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.
Dane D.
Mar 4, 07:47 PM
http://www2.hernandotoday.com/content/2010/oct/17/ha-fdrs-warning-public-employee-unions-a-no-no/
President Franklin D. Roosevelt, the patron saint of the American labor movement, was a man of strong character. One has to look no further than the heroic way he coped with his crippling polio. This dreadful disease undoubtedly made him the consummate realist.
For example, although he had a lock on labor's vote, he expressed caution about public sector unions. In a little-known letter he wrote to the president of the National Federation of Federal Employees in 1937, Roosevelt reasoned:
"... Meticulous attention should be paid to the special relationships and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the government. All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations ... The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for ... officials ... to bind the employer ... The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives ...
"Particularly, I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place in the functions of any organization of government employees. Upon employees in the federal service rests the obligation to serve the whole people ... This obligation is paramount ... A strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent ... to prevent or obstruct ... Government ... Such action, looking toward the paralysis of Government ... is unthinkable and intolerable."
Even he had enough sense to know what will happen over time.
To quote Margaret Thatcher, http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Talk:Margaret_Thatcher
Update: Margaret Thatcher, in a TV interview for Thames TV This Week [[1]]on Feb. 5, 1976, Prime Minister Thatcher said, "...and Socialist governments traditionally do make a financial mess. They [socialists] always run out of other people's money. It's quite a characteristic of them."
Basically public unions are legal money laundering operations. Follow the money: I pay taxes which go to pay the public employees who pay union dues, which the union bosses take and contribute to Democratic candidates who get elected who pass favorable legislation to benefit the public unions. Lovely system that have going. Has anybody noticed that these people could care less about where the money comes from, these protesters are whining because the cookie jar is threaten to be closed. Just love watching all these cry babies on T.V., real classy people. The runaway Wisconsin Senators are demostrating just who they really are, spoiled children.
President Franklin D. Roosevelt, the patron saint of the American labor movement, was a man of strong character. One has to look no further than the heroic way he coped with his crippling polio. This dreadful disease undoubtedly made him the consummate realist.
For example, although he had a lock on labor's vote, he expressed caution about public sector unions. In a little-known letter he wrote to the president of the National Federation of Federal Employees in 1937, Roosevelt reasoned:
"... Meticulous attention should be paid to the special relationships and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the government. All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service. It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations ... The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for ... officials ... to bind the employer ... The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives ...
"Particularly, I want to emphasize my conviction that militant tactics have no place in the functions of any organization of government employees. Upon employees in the federal service rests the obligation to serve the whole people ... This obligation is paramount ... A strike of public employees manifests nothing less than an intent ... to prevent or obstruct ... Government ... Such action, looking toward the paralysis of Government ... is unthinkable and intolerable."
Even he had enough sense to know what will happen over time.
To quote Margaret Thatcher, http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Talk:Margaret_Thatcher
Update: Margaret Thatcher, in a TV interview for Thames TV This Week [[1]]on Feb. 5, 1976, Prime Minister Thatcher said, "...and Socialist governments traditionally do make a financial mess. They [socialists] always run out of other people's money. It's quite a characteristic of them."
Basically public unions are legal money laundering operations. Follow the money: I pay taxes which go to pay the public employees who pay union dues, which the union bosses take and contribute to Democratic candidates who get elected who pass favorable legislation to benefit the public unions. Lovely system that have going. Has anybody noticed that these people could care less about where the money comes from, these protesters are whining because the cookie jar is threaten to be closed. Just love watching all these cry babies on T.V., real classy people. The runaway Wisconsin Senators are demostrating just who they really are, spoiled children.
madmaxmedia
Jan 11, 04:53 PM
Doing it during somebody's presentation is just plain cold.
I heard that the Gizmodo people pushed all the buttons in the elevators too.
I heard that the Gizmodo people pushed all the buttons in the elevators too.
creator2456
Apr 10, 12:36 AM
Can you report your speeds with that whenever you get it running?
I shall try to remember, but won't have it until Wed., won't have connection until the Monday after.
I shall try to remember, but won't have it until Wed., won't have connection until the Monday after.
leekohler
Mar 3, 09:44 PM
Go Ohio! Crush the unions! Return to fiscal sanity. No more hiding behind a union... time to return to personal responsibility. Ohio today, Wisconsin tomorrow, who's next? Sweep the states clean, Tea Party!
BTW, there is no 'RIGHT' to collective bargaining.
Collective bargaining is a legislative privilege granted by friendly law makers in some localities which can be quickly and abruptly eliminated (as you've all just observed.)
Public unions are idiotic. Imagine a private sector union where the union members themselves were able to contribute to the election and vote for the individual whom they'd be bargaining against. BRILLIANT! It's a conflict of interest - straight up.
Interesting quote by Bill Gates recently: (http://www.gatesfoundation.org/foundationnotes/Pages/bill-gates-110302-ted-2011-line-up.aspx) (thanks for the help twice in one day, Billy boy!)
Hahaha, keep telling yourself that! http://www.gallup.com/poll/125066/State-States.aspx ;)
Fivepoint- you act as if teachers make lots of money. The don't, even though they are required to have masters degrees. People understand if the belt is tight. People do NOT understand being denied the right to unionize and fight when they feel taken advantage of. NO ONE should ever be jailed for striking. That you support this is nothing short of sickening. I am absolutely disgusted. Just wait- you guys will get yours soon enough, trust me.
BTW, I don;t know what your point was with that link, but it indicates for the most part that the political tide can tip quite easily.
And Bill Gates said nothing about union busting. Fail to see your point there as well.
I heard somewhere that federal employees are not able to collectively bargain for their benefits package. If this is true, why are recent states' attempts to restrict unionized bargaining seen as being so draconian, and why isn't there an outcry to give federal employees the same "rights"?
Will federal employees be jailed if they unionize?
BTW, there is no 'RIGHT' to collective bargaining.
Collective bargaining is a legislative privilege granted by friendly law makers in some localities which can be quickly and abruptly eliminated (as you've all just observed.)
Public unions are idiotic. Imagine a private sector union where the union members themselves were able to contribute to the election and vote for the individual whom they'd be bargaining against. BRILLIANT! It's a conflict of interest - straight up.
Interesting quote by Bill Gates recently: (http://www.gatesfoundation.org/foundationnotes/Pages/bill-gates-110302-ted-2011-line-up.aspx) (thanks for the help twice in one day, Billy boy!)
Hahaha, keep telling yourself that! http://www.gallup.com/poll/125066/State-States.aspx ;)
Fivepoint- you act as if teachers make lots of money. The don't, even though they are required to have masters degrees. People understand if the belt is tight. People do NOT understand being denied the right to unionize and fight when they feel taken advantage of. NO ONE should ever be jailed for striking. That you support this is nothing short of sickening. I am absolutely disgusted. Just wait- you guys will get yours soon enough, trust me.
BTW, I don;t know what your point was with that link, but it indicates for the most part that the political tide can tip quite easily.
And Bill Gates said nothing about union busting. Fail to see your point there as well.
I heard somewhere that federal employees are not able to collectively bargain for their benefits package. If this is true, why are recent states' attempts to restrict unionized bargaining seen as being so draconian, and why isn't there an outcry to give federal employees the same "rights"?
Will federal employees be jailed if they unionize?
emotion
Nov 16, 01:16 PM
I don't know where this assertion that AMD are rubbish comes from. The integrated memory controller technology that AMD have currently is beter than Intels offering (for the moment).
That said, they'd be daft to go with AMD. It's nice that they have this stick to poke Intel with though.
That said, they'd be daft to go with AMD. It's nice that they have this stick to poke Intel with though.
Michaelgtrusa
Mar 6, 07:18 PM
Apple makes what?
dmr727
Aug 9, 05:33 PM
I completely agree with your position that we should have access to the efficient and modern diesels in this country.
I hear this comment all the time. I was in Europe a few months back, and diesels were all over the place too. I don't know squat about the automotive industry, but given what you guys are saying about diesel's efficiency and so on - it seems to me that offering a modern diesel would be a slam dunk for an automaker in the States.
So it begs the questions - why isn't it happening?
I hear this comment all the time. I was in Europe a few months back, and diesels were all over the place too. I don't know squat about the automotive industry, but given what you guys are saying about diesel's efficiency and so on - it seems to me that offering a modern diesel would be a slam dunk for an automaker in the States.
So it begs the questions - why isn't it happening?
KnightWRX
Mar 13, 11:25 AM
I think there will be a change in computing
So you mean computing won't be "Input, Process, Output, Storage" but something else ?
No, there will be no change in computing. It's already general and basic enough to cover all the bases.
and tablets are the future of it. I do think servers/ power machines will remain, but I can see them becoming specialised (such as in power stations etc). I can see Linux filling that whole perfectly. I do feel that tablets/ touch based computers are the future, but I think they need voice recognition software to truly come into play for text input. If the iPad had a killer voice recognition software, then MS Word for iPad might truly become a game changer. As good as any touchscreen is, typing 2,000 words on a touchscreen would be a bit of a push.
You failed to see any of my points. Tablets are not some kind of "future change to computers!", tablets are very much computing devices utilizing the same concepts and ideas that have been the very core of the industry for the last 50 years.
Touch based computer ? It's still input and input is just that, input. It doesn't matter whether is touch, keyboards, mice, network, voice, biometrics. Input is input.
A lot of you people want to see a massive change where frankly there isn't any. A new type of device doesn't somehow make everything different. It can just be a "new type of device", something the computer industry of the last 50 years has seen plenty of.
Read my post again carefully, you'll see that I already addressed all your points. Don't just respond to me without even understanding what I'm talking about and at least trying to counteract my points if you're going to try to contradict me.
So you mean computing won't be "Input, Process, Output, Storage" but something else ?
No, there will be no change in computing. It's already general and basic enough to cover all the bases.
and tablets are the future of it. I do think servers/ power machines will remain, but I can see them becoming specialised (such as in power stations etc). I can see Linux filling that whole perfectly. I do feel that tablets/ touch based computers are the future, but I think they need voice recognition software to truly come into play for text input. If the iPad had a killer voice recognition software, then MS Word for iPad might truly become a game changer. As good as any touchscreen is, typing 2,000 words on a touchscreen would be a bit of a push.
You failed to see any of my points. Tablets are not some kind of "future change to computers!", tablets are very much computing devices utilizing the same concepts and ideas that have been the very core of the industry for the last 50 years.
Touch based computer ? It's still input and input is just that, input. It doesn't matter whether is touch, keyboards, mice, network, voice, biometrics. Input is input.
A lot of you people want to see a massive change where frankly there isn't any. A new type of device doesn't somehow make everything different. It can just be a "new type of device", something the computer industry of the last 50 years has seen plenty of.
Read my post again carefully, you'll see that I already addressed all your points. Don't just respond to me without even understanding what I'm talking about and at least trying to counteract my points if you're going to try to contradict me.
tofagerl
Apr 29, 01:18 PM
Can I possible take the power, and switch the magic with something else? Like pizzazz, or awesomeness or something?
thisisahughes
Mar 29, 01:03 AM
Obviously, Apple is trying to encourage more Apps to get on iTunes or in the App store. Nothing wrong with that.
agreed. I sometimes wish there were more apps. in the Mac App Store. I think it's great and would love to use it more.
agreed. I sometimes wish there were more apps. in the Mac App Store. I think it's great and would love to use it more.
Bubba Satori
Mar 28, 03:50 PM
What exactly is a 'hater'? Someone that disagrees with the company line? Someone with a dissenting opinion?
Yes, it's the new iToy double think paradigm.
Think Different has been replaced by Don't Think At All, Hater. :rolleyes:
Sad, what long term koolaid abuse does to the gray cells.
What's hilarious is the preemptive timing of the hating predictions.
Poor, feeble minded bois must be constantly trembling in fear.
Not even Pavlov's dog drooled before the bell rung.
Scary iZombies are scary.
"Don't think haters. Agree with glorious leader."
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4132/4991954896_4b42731d2d.jpg
Yes, it's the new iToy double think paradigm.
Think Different has been replaced by Don't Think At All, Hater. :rolleyes:
Sad, what long term koolaid abuse does to the gray cells.
What's hilarious is the preemptive timing of the hating predictions.
Poor, feeble minded bois must be constantly trembling in fear.
Not even Pavlov's dog drooled before the bell rung.
Scary iZombies are scary.
"Don't think haters. Agree with glorious leader."
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4132/4991954896_4b42731d2d.jpg
firsttube
Sep 12, 07:37 AM
Ok, I've been going to macrumors.com for about 8 years or so, but I rarely post. How do I vote whether a story is positive or negative? They each look like a link, but upon clicking either and then refreshing the page.. nothing is any different. Am I missing something?
ft
edit: I know it's kinda OT, but I need to know if I've been doing something wrong all this time.
ft
edit: I know it's kinda OT, but I need to know if I've been doing something wrong all this time.
MorphingDragon
Apr 30, 12:24 AM
Hey knock it off with all the off topic Windows drivel. Winrumors forums would be a better place to dispute these matters.
Slight UI tweaks aren't a big topic pool to draw from.
Slight UI tweaks aren't a big topic pool to draw from.
notjustjay
Jan 10, 03:58 PM
I've made presentations and I have felt the rush of panicked adrenaline and beads of sweat when my equipment doesn't work exactly as expected or rehearsed. If someone did that to me during a presentation, especially at one so public, I would be VERY angry.
This reflects very, VERY badly on their professionalism. I watched the video. The first few screens that went off was funny and subversive. The rest was just sickening to watch, literally watching a childish prank go on way too far. The fact that we saw repeating shots of the same walls going off (the big wall, the gaming station) suggests that whoever did this went back and did it OVER AND OVER AGAIN.
I did this once at school, but only once, and I was 14 at the time. How old are these guys?!
Gizmodo's press passes should be revoked permanently. There are already enough gadget-tech-blogs out there, I won't miss them.
This reflects very, VERY badly on their professionalism. I watched the video. The first few screens that went off was funny and subversive. The rest was just sickening to watch, literally watching a childish prank go on way too far. The fact that we saw repeating shots of the same walls going off (the big wall, the gaming station) suggests that whoever did this went back and did it OVER AND OVER AGAIN.
I did this once at school, but only once, and I was 14 at the time. How old are these guys?!
Gizmodo's press passes should be revoked permanently. There are already enough gadget-tech-blogs out there, I won't miss them.
kiljoy616
Jul 22, 11:59 PM
Annoyed by Apple? I'm sure Apple is annoyed by all the people who are saying that Apple doesn't know how to make phones, especially when the problem they're getting flak from is also reproduced on other phones just as easilly, but no other companies are getting **** on by the public and media for also having this issue? Why is it ONLY Apple that gets dumped on?
Because we love Apple and just use Nokia phones, who cares about BlackBerry, except when someone with a patent almost shut them down completely in America. In the end Apple with ONE ONLY PHONE MODEL IS DOING INCREDIBLE, who can say the same?
Iphone 4 is not perfect but it sweet that for sure! :D
Because we love Apple and just use Nokia phones, who cares about BlackBerry, except when someone with a patent almost shut them down completely in America. In the end Apple with ONE ONLY PHONE MODEL IS DOING INCREDIBLE, who can say the same?
Iphone 4 is not perfect but it sweet that for sure! :D
reflex
Nov 16, 03:59 PM
Maybe AMDs for the low end lines and Core 2 Duo for the high end? What about a Mac Mini with dual AMD X2 for less than $400 with ATI graphic? :D
Sort of what I was thinking. A Turion x2 or maybe an upcoming dual core Sempron (the current one runs pretty cool). Might put the mini back at a $499 starting price.
Sort of what I was thinking. A Turion x2 or maybe an upcoming dual core Sempron (the current one runs pretty cool). Might put the mini back at a $499 starting price.
davepoint
Aug 12, 04:31 PM
surely they wouldn't update the specs only to release something new in a month or so..
Whyren
Sep 7, 08:25 PM
Jobs in 2008 is that what i am hearing. YAY president Jobs.
Ha ha, well he's already got the Mac crowd. Advertise he's CEO of Pixar and you've got a good portion of the parental/Disney crowd too. :D
Ha ha, well he's already got the Mac crowd. Advertise he's CEO of Pixar and you've got a good portion of the parental/Disney crowd too. :D
miamialley
Jul 21, 09:13 AM
Fine, but does it drop as many calls as my iP4?
Full of Fail
May 3, 04:14 PM
I'd still argue that communism isn't really open because it's a top down government, but in theory it is more open than it is in reality.
In Texas, people are so ignorant about different forms of government, I forget that other people are more educated.
I am still referring to pure communism, with no top down government. You are referring to the Leninist theory that has become what we commonly think of communism as, which has a vanguard party lead the proletariat. Unfortunately this is not the right thread to continue this discussion.
Back on topic... the bottom line is, does it suck to be charged twice for data? Yes, it does. Is it legal? Yes, you agreed to it, and if you were in the carriers shoes, you would do the same. As cited previously, it does make economic sense as the price for all of us would go up if they allowed it at no additional cost. Are you stealing when you circumvent paying? Yes, and whether or not that matters is up to you.
In Texas, people are so ignorant about different forms of government, I forget that other people are more educated.
I am still referring to pure communism, with no top down government. You are referring to the Leninist theory that has become what we commonly think of communism as, which has a vanguard party lead the proletariat. Unfortunately this is not the right thread to continue this discussion.
Back on topic... the bottom line is, does it suck to be charged twice for data? Yes, it does. Is it legal? Yes, you agreed to it, and if you were in the carriers shoes, you would do the same. As cited previously, it does make economic sense as the price for all of us would go up if they allowed it at no additional cost. Are you stealing when you circumvent paying? Yes, and whether or not that matters is up to you.
lordonuthin
Aug 14, 07:50 PM
well i added 2 more GPUs to my folding mix. i got a gtx 465 folding in the same rig as a gtx 260. it took awhile, but finally have them both folding with the gpu3 client. we'll see how it does
Ooooh! great, it will be good to get the points on our team from that 465!
Ooooh! great, it will be good to get the points on our team from that 465!
bense27
Aug 3, 06:40 PM
just the fact that its name is the "Argo" tells you that its not posing a threat to iPods.
LethalWolfe
Nov 11, 02:54 PM
anyone read my post at the top of the page.
anyone else having problems joining team death with a party of 2 or more?
anyone else having problems joining team death with a party of 2 or more?
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario