Apple ad-addled OS scheme resurfaces Steve Jobs & Co have renewed their interest in developing an operating system that can disable "one or more functions" of your Mac while an ad is being played. "Jobs; Steven; (Palo Alto, CA)" is the first-listed inventor in a filing published Thursday by the US Patent and Trademark Office. The application, "Advertisement in …
I love how you Linux fanbois never miss a trick to get some "free" advertising! ;o)
I wonder what Steve is planning down in his white shiny underground bunker? Ad-ware isn't their style, ads popping up doesn't suit there clean user interface dose it. Hmmm!
It just works, accept when the adverts are on!
If I don't want to watch an ad I don't want to have to watch the ad. That's why DVR's are so popular.
it almost seems like Apple is preparing for a day when an anti-trust suit makes them divide the software and hardware groups into two different companies. If that happens they will need a different revenue stream.
The article talks about getting an otherwise paid for free update for MacOS in return for having to watch ads.
That sounds like a pretty good deal to me. If I don't want to fork out $129 for a new version of the OS, I don't have to.
Mind you, $129 is a bit of a bargain compared to a Windows upgrade, especially when you discover that your old scanner, printer, graphics card, cpu, motherboard, whatever doesn't actually work with the new version.
If you want free updates, run Linux. I know I do.
if i buy a phone, it comes with the OS and i expect OS updates. if an OS upgrade is required (this is apple, be under no delusions, if you want app updates/stop the annoying iTunes nag screens you will have to update) i'm not going to pay for it. nor will i surrender my phone to crippling ads.
What a revolting idea. Who in their right mind would submit to being controlled in such a manner?
If you forget the Ad aspect of it, what they're proposing is an OS which periodically locks up and interrupts what the user is doing. I would junk any OS which behaved like that. Not that I'm an MS hater, but that's exactly why I have avoided Vista - having seen how it treats my wife.
Can see it now, you go click print, up pops an ad and you end up still cursing the bloody thing for the next 10mins while you get brainwashed by Jobs' Ads while all you want is you damn print. Great idea isn't it :P
People claim MS is evil, then again MS doesn't go after it's users and just it's competitors. Shame Apple always continues to go out of it's way to find new ways to shaft it's users!
Or perhaps for the next (much rumoured) version of Apple TV perhaps?
This would make sense in a cloud-streamed TV service environment, where Apple could deliver highly targeted advertisements to victims^H^H^H, *ahem*, customers, in a powerful and granular way. One source TV program, but different adverts shown dependent on geography, viewing style and previous preferences/selections.
An advertiser's dream, giving Apple the revenue stream to bulk-purchase the content needed to differentiate themselves from other up-and-coming competitors in this market.
Or there again, perhaps not.
If they're gonna offer a free Ads supported version (which will end up hacked to buggery) then fine... whatever.... but if this is gonna be implemented on a paid product, just like the flipping adverts on paid DVDs that cant be skipped... I DONT THINK SO... It won't be long til we see WGA style crap and all manner of hackery to kill it.
So what happens is I get an OS update that makes me play ads, or it bricks the machine?
Can I set up a script to make the ads play when I am at lunch, or on the john?
I am just waiting for Apple to come up with a chip that zaps you if you aren't sitting at the machine watching the ads as they play.
Call it iownyou and I am sure the fanboys will line up to get the new jobisian control device installed.
I hate advertising in all its forms.
Fire, because we need to cleanse the ad industry off the planet with it.
I'm sure that last time I saw relevant slides, the Mach kernel stuff underneath supported the BSD subsystem but the BSD subsystem wasn't below CoreFoundation, on which Cocoa and Carbon sit.
That aside, I'm not sure Apple are likely to use this on the desktop as they don't pitch anything there at people who count the pennies. It's more likely to be for one of the iOD devices - maybe you can have your carrier subsidised iPad, but at a cost?
So far, I've not seen a single bit of technology that could be abused... and wasn't!
'Hello... Yes, Ambulance... What, no I don't want life insurance. I need an ambulance, like now... What do you mean reset to the start of the sponsors message...'
and so it continues.
What happens when a Apple computer is in a LAN environment without InterNet?
Because of the risks associated with InterNet access, companies often have a 'firewall' that is actually an 'air gap' - not actually connected to the InterNet. What will happen to an advertisement controlled OS if it can't connect to Job's ad server.
If, on the other hand, the OS can work without InterNet, and not show adverts, it means you can simply block Job's URLs and not be troubled with this crap.
He pulled a similar trick back in the Apple ][ days with "Apple Corps". I got a letter from a nasty attorney telling me that my 150 member Apple User Group, in the Bay Area of Houston, (BAAUG) HAD to sign up for Apple Corps and HAD to collect dues, so everyone could get a shiny magazine, OR cease and desist using the word Apple in our user group name.
I wrote back and informed them that since we had some of the astronauts and their kids in the group, did they REALLY want to mess with me? So, we boycotted the local Computer Land dealer, who already threated to sue us/me as a member was selling boxes of floppy disks for half the price he charged. Seems like Apple wanted to OWN us and do as they pleased. Well, the Computer Land eventually went broke, and each of our members migrated to the IBM XT. I'm truly sorry I ever spent hard-earned 1978 dollars on the damn thing, as I just encouraged him. It's all my fault.
Those that ignore the past are condemned to repeat it.. Now, just look at the Mac users all out of luck. The Woz was god, Jobs was the guy with the seersucker sport coat, straw hat and bamboo cane going "Huzzah! Huzzah! Lookee HERE! Lookee HERE FOLKS!", pounding the bass drum. If any of you hand this man another dime, you're just encouraging him to continue in his EST style tactics.
Two secs after this got released, it would be hacked and disabled. This is just typical of money grabbing corp scumbags stopping at nothing to get a few extra pennies!
"Oh Steve is so great!' "Steve is such cool tech-head!" "Steve understands me!"
Bollocks! Steve is a buisnessman! Steve doesn't give a monkey's what you say, think or do, so long as you buy his kit, pump up his stock price and increase his bank balance. When are you fanbois going to learn this?
Oh, I write this as a Mac owner! I like OSX, think it's fun to use, I just despise the fanbois with a passion!
It appears to be an OS forcing people to watch adverts to do what they want.
A way to take revenue from MS and Google at once.
Well fortunately it won't work because companies won't use it and risk losing working time watching adverts and home users won't want to watch ads when they can play games or go on FB
Unless they're patenting the things trojans and viruses do to build their own i can't see any need to copyright something noone else would be stupid enough to want
Clearly it is a plan by extraterrestrials to get us so used to watching ads that we wont notice when they start brainwashing us... or maybe they already started? You'd have to be a bit spin-cycled to accept ads in your OS....
I love the ad-free BBC, and I love not having ads on my OS. If I choose to go to a website or buy a magazine, then I accept there are ads. I don't LIKE them but at least I have chosen to view them in return for the content. (revenue streams etc etc) this is why I don't run ad-blockers. But the day I willingly accept an OS with ads is the day I give up on life.
Is there any moral difference between blocking ads and simply ignoring them?
I don't think there is... and since I ignore adverts anyway, why shouldn't I go half a step further and block them?
I've never bought something purely off the back of an advert unless it was dirt cheap (a loss leader) and those people never got my repeat business. So I actually cost them money by following their ad. I also cost them an (admittedly tiny) amount of money every time my browser downloads their ads in spite of the fact that they will be ignored. The logic is irrefutable - I save advertisers money by running Ad Block Plus.
Let's not be silly here and pretend that an impression on an advert is actually worth something. It's worth nothing. Sales are worth something, and you don't get sales from me by pissing me off with adverts. If your advertising model assumes that impressions are worth something then you are wrong and that's not my fault.
If they are being served to me for free.
If, however, they are using up some of my bandwidth allocation, however small, then they are no longer free, I am effectively paying to view them. I consider that unacceptable and will find any way I can to remove them!
So ads, fine on unlimited connections, not so fine on unlimited* connections.
Now this kind of nonsense won't be showing up in any of the products I buy.
"Watch Ads now", "Watch previous Ad"? Why should I want to? I don't watch any commercial TV programming and am constantly amazed when people ask me "hey did you see that really annoying advert?" NO, I didn't. Why did you, doesn't your TV have an off button?
I also lol at the irony of a "premium" product carrying adverts. If you wanted a Lamborghini because of how cool they look, you wouldn't decide to save a little money and buy the one with the ASDA logo painted on the side.
I don't know if this is in the patent or maybe in the next one, but it seems to me feasible that the advertisement won't release control of the device back to the user until they successfully complete a quiz on information contained in the ad. Maybe you can either view the ad again and again until you can answer all of the questions correctly, or the device will phone a customer sales representative for you to help with any detail that you find confusing. Such as why tying an elastic band around your new phone is a -good- thing. (Although, if you don't get that, then phoning the sales line is going to be problematic.)
People who buy Apple's desktop and notebook kit aren't afraid of spending money, so there's little advantage to having ads on these versions of OS X.
It makes little sense for the iDevices either: iPhones and iPads already have the "operator subsidy" option, which doesn't seem to be going anywhere soon.
However, the Apple TV platform is long overdue for a major overhaul, and this could be the piece of the puzzle that finally makes it viable.
Why is everyone so up in arms about this?
In Blighty, it's only like the difference between paying your TV licence and getting the service ad-free (i.e. BBC) or getting a free service with ads (i.e. ITV, Channel 4, five.)
As long as it remains this choice of "free-with-ads" or "pay", and not "pay-with-ads", I'm happy - I'll pay every time. It's still cheaper than buying a Windows upgrade.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
