we already experience in the physical world. If you dislike Apple's changes then the fix is going to have to be general consumer protection laws that apply in real world spaces as well as digital.
- AlexandrB 4y ago
  The analogy here breaks down because the App Store is not a physical space with "aisles" and "endcaps". The only realistic way to navigate the App Store's millions of apps is with search. It's ok to place paid results for searches like "todo list" or "calendar". But if I search for "Fantastical", I better get "Fantastical.app" as my first result. Not some unrelated bullshit that a competitor has placed there. The latter is the equivalent of me reaching for the Corn Flakes at the store and some guy popping up and shoving Cheerios in my hand instead.
  - pjmlp 4y ago
    It would be the same as having Cheerios to pay more, thus Corn Flakes gets demoted to the lower rows, knie level.
    - echelon 4y ago
      Not when you're searching for Cheerios. This type of behavior is new and the patterns were developed by the advertising giants to favor their revenue streams. It's trademark disparagement. It lets platform monopolies take even more revenue from disenfranchised businesses. Businesses that in turn have to cede more control over their storefronts, brands, and operations to these hitherto unrelated tech companies.
      - pjmlp 4y ago
        You will be searching for them alright, and find them, on the bottom row on the supermarket aisle.
AlexandrB 4y ago
Because of the dominance of advertising as a revenue model, new entrants may actually be worse than what we already have. Before the forest gets a fire we need to make more room for software business models besides "ad-funded". My favoured approach is regulation that would make tracking mandatory "opt-in", but anything that makes collecting and selling user data less lucrative would be good.

lloydatkinson 4y ago

I do not understand what a demand-side platform is and the article does a terrible job of explaining it. Something to do with ads? Pretty sure they just made this phrase up for the article.

JLCarveth 4y ago
It's definitely an established term, Apple is using it in their job posts https://jobs.apple.com/en-us/privacy?returnUrl=/en-us/details/200369598/senior-product-manager-demand-side-platform-ad-platforms https://jobs.apple.com/en-us/privacy?returnUrl=/en-us/detail...
jaywalk 4y ago
Definitely not made up. It's basically a platform to allow advertisers to manage bidding on ad impressions in real-time, among other aspects of their ad campaigns. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demand-side_platform https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demand-side_platform
secondcoming 4y ago
DSPs are the part of adtech that match your data to an advertising campaign and then bid to serve you that ad.
ikiris 4y ago
Its always weird when people jump from "I don't understand something" to "no one understands something, they must have made it up" without any effort to verify that its not just you. Like is it arrogance? You can clearly find the term almost immediately defined here for example https://bfy.tw/TOgI https://bfy.tw/TOgI Like any basic search will do so.
- metadat 4y ago
  You've hidden a LMGTFY link behind a URL shortener. Please don't do this, there are better (and gentler, kinder) ways to get your point across other than tricking people other than the parent poster into clicking the link.
- 4y ago

ohgodplsno 4y ago

5350-uiop-1130 4y ago
you WILL be surprised, and you WILL be delighted
Nextgrid 4y ago
The good thing about ads is that it's a cancer that nobody wants so even anticompetitive actions such as pushing all the other players out of business is beneficial as it just leaves one adtech company to block as opposed to dozens/hundreds.
- ohgodplsno 4y ago
  Unfortunately, in app data collection and in OS data collection in a completely uncustomizable OS is unavoidable. Watch as they cripple Safari to no longer be able to block their own services (or collect it in the background)
  - Nextgrid 4y ago
    I don't disagree, but my point was that if Apple switches to ads and pushes all other adtech vendors out of the market, all you'd need to do is to switch to literally any other manufacturer than Apple. In a way they'd be doing you a favour by killing off this disgusting industry.
juve1996 4y ago
This has nothing to do with a "walled-garden" approach. Removing the walled garden essentially allows what you're so smugly against. Of course, this can be abused. But the problem isn't having a walled garden. The problem is monopoly and duopoly. There aren't any real options. We keep beating around the bush of the reality - anti-trust is what's needed. Not squabbling over details and feeling good about arguing with kids about apple. I mean, go ahead, pat yourself on the back, but we're still in the same place. The EU can add a selector for a browser or tell apple to change their input jack but that still doesn't solve the problem - the market is anti-competitive because there is no competition. Walled garden or not doesn't matter if there are only 2 competitors.

AlexandrB 4y ago

> Sources within Apple, a company notoriously shy of making public statements, have briefed media outlets with news of more advertising opportunities for those eager to promote their wares in the App Store. > The planned ad placements include two additional slots in the App Store with a promotional placement on its “Today” tab where the paid-for slots will feature alongside editorialized content. The other planned ad placement will feature on app product pages where ads will be served under a tab that reads “You Might Also Like.” We'll see if Apple's ad efforts extend beyond the App Store but even so, the incentives here are all fucked up. Why bother making App Store search better and cleaning up spam/scam apps when these problems enable a new revenue stream in the form of paid placements? Incidentally, is the App Store yet another venue where you need to buy ad placement for your own product's name lest it be taken over by your competitors?

api 4y ago
> We'll see if Apple's ad efforts extend beyond the App Store but even so, the incentives here are all fucked up. Why bother making App Store search better and cleaning up spam/scam apps when these problems enable a new revenue stream in the form of paid placements? All commercial vendor app stores are trash fires. We need anti-trust action to force the ability to subscribe to alternative app stores. There's just no incentive to improve them once users are locked in and as you say there are often perverse incentives to do the opposite. I'm really glad both power users and developers on the Mac roundly rejected the Mac App Store. I actually do use it for things like communicator apps and other limited-scope apps since auto-updates are nice, but if Apple pushed app-store-only for Mac or even made installing apps outside the store too hard (pushing via dark pattern) it's one of the things that would drive me off the platform. I realize there are security benefits but like I said the App Store is a trash fire. They all are.
- jhenkens 4y ago
  I don't think I've relied on the app store search for anything except exact matches in half a decade. The greatest feature of the app store is that it handles app links. I just use search engines to discover apps then click the links to open in the app store. I still do wish they weren't quite so abusive in other ways of their monopoly - their pricing, and dev tooling fees, are pretty outrageous.

Yhippa 4y ago

So was Apple being disingenuous this whole time about privacy? Presuming they plan on using all the data they capture from their users iDevices for their ad platform. Is there a way to opt out of that?

candiddevmike 4y ago
Gotta chase growth to keep the shareholders happy. Don't be surprised when App Store ads come to your home screen or Finder.
- Ro93 4y ago
  You sound like such a typical HN user it's hilarious . Not everything is so cynical. Apple has a history of putting users first. Do you really think they're going to jeopardize the likability of their own OS to the masses?
  - MobiusHorizons 4y ago
    Apple has a history of making choices that jeopardize the likability of their platforms with the masses (eg headphone jack, removing Touch ID) They also have a history of getting away with it.
    - threeseed 4y ago
      > jeopardize the likability of their platforms with the masses You don't represent the opinions of the masses. The fact that Apple iPhone sales continue unabated factually and objectively indicates that Headphone jacks and TouchID are not significant issues to warrant customers switching platforms.
    - askafriend 4y ago
      Everyone I know primarily use wireless headphones and love FaceID. If they don't have wireless headphones, they just pop the little adapter onto the end and go on with their day.

joshstrange 4y ago

I'm a little confused by this author feeling like they are pulling back the curtain on Apple & Ads. Apple hasn't been anti-ad (though their products have way fewer ads than the competition. I installed Windows on a new machine yesterday and oh boy I was not prepared) but rather they are pro-privacy. Their recent crackdown on ad networks wasn't "we hate ads so we are going it make harder" but instead it was "you all are leaking customer data like a sieve and that's not ok". The problem with most all the ad networks out there is they are not good stewards of their data and will sell it (directly or indirectly) to anyone with the money to buy it. Personally I hate ads but I understand their place in the world and if I have to see ads I trust Apple way more than Google or whatever fly-by-night ad tracking company is out there. The problem has always been that the advertisers had way more access to the info about the customer (and sometimes the customer's PII/unique id) than I was comfortable with and they would share that indiscriminately. If Apple is the one holding that info and if they design their system in a way that protects it then I don't personally see this as a problem.

bombcar 4y ago
I'm a bit of cynic and I think part of Apple's privacy push is that they see the writing on the wall - advertising is way less valuable than the current customers of advertising think it is, and by removing a bunch of the "targetability" of said advertising they can get closer to the more profitable advertising of yore (where you couldn't directly track all metrics all the time).
- avalys 4y ago
  Have you ever run a business that relied on advertising to drive revenue or are you just relying on what you've read online? Anyone running a small business in a niche space knows that targeted advertising works. The other aspect of it is that targeted advertising allows you to make money from niche advertisers even if you operate a general-interest website.
  - dwaite 4y ago
    Third party general interest websites generally don’t care where their advertising dollars come from, which is why they outsourced it all in the first place. If anything, they would probably prefer advertisements at least tangentially related to the content so that their readers don’t get creeped out by some Amazon product following them around the internet.

thefz 4y ago

> “Our platform runs and delivers advertising auctions to match supply (customers) with demand (advertisers), focusing on technical components including Campaign Management, Bidding, Incrementality, Dynamic Creative Optimization, Matching, Auctions, and Experimentation Silly me, I thought that in a supply/demand scenario you are meant to pay your suppliers, not just harvest what you need from them without spending a cent. Monetization of everything.

soared 4y ago
Users are “paid” in the sense that they use apps for free. App developers instead of charging a user a download fee, show users ads. You’re also taking industry words and using them in weird ways. Supply is available ad slots, demand is advertiser dollars wanting to fill those slots. Demand pays suppliers but it goes through tons of intermediaries (brand, agency, agency, dsp, exchange, ssp, agency, app/website) plus a bunch of vendors get tiny percentages during the dsp/exchange/ssp phase

swayvil 4y ago

We will deliver your cheeseburger momentarily, but first we will flap this prostitute's filthy junk in your face. How did the toxic apocalypse of ubiquitous advertising become so normal? I can only blame the slowly boiled frog.

saimiam 4y ago
Yeah, it’s unbelievable how much we have accepted being constantly marketed to. Our brains don’t ever get any downtime to just be. Sometimes, it is insidious - e.g., in my apartment building’s WhatsApp group, we have a neighbor who regularly posts content by dairy brand called Country Delight promoting contests for kids. I feel she’s getting paid to do this because she’s the only one who puts out this content. Our HOA has monetized us residents by entering into an MOU with MyGate to allow promo events by brands inside the community on Sundays. In return, they get a discount on their yearly MyGate charges. It’s all pervasive now and there’s no escaping.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

navi0 4y ago

I, for one, would welcome an Apple attempt to create a better digital advertising paradigm focused on users and that respects/protects privacy as much as possible. As an optimistic college freshman in 2000 (dating myself, I know), I had the privilege of taking a class where once a week, a successful business entrepreneur would come in and expand our minds about a company/product/vision they had created. Being the height of dot com frenzy, I still remember one class where a guy described how the Internet offered the potential to revolutionize advertising in a way that would be a win-win for everyone. He described a world where ads might even be enjoyable to watch because of the Internet’s potential to show each viewer/user ads relevant to them: because every beard trimmer ad shown to a woman was wasted time for her and money for the advertiser. So far, his predictions have broadly become true, but stick with me. The coolest part of his vision to my 18yo self was that each of us would have a personal ad software agent running on our PC/TV (the most personal devices at the time) that learned our desires and went out and found ads for stuff we might want. It was a completely different paradigm to the ad model of the day and one that was potentially privacy protecting because your personal ad agent would be the automated broker for your time and attention, and everyone would want this because a good agent would delight you with new services and products that you found useful and maybe didn’t know you wanted. There would be a healthy market of personal agents to choose from, too, because the costs of switching were minimal and companies would complete to create the best personal agents. Alas, the optimism of the early Internet morphed into magic Google and Facebook/Meta pixels, and we got personal ad agents, but they are oligopolies with extreme network effects that are incompatible with privacy. The Brave browser has come closest to the vision described by the dot com entrepreneur who spoke to my class, but I’ve always wondered whether anyone else would create personal ad agents, and of all the candidates, Apple is probably best positioned. I’m curious to see how they do it.

duxup 4y ago
I wish I could tell them what I want to see. Amazon thinks I’m a woman, and wants to sell me things I already bought / don’t want to buy anymore. Google is convinced I’m a Cornhuskers super fan (I’m a fan of a rival team). I got an ad once to “sign melania trump’s virtual birthday card”….
4y ago

smm11 4y ago

I thought this was a DATA demand-side platform. Since we're living a dumb client-terminal life now anyway, only nobody realizes it.

avalys 4y ago

Apple is using their dominant (monopoly) position in mobile devices to shut down competitors in another industry (advertising) in order to drive growth in their own advertising platform, got it.

macintux 4y ago
Under what definition of monopoly does Apple possess one? Even in their best market, the U.S., iPhone holds just a smidge over 50%.
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  > Under what definition of monopoly does Apple possess one? Market power is defined by pricing power (empirical absence of substitution effect), not share of some descriptive market (where you could always get any result you wanted just by changing the way you divide market descriptions.)
  - celeritascelery 4y ago
    That isn’t the definition of monopoly as stated by Wikipedia[1]: “a market with the "absence of competition", creating a situation where a specific person or enterprise is the only supplier of a particular thing.” I think calling them a monopoly is a real stretch. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly
    - Apocryphon 4y ago
      That is how the FTC defines one. > Courts do not require a literal monopoly before applying rules for single firm conduct; that term is used as shorthand for a firm with significant and durable market power — that is, the long term ability to raise price or exclude competitors. That is how that term is used here: a "monopolist" is a firm with significant and durable market power. Courts look at the firm's market share, but typically do not find monopoly power if the firm (or a group of firms acting in concert) has less than 50 percent of the sales of a particular product or service within a certain geographic area. Some courts have required much higher percentages. In addition, that leading position must be sustainable over time: if competitive forces or the entry of new firms could discipline the conduct of the leading firm, courts are unlikely to find that the firm has lasting market power. > Obtaining a monopoly by superior products, innovation, or business acumen is legal; however, the same result achieved by exclusionary or predatory acts may raise antitrust concerns. https://www.ftc.gov/advice-guidance/competition-guidance/guide-antitrust-laws/single-firm-conduct/monopolization-defined https://www.ftc.gov/advice-guidance/competition-guidance/gui...

mark_l_watson 4y ago

To some degree, I trust both Apple and Google but for different reasons. Apple is pushing privacy tools, and within limits of government suponenas they do a reasonable job. Google has a business of using your data to advise advertisers how to sell you stuff, but if you go on Google’s privacy settings page you have a fair amount of control. Personally, I let Google track my YouTube use for 90 days in order to make good suggestions and turn almost everything else off (Google makes money from me from buying content, paying for YouTube, and GCP). I really respect people who self-host their own data platforms, etc. but I don’t have time for that.

okdood64 4y ago
> I really respect people who self-host their own data platforms, etc. but I don’t have time for that. Exactly how I feel when I see the myriad amounts of threads/comments from people here who are self-hosting things in the name of privacy, control, "stick it to the man", etc.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

seydor 4y ago

> Whoever gets the job will be asked to “drive the design of the most privacy-forward, sophisticated demand side platform possible,” per the post. Why would someone who can do that go to apple, instead of launching her own company? Has it become impossible to build new things on the internet independently now?

fariszr 4y ago

If you think Apple cares about privacy after the CSAM thing, I really don't understand why, yes they are a bit better than other big tech companies, but they are in no way "Privacy-respecting". This video might help. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r38Epj6ldKU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r38Epj6ldKU

whywhywhywhy 4y ago

I feel the Apple I used to like would say "Why would we bother making an ad platform? It's a boring problem and ads only make the experience worse"

ggregoire 4y ago
> It's a boring problem When you start digging into it, it's actually a pretty complex and interesting topic. Lots of engineering and infra/scalability problems to tackle.
post_break 4y ago
And now Apple is like Mr Krabs. "Money"
mattlondon 4y ago
Because it is hugely profitable? Look at Facebook and Google - billions and billions in profits from selling ads. Now Amazon is following suit too. Apple are well poised to do this (some might say well poised to abuse their position...) so it would be almost irresponsible to Apple shareholders not to pursue this, since they have a responsibility to their shareholders.
- Apocryphon 4y ago
  There was a time where Apple's m.o. was responsibility to the users, this shareholder talk sounds like John Sculley talk.
- whywhywhywhy 4y ago
  “You can sell sugar water for the rest of your life or come with us and change the world” Jobs quote comes to mind.

nonrandomstring 4y ago

As an actual DSP (Digital Signal Processing) person I can only manage a weary sigh at what looks like dog poop all over the tidy lawn of my acronym space.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
Macha 4y ago
Unfortunately you're about 15 years past the get off my lawn time for the demand side platforms.

dismalpedigree 4y ago

Damnit Apple. Focus on user. Remove distractions and noise. Don’t go down the path of everyone else.

Rackedup 4y ago
The only thing different about Apple is their speech.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

SnowHill9902 4y ago

Can someone explain the difference with “standard” advertisement?

MrWiffles 4y ago

So, how long before iOS becomes another unusable ad-infested hellscape as bad as Android? One year? Two?

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

6841iam 4y ago

Listen to Mike Munger on Econtalk https://www.econtalk.org/michael-munger-on-antitrust/ https://www.econtalk.org/michael-munger-on-antitrust/

pkaler 4y ago

This is an excellent 3-part series on Apple, ATT, and how they robbed the ad mob: - https://mobiledevmemo.com/apple-robbed-the-mobs-bank/ - https://mobiledevmemo.com/apple-robbed-the-mobs-bank-part-2/ - https://mobiledevmemo.com/apple-robbed-the-mobs-bank-part-3/ Also the job posting for Senior Manager for DSP (Demand-Side Platform) was probably supposed to be Antonio Garica Martinez before he got hired/fired/offer rescinded. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio_Garc%C3%ADa_Mart%C3%ADnez_%28author%29

solarkraft 4y ago

Apple is already advertising on the App Store, significantly hurting the experience. Excited to see how they're going to kill their biggest advantage over other platforms (basic respect for the user in certain areas).

noncoml 4y ago
This need to be heard loud and clear. The main reason to use iProducts is the non-ad experience. App Store is already a horrible experience with their ads. If this expands, I don't see why one shouldn't move to Google.
- jjtheblunt 4y ago
  because Google is all ads all the time, and you're the ad?
  - vkou 4y ago
    For those of us old enough to remember television, cable TV also started out as a premium experience that you pay for, that did not have ads. Fast foward to the present, and cable TV is nothing but ads, you are the product, and you get to pay $XYZ/month for the privilege of being advertised to. It's just a matter of time until Apple will be the cable TV of tech. Just because you pay, or even pay a premium doesn't mean you aren't the product. When quarterly growth expected by shareholders cannot be met by getting new users, it will be met by squeezing existing ones.
    - jjtheblunt 4y ago
      i hope you're wrong about it being a matter of time until Apple advertises us to oblivion, but i know what you mean!
    - scarface74 4y ago
      Why does this false meme keep coming up? Basic cable was never a premium experience. Cable was first introduced to bring network TV - with ads - to areas that couldn’t get over the air reception, The only stations that were add free were the same premium channels that you have today like HBO. Some of the earliest cable “superstations” were just rebroadcast of local channels with ads like TBS and WGzn.

cutler 4y ago

I wish journalists would define their terms. I had to dig deep into the article just to find out what a "demand-side platform" is.

pantulis 4y ago
To be fair to the journo, I'd say the target audience of Digiday should be pretty acquainted to the term.

Animats 4y ago

So Apple has turned to the dark side. Sad.

cletus 4y ago

So I like Apple a lot. Given there are only two choices of phone (iOS or Android), IMHO Apple is way better than Google in terms of privacy. Apple sent shockwaves through the ad industry by making third-party ad cookies opt-in [1]. This has a material impact on, for example, Facebook's business, arguably to tune of $10 billion [2]. So a demand-side platform ("DSP") would be an incredibly significant move by Apple. A DSP is really one side of the coin of programmatic or real-time bidding ("RTB"). The other side is the exchange of supply side platform ("SSP"). RTB exchanges started as a way of selling remnant inventory in the display advertising space but have grown significantly since then. But why this is significant is that the big player in display advertising is Google and the centerpiece for that is the Doubleclick Ad Exchange. So Apple could be positioning itself to take a shot at Google's dominance of this space just like they have been doing to Facebook. If so, Apple needs to be incredibly careful here because if they offer advantages to their own DSP or exchange they may well run afoul of anticompetitive behaviour. Disclaimer: Ex-Googler (and I worked on the Doubleclick Ad Exchange many, many years ago). [1]: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-04-26/how-apple-google-are-killing-the-advertising-cookie-quicktake https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-04-26/how-apple... [2]: https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/02/facebook-says-apple-ios-privacy-change-will-cost-10-billion-this-year.html https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/02/facebook-says-apple-ios-priv...

aerique 4y ago
SailfishOS is continually improving and might be becoming an option for the US (assuming you're there, I haven't checked). There's also degoogled Android options like GrapheneOS. Both of these give you better privacy options than Android or iOS.

peanut_worm 4y ago

Unrelated but this site says they charge 160 dollars for a 3 month subscription that seems insane for a newspaper

madrox 4y ago

There are two outcomes: 1. It isn't terribly successful and dies a quiet death as do a lot of non-consumer Apple initiatives 2. It's wildly successful and Apple shifts its focus to the pursuit of ad revenue...which will gradually erode privacy controls and the pristine experience Apple is known for. This may sound like hyperbole, but if this takes off, then we'll look back on this as where it all went wrong for Apple.

freeplay 4y ago
It's already shifting. Look at their latest earnings report. Behind the iPhone, their second largest income stream by far is services.

foxbee 4y ago

I feel Apple have tried this numerous times in different flavors before. Just stick to what you do best. Let Google and social networks poison our minds with ads.

SergeAx 4y ago

I don't know about you, but for me it was obvious from day one. Amassing a huge heap of personal data, bar access to it for all competitors and not to exploit it themselves means to leave a tremendous pile of cache on the table. Shareholders won't understand that. Apple just badly needs revenue to justify its' 10 years exponential growth.

apatheticonion 4y ago

If Apple is forced to allow 3rd party app stores or the installation of unsigned IPAs, does that mean browsers running different engines can be developed for iOS?

porknubbins 4y ago

I wish someone would explain in simple terms what a demand-side platform is. If you are assumed to be fluent in ad business speak to work in the technology field that is kind of a depressing commentary.

nl 4y ago
A demand side platform (DSP) is a platform where you as an ad buyer can buy advertising space on one or more platforms. The ad spaces are standardized. There are also supply-side platforms (SSP) where media companies sell space to advertisers. In this case the ad inventory is already there on the platform looking for places to get deployed.
- alberth 4y ago
  Is Google search a DSP or SSP? Can you give examples of each? Thanks.
  - shostack 4y ago
    Eh, not really. Google's DV360 platform (formerly known as DBM) is their DSP. Google Search is their platform for buying search inventory. Some of the display/video buying capabilities that exist in Google Ads exist in a much more advanced version in Dv360 via Search Ads 360. The stack can get a bit convoluted. If you want a high signal overview to various components of the ecosystem, I often point people to the Jounce "little black book" series as I find it does a decent job of summarizing the components and their use, as well as how data flows between and within them. https://jouncemedia.com/little-black-book https://jouncemedia.com/little-black-book
  - ing33k 4y ago
    Google search is closely linked with Google Ads, Google’s own advertising service which allows advertisers to place search results for their website on search engine results. Google also allows Advertisers to let the ads be displayed on their Search partners as well. Technically speaking, Google Ads is a DSP. Google search is a place where ads shown along with Search results.

DevKoala 4y ago

It was obvious that Apple’s push for privacy was to create a walled garden.

etempleton 4y ago

It is wild that Apple even slightly risks their platforms with ads. They have always been tasteful with the small amount of ads they allow, but why even risk it? I wonder if this is to offer a free tier of AppleTV and Apple Music. whole DSP would not really be required if it was just for something like the App Store. Typically a DSP is for something like TV and radio.