3 ms·

It's an interesting solution but the problems as you mentioned are pretty significant. It's like Apple banning third party analytics and advertising and forcin

by sumukh1 15y ago

It's an interesting solution but the problems as you mentioned are pretty significant. It's like Apple banning third party analytics and advertising and forcing devs to use iAds for security reasons.That would not sit well with developers. What if programs grab screenshots, and then upload them. There are many different security issues in mobile, and creative solutions that require the least effort will win out. The way Android prompts me for permissions is annoying (too many prompts/permissions needed to use the app). iOS isn't much better either.

SomeCallMeTim 15y ago
Really? Android prompts once for permissions, per app, and that's it. iOS does a per-capability request of the user, at run-time. To some degree I like that; sometimes an app needs a permission (say, reading the crash log) in 1% or less of runs. It would be nice to be able to dynamically request a permission. If every ad network could push their own (signed!) ad-serving app, then it wouldn't be TOO bad. The system is in place on Android to ask for another app to handle a service, after all, so it's just the "auto-install dependencies" feature that's missing. And that feature is needed by some existing apps already as well. I also grab an announcement message when my games start, though, so I can push out announcements when appropriate. And soon I'm likely to be downloading new levels in my games. So I wouldn't be able to get rid of INTERNET permission. The PROBLEM, of course, is that now you've got users downloading an AD app, so if it wasn't explicit before that it's the ad provider that's tracking your position, your contacts, etc., then now it is. This would give a huge advantage to the dominant ad providers, and raise barrier-of-entry to newer providers, because if a provider is already installed on 85% of phones, then it's lower-friction to install the app that uses that provider.
- sumukh1 15y ago
  > Android prompts once for permissions, per app, and that's it. That's the problem I have with it, I should have been clearer. If I have an app that I install, and on launch prompts me to give it access to 4 different things, the only thing I can do is close the app. I can't selectively enable it. What could be interesting is Google/Apple being brokers of ads from different networks. (Not in their best intrest to do that, so it won't happen). Perhaps a verification system to verify the code as a certified ad framework that doesn't track you.
  - SomeCallMeTim 15y ago
    What I was trying to say is that it asks you prior to install, not on first run, though I guess that's not really important. I heard recently that AdMob was going to be serving ads from competing ad networks, to increase its fill rate; it certainly can be in their best interests if they take a cut, right? :)
lucaspiller 15y ago
> It's like Apple banning third party analytics and advertising and forcing devs to use iAds for security reasons. Off-topic, but I could actually see Apple doing that :) It makes perfect sense from a business point of view and the control as much as we can of the experience point of view. I have no doubts some developers wouldn't be happy (I would imagine mainly those that run the other ad networks), but most wouldn't bat an eyelid. It is in exactly the same boat as the digital media subscription fiasco.

by sumukh1 15y ago

SomeCallMeTim 15y ago

Really? Android prompts once for permissions, per app, and that's it. iOS does a per-capability request of the user, at run-time. To some degree I like that; sometimes an app needs a permission (say, reading the crash log) in 1% or less of runs. It would be nice to be able to dynamically request a permission. If every ad network could push their own (signed!) ad-serving app, then it wouldn't be TOO bad. The system is in place on Android to ask for another app to handle a service, after all, so it's just the "auto-install dependencies" feature that's missing. And that feature is needed by some existing apps already as well. I also grab an announcement message when my games start, though, so I can push out announcements when appropriate. And soon I'm likely to be downloading new levels in my games. So I wouldn't be able to get rid of INTERNET permission. The PROBLEM, of course, is that now you've got users downloading an AD app, so if it wasn't explicit before that it's the ad provider that's tracking your position, your contacts, etc., then now it is. This would give a huge advantage to the dominant ad providers, and raise barrier-of-entry to newer providers, because if a provider is already installed on 85% of phones, then it's lower-friction to install the app that uses that provider.

sumukh1 15y ago
> Android prompts once for permissions, per app, and that's it. That's the problem I have with it, I should have been clearer. If I have an app that I install, and on launch prompts me to give it access to 4 different things, the only thing I can do is close the app. I can't selectively enable it. What could be interesting is Google/Apple being brokers of ads from different networks. (Not in their best intrest to do that, so it won't happen). Perhaps a verification system to verify the code as a certified ad framework that doesn't track you.
- SomeCallMeTim 15y ago
  What I was trying to say is that it asks you prior to install, not on first run, though I guess that's not really important. I heard recently that AdMob was going to be serving ads from competing ad networks, to increase its fill rate; it certainly can be in their best interests if they take a cut, right? :)

lucaspiller 15y ago

> It's like Apple banning third party analytics and advertising and forcing devs to use iAds for security reasons. Off-topic, but I could actually see Apple doing that :) It makes perfect sense from a business point of view and the control as much as we can of the experience point of view. I have no doubts some developers wouldn't be happy (I would imagine mainly those that run the other ad networks), but most wouldn't bat an eyelid. It is in exactly the same boat as the digital media subscription fiasco.