#4: iAd
Apple's iAd platform may be getting scrutinized by the FTC, but let's just talk as if everything goes as planned for Apple. Which it probably will anyway.
Ads were never something I imagined I'd be discussing in an iPhone feature post. Fact is, if you've downloaded even a few free apps on your iPhone, you've probably had some exposure to inline ads - I mean, a developer has to make a profit somehow, right? The problem, much like web-based ads, is that they're often obnoxious, if not obtrusive enough, that you won't be compelled to click on them. Or tap, in this case. Many users install browser plug-ins to disable ads, especially Flash-based ads. (Though the vocal masses that once lauded ClicktoFlash seem to have been silenced by people who insist we need more Flash online. Suspicious! But that's a whole 'nother ugly topic.)
But why disable ads? You don't hear people complaining about ads in magazines or newspapers. It's how many of us first learn of products or services we might not have otherwise known about. The only magazine I even read any more is Photoshop User, and it has ads like every other magazine. But I've learned about some cool things because of that fact. Television ads fall somewhere between the web and magazines: they're viewed by millions, cause hey, what ELSE are you going to do for two minutes until your show comes back on? Bake a pie? TiVo and other DVRs let us skip past commercials, but so did the old-school VCR, if we so desired.
So why watch ads at all? Because sometimes we want to be informed. We may have a need for Product X, but didn't know it existed prior to the commercial. Or maybe we just didn't know that our favorite cleaning product has an improved formula and now works even BETTER at fighting tough stains and pet odors. And you may not have known you were looking for a new car, but that 2011 Mustang looks pretty good on TV, and… wait, 31 MPG? Really? Well maybe I should go check it out...
So that's the educational and informational side. There's also the entertainment angle. There are truly some great minds in the ad business, crafting anything from sensational and artistic ads often used for cars (See Lincoln's ads for some of my favorites - the MKZ ad in particular is simply stunning), to downright hilarious ones. The Super Bowl alone is enough to convince anyone the value of ads. They get people talking, and the most effective will get you interested in whatever is being advertised.
Why is it then, that advertising online and inside apps fails to have that effect? It's one word, and simple to point out, but hard to achieve: Quality. As TV advertising proves (I say, based on no actual knowledge of industry numbers), quality ads see results. How many times have you been speeding past commercials on your DVR only to rewind because you want to see your favorite one?
Is achieving quality ads online so hard because of the low entrance barrier? After all, anyone at a computer can get some simple image editor and create an ad, even those that have no business doing so. Is a solution to this to simply let a company with immensely high aesthetic standards control what ads are displayed through it's service? Apple seems to think so. And you know what?
They might be on to something.
The mock ads that Apple created and showed off for Toy Story 3 and Nike were fantastic, and could completely change what we think of when we think of online advertising. Offering simple games or other interactive experiences, wallpaper downloads, and even links to other apps WITHIN the ad are potential game-changers. Perhaps one of the most important aspects are that you never leave the app when viewing the ad. Knowing you won't have to switch apps and get back to where you were before viewing the ad is a huge plus for users.
Anyway, I understand Apple's examples weren't real ads, but they highlight the possibilities beautifully. From offering a better user experience, and applying some actual design standards to ads, I think they're going to be more enticing to people, and overall a good decision by Steve Jobs and company.
To be clear though, don't misunderstand me: If Apple pitched iAd as the one and only option to advertise within apps moving forward, I wouldn't exactly applaud the move, and I'm pretty sure it would be a bigger PR disaster than any rejected app story thus far. Thankfully, much like Game Center, iAd is an opt-in service. If a developer wants to use the platform, they can, and Apple controls & sells the ads, each side gets their cut, and everyone is happy. If not, hey, just keep doing what you're doing. Hard to argue the concept, especially if you're a developer looking to get your name out there with a free app or two, but still need to, you know, eat.
In the end, with or without iAd (iAds?), we're going to be seeing ads in some apps, so if we can be looking at something of higher quality than the norm, that even offers us some functionality and a pleasant experience, instead of, say…
...I really think I'd be okay with that.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment