Slashdot Mirror
Google Slams Apple Over iPhone Ad Ban
crimeandpunishment writes "This real-life clash of the titans could be much more interesting than the movie. Today Google fired the latest volley in its war of words with Apple over mobile advertising. In a blog posting, the head of Google's mobile ad service, Admob, had harsh words for Apple's new restrictions concerning the iPhone and iPad ... calling them a threat to competition. There's a lot of money at stake ... the US mobile ad market, which is about $600 million, is expected to more than double by 2013."
I just downloaded Google Chrome 3.0.192.0 for Mac and it crashed before I could even open a page. There is no excuse for this; my Mac Pro is perfect in every way with eight 2.93 GHz cores, 32 GB RAM, and a fresh install of Mac OS X Leopard v10.5.7. Ergo any crashing Google Chrome does is Google Chrome's own fault!
Why is it that Apple and Mozilla can do this but Google can't? I ran Internet Explorer 8 for months before its final release, Firefox 3.5 since its 3.1 days, and found Safari 4 Developer Preview more stable than Safari 3. In fact, even WebKit is more stable than Chrome.
What really baffles me, however, isn't the instability I've come to expect from Google, but that Google has the audacity to ask for personal user info to improve its browser. Is the search engine maker datamonger really so desperate for my private information that it's stooped to the level of Trojan horses to get it?
They should ask me that when it doesn't crash on launch.
Everything Google does is just another way to sieve personal data away for targeting ads. This kind of Big Brother crap is more repulsive than the fat programmers that make it possible. Google, with its deep pockets and doctoral scholars, thinks that by holding user data hostage it can maneuver around Apple and Microsoft. While this may be true, I'm not willing to be a part of it.
In using Google's search, Gmail, Chrome or whatever else the faceless robot of a company invents, the user is surrendering their personal information to a giant hivemind. No longer are their personal preferences some choice they make; they're a string of data processed by a Google algorithm: Google dehumanizes its users!
So while Google is arrogant enough to paint spyware shiny so it can parse our browsing habits, the least they could do is make sure it doesn't crash. If Apple, Microsoft, and Mozilla can get their preview releases right, why can't Google? And now they're making their own operating systems?
Get real, Google! I'll use your crashing codebloat when my Mac is cold and dead and I'm looking for handouts. Until then, quit mining my personal data!
Google started this whole dust-up when they went after Apple. See Gruber's thoughts on the matter:
http://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/06/09/battelle
"There’s no question it’s a dick move on Apple’s part. But what’s the argument against it? That Google gets a pass for being dicks to Apple, and Apple ought to just sit there and take it?"
Do you think Google will permit iAD advertising in their any of their web based products? Why should Apple not institute a reciprocal restriction?
It always has been the intention of Apple for everything you use to be apple and apple only. The iphone has given them a good environment to do this and they are taking advantage of it. If you buy into it, its your own choice, but know that this is what you are buying in to.
How did you get from iAds to there?
iAds are not a platform lockin beyond earning the developer more money than other ad frameworks. Do you not think other frameworks might just move to compete as needed?
As for "rent-seeking", that doesn't even make sense - they are just providing a simpler means for third parties to keep free applications free - at no cost to the developer to participate, and no extra cost to the consumer since the developer would have used SOME ad framework anyway and so would have had to look at ads regardless. How is this "rent seeking?"
You come off as just another illogical Apple Hater foaming at the mouth, proclaiming loudly and with great spittle that Apple is terribly, terribly wrong though you can't actually say how when pressed.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The Apple terms prevent anti-competitive behavior by Google, Microsoft, and others. Complaining that the terms are anti-competitive is the same old bizzaro Google bullshit. Like how they claim iPhone's curated native C app platform is closed, but Android's native C app platform actually is closed. Only Google can make native C Android apps. No 3rd parties have access. Same with Chrome OS. And Google now claims Adobe Flash is open, and WebM is a standard. And iOS is North Korea, because you know how in North Korea they enjoy massive commercial success, right? They're rolling in money in North Korea. Same as iOS. iOS developers getting monthly checks is just like North Korea and Android developers working for free is just like the US. Right?
Google is actually making me weary of nerds. Not only have they damaged their brand with Android, they've damaged the Ph.D brand. When I meet a Ph.D now I think this is a person who doesn't know anything about people or the real world.
Similar to the way that human beings like a house to shelter them from the cold, but don't actually depend on it.
You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
The difference is Apple users use the word "monopoly" in the dictionary definition of the word, but you're using it in the Google definition, where a "monopoly" is any company that dares to compete with Google. That is the same way Microsoft uses the word. Words actually have meanings, though. Google actually has a monopoly. There needs to be a wall between Google's ad business and Google's other businesses so that they don't do something anti-competitive. If Google is not going to put one up, they certainly have no right to expect Apple not to do so on their own platform.
But I bet you think Apple should just quietly acquiesce to the anti-competitive wishes of a company with half their market share and half their market value? I mean, if you were competing with Google you'd just roll over for a belly rub, right? You'd be happy to see them leverage their monopoly so they don't have to compete with you, right? You'd open up your front door wide and pucker up and let Google apply their ass directly to your face?
You seem to imply that the iphone is expensive?
It is the same price, or cheaper than many Android phones. And there are free apps and games, if you don't want to spend on the paid ones.
The net prices are roughly the same for smartphones.
I think the problem is that you're cheap. Nothing in the world is cheap enough for you.
> What Apple has done is not explicitly ban third party advertisers, but instead
> achieve that goal through crafty wording in their developer agreement.
No, no, no. You missed that the only advertisers that are banned are ones that are run by Apple's competitors in the mobile phone market. That is why Google is crying like a spoiled little rich kid.
If Apple wanted to do all the ads on iOS they could do it, they don't have to be sneaky about it. It's their fucking platform.