I was wondering what Woz thought about the spat between Adobe and Apple over Flash, and I came across an article on MacDailyNews.com featuring an interview with Woz. #AdobeCP
The interview was cribbed from Fox Business News' web site. What caught my attention wasn't the interview itself, but the Note to Advertisers, which advises advertisers: "you might want to consider dumping your flash-based ads and moving to a more open format that people with money and the will to spend it can actually see." I then provides a series of links to specific petitions or user comment pages on large, popular sites that deliver content via Flash.
The claim is that advertisers are missing out on >86 Million eyeballs attached to discretionary income. These 86 million are iPhone, iPod Touch and iPad users who can't view the Flash ads. Is the motivation the site's clear salivating love for all things Apple, or the likely fact that its revenues are negatively impacted by their advertiser's choice of delivery method?
Thinking like an advertiser, I have to balance cost of ad creation and delivery with the potential return on that advertisement. Do I develop two ads: Flash for the >1 Billion with a B Flash-enabled devices out there and javascript/CSS for the 85 million with an m Apple iDevices? Or, do I look at the bigger picture and realize that the iDevices represent less than 10% of the market, and that the number is going to be steadily offset with Android devices over the next year?
Yes, the iDevices are cool and hot at the same time, and get a lot of press. The reality here is that the advertisers look at marketshare as well as the cool factor, so to demand a delivery method change of your advertisers is biting the hand that feeds you.
Leave a comment