So Steve Jobs’ recent statement on flash was dubbed “the rant heard across the web” and apparently, a bunch of premium content publishers (according to James McQuivey of Forrester) scrambled to take Apple’s stance against Flash as a reason to charge for their content (read: Paid Apps), bandwagoning and claiming it’d give both publishers and advertisers a cleaner, richer venue for “premium advertising” (read: iAd).
FORRESTER LINK JUMP HERE
To use the old italian-canadian saying: Meeeeeeeeeeeeeee! This all makes sense now – I download a free app and have advertisers pay Steve Jobs through iAd revenue (which is massively premium costs), or pay do I give the money to my fav. publisher for a non-ad-supported app. I’m not biting into that first Apple (look at what happened to Snow White). If i didn't already have an iPhone with work, I'd start to think about other platforms like Android for my mobile needs. Tks for the iPad Stevie - but I'm not going to help you amortize the development of it.
But questions that are really grinding my gears:
Is Apple really that powerful?
Should publishers concede to Apple?
Are Blue-Chip advertisers going to get on-board at such a high cost to reach that specific of an audience?
Should publishers concede to Apple?
Are Blue-Chip advertisers going to get on-board at such a high cost to reach that specific of an audience?
Get yo' geek on - cuz the ad world's gone wild.
-P
0 comments:
Post a Comment