Apple Bringing Full-Screen Video iAds to Mobile | Hacker News Reader

Apple Bringing Full-Screen Video iAds to Mobile

adage.com

Unless I'm missing something, only apps that specifically include iAds will result in a user being subjected to these full-screen video ads ... right?

Presumably this will only occur for free apps?

I don't see why (a) people have the right to complain about what they are subjected to when they are using a "free" app, or (b) how this is somehow "Apple's fault".

Don't want ads? Pay for your product!

(it also increases the likelihood of getting real customer support if you pay)

> Don't want ads? Pay for your product!

So that's why there are no ads on cable TV, in magazines or newspapers?

Android user here, so forgive me for being unfamiliar with the iOS app ecosystem.

Is it common for free apps to offer paid, ad free versions on iOS?

Yes, and it is quite annoying when they don't.

| Don't want ads? Pay for your product!

If only it was that simple.

Plus don't worry, no one uses iAds anyways.

I'm already mad at apple because allows the NSA to spy my phone, but when it got stolen I was left with a baby-level find-my-phone idiocy, for a mobile device that costs a month's salary where I live. So basically it's okay to use technology to spy on me, but to help find my phone it's a no-no.

Now the ads thing? I think I'm going to ditch all my apple hardware at once.

The moment full screen video ad is forced on me on iOS is the moment I completely abandon Apple ecosystem and start behaving like they don't exist (just like Microsoft before them, albeit for different reasons).

I don't understand why people are surprised or upset by this. There are dozens of ad networks that already serve full-screen video ad content. People who want free and ad-supported apps will continue to watch video ads, people who don't will continue to purchase ad-free apps. I don't see anything changing in the iOS ecosystem.

What are the ad units and what are typical CPMs?

Android has 79 percent market share. I wonder if full screen video ads on Apple devices will change that.

Why would it?

edit:

To expand on that a bit, I was under the impression that the Android app ecosystem was far more ad-driven than the iOS app ecosystem. At least it seems as if iOS usually offers a ad-supported free version and an ad-free paid version, where as Android seems to mostly just have the ad-supported free version.

Even if that is not true, there are already ways to get full screen video ads on iOS (I believe Flurry is one), the app developer just has to want to do it. Apple adding this to iAds seems to be irrelevant to the status quo except to make iAds more appealing to users of other ad services.

This fact is probably what killed iAd adoption in the first place. When iAd was released in 2010, Android was barely anything and iPhone was growing rapidly vs. Windows Phone and Blackberry.

But since then, with the growth of Android, and especially Android free-with-ads apps, the idea that you would have a mobile ad platform that was only on iOS just seems silly. Especially when Apple wants only big customers (they had a $1M minimum buy-in IIRC), and wants "fancy" ads with embedded mini sites, while at the same time not providing the tracking data advertisers wanted. Not surprised the advertisers said no thanks.

Android has 97 percent of mobile malware. I wonder if full screen video ads on Apple devices will change that.

http://thenextweb.com/google/2014/03/04/f-secure-android-acc...

And all that malware is outside the play store. So no need to paint the sky all dark when things are mostly rosy.

Yes, Google's walled garden is fairly safe.

This is brilliant. Essentially the entire line of iOS devices up to this point have been loss leaders for building an entrenched advertising system - but without the loss!

I can see it going a lot of ways.

"iPhone 6: $400.00. iPhone 6 with no ads $600.00."

"Pay only pennies a day to skip ads."

"Apple: Pay up advertiser, we showed your ad 1 gajillion times. Advertiser: Show me the numbers! Apple: Here's some we made up." Works for Facebook.

"Put yourself in an ad for your favorite product. Take a selfie with this app!" iAds + JibJab.

Of course, you could always just install an app that disables... Ahhh, Apple owns the app store, too.

You missed an opportunity to suggest that full screen video ads would play before the device would allow you to send a text or place a phone call.

That's a good idea, although, it might annoy people in a hurry.

I like the idea of making it contextual. Calling you grandson? Ad for LifeCall! Calling your buddy to get together for football (and you use a Fantasy Football app on your phone)? Ad for Budweiser! Calling 911? Ad for MetLife!

See under "offer type": http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00AWH595M/ref=kods_gw_nrm_...

It never fails that as evil as I can make my thoughts, someone has already thunk it and done it.

Cool, more reasons not to use apple products.

Are these unskippable? Maybe people will finally put down their iDevices more frequently and do something else when they realise they're being fed adverts like what they would do with the TV. I hope.

Why does everything, including their ad program, have to start with an 'i'? Maybe I can understand the marketing side for consumer electronics, but ads? Really?

  > Ken says that the "i" stands for "Internet", but also
  > represents the product as a personal and revolutionary
  > device ('i' for "individuality" and "innovation"). [0]

Sent over the internet, personalized, sent tp personal devices. Seems to fit.

0 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMac#History

iOS and iCloud are strategically important non-electronics products.

"i" is still the most succinct way of saying "This is an elegantly made Apple product". To the point where any "i" product made by another company feels imposter-ish, and any below-par Apple "i" product feels like a letdown from a high standard.

And now it has full screen intrusive ads. I mean iAds.

"Intrusive" implies that you have some knowledge about the context in which these ads would be displayed, which would certainly add to this story. What's your source?

For the same reason nearly everything McDonald's makes starts with "Mc" -- it establishes and reinforces brand cohesion.

Alternatively, it makes it sound like you are utterly incapable of just calling something what it is, you have to stick your trademarks all over it.

It's like when companies insist on calling common things by Special Names™ all over their documents instead of just writing like Normal People™ so they can have some Strange Monopoly™ over their terms.

"Oh, no no, you've got it wrong, this isn't a cloud database, it's a Data Knowledge System™ from Some Company™®©, which enables you to Do More™."

At least that's how I feel about it. And yes, I feel the same way about McEverything.

In 2010, that was still their primary branding. Nowadays they would probably call it Apple Ads.

Because it's simpler/lazier than alternative.

Sound pretty annoying if you can't even skip them and they suddenly show up and interrupt you.

What does the second sentence here even mean?

"A handful of marketers wrote checks for up to $10 million to become iTunes Radio launch sponsors last year. Those advertisers are already familiar with Apple-run full-screen video ads -- albeit ones limited to the company's streaming music service."

Looks pretty straight-forward to me. What are you struggling to understand?

AFAIK, iTunes Radio is audio ads, not full-screen video ads. Or does the desktop iTunes client show video ads? Apple TV and iOS devices definitely don't.

This might be good... maybe these ads will be annoying enough to make people pay for products. Right now ads are out of the way enough to be completely ignored and apple and/or advertisers may be realizing they aren't worth much.

This might be good... maybe these ads will be annoying enough to make people choose free software instead.

iAds coming to AppleTV

Guess who has two thumbs and is never updating his appletv again... This guy

Reply on news.ycombinator.com