U.S. Government Still Considering Antitrust Investigation of Apple's iAd
The Financial Times reports that the U.S. government is continuing to take a look at Apple's forthcoming iAd mobile advertising system in order to decide whether to pursue a full antitrust investigation of the service. The possible investigation comes just after the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) concluded an exhaustive inquiry that ultimately resulted in the approval of Google's acquisition of AdMob, with the FTC pointing to Apple's iAd as a competitive factor contributing heavily to its decision in that case.
According to two people close to the situation, US regulators have already taken an interest in Apple's actions, though it is not yet clear whether it will be left to the Federal Trade Commission, which carried out the recent Google investigation, or the Department of Justice to take an investigation forward.
Apple's latest rules for developers who create apps for its devices limit the situations in which they can send approved information about their apps' audiences to advertising services. The information cannot be sent to advertising networks that are affiliated with companies developing or distributing mobile devices or operating systems - a definition that effectively excludes Apple rivals like Google and Microsoft.
Word of iAd interest on the part of federal regulators first surfaced early last month after the company altered its developer terms to exclude analytics companies from collecting data on users, although details of the FTC's interest at the time were not revealed.
Earlier this week, Apple again tweaked its developer terms to permit some analytics data collection, but a requirement that such companies be "independent" from mobile device or platform developers appears to shut out Google and AdMob from the platform, a move which unsurprisingly drew heavy criticism from AdMob's founder.
Apple has become embroiled in a number of potential antitrust cases in just the last month or so, with federal regulators taking a look at Apple's Flash-to-iPhone compiler at the behest of Adobe, as well as the company's tactics in the digital music market.
Popular Stories
As previously rumored, the next-generation iPhone 15 Pro and iPhone 15 Pro Max will feature a unified volume button and a mute button, according to leaked CAD images shared in a video on the Chinese version of TikTok and posted to Twitter by ShrimpApplePro.
Instead of separate buttons for volume up and volume down, the iPhone 15 Pro models are expected to have a single elongated button for...
Apple says iOS 16.4 is coming in the spring, which began this week. In his Sunday newsletter, Bloomberg's Mark Gurman said the update should be released "in the next three weeks or so," meaning a public release is likely in late March or early April.
iOS 16.4 remains in beta testing and introduces a handful of new features and changes for the iPhone. Below, we have recapped five new features ...
A first-generation iPhone still sealed inside its box sold for $54,904 at auction, which is more than $54,000 over the original $599 price tag of the device when it was released in 2007.
The original iPhone was put up for sale by RR Auction on behalf of a former Apple employee who purchased it back when it first came out. Back in February, an original, sealed iPhone sold for over $63,000,...
The iOS 16.4 update that is set to be released to the public in the near future includes voice isolation for cellular calls, according to notes that Apple shared today.
Apple says that Voice Isolation will prioritize your voice and block out the ambient noise around you, making for clearer phone calls where you can better hear the person you're chatting with and vice versa.
Voice...
While year-over-year iPhone upgrades are not always groundbreaking, new features can begin to stack up over multiple generations. For example, the iPhone 15 Pro will be a notable upgrade for those who still have a three-year-old iPhone 12 Pro.
If you are still using an iPhone 12 Pro and are considering upgrading to the iPhone 15 Pro when it launches later this year, we have put together a...
Apple's high-end iPhone models have started at $999 in the U.S. since they first launched back in 2017 with the iPhone X, but could this finally be the year that starting price sees an increase?
This week also saw some more rumors about Apple's upcoming headset and the company's explorations in the booming AI industry as well as the release of a new round of beta updates, so read on for all...
Samsung today kicked off a special "Discover Samsung" event, which will be a week-long savings event focusing on Samsung monitors, smartphones, TVs, appliances, and more. While some deals will stick around the entire week (through March 26), others will refresh every day.
Note: MacRumors is an affiliate partner with Samsung. When you click a link and make a purchase, we may receive a small...
Top Rated Comments
Yes, semantics. The point I wanted to make is Apple isn't the only company that places restrictions in its marketplace. People get all hot and bothered about Apple's restrictions, but restrictions are restrictions, Android's are just different. They both are about protecting maximising the user experience, but they go about it in different ways. However, I *never* see anyone complain about the Android marketplace's restrictions, or even a mention of them in the context of attacking Apple's.
I like Apple's restrictions. They put *me* (the consumer) first, and I appreciate that. That's my point.
You both have now backed away from your original positions, and that was that you both said ads are ineffective without data. That's simply not true. Try driving down a road without seeing a big billboard - what would they know of you? That you are a driver? Passenger? Pedestrian? Bicyclist? Bus traveller? Just plain lost?<grin>
I agree data is more appealing to advertisers, but your original comment that ads don't work without it is just plain wrong.
Either that or the advertisers haven't figured out you *must* have data for an ad to be effective.
I call shenanigans.
I have a television that isn't connected to satellite or cable, but is just "free to air" or Freeview as it's called here in the UK - I have an aerial on the roof that delivers the signal to my television.
There are ads on all channels (except the BBC). The advertisers know nothing of my viewing habits, and nothing about me personally, yet they still appear. They only know that if I'm home during the day watching a television show, an advertisement for lawyers might hit the mark as I might be someone who was harmed by someone that can be sued (hence their offering).
When I buy a magazine, there are ads all through it - however, I don't have to give any information about myself at the news agent.
The point is that although advertising is made better with detailed information about me (the target for the advert), it isn't nullified (as you've both stated) when that data isn't there.
Why is that funny? The iAds idea is a good one. They are taking mediocre ads and trying to improve them. I have never purposefully clicked on an in-app ad, but I still love some things about iAds. For instance, accidentally clicking an in-app ad from iAds will no longer remove me from my app. How could people not like that?