10 June 2010 | Author: J. Morton Search Copywriter

AdMob fires back over Apple's 'ad-less' iPhone

To a consumer, Apple's Safari Reader mode might sound like music to the ears: Browse your favourite blogs, news sites and apps without all the pesky ads chewing up screen space and bandwidth.

However, for many websites and developers, ad revenue is the bulk of the way they manage to fund their operations. And for opposing ad-sellers, this new feature for the iPhone 4G, in addition to proposed changes in Apple's App Store developer terms, present a big problem for their businesses.

And with Apple set to debut its iAd service - which is reported to be outwith the reach of the advert-eliminating reader - AdMob, a subsidiary of Google, is crying foul.

"Apple proposed new developer terms on Monday that, if enforced as written, would prohibit app developers from using AdMob and Google's advertising solutions on the iPhone," said AdMob chief Omar Hamoui in a blog post. His company is currently the number one supplier of advertisements through iPhone apps, but would be hampered by the changes.

The new terms of services would only allow 'independent' third-party developers to sell ads. As AdMob is owned by search giant and market rival Google, it appears as though the company would be cut off from one of its biggest revenue streams.

This is a distinct twist on Steve Jobs' words at the D8 technology conference last week in which he stated "we are not banning other advertisers from our platform."

The accelerating market rivalry between Google and Apple - with smart phone and mobile ad sales resting at its heart - paint the statement in a different light, however.

Hamoui stated in his blog that the proposed terms would hurt tech companies and developers overall; not just his own firm.

"This change is not in the best interests of users or developers," he wrote. "In the history of technology and innovation, it's clear that competition delivers the best outcome. Artificial barriers to competition hurt users and developers and, in the long run, stall technological progress."