Posted on 07/08/2010 9:12:29 PM PDT by dayglored
Microsoft is positioning its upcoming Windows Phone 7 smartphone OS, planned for release this October, as an "ad-serving machine."
That's how Microsoft exec Kostas Mallios described the OS...
Microsoft's smartphone OS will provide advertisers with three levels of ad-serving "opportunities" in addition to standard browser-based ads, and in a radical departure from the tacks taken by either Apple's app-based iAds, or Google's browser-centric world, two of Windows Phone 7's ad-delivery systems will enable ads to be sent outside of either apps or the browser.
The first level of ad-serving is app-based. No surprise there... The next two ad-serving schemes, however, break new ground — although some may argue that it's ground that might better be left un-tilled.
One is based on Windows Phone 7's concept of "tiles",... "That tile," Mallios told his crowd, "is actually a dynamic tile that you're now able to push information to as an advertiser, and stay in touch with your customer. It's a dynamic relationship that's created. It provides for an ongoing dialogue with a consumer."
"We have a third concept called 'toast'," Mallios said... Toast allows advertisers to push ads onto your Windows Phone 7 smartphone whether you have an associated app running or not. The advertiser sends your phone an ad, your phone receives and displays it, you view it, and presumably you tap 'n' buy whatever the advertiser is promoting.
Mallios adds: "A customer can opt out of all of this, or they can opt in — it depends on how creative we are in gathering their attention and wanting to keep them engaged."
(Excerpt) Read more at theregister.co.uk ...
I just love people I’m paying serving me up as a lead to third parties. They may have to put a new wing on hell to accommodate all these guys.
you can opt out of the ads, or probably have to opt in as they have to now (yes few observe that law)
I am surprised how many opt in.
how many suckers will NOT buy a shirt or pants unless it has a little aligator or polopony on it?
you are right, if they want ads then they should give it away for free
(see the humiliation of people who wear the shirts with the super sized pony on them)
1975 in my case. Haven't missed it in 35 years. Considering time spent at other people's houses where a TV was on, and time in bars waiting for a pint to appear, I've probably watched a total of 8-10 hours in those 35 years. Some people watch that much TV in a single day.
It didn't hurt, of course, that I discovered microcomputers in 1975. Now, don't start on how many hours I've spent in front of -that- tube... :)
Not yet. But give it a year or so.
No one would have bought a smartphone if all it did was serve up ads. Smartphones were designed first to provide cool high-tech features.
And the World Wide Web was originally designed to provide easy access to academic publications (look it up).
The advertisers come later. They took over the web in the late 90's. They're just arriving at the smartphone party. In a year or two, your smartphone display will have about 30% content, 70% ads, just like most commercial web pages do these days.
And you'll pay for the privilege of watching the ads. And then you'll pay for the additional apps that block the ads... ad infinitum.
BTW, just a mention, since we're on this thread about annoying advertising.
I'm nobody special on FR and don't know the secret handshake or anything, but does anyone else around here appreciate how nice it is to surf this site free of ads?
We all ought to send the guys who run FR some money or something, every so often, just to let them know how much we appreciate it.
I’ve worked in traditional direct marketing, and “opt in” for any number of good catalogs that sell products I like and want to buy. I visit their websites. This is all of my own volition.
I detest having my website viewing habits tracked, though. Ads presumably “targeted” on the basis of cookies accepted by my web browser do not impress or compel me to do anything other than delete the cookies.
Heck, I even remove the dealer logo from the back of my cars, lol. I’m a marketer, but some forms of marketing are just too presumptuous, too intrusive, or both.
“Personalization” such as this is going to get someone sued, and isn’t always the panacea that naive marketers believe it to be. Want to criticize Apple for refusing porn apps? Ha. Just let Microsoft start pushing ads to cellphones based upon porn viewing habits.
That’ll sure impress the boss ... or the wife, lol.
I totally agree. I’m a huge fan of Microsoft and I am totally embarrassed by their advertising. I could do better for less than half.
Oh, no need to guess, I'm 58. Been there, done that :)
> I don't see any links in your post. For better or worse Apple has maintained tight control of software and hardware. The markets are too competitive to anger your customer base (unless your microsoft).
So far, that's true. I don't think we'll see really intrusive ads on iPhones until the market demands them, which I think is about a year in the future.
I see Microsoft's blatant statements as only saying out loud what the others are thinking. My comments about Apple's and Google's phones are predictive, not current. I should have been more clear about that.
Yep, I have it for Firefox - "Readability". Same thing Apple integrated into Safari, but available for other browsers as well.
> I'm nobody special on FR and don't know the secret handshake or anything, but does anyone else around here appreciate how nice it is to surf this site free of ads?
Yep. Lots of appreciation.
> We all ought to send the guys who run FR some money or something, every so often, just to let them know how much we appreciate it.
Yes, indeed. I'm scratching together my donation this weekend...
Plenty of "Oops!" potential there...
Geez, that's a lot of ads. One must assume Jobs had some number of mobile devices in mind, that is more than exist at present -- he said in April that "his goal was to have one billion ad impressions per day by the end of the year", which could be calendar 2010 or a fiscal (or some other) year.
> I wish they'd just come forward like Microsoft and admit they want to push ads to make money...
I would listen to what Apple says to their prospective advertisers, not the public at large. After all, this thread was about a statement Microsoft made not to the general public, but to "attendees at the Cannes Lions International Advertising Festival", who are looking for such statements. But regardless of how you cut it, or how many phones it's distributed over, a billion is a lot of ads.
Yeah, a billion a day is huge, must be planning on multiple ad impressions for every user every day.
Mobile phones are becoming ad delivery platforms. I think I’ll stick with WinMo 6.5 as long as I can, and then jump to an OS where I can muck around in the guts and disable the ad delivery...
A question, though, would be if the ad delivery counts against bandwidth. I know a lot of folks overseas were pretty ticked that the iOS4 download counted against their bandwidth allocation (in some places, like South Africa, it ate up nearly all their 500 MB/month allotment).
That would really suck if you had to “pay” for ad delivery with your metered bandwidth. Bad enough to get junk mail and spam, but to have to pay for it too would really irk me!
Roger that!!
Oh, and for the inevitable folks who will come in and call me a hater, this goes for ALL vendors and carriers - ads suck, and it’s downright unethical to charge ME to receive your ads. That includes bandwidth usage.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.