goober1223
Apr 6, 11:21 AM
With respect, you clearly don't work in advertising. You pay to put ads in front of the right people, not just anyone. Especially not competing advertisers and agencies. Why do you think Google (a) makes so much advertising revenue and (b) collects so much data about its users? Coincidence?
Secondly individuals are just as greedy as corporations, and generally get to operate outside of the spotlight. Apple has a lot to lose if its iAd platform is seen to be poorly targeting users, but an App developer has a lot to gain from indiscriminate iAd spamming. So in this case, yes, for the sake of self interest I'd expect Apple to reimburse advertisers for clicks inside their iAd app, and I'd expect an independent developer of a similar app to laugh all the way to the bank.
I never said btw I'd expect Apple to reimburse developers for their time on rejected apps. Or if I did I didn't mean it.
I know you didn't say that. I was just explaining my original statement that said that they should.
And no, I don't work in advertising (electrical engineer), so you certainly bring a different view, which I appreciate.
As far as a comparison between corporations and individuals, and in this case Apple, I still see no proof that they aren't charging advertisers for displaying these ads. Certainly, they are more capable than a 3rd party in reimbursing such money, but I also see no proof that there is an exorbitant amount of money to be made here. It's a cool gimmick that will not spend much time in actual use, especially if the ads don't change very often, and if there is no additional content to the application.
Besides, pertaining to your best point, how well are iAds targeted at this point? Considering how few big advertising partners there are, I have a hard time understanding how well they are able to advertise when these ads also aren't included in general browsing, but specifically-purposed apps.
Certainly, Apple wants to get there with iAds, but the first step seems to be to take the premium off of the price. The infrastructure may cost a lot, but they have tons of cash to drain on this project if they want to make it a true competition with google and operate similarly. For instance, if I'm playing "Doodle Bowling", the odds that I will get an iAd for anything relevant to bowling is zero. I also associate bowling with greasy bowling alley food, too, but the odds of having any food advertised (on purpose) appears to be zero, as well. The odds of getting an advertisement for a local bowling alley? Again, zero. If I go online and search "doodle bowling" they have tons of options to select from in targeting my search: past search history (and whatever else they know about me), they know that my search is related to bowling, mobile applications, cartoonish games, etc.
The point is, the differences are innumerous. iAds is absolutely primitive in its targeting capability simply by virtue of how many advertising partners it has, and it should not be any different (at this point) how those ad impressions are received.
Secondly individuals are just as greedy as corporations, and generally get to operate outside of the spotlight. Apple has a lot to lose if its iAd platform is seen to be poorly targeting users, but an App developer has a lot to gain from indiscriminate iAd spamming. So in this case, yes, for the sake of self interest I'd expect Apple to reimburse advertisers for clicks inside their iAd app, and I'd expect an independent developer of a similar app to laugh all the way to the bank.
I never said btw I'd expect Apple to reimburse developers for their time on rejected apps. Or if I did I didn't mean it.
I know you didn't say that. I was just explaining my original statement that said that they should.
And no, I don't work in advertising (electrical engineer), so you certainly bring a different view, which I appreciate.
As far as a comparison between corporations and individuals, and in this case Apple, I still see no proof that they aren't charging advertisers for displaying these ads. Certainly, they are more capable than a 3rd party in reimbursing such money, but I also see no proof that there is an exorbitant amount of money to be made here. It's a cool gimmick that will not spend much time in actual use, especially if the ads don't change very often, and if there is no additional content to the application.
Besides, pertaining to your best point, how well are iAds targeted at this point? Considering how few big advertising partners there are, I have a hard time understanding how well they are able to advertise when these ads also aren't included in general browsing, but specifically-purposed apps.
Certainly, Apple wants to get there with iAds, but the first step seems to be to take the premium off of the price. The infrastructure may cost a lot, but they have tons of cash to drain on this project if they want to make it a true competition with google and operate similarly. For instance, if I'm playing "Doodle Bowling", the odds that I will get an iAd for anything relevant to bowling is zero. I also associate bowling with greasy bowling alley food, too, but the odds of having any food advertised (on purpose) appears to be zero, as well. The odds of getting an advertisement for a local bowling alley? Again, zero. If I go online and search "doodle bowling" they have tons of options to select from in targeting my search: past search history (and whatever else they know about me), they know that my search is related to bowling, mobile applications, cartoonish games, etc.
The point is, the differences are innumerous. iAds is absolutely primitive in its targeting capability simply by virtue of how many advertising partners it has, and it should not be any different (at this point) how those ad impressions are received.
kresh
Oct 28, 05:08 PM
Folks, I think you are misinterpreting what the OSx86 project is doing (at least in this case)...
The OSx86 project is taking the Darwin and XNU source that Apple releases and making them so they can run on any x86 hardware. Basically, they are bringing back the functionality that Darwin and XNU had BEFORE Apple ported OSX to Intel, as the x86 versions of Darwin used to run on any x86 hardware until Apple started including a lot of EFI-specific commands (as well as some other things). If you download and compile the OSx86 source, you won't be able to get a full-fledged OSX user experience, because they have not circumvented Apple's TPM protections for the GUI. In order to get Aqua, you need to have the Aqua resource files (which you'd have to get from a OSX install CD), and you'd have to get the TPM keys, which would be illegal.
Also remember, Darwin and XNU does NOT EQUAL the full OSX user experience. Darwin/XNU is just a command-line operating system, as that is the only part that is open-source.
Oh no, we get what they are doing (from the blog at OSx86):
"I had to remove a key which you need to reinsert if you want to run it GUI, due to legal issues. I called it the "magicpoem" maybe you got the point now. The hex for it is around so don't mail me about it, I want spread anything illegal.
I hope Steve, you enjoy this release, read my poem and think about it. The community was victorius again. Thanks to everyone who supported me and/or worked this out with me. Special thanks go to (in no special order):"
The whole point of them "running the rat-race for 2 days" was to make the kernel work with the express intent of running the Aqua GUI.
How much plainer does it need to be, their whole intent is to enable people to steal the GUI and enjoy the Apple OS X experience for free.
The whole OSx86 project is a warez project hiding behind OSS. It just re-enforces the negative OSS image.
edit: They even have screenshots of Aqua running on an unknown Pentium 4 processor. If that's not promoting warez, what is it? And you know where this path eventually leads to? WGA!! I rue the day when Apple has to try and lock down OSX like MS is forced to attempt with Vista!
The OSx86 project is taking the Darwin and XNU source that Apple releases and making them so they can run on any x86 hardware. Basically, they are bringing back the functionality that Darwin and XNU had BEFORE Apple ported OSX to Intel, as the x86 versions of Darwin used to run on any x86 hardware until Apple started including a lot of EFI-specific commands (as well as some other things). If you download and compile the OSx86 source, you won't be able to get a full-fledged OSX user experience, because they have not circumvented Apple's TPM protections for the GUI. In order to get Aqua, you need to have the Aqua resource files (which you'd have to get from a OSX install CD), and you'd have to get the TPM keys, which would be illegal.
Also remember, Darwin and XNU does NOT EQUAL the full OSX user experience. Darwin/XNU is just a command-line operating system, as that is the only part that is open-source.
Oh no, we get what they are doing (from the blog at OSx86):
"I had to remove a key which you need to reinsert if you want to run it GUI, due to legal issues. I called it the "magicpoem" maybe you got the point now. The hex for it is around so don't mail me about it, I want spread anything illegal.
I hope Steve, you enjoy this release, read my poem and think about it. The community was victorius again. Thanks to everyone who supported me and/or worked this out with me. Special thanks go to (in no special order):"
The whole point of them "running the rat-race for 2 days" was to make the kernel work with the express intent of running the Aqua GUI.
How much plainer does it need to be, their whole intent is to enable people to steal the GUI and enjoy the Apple OS X experience for free.
The whole OSx86 project is a warez project hiding behind OSS. It just re-enforces the negative OSS image.
edit: They even have screenshots of Aqua running on an unknown Pentium 4 processor. If that's not promoting warez, what is it? And you know where this path eventually leads to? WGA!! I rue the day when Apple has to try and lock down OSX like MS is forced to attempt with Vista!
Ommid
Apr 25, 12:18 PM
It looks like a painting.
Lol, no it doesn't
Lol, no it doesn't
MacsAttack
Nov 16, 12:52 PM
I think it would just be an additional code in the x86 part of the UB. Correct me if I'm wrong...
Probably you are wrong.
The firmware would have to be written to work with the net hardware, but AMD chips are i86 compatible processors with the same 64 bit extensions that Intel use (Intel had to suck it up and use the same 64 bit extensions as AMD when the universe + dog rejected their take on 64-bit processing).
Probably you are wrong.
The firmware would have to be written to work with the net hardware, but AMD chips are i86 compatible processors with the same 64 bit extensions that Intel use (Intel had to suck it up and use the same 64 bit extensions as AMD when the universe + dog rejected their take on 64-bit processing).
bcslay
Sep 12, 03:06 AM
no, I wouldn't prefer osx media player, i'm not saying that I would prefer anything different, imedia would make more sense, but there's no way apple would change the name of there most well known software.
Dr Kevorkian94
Sep 28, 06:00 PM
he can control everything from his ipad and his iphone, he will be so happy with the house we cant have. but in all seriousness that is awesome but i wonder if it will be technological, and everything will run on ios. lol
gaseby
Aug 2, 02:58 PM
hi,
I have had a chance to browse through the reply (allthough parts of it was cencored):
- License agreement. Apple distinguish between license agreement for iTunes Jukebox and iTunes Music Store and they mean the government have been mixin this up
- License agreement. They will do som smaller adjustments (clarifications) around the issue of changes to the license agreement would have effect on previously purchased music, the intention was not to have any effect on previously purchased music
- License agreement. They will do changes so it will be clearer to the user when the license agreement has been changed
- DRM, usage of iTunes music files in other players than iPod. They do not give in on this, their argument is 1) it is playable on the PC 2) it may be burned on a CD and played on other CD players. They also blend into the argument that Norway has a fairly new law with respect to music download and copy/usage rights and the different plotical parties and politicians have said "this and that" which may support Apples case. I would assume that sooner or later there will be a court case in order to put more details on the law and its interpretation. This may be it (or not).
With respect to this having impact on other countries there are some arguments in the letter which quotes EU/E�S laws, however their DRM arguments is mainly reflecting their interpretation of Norwegian law.
I have had a chance to browse through the reply (allthough parts of it was cencored):
- License agreement. Apple distinguish between license agreement for iTunes Jukebox and iTunes Music Store and they mean the government have been mixin this up
- License agreement. They will do som smaller adjustments (clarifications) around the issue of changes to the license agreement would have effect on previously purchased music, the intention was not to have any effect on previously purchased music
- License agreement. They will do changes so it will be clearer to the user when the license agreement has been changed
- DRM, usage of iTunes music files in other players than iPod. They do not give in on this, their argument is 1) it is playable on the PC 2) it may be burned on a CD and played on other CD players. They also blend into the argument that Norway has a fairly new law with respect to music download and copy/usage rights and the different plotical parties and politicians have said "this and that" which may support Apples case. I would assume that sooner or later there will be a court case in order to put more details on the law and its interpretation. This may be it (or not).
With respect to this having impact on other countries there are some arguments in the letter which quotes EU/E�S laws, however their DRM arguments is mainly reflecting their interpretation of Norwegian law.
sailnavy
Jan 15, 02:13 PM
So are we ever going to see Time Machine support for the TB drive I bought for my AEBS in preparation for Time Machine release?
floam
Oct 28, 05:02 PM
.
toddybody
May 2, 02:35 PM
Everyone should therefore throw their iPhones in the garbage and buy an HTC?
dont be irrational, step away from the trashcan! :eek:
dont be irrational, step away from the trashcan! :eek:
balamw
Apr 27, 08:32 PM
I'm only posting my timer code balamw, you don't want to see the rest and even if you do, I wouldn't show it here. The only problem is the timer the rest works fine. You can check out my App tomorrow morning (Availability Date is 28 of April). Look for "Pastry Chef app"
Then, as I suggested above you need to pull all of that timer related code out into a "toy"/"test" app that you can post the entire code of to help us help you. As KnightWRX says we have to be able to reproduce what you are seeing to see the problem(s). This is part of the work you need to do to get help.
I don't think you are in a position to judge where it is broken, being that you don't care to understand fundamentals.
B
Then, as I suggested above you need to pull all of that timer related code out into a "toy"/"test" app that you can post the entire code of to help us help you. As KnightWRX says we have to be able to reproduce what you are seeing to see the problem(s). This is part of the work you need to do to get help.
I don't think you are in a position to judge where it is broken, being that you don't care to understand fundamentals.
B
twoodcc
May 2, 10:16 PM
well i think i finally got my home built system running at 4.0 ghz. it has been a long journey, to say the least. but it's folding away a bigadv unit and 2 GPUs. hopefully this will last all week since i'll be away
.png "selena gomez and demi lovato")
obeygiant
Apr 25, 05:18 PM
Is anyone mad as the two *******s who actually beat this person up? I am. They should be charged with aggravated assault.
jimbo999
Oct 3, 12:01 AM
The DMCA changed that, and until it's tested in court anything where encryption is used or even potentially used is not "safe" to reverse engineer in the US.
B
Not "anything where encryption is used." But if something is encrypted, it can only be reverse engineered under 1201(f):
(f) Reverse Engineering. -
Selena Gomez e Demi Lovato One
selena gomez and demi lovato
selena gomez and demi lovato
One and The Same - Demi Lovato
selena gomez and demi lovato
B
Not "anything where encryption is used." But if something is encrypted, it can only be reverse engineered under 1201(f):
(f) Reverse Engineering. -
hana
Nov 23, 06:42 PM
Link to inspire to get to the Apple Store for the holiday....
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/nov2006/tc20061122_386136.htm?chan=top+news_top+news+index
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/nov2006/tc20061122_386136.htm?chan=top+news_top+news+index
Ommid
Apr 25, 12:14 PM
Uh, no... the iPhone 4 was called the iPhone 4 because it was the 4th version of the iPhone (not because it came after 3 in 3G). If the next iPhone is called the 4S, that'd be the 5th iPhone model. So the next one after that would be called the iPhone 6.
It would go:
iPhone
iPhone 3G
iPhone 3GS
iPhone 4
iPhone 4S (or iPhone 5)
iPhone 6
So that is fine, I dont think people will care if they skip 5. Why are you adamant that they wont skip 5?
It would go:
iPhone
iPhone 3G
iPhone 3GS
iPhone 4
iPhone 4S (or iPhone 5)
iPhone 6
So that is fine, I dont think people will care if they skip 5. Why are you adamant that they wont skip 5?
TBDNET
Oct 6, 11:46 AM
First, Apple must build an iPhone that will work on Verizon's CDMA network (iPhone is GSM & HPDA), OR Verizon must upgrade their network to handle GSM/HDMA. I don't thing either will ever happen.
Isn't Verizon's 4G network going to be GSM?
on another note if it is wouldn't their coverage also be spotty?
Isn't Verizon's 4G network going to be GSM?
on another note if it is wouldn't their coverage also be spotty?
MacBoobsPro
Sep 12, 07:29 AM
So who is going to watch Snow White?
No... Bambi?
Or what about Lady and the Tramp?
:D
No... Bambi?
Or what about Lady and the Tramp?
:D
Rodimus Prime
Apr 11, 12:52 PM
only if W8 had a 32bit flavor. Otherwise, no. Apple prefers one flavor. At any rate, Apples motivation is to sell hardware so the push to update is always there. MS only cares about software.
umm my computer from 2004 could run Windows 8 (slowly but it could) because it does have a 64 bit processor in it. I also believe W8 is going to be 64 bit only. W7 was the last 32 bit OS.
umm my computer from 2004 could run Windows 8 (slowly but it could) because it does have a 64 bit processor in it. I also believe W8 is going to be 64 bit only. W7 was the last 32 bit OS.
mkrishnan
Sep 7, 08:23 PM
Kanye West is one of the most amazing things to happen to hip-hop in the past several years.
Anyone get his new album yet? I haven't ... I need to pick up a copy.
Anyone get his new album yet? I haven't ... I need to pick up a copy.
sevimli
May 3, 09:33 PM
Well done apple! :apple:
OziMac
Sep 12, 01:14 AM
G'Day Tangles, welcome to the boards. You're right though, US$20 is a lot of money compared to DVD prices.
Oh I hope you get the Tangles reference, otherwise I've just made a goose of myself.
I got it Chundles, but maybe his name really is Max Walker? ;)
If it's true that the USD20 includes portable-compatible files, then it's slightly more attractive (at least to the less tech-savvy). It's also 100 per cent legal too.
But they really have to consider opening the pricing structure up to rentals at some stage, movies and music really are two different things, and unless the sale prices are really competitive (these aren't) then there's no incentive for buying/renting patterns to change.
Oh I hope you get the Tangles reference, otherwise I've just made a goose of myself.
I got it Chundles, but maybe his name really is Max Walker? ;)
If it's true that the USD20 includes portable-compatible files, then it's slightly more attractive (at least to the less tech-savvy). It's also 100 per cent legal too.
But they really have to consider opening the pricing structure up to rentals at some stage, movies and music really are two different things, and unless the sale prices are really competitive (these aren't) then there's no incentive for buying/renting patterns to change.
TimUSCA
Apr 15, 10:37 PM
And by that what do you mean. iPhones had little impact on phones like the BB Curve
He said *smart* phone.
He said *smart* phone.
J Radical
Jan 9, 05:01 PM
Ha it won't play for me. The website is probably being hammered. Anyone having any luck?
0 comments:
Post a Comment