101–110 of 241 posts
This could backfire. Surely this should result in a Google penalty against Wired.com for publishing thin content? https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/2604719?hl=en If Wired wants the article to be exclusive on Apple News, fine, but in that case it should not be on the website. Keep it exclusively on Apple News. There is no content on this page beyond a headline.
I have a silly question: If the conspiracy theorists are right, the whole ad-blocking on ios is a ploy to get the ad-starved publishers, and thus the masses, off the web-based internet and onto in-app content silos such as Apple News. If they're wildly successful, the only ones left on the traditional internet would be those not producing content for money. Does that mean I'll be able to experience the internet the w…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
HTTP 418 is already reserved for teapots whom have been requested to make coffee (RFC2324, section 2.3.2[0]) [0] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2324
We can use existing REST methodology to serve coffee from coffee pots. Send a POST request to the coffee pot with parameters for the required type of coffee. The server on the coffee pot responds with 200 OK if it can process the request and makes the coffee. 500 if there was a problem. WHEN method is unnecessary, use GET to retrieve status. "418 I'm a teapot" is also unncessary, just use 500. What a short sighted pr…
Wired will be losing ad revenue due to Apple adding ad blocking abilities to mobile Safari. So, Wired moves content to Apple News which has ads that can't be blocked (and Apple conveniently takes a nice juicy cut of).
It's almost certain that Apple's long game is to make this the norm. If there's one surefire way to get people addicted to ad blockers, it's to make them available on mobile devices. Once enough content creators start moving content behind News-walls, then Apple can roll out desktop versions of News. And as people then start asking each other "how do I get ad blocking in my browser as well," Apple's well positioned t…
Most of the world doesn't.
Saying that you will only do business with those who has Apple-equipment is leaving out most of the market, and doing so would be suicide for most businesses.
Wired will be losing ad revenue due to Apple adding ad blocking abilities to mobile Safari. So, Wired moves content to Apple News which has ads that can't be blocked (and Apple conveniently takes a nice juicy cut of).
It's almost certain that Apple's long game is to make this the norm. If there's one surefire way to get people addicted to ad blockers, it's to make them available on mobile devices. Once enough content creators start moving content behind News-walls, then Apple can roll out desktop versions of News. And as people then start asking each other "how do I get ad blocking in my browser as well," Apple's well positioned t…
Locking away articles in native apps so people can't block ads isn't brilliant. Apple encouraging ad blocking on the web to "nudge" publishers into their exclusive native eco-system is nothing but typical tech giant arrogance.
Wired publishing stories that when clicked from Google go to place-holders with pointers to native should be penalised by Google search, and I hope they are. There is nothing on the Google results page to indicate the link is anything less than the content.
Native app "content browsers" are all about less control for users. Native has always been about that. Sometimes less control works for users. No distractions, just minimal concentrated function. Other times, like with news articles, users are missing out on basic things like bookmarking; sharing the link - there isn't even a link; accessibility is out the window; copy and paste is out the window; discussion and comments are all but closed/extinct; no choice of browser to access the article. It's not good news for users.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google should penalize sites that do that exactly the way they are penalizing sites with banners telling visitors to get their app. If you want your content on the web and have the benefits of it being on the web (searchable, linkable, etc) put it on the web. If you want it "exclusively on Apple News", put it there. But you shouldn't get to have your cake and eat it too.
Penalize the site or the story? Should Google keep it out of search until it shows up on the "greater" web or are you advocating punishing the whole site because they have some content exclusively walled for a certain amount of time?
Apple News isn't available in a lot of countries for whatever reason. So this not only means its inaccessible to non-iOS9 devices, but it's also inaccessible to, eg., all of New Zealand.