Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

“This story is being previewed exclusively on Apple News until Tuesday”

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 241 posts

Re: “This story is being previewed exclusively on Apple News until Tuesday”

#181

Post by sangnoir »

jameslk wrote: post #89

This is the wrong direction. What users want are unobtrusive ads and what content creators want is to get paid. Apple and Facebook are trying to take advantage of this by pushing users to their AOL-esque walled gardens. We need a browser standard for built-in unobtrusive ads or payments so content creators can get paid and users don't get stuck with AOL 2.0.

Apple is not "trying to take advantage of this" - it's an active participant! I'm sure there are several Sun Tzu quotes that can describe the unfolding proxy war.

Re: “This story is being previewed exclusively on Apple News until Tuesday”

#182

Post by GFK_of_xmaspast »

coldtea wrote: post #95
mendelk wrote: post #92

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…

Eternal September? The internet was still great from that regard (tons of people "not producing content for money"), no big central control, no FB/Google/Twitter/etc, until around the time we got Google. There was AOL of course, but that was mostly mocked by people on the "real" internet. > and while this would certainly be a regression for the society at large Actually, it might be a huge improvement. Technofiles wi…

The Eternal September started in 1993, and I don't know if you remember what the internet was like at that time, but I do and I wouldn't go back to it.

Re: “This story is being previewed exclusively on Apple News until Tuesday”

#183

Post by deong »

daenney wrote: post #179
deong wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't contradict his post saying "iAd allows you to do direct sales through it's own system".

It contradicts his implication that Apple will force you to use iAd, at least the way I'm interpreting it.

This (https://developer.apple.com/library/prerelease/ios/documenta...) seems clearer to me.

Quoting:

    How can I monetize my content?

    You can monetize your Apple News Format content with
    iAd, Apple’s advertising platform. Whether you sell your 
    own ads or have iAd sell on your behalf, you’ll earn 
    revenue from every impression in your articles and channels.

Re: “This story is being previewed exclusively on Apple News until Tuesday”

#184

Post by smackfu »

kapitalx wrote: post #59
kristopolous wrote: post #50

Do you ever wonder what the conversations were like which led to decisions like this?

This is how I imagine it went: Apple: "We'll give you a lot of money if you make content exclusive to us" Wired: "Lets trial run it with one article and see how it goes, and we'd like the exclusivity period to expire" Apple: "Sure, but we'll have to come back to the timed exclusivity, we think you'll cave"

Or it could be:

Apple: "We will feature Wired in the WWDC keynote, and give it a prominent place in the News app when people are choosing sources. In exchange, we want a few exclusive articles."

Wired: "OK"

Re: “This story is being previewed exclusively on Apple News until Tuesday”

#185

Post by sangnoir »

r00fus wrote: post #37
narrator wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Theory: Apple wants to defeat Google by eliminating ads and making the purchase of the device the amortized payment for content. Analysis: The problem with this strategy is that Apple is going to have to scale to all the content in the world, in foreign languages, on obscure or controversial topics on a million blogs. Super niche content will fade, starved of app revenue and have to rely on native IOS ad with unblock…

Apple doesn't believe in the long tail. They target the profitable niches first and work downwards. They don't need to compete in all Googles markets.

> "Apple doesn't believe in the long tail"

Thank - you've succinctly put into words what's been bothering me about this whole affair.

Economically, I am in the long tail (middle class 3rd worlder) and I think I've found the disconnect between me & the anti-ad folk. They are bothered by ads, and think if ad-supported sites shut down, nothing of value will be lost. Whereas I am not bothered enough by ads to feel strongly about it, and I don't want the ad-supported sites I frequent to disappear. I most likely won't afford to pay subscriptions in a post-ad world.

I don't mind individuals blocking ads, but I fear the entire ad-supported ecosystem will be destroyed if a critical mass is reached.

Re: “This story is being previewed exclusively on Apple News until Tuesday”

#186

Post by sangnoir »

jameshart wrote: post #22
narrator wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Theory: Apple wants to defeat Google by eliminating ads and making the purchase of the device the amortized payment for content. Analysis: The problem with this strategy is that Apple is going to have to scale to all the content in the world, in foreign languages, on obscure or controversial topics on a million blogs. Super niche content will fade, starved of app revenue and have to rely on native IOS ad with unblock…

Apple has done a pretty good job of building and supporting a long tail of apps. They're working on it with music. Why can't they take that model to content?

> Apple has done a pretty good job of building and supporting a long tail of app

I think "adequate" is a better description of Apples efforts. Discoverability is still awful on the App Store, after many years.

Re: “This story is being previewed exclusively on Apple News until Tuesday”

#187

Post by codewithcheese »

chkuendig wrote: post #148
codewithcheese wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some interesting disallows there such as Disallow: /topics/Brooklyn_Police_Department. Can anyone comment on why this is?

That seems to pop up semi-frequently, It's basically a voluntary "right to forget" provided by the publishers. http://f.cl.ly/items/1o2k3u2J343O3y3X290J/Image%202014-04-07... http://harpers.org/robots.txt https://twitter.com/waxpancake/statuses/453024948475293696

Very interesting, good to know. Thanks!

Re: “This story is being previewed exclusively on Apple News until Tuesday”

#188

Post by kuschku »

andreyf wrote: post #27
kuschku wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do we make text bold for emphasis? or should we just use UTF characters for that?

For emphasis there is italics , which you can make by adding asterisks around the word.

And if I want 𝗯𝗼𝗹𝗱 text? I know how to get italics.

Most typographs disagree with using italics:

> If you’re us­ing a sans serif font, skip italic and use bold for em­pha­sis. It’s not usu­ally worth ital­i­ciz­ing sans serif fonts—un­like serif fonts, which look quite dif­fer­ent when ital­i­cized, most sans serif italic fonts just have a gen­tle slant that doesn’t stand out on the page.

http://practicaltypography.com/bold-or-italic.html

Re: “This story is being previewed exclusively on Apple News until Tuesday”

#189

Post by kuschku »

desdiv wrote: post #25
kuschku wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do we make text bold for emphasis? or should we just use UTF characters for that?

According to grammarians, you're supposed to use italics for emphasis in English.

Eh, I read quite a few books that say the opposite

> If you’re us­ing a sans serif font, skip italic and use bold for em­pha­sis. It’s not usu­ally worth ital­i­ciz­ing sans serif fonts—un­like serif fonts, which look quite dif­fer­ent when ital­i­cized, most sans serif italic fonts just have a gen­tle slant that doesn’t stand out on the page.

http://practicaltypography.com/bold-or-italic.html

Re: “This story is being previewed exclusively on Apple News until Tuesday”

#190

Post by kuschku »

p00b wrote: post #49
andreyf wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For emphasis there is italics , which you can make by adding asterisks around the word.

Which was explained in the cited link .

Which does not help me when most typographers say to use 𝗯𝗼𝗹𝗱 for emphasis: http://practicaltypography.com/bold-or-italic.html
Post reply on HN