Apple patents Ad technology that freezes device
The New York Times is reporting that Apple has filed a patent for a new advertising technology that will make commercials impossible to ignore by freezing the user’s device and forcing them to interact with the ad (by clicking or answering a question) before the device (both video and music) will continue operation. The patent was filed last year and was made public last month.
Its distinctive feature is a design that doesn’t simply invite a user to pay attention to an adit also compels attention. The technology can freeze the device until the user clicks a button or answers a test question to demonstrate that he or she has dutifully noticed the commercial message. Because this technology would be embedded in the innermost core of the device, the ads could appear on the screen at any time, no matter what one is doing.
Hands up: who thinks this is a bad idea? It’s especially shocking—not just because everyone hates ads, and most new media technology (heck, going all the way back to the video cassette recorder) is based around avoiding commercials—but because Apple has always pushed the idea of people paying to own media (and high-profit devices), rather than subsidizing it through ads or subscriptions.
But do they have another plan in mind? Fake Steve seems to think so:
But see, that’s the point. We don’t expect anyone will choose the ads. Because, for a very reasonable monthly fee, you’ll be able to eliminate all those ads and get your content free of all nterruptions. How reasonable, you say? Well, let’s say that for $30 a month you could watch all the TV you wanted. Let’s say that we can get all the TV networks, or most of them anyway, on board for this. Let’s say that we give you not just this week’s shows but an enormous archive, one that ultimately includes every TV show ever made. Tear out the cable box, stop paying those assholes $100 or $200 a month, and go with us instead.
Thus Apple now becomes the cable company. And the cable company dies.
I had to admit, it makes as much sense as anything. I’d love to have an a la carte video system rather than paying Comcast for 100 channels when I don’t watch 80 of them.
So what do you think; is this another operation like the original iTunes store where the record companies got involved because they thought that they had nothing to lose, only to find that they had inadvertently put Apple in control with no easy way to back out? Are the television, film, and production companies eying easy ways to boost ad revenues, only to figure out too late that Apple doesn’t want to save the old system, but to destroy it?
Read [The New York Times] and [The Secret Diary of Steve Jobs]
Subscribe to keep up with the latest Apple news and rumors! -
Subscribe to our feed
iPhone App Reviews
iPhone Apps. They were great when the App Store was first announced and we could all pick and chose what we wanted, but the number is now overwhelming. Here at Appletell, we'll detail the great iPhone apps we find, and steer you clear from those that aren't worth it even if they're free.
iPhone Game Reviews
As Apple turns the iPhone into one of the most popular gaming devices, the staff of Appletell--gamers and Apple fans alike--are here to help you get the most entertainment value out of your app store purchases.





Interesting take on things, but more thank likely (at least in the short term) the cable companies don’t die because that’s where a large percentage of us get our broadband from.
As soon as Apple (or anybody) introduces this monthly business model, that’s when the cable companies begin charging us for bandwidth and data transfers. However, I have no doubt they’ll introduce an unlimited data transfer package that likely costs more than we’re already paying them each month.
Upshot: cable still wins.
Ugh.
-G
on November 15, 2009 at 10:49 PM - LINKThis is going too far, Being forced to watch ads, on the computer you paid good money for? its invasive.. like having to recieve a prostate exam every morning before you eat your cereal.
This news makes me ashamed of being such an ardent apple supporter in the past, any computer I buy that treats me this way would be returned the same day and I would NEVER buy from that brand again.
on November 19, 2009 at 07:11 AM - LINKI find it odd how Fake Steve seems to make it sound that they are doing us a favor by giving us an “option” for the users to pay them take the ads away. The users paid for the device and the content. These ads did not exist in the first place.
If they are going to give away these devices (meaning no-cost, zero) along with the content then they can justify putting ads to recoup their investment. Otherwise, people are going to move to other devices. I wouldn’t even use it if it’s free. I’d just listen to the radio, at least some DJs are fun to listen to (and don’t hold the music hostage by requiring you to do something.)
At least for now it’s just a patent. If the market shows that this approach hurts the company’s bottom line, then hopefully it won’t be implemented in future devices.
on December 23, 2009 at 06:07 AM - LINK