Apple Seeks Patent On Operating System Advertising 342
patentpundit writes "On April 18, 2008, Apple Computer applied for a patent relating to an 'invention' that allows for showing advertisements within an operating system. The first named inventor on the patent application is none other than Steve Jobs. The patent application published and became available for public inspection on October 22, 2009. If implemented, the invention would make it possible for advertisements to be displayed on a variety of devices, including desktop computers, cell phones, PDAs, and more. In one alarming aspect, the device could be disabled while the advertisements run, thereby forcing users to let the advertisement run its course before the system would unlock and allow further use. In an even more invasive scenario, explained in the patent application, the user could be required to do something, such as click to continue, in order to verify that they are actively watching the advertisement and haven't simply walked away while the ad runs. Whether Apple would implement such an invention is unknown, but it is possible that they think there are others out there who might want to implement such invasive advertising. It is possible Apple wanted to get ahead of the curve and file this patent so that if any company is silly enough to engage in Big Brother advertising, then Apple will get a royalty. I sure hope this is not the future of advertising."
I sure hope they get this patent (Score:4, Insightful)
In other news, I use linux?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
not be able to use it ... without licensing.
On the US market.
On other markets it will probably still be open for competition.
But if such an ad appears I will surely be upset enough to go ballistic. As if the ads today aren't intrusive enough?
Re: (Score:2)
oh wait.. this is apple? Wow, this may actually be the final straw that made Linux win.
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, this may actually be the final straw that made Linux win.
What did Linux win, and how did it beat Windows 7?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Yeah, stupid microsoft! what were they thinking!?
oh wait.. this is apple? Wow, this may actually be the final straw that made Linux win against Apple's Mac OS X.
Fixed that for you. It's still a long way off from competing with Windows, in terms of market share, regardless of how awesome it is.
Re:I sure hope they get this patent (Score:5, Insightful)
Does anyone in this thread really think that Apple, a company utterly obsessed with aesthetics, good design, and usability, would put ads in their operating system? Not likely. Remember when Apple switched to Intel chips? There were no "Intel Inside" stickers for Macs.
I think the poster and the first commenter have it right: this is a protection measure to make sure that any company stupid enough to try and set this precedent (advertising in the OS) will have to pay through the nose to Apple. It is in fact, the quintessential poison pill.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Perhaps too much faith in Apple? I can easily imagine somes ads popping up in your iPhone soons...
Re:I sure hope they get this patent (Score:4, Interesting)
I think the whole point of the patent is so Apple can profit share should any apps choose to run ads on their devices. For example, if you install an app on your iphone that pops up ads and behaves in any modal way that makes the iphone inoperable, Apple might not like that. In addition to any TOU and contractual obligations imposed on app developers, this gives Apple a patent should an app designer manage to circumvent the TOU in any way.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Right(sarcasm). So the Ad will block the whole phone from working while my boss calls and I can't answer it for the next30 seconds.
The idea is stupid. I am actually shocked that IBM or MSFT donthave prior art.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm pretty sure there is some prior art from the dot.com era when someone tried to introduce an ad supported free pc.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Apple, a company utterly obsessed with aesthetics, good design, and usability, would put ads in their operating system?
And marketing. Don't forget marketing. Maybe Apple wants to show their own ads?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If they did, Apple would have a much larger share of PC sales. But they do not, so I guess they have room for improvement in that area. Consider how many Mac vs. PC ads you see on TV and tell me Steve doesn't want more avenues to push Mac ads.
Re: (Score:2)
Does anyone in this thread really think that Apple, a company utterly obsessed with aesthetics, good design, and usability, would put ads in their operating system?
Uh, yeah. One reason why I think they would do this is because they got a patent to do this. Weird, I know. I'm sure they'll come up with a wonderfully-designed, aesthetically-pleasing, usable* interface for showing advertisements.
It may shock you to realize this, but Apple is actually a for-profit corporation which, like other for-profit corporations, is focused on maximizing revenue.
*Usable for the advertisers, of course.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They won't block anything, Microsoft has plenty of money to use for royalties if they want to. So does Google, in fact. Regardless, Apple is just looking to cash in, probably by implementing their own advertising in addition to accepting royalties from anyone else who wants to do the same.
Re:I sure hope they get this patent (Score:5, Insightful)
Does anyone in this thread really think that Apple, a company utterly obsessed with aesthetics, good design, and usability, would put ads in their operating system?
Yes, I think they would do it on iPods. I imagine in their talks with record labels they discussed many revenue streams. One could easily be free music downloads if you're willing to watch ads on your iPod.
They could also offer two revenue models for iPhone app publishers: the current cash model or advertising. The OS could block use of the app until the ad is run.
I don't imagine this coming to desktops, but it's definitely a possibility for their more specialized operating systems.
Re: (Score:3)
Does anyone in this thread really think that Apple, a company utterly obsessed with aesthetics, good design, and usability, would put ads in their operating system?
Have you used iTunes lately? Ugh. Their design and usability practices are clearly not universal within the company...
Re: (Score:2)
What does that protect against? Why would Apple care if somebody wanted to do something Apple truly believed was stupid?
People might not like this idea, sure... but if the only way they can afford an iPhone is to sit through a 10-second ad before making a call, they'll probably still do it.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
... this is a protection measure to make sure that any company stupid enough to try and set this precedent (advertising in the OS) will have to pay through the nose to Apple. It is in fact, the quintessential poison pill.
Wow. I admire Steve Jobs, but not to the point of denial. Jobs cares about athletics... almost as much as he cares about making money. I could easily imagine Apple selling top billing in the ap store or iTunes store to the highest bidder -- or running an ad before you get into the stores.
Re: (Score:3)
Fixed that for you.
While this may truly be a defensive filing, I don't think it is that far fetched that a control-crazed company like Apple wouldn't use this in some fashion. As long as the ads are for Apple products and services, I'm sure Steve Jobs sees nothing wrong with it.
iAds...coming soon to OS X 10.7 Frozen Kitten
Re:Apple... maybe rotten to the (dual) core (Score:4, Informative)
and makes it nearly impossible to install the OS (or first boot) a mac without buying .mac.
I have to experience with the former statements, but this is utter crap. I have installed 2 different releases on my Macbook, and never once did I see more than an ad for .Mac during the install. I was never prompted to create an account. It certainly never hindered my ability to book my machine.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Not to mention the utter lack of any shovelware on a Mac install. No McAfee adds, Quicken shortcuts on your desktop, Printer supplies, etc, etc. There is none of that on any Mac. You get the OS, and no 3rd party crap that has to be uninstalled as soon as you unbox it.
I just don't see Apple pushing any of this into any of it's products, but it can certainly prevent others from doing it as well.
Re:Apple... maybe rotten to the (dual) core (Score:4, Informative)
You get the OS, and no 3rd party crap that has to be uninstalled as soon as you unbox it.
Not strictly true. There have been third-party apps, such as a version of Omnigraffle and various games that have shipped with Macs and MacOS. However, it's generally not crap, doesn't draw attention to itself through advertising or require removal, it just sits there dormant unless you decide to use it. Apple also puts trial versions of iWork on Macs, and if memory serves correctly, has also pre-installed trial versions of MS Office in the past (but I might be wrong about that one) and definitely shipped with Internet Explorer at one time.
Re: (Score:2)
If by "nearly impossible" you mean checking the radio button that says "no thanks, I don't want to try .mac now" then I'm amazed you could even find the power button to boot the Mac up in the first place.
Re:I sure hope they get this patent (Score:5, Insightful)
Ahhh! I see...! Patent trolling, usually nasty, evil and sleazy, is quite alright if it's Apple that is doing it...!
Gotcha.
Prior Art: (Score:5, Funny)
There is prior art from 2002: http://www.bbspot.com/News/2002/10/bsod_ads.html [bbspot.com]
Re:I sure hope they get this patent (Score:4, Interesting)
This reminds me of the "free computers" of 1990 or so, with some of the screen space taken up by extra ads. I think that was just when running the browser though.
The same users that went for those "discounted" PCs with an AOL contract obligation might opt for other cheaper hardware with an ad hook-in subsidizing the purchase.
27" iMacs turning into billboards... hmmmm...
Re: (Score:2)
The only thing that gives me confidence is the fact that even the almighty Apple would be tarred, feathered, and run out of town on a rail if they tried to actually implement this.
Of course, I don't really see the need for a patent to prevent other people from doing it. None of the major OS vendors would be so foolish as to think they could actually get away with attempting to implement OS support for invasive ads such as described in the patent.
Re: (Score:2)
"In other news, I use linux?"
What the hell is this question asking?
I dare them! (Score:5, Insightful)
So long as there is a Free (not $$$ free) alternative, all they will do is push users to it.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Pretty much. I've got limited real estate on my screen. Even more so on a netbook. To top it off, I have limited bandwidth, occasionally use metered bandwidth, and often play online games where any interruption is deadly.
I'll actually go one step further: as long as there is any alternative that does not display ads, I will use it. I will pay a significant amount of money (at least a few hundred dollars) and put up with other significant UI issues (including learning a brand new one) if I can get my hands o
Re: (Score:2)
You need to buy the new 27" iMac. :)
No ads, no IP (Score:4, Interesting)
I will pay a significant amount of money (at least a few hundred dollars)
Per month? Because eventually, a home Internet connection that's compatible with an operating system that doesn't display ads will cost that much. Consider Trusted Network Connect [wikipedia.org], which allows a DHCP server to quarantine traffic until the the ISP can verify that your computer is running specific proprietary software. No ads, no IP address outside 169.254.0.0/16.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I can imagine the Mac vs PC commercials reversing very quickly if they start doing things (like this) to annoy the user.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I can imagine the Mac vs PC commercials reversing very quickly if they start doing things (like this) to annoy the user.
We already have pop up advertising like this on PCs that run Windows, they are called "viruses" and "trojans". If Apple did this, surely someone would come up with an "antivirus" product that will rid of the ads.
Worse yet, someone would come up with an OS X virus that displayed pop up ads that promised to get rid of the Apple ads, and then you couldn't tell which ads were Apple, and which
Logos (Score:3, Interesting)
Doesn't putting a logo or a brand name on a product constitute advertising? That's been done all over operating systems since the beginning of time - prior art?
Re:Logos (Score:4, Informative)
Branding isn't the same as advertising. For one, advertising involves showing ads for products that don't necessarily have anything to do with the one you're using. The tag on the back of your shirt that says who made the shirt isn't an advertisement for that brand, it's just identifying who made the shirt. The design on the front of the shirt, however, is an ad.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Come on, you missed a perfect time for a car analogy. The Chevy cross on the back of a car is just a logo and branding. The stuff painted on these cars [nascar-wallpapers.com] is advertising.
Re: (Score:2)
No, a boot screen is a boot screen. Not everything that has any sort of branding on it is necessarily an advertisement. A boot sequence is indeed critical to the functionality of the computer, and frankly it makes sense to show what is booting, however stylized they want to make it.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
If it's self-referential, it's branding. If it refers to other products, it's advertising.
While it is possible for branding to be just as obnoxious as advertising (e.g. a logo on the shirt bigger than the wearer's head), they are different beasts.
There are other OS's (Score:4, Interesting)
Not even MS would do something that doucebaggery on their own
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft could get away with doing it. No one else could. Now if Microsoft wants to do it, Apple will be making double profit (1) switching users (2) royalties.
Re:There are other OS's (Score:5, Insightful)
I am an Apple fanboi, born and bred in the soft, comforting womb of the Reality Distortion Field. There is not a single computer or device in my house that was not Designed by Apple in California.
If Apple were to do this on my Mac, or my iPhone, or my iWhateverTheHellElse, I would jump ship like Neo leaving the Matrix*. Apple fanbois are Apple fanbois because we prize elegance and design. Implementing this in OS X would shit on it.
(* Just like in that ONE AND ONLY ONE movie, that had ABSOLUTELY NO sequels... See how good at distorting reality I am?)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Apple fanbois are Apple fanbois because we prize elegance and design.
Yeah, but what if they are elegant, well designed ads?
Very impatiantly waiting... (Score:5, Funny)
.... for an explanation from the apple fan boys why this is so awesome!
Re:Very impatiantly waiting... (Score:4, Insightful)
It's not, but since when is the world entirely black and white?
Just look at Michael Jackson.
Re: (Score:2)
They gotta get rid of Google fascist box first (Score:3, Funny)
You mean the same people who paid to software (OS) and hardware combination and didn't ask Apple what the heck that "impossible to change" Google search in OS Default browser will cause a riot against some ads?
What made me more than angry was the first release and later releases of Safari on fscking Windows had Yahoo search option. iPhone/iPod too. Believe or not, Apple is after couple of cents from Google and that is why they include Google by default. Apple, the 1.6 billion profit making company... I unde
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, I hadn't even thought of that, but you're right. I can totally see Google trying to put ad support in the OS itself. I wonder if Apple is trying to keep them from doing this, or are they just trying to get their hand on the cookie jar so they can potentially license it and get royalties?
Prior Art? (Score:5, Informative)
There were also plenty of "free" dial-up ISPs that required you to click their advertising banner every so often for the connection to stay alive.
Re: (Score:2)
That is software on top of the OS, not the OS itself.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So where is this separation between OS and software on top of the OS? You could say Explorer.exe is just an application on top of the OS. How low does it need to be? Advertisment.dll? Advertisement.sys? Adverisement.Hypervisorkernel?
Re:Prior Art? (Score:5, Informative)
Scratching head over this one (Score:2)
Maybe they're going to start giving away Mac OS X or iPhones for "free" -- if you allow advertising? It's the NetZero approach to OS distribution!
To turn off the ads, you just have to sign up for MobileMe at $99/year. That's all! Small price to pay to bask unimpeded in the Shekinah Glory of Macintosh. (Shekinatosh?)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Silly. (Score:2)
First, there's prior art for this of course. Second, it's just like the old con of putting "on the internet" on the back of any old idea and claiming it's new.
Is Apple going to get one upped when some super-genius comes up with the amazing idea of Advertising on the OS...on a netbook! or Advertising on the OS...on a laptop! It's ridiculous. Advertising on _anything_ is inherently an obvious idea.
Re: (Score:2)
A refrigerator that inventories your food and advertises custom tailored ads based on what you like to eat?
I Suppose This is Good (Score:2, Insightful)
As somebody who avoids Apple products I hope they are granted the patent and it is vigorously enforced. If a company wants to pursue such amazingly stupid advertising techniques like these, I'd be just fine with having them confined to the Apple product line. (What I find interesting is Steve Jobs being listed as the "inventor". Does he have nothing better to do than sit around and come up with ways to screw over his customers?)
Even better is requiring other companies (who also wish to shoot themselves i
Re: (Score:2)
Having a patent doesn't mean you are going to use it. However Apple could use it against other firms for doing something similar and possible threatening their business model of selling hardware. Now selling adds and giving away the hardware would be a threat to Apples model so if someone does this apple could sue them to death.
Re: (Score:2)
What I find interesting is Steve Jobs being listed as the "inventor". Does he have nothing better to do than sit around and come up with ways to screw over his customers?
In all fairness, turtlenecks don't buy themselves.
Re: (Score:2)
Since this patent pretty much describes Google's core business model, I assume Apple is simply doing it as a way of keeping Google at bay. Do you seriously think a company which is as minimalist with its design as Apple would scatter ads over the desktop? No, they're just adding an idea to a patent portfolio as a bargaining chip when/if Google tries to implement this idea.
I claim prior art. (Score:5, Insightful)
http://www.ubersoft.net/comic/hd/2000/12/next-logical-step [ubersoft.net]
http://www.ubersoft.net/comic/hd/2000/12/next-logical-step-ii [ubersoft.net]
Apple, if you really want to go forward with this please have your lawyers shower me with cash.
Awww... (Score:2)
... go ahead and spoil my payday!
Re: (Score:2)
your payday is not lost if you pre-emptively sue them NOW.
Or contact their lawyers and go "Hey, I've got prior art, if you don't want your patent invalidated you'd better pay X$$$$"
I for one (Score:3, Insightful)
welcome our advertising-patenting overlords.
Seriously. I hope Jobs all the best in this patent pursuit. If Apple succeeds, then I can avoid occurrences of this amazingly offensive idea by the simple expedient of avoiding Apple operating systems, a course of action I'm already pretty much committed to for ample reasons of Apple's corporate citizenship and customer relations.
As far as I'm concerned, this patent will be the legal equivalent of encysting a noxious parasite for 20 years.
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously. I hope Jobs all the best in this patent pursuit. If Apple succeeds, then I can avoid occurrences of this amazingly offensive idea by the simple expedient of avoiding Apple operating systems, a course of action I'm already pretty much committed to for ample reasons of Apple's corporate citizenship and customer relations.
Your theory is flawed because it is based upon two unsupported assumptions. First, that Apple plans to implement this patent in their own products. Second, that Apple won't license this patent to other companies.
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed. Let's just say I'm specifying a best-case scenario.
Another pretty good one is the "Apple as White Knight" playbook. Apple patents this technological obscenity for the sole purpose of locking it away, never to be implemented by their own operating systems, never to be licensed to another operating system, for 20 years.
I find this story less convincing to me, given my beliefs in Apple's corporate behavioral tendencies. But I concede that it is a plausible, if unlikely, alternate outcome.
The other obvi
Re: (Score:2)
First, that Apple plans to implement this patent in their own products.
The fact that Apple got a patent supports the assumption that they plan to implement it. Unless Apple is just a patent troll, which is another possibility. Both of those assumptions are supported. I find the former more likely.
Second, that Apple won't license this patent to other companies.
That doesn't imply that every operating system will have advertising.
Re: (Score:2)
First, that Apple plans to implement this patent in their own products.
The fact that Apple got a patent supports the assumption that they plan to implement it.
Actually it does not. That's called a non sequitur. Just because they patent something does not imply they are going to implement it as evidenced by the many patents they file which never see implementation. It simply sparks speculation that they might implement it, which is not the same thing.
That doesn't imply that every operating system will have advertising.
True, but irrelevant, since the original assertion was they could avoid OS's with built in advertising by simply avoiding Apple products.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Or plans to use the patent defensively in the periodic patent wars that large tech companies inevitably get into. Or sees the idea as having some commercial value, but not within the context of its current premium-product strategy.
Apple has years-old patents on shape-shifting keyboard
Big Brother advertising... (Score:4, Insightful)
The Big Brother metaphor has finally been dealt its final blow. Big Brother advertising is propaganda. I think a better term for this new patent would be "Jerk Advertising"
I say it's a good thing!! (Score:2)
I would be happy to have someone patent this pile of crap idea!!
If other people would be forced to pay them money for adding annoying crap to my OS..then perhaps they are less likely to do it.
Oh yeah. (Score:2)
Whether Apple would implement such an invention is unknown, but it is possible that they think there are others out there who might want to implement such invasive advertising. It is possible Apple wanted to get ahead of the curve and file this patent so that if any company is silly enough to engage in Big Brother advertising, then Apple will get a royalty. I sure hope this is not the future of advertising.
Riiiiiight. Hey, anything is possible.
My first thought was "I wonder if it is possible to apply for
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
ipods do not need itunes.
Jesus christ does anybody pay attention to Winamp any longer? It's had ipod support for YEARS.
I bet Google is pretty ticked off ... (Score:5, Interesting)
um.. (Score:2, Insightful)
Been There Done That...10 years ago (Score:2)
There was a company ( here [pbs.org] is a link to a story Cringley did on it at the time) that gave away a desktop system with a program that loaded a "frame" around the Windows desktop that streamed advertising. You basically filled out a questionnaire about your interests and if you fit their profile you got a PC. A coworker checked everything ( I ridiculously actually put the things I was interested in) and got one of the first PC's. I think that venture lasted about six months.
Oh HELL NO! (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
..so software that creates unwanted advertising pop-ups is called "malware" and the authors of such are prosecuted...
It's only called malware and prosecuted if it is deceptively marketed. If you offer a software package designed to show people ads and are upfront about that and it is what users want or it offers a benefit in addition to the ads which users feel outweighs the cost of seeing ads then it is not malware at all. For example, lots of Web apps are partly or completely subsidized by advertising and are not malware.
...but then someone decides to write an operating system that does that by design!?
Maybe, but if someone does then you are free to buy it or not and so long as they are not deceptiv
Late 90's (Score:2)
http://usproxy.bbc.com/2/hi/business/275213.stm [bbc.com]
In other words... (Score:5, Insightful)
It is possible Apple wanted to get ahead of the curve and file this patent so that if any company is silly enough to engage in Big Brother advertising, then Apple will get a royalty.
So, best case scenario, Apple is a patent troll?
Fails the novelty test and prior art (Score:3, Interesting)
Google's Chrome OS (Score:2)
I would bet a lot of money on the fact that advertising giant Google's Chrome OS would have this built in.
If I understand patents correctly, they don't need to patent it to be protected as long as they have been working on it for a while and can prove it.
Oh, no! (Score:2, Funny)
I want to patent my idea! (Score:2)
My idea is to create an adblocker for advertising in operating systems.
Simple Answer (Score:2)
And if it would come to fruition, then it would be time for a new unit without this bunch of bull.
Mac needs advertising in its OS (Score:2)
It's a free country (Score:3, Funny)
But if Apple *does* implement that particular feature, I will join Al Queda. Just sayin'.
Re:Troll protection (Score:5, Interesting)
If you don't intend to put ads in your OS, why would you need to protect yourself from someone else patenting it? No, this is a patent to preempt "free" advertising-supported commercial operating systems by competitors, namely Google.
Re: (Score:2)
I think the majority of the stupid patents from the big companies are just to protect them from the patent trolls in the future
Sounds like you're "thinking different".
SJobs wouldn't bother (Score:2)
Note the patent belongs to Steve Jobs, not some Joe Nobody intern guy or some lawyer.
If SJobs gets patent himself, it is unlikely an preemptive patent.
You are right though, a lot of patents are taken just to stop those trolls.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Isn't that anti-slashdot-zeitgeist though? Patenting something simply so someone else can't do it? IMO, that sounds like a "patent troll," just not in the typical usage of the phrase.
And I have a hard time putting so much faith in Apple, which has done plenty to not deserve said faith, that they would not advertise - if nothing else, their own products. Apple is looking for money. Just like Microsoft and Google.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Isn't that anti-slashdot-zeitgeist though? Patenting something simply so someone else can't do it? IMO, that sounds like a "patent troll," just not in the typical usage of the phrase.
Yes, but in this case it is altruistic patent trolling.
And I have a hard time putting so much faith in Apple, which has done plenty to not deserve said faith, that they would not advertise - if nothing else, their own products. Apple is looking for money. Just like Microsoft and Google.
In my opinion, this seems out of character for Apple. When I bought my HP netbook, it came with all kinds of crap including links on the desktop to websites like eBay. So far, this type of Apple has avoided this type of behaviour.
I agree that Apple is here to make money and ever since my iMac G5 died I have held a grudge against them but I will admit that their products are very nice, clean packages. Their current customers are in general people who
Re: (Score:2)
I like how you spell "M$" while defending Apple for patenting a method of advertising. Well done.
Re:Good (Score:5, Insightful)
Confine advertising to OSX, sounds good to me.
It would be funny if the ads kicked in when OS X detected installation on non-Apple hardware.
Re: (Score:2)
Jobs' "vision" for Apple is a full bank account. This helps him achieve that vision.
Re: (Score:2)
"Technology moves on, and after a while it won't make sense to support the oldest models anymore."
Tell that to Linux. Tell that to any embedded OS maker. Get laughed at.