
Apple Wouldn’t Risk Its Cool Over an Ad Gimmick, Would It? - mjfern
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/15/business/15digi.html
======
jrockway
Most people probably don't care. They still watch ads online and with their TV
shows. I work in an office building that is completely owned by my employer,
and there are little screens in the elevator that show ads all day. You walk
into the elevator, and instantly any conversation you were having stops, and
people stare at the ads. It is mind-blowing that the ads exist, and mind-
blowing how interested people are in them.

(The ads are sometimes even for our competitors! WTF!?)

~~~
mmt
This is, perhaps, another reason I prefer stairs beyond the nominal extra
exercise[1]: I don't like being a captive[2] audience. I feel similarly about
advertising inside of public transit vehicles and facilities.

[1] Perhaps another reason I hate high-density cities with high-rise office
and/or apartment buildings.

[2] I'm not claustrophobic, even though I joke about being "trapped" in a
little metal box, especially here in earthquake country. An elevator bigger
than my car wouldn't be any more comfortable.

~~~
jrockway
I agree with you. I would take the stairs, but I don't know where they are.
(You would think, for fire safety reasons, that they would be clearly marked.
But I have never seen any indication of their existence in this building.)

(I am OK with advertising on public transit. The government won't pay for
public transportation, but advertisers will.)

------
akamaka
If anyone has been watching the new Apple over the past decade, it is obvious
that they are not interested creating new market areas, but rather coming late
to an established areas and beating the competition.

If Apple launches an ad-supported device, I would bet it will only be in
response to a move into that area from Google or MS, after learning from their
mistakes (just as they learned from the many problems of Windows-based
smartphones).

------
mullr
The fact that a big company has filed a patent doesn't necessarily mean that
they're going to make a product. Usually it means that they care about that
area in general and need some amount of patent "presence", some asset that
they can take into negotiations to give them a bit of weight.

------
jws
The television networks have not accepted a viable internet distribution
system. Until that happens, Apple and others will continue developing treats
to entice them.

Consider the recording industry. Apple had to use DRM that made purchases feel
like the familiar single copy sale of the industry. Eventually the music
industry got over that and adapted to unlocked sales.

The television networks or studios will be happier with ads in their internet
distributed product, since it is how they work. Maybe they will get over it
with time and accept a model that people prefer, or maybe people will prefer
to serve the advertisers instead of paying for the content. Time will tell.

------
cmelbye
Apple already lost its "cool" a while ago.

Openness of iPhone Development (or lack thereof). 'nuff said.

------
rabidsnail
While it would seem unlikely for Apple to implement a scheme like this for ad-
subsidized computers, it does seem like something they would do for the music
industry. I can see ad-supported itunes store content; watch this 30 second
ad, and then you get to listen to the song.

------
goodside
Apple hasn't filed the patent to implement it, but to stop others from doing
so. It damages the Apple brand if third-party crapware like that mentioned in
the patent shows up on the Mac, and they just want another tool in their
pockets to get rid of it if they ever need to.

------
alilja
Simple answer: no. If they use this for anything, I imagine it'll be for
something similar to the iPhone, but without another company (like AT&T)
backing them up financially. This allows Apple to sell something at a low
price but still be financially viable.

------
marcell
My guess: This is for the Apple Tablet. Either pay for subscriptions, or view
ads. And, since it's Apple, I'm going to guess that all ads must go through an
ad approval process.

------
brisance
This was covered by Patently Apple a few weeks ago. NY Times is late to the
party. To me this is to prevent Google's Chrome OS from being profitable.

~~~
noelchurchill
Or maybe for the apple tv?

------
joezydeco
How do we know this technology isn't targeted for the Apple Media-Industry-
Saving Tablet Device? Is this how Steve plans to save the newspaper biz?

------
noonespecial
Maybe they're going to do the _right_ thing and use the patent to keep other
idiots from ruining the "mac experience" with garbage like this.

------
cmars232
Looking forward to the mods and jailbreaks for cheap subsidized Apple
hardware.

------
pwmanagerdied
Large companies have patents for multitudes of ideas that they don't actually
implement. Getting worked up over patent filings like this is a waste of
energy, since it's rare that anything comes of it.

------
rick_2047
If you look at the article, it mentions that the ad enabled devices are
optional and that too on a lower price. Now a person who cannot afford an
iPhone may opt for the ad enabled device and may make it through the price
barrier own a shiny new iPhone.

