The battle between Apple and Google is more than just a contest for who leads in the mobile platform space–it’s an appeal to the masses and their morals. In the ongoing saga regarding Apple’s stance on adult iPhone and iPad apps, Jobs tells customers to go ahead and get an Android. The Jobs jabs at Google’s mobile platform not only indicates that Apple has taken the moral high ground, but that Android is for the heathens that aren’t worthy of an Apple mobile device.

Good play, or bad? Just looking at the Internet at large, it would seem to be that the adult industry is relatively easy to access. Of course, Apple doesn’t have to create an adult category for its mobile apps–that’s its right. But when those morals come into question regarding banned apps with no seeming just cause, the moral police at Apple have a few more decisions to answer for.

Apple has been relatively strict over the accessibility and distribution of content available through its platform, and this goes for content sold through iTunes even before the App Store was opened to third party developers. The pricing and availability of songs, movies and books have been regulated, per Apple’s relationships with content publishers, owners and producers. This has a nice revenue model for Apple, but it also grants a large opportunity for Google to appeal to a large base of developers and consumers.

Sometimes the control Apple retains over these monetary relationships is strong enough to deter competing moves from other businesses, as we saw with Amazon’s Kindle and the pricing model behind its e-book sales. It’s a control that Apple holds dear, and Google is hoping to exploit. Who turns out the winner? It may be more for us to consider more than just the platforms, or the devices, or the companies, or even porn.

The overlap of all these factors means that Jobs could end up making his products and platforms look bad, driving even more support to Android. Though security is still a major source of strife for the Android platform and its apps, ongoing work on the platform, frequent updates, and partnerships with more and more device manufacturers also makes this battle one of numbers and accessibility.

Of course, the battle will live on for quite some time, particularly as Apple and Android continue to represent different aspects and attitudes towards the way in which a mobile platform should be developed. What will make the battle even more relevant towards consumer electronics and mobile devices is the growing presence of additional products and platforms. The resources that mobile platforms make available to developers and the platform owners looks to monetize consumers in an entirely different manner, attracting the likes of HTC, Sony and several others, towards owning as big of a piece of the pie as possible.

The iPad isn’t out yet, and that leaves us a few more days to speculate about its greatness. Isn’t speculation fun? We have no idea how many iPads have been ordered so far, meaning your guess is as good as mine. We have very little idea as to how the device will work in the practical, every day sense. We don’t even quite know where to categorize the tablet, seeing as it appears to be a bigger version of the iPod Touch, but with a lot of the cool factor that has been determined by the popularity of the iPhone.

Seeing as the iPad is a little bit the same and a little bit different from everything we’ve experienced before, there’s a lot of room for…speculation. When it comes to the applications built for the iPad, there’s not only room for speculation, but for opportunity as well.

Selling more apps could be big business for some app developers, especially as the iPad has such a large focus on media consumption. But a recent review by Wired indicates that a few other things may be different for the iPad’s app store, some of which could have consequences (good and bad) all their own.

Browsing the iPad App Store: A Video [By @viticci] from Federico Viticci on Vimeo.

The three areas Wired mentions are the cover flow, the pricing and the titles of the apps themselves. These partially address some of the concerns that have been brought up since we saw our first Steve Jobs demo of the iPad.

With what appears to be a new section for highlighted apps, the cover flow of the iPad app store may be different than what iPhone users are accustomed to. Yet similar changes are being made to the iTunes App Store as well, especially as Apple seems a better way to help users fin the apps they’re looking for. Adding a new Adult category for those apps that have previously been banned all together is just one concession Apple may make towards offering more app options within a system the company is comfortable with.

The prices of the iPad apps have already changed, as many developers are requesting higher prices for apps already present for the iPhone. Of course, the apps aren’t exactly the same–optimizing for the new tablet has been something many developers have already begun working on, particularly those in the media production and distribution industries. Yet, we’ll still have to see what the demand will be for pricier apps that are coming in a bigger size.

Naming the apps for an iPad app store would seem like a trivial thing to concentrate on, but the vastness of the existing iTunes App Store means that a properly named app could do even better on the iPad than on the iPhone. It’s safe to say that this can be confusing for consumers if a company has changed the name but not the product, but even more important is whether or not Apple will create a new store entirely for iPad apps. This would offer a bit of a reprieve for users, as the iTunes App Store is already filled with apps and its search and recommendation system is less than stellar. However, carrying over the iTunes App Store to the iPad seems like the logical thing to do.

What we’ve seen from the iPad so far seems to have merely raised more questions than answers, so we’ll still have to wait a few more days to see how things really play out. But the fact that so many questions have been raised means that the expectations around the iPad may truly offer Apple another great opportunity to build its brand and increase consumer satisfaction with its wireless, mobile devices.

Apple sold 120,000 iPads the day it opened its doors for pre-sale orders, making the new member of the all-star device lineup already a commercial hit. Yet the revelation of Apple’s battery replacement policy has stirred a bit of controversy, particularly as the device hasn’t even reached the hands of consumers yet.

The battery replacement policy will charge iPad owners $99 to swap out the device’s battery, upon which time they will also receive a new iPad. The policy is similar to the iPhone battery replacement system, save for the fact that your iPhone battery is the only thing that gets replaced. But the debate about whether or not the customers should pony up the cash to have their iPad replaced is of concern.

Several of Apple’s devices have limiting battery options, as they cannot be replaced on your own. The modified verbiage on the iPad, however, has raised a few brows. Compared to the jargon used for the iPhone battery replacement, it appears Apple may be expecting some issues with the batteries of its upcoming and heavily anticipated device.

One issue with the policy is that replaced devices could be refurbished. This is a relatively green (economic and otherwise) method for Apple, but should the company be charging so much for that process? The other issue is that your data will be lost, so backup of your iPad will be necessary for anything you want carried over to your replacement device.

The biggest issue, however, may be the iPad battery itself. Already the expectations around it have been compromised, so consumers and pundits alike will be looking for problems. The service fee, too, is a matter of debate, especially as the recall nation seeks retribution for faulty products. From Toyota to Pringles, the consumer trust level is waning for a few companies out there. With all the hype around Apple’s latest, will the iPad be something else to be distrusted?

If there really are battery problems with the iPad, consumers may be leary to purchase something with a known problem. Especially as they are made aware of the battery replacement policy beforehand, some consumers may want to wait until the next generation of the iPad all together.

Unless the iPad has major issues with its battery, I doubt this will become a major issue for sales or the legal system. Nevertheless, it’s important for Apple to protect its brand. Doing so will ensure the health of its media-changing potential with the iPad device itself.

Developers of Apple iPhone apps have noticed something new on their end–an Explicit category for iPhone apps. While the new category isn’t available in the iTunes store yet, its presence on the developers side of things suggests that Apple is looking to modify its app store and the criteria that goes along with a given application being accepted into the iTunes App Store itself.

The discovery comes shortly after Apple banned an overtly sexual app that was created for the iPhone’s mobile app platform, despite it being no more explicit than other apps already accepted into the App Store. The app banning was the last straw for many developers that have been seeking clarification from Apple as to what can and cannot be incorporated into a particular iPhone app. With confusion rising around the criteria Apple uses to determine which apps make it through the approval process and which apps are rejected, Apple has been stirring the pot and having to deal with a lot of frustrated developers, more than two years after launching the iPhone.

Some had even hoped that the Explicit category would appear with the latest iPhone device release, tough that didn’t happen. It’s a step that many platforms used for media distribution are hesitant to make, for mobile platforms, on-demand television and film content, and user-generated content. Finding the best way to deal with new and budding platforms as well as the established concept of tiered distribution to fit everyone’s needs is something that has not sped along with the mainstream adoption of certain technology, at least not without being labeled as taboo.

What this particular situation does highlight, however, is the need for Apple to improve its relationships with its developers and end users. The addition of an explicit category could prove to be an acceptable answer for dealing with the plight of concerned parents as well as developers looking for answers.

This is also something other developers and platforms can learn from. Google’s Android platform is open source, meaning it’s a great deal easier to push an app through to the Android market in comparison to the iTunes App Store. The open source tactic has caused its own set of problems for Google, given the security breaches some apps have benefited from for certain banking apps. So it’s clear that an acceptable medium needs to be met. For the time being, we’ll just look forward to the Explicit category from Apple, which would come just in time for the iPad release.

So, everyone is making their own mobile devices these days. At least, that’s how it seems. Connecting a hand held device to the web and enabling it with Wi-Fi seems to be enough reason to make one’s own mobile device and sell it for an exorbitant price. Yet the ability to use these mobile devices to run various platforms could entice developers, build out a growing marketplace, and become the new way of doing business. Companies such as Amazon are looking to move in on Apple’s turf in order to get a piece of this pie.

Apple’s iPhone still dominates on the mobile app scene. It’s cell phone has won the hearts of millions around the world, with the iTunes App Store attracting countless developers, publishers and buyers to its mobile marketplace. The growth f an entire industry is looking to mobile as its future, and Apple is starting to see more and more competition from others seeking a comparable platform approach to the mobile app forum.

Amazon, for example, has the Kindle. It was launched as a mobile book reader, and has seen some good numbers in the couple of years it’s been out on the market. As a mobile device that is able to connect to the web, however, it has much more potential beyond that of an e-book reader. According to BusinessWeek, Amazon is looking to expand by launching a platform where developers can create apps to run on the Kindle.

It makes sense for Amazon to move in this direction, especially as Apple continues to launch mobile devices that support its growing selection of apps. Enabling developers to create apps for an open platform supported by Kindle could mean additional revenue streams for the online retailer. The best part, is that Amazon gets to maintain its position is a relatively intangible retail service, moving deeper into the mobile app industry and being able to provide access to more virtual products.

Industry-wide, Amazon’s move will also spur further growth in the mobile app space. Google has already begun to impede on Apple’s territory with its Android platform, which is run on multiple devices and is more open than Apple’s own platform. Amazon could learn from the existing battle between Google and Apple in this regard, as the two platform extremes demonstrated by Google and Apple represent two sides of the regulation spectrum.

The concern is that Apple is too strict with its review process, without having a transparent system for developers to navigate. Google, on the other hand, could let malware creep into its Android Marketplace, as it’s more lax with its approval process. Reaching a middle ground could be a good way for Amazon to launch an app store for Kindle, encouraging the developers right off the bat.

Additionally, the ensuing war against Apple’s app domination is being taken up by more than just Google. Several mobile devices from several companies (i.e. GPS navigation service Garmin), will be looking to make some extra money through mobile apps and the ownership of a platform that runs on their self-distributed devices. While this breaks up the industry a great deal, it also gives developers and publishers more options for distributing content.

Against Apple in particular, apps running on Amazon’s Kindle could be for music or television content, which could cost less than what we find on Apple. Amazon already made a similar move when releasing its own mp3 download service, though this didn’t seem to make much of a dent in Apple’s jurisdiction. Specifically towards the price wars, consumers are less likely to see extreme differences amongst different devices this time around, as it’s clear that industry-wide changes are capable of being made.

Whether or not this oncoming variety of devices and content distribution will remain consumer-centric remains to be seen. With so many of the big players being involved, the standards established around the mobile app industry could end up evening out in favor of companies like Apple, Google and Amazon. I think it’s important to keep the consumers in mind when developing competing platforms and methods of mobile app distribution, so hopefully we’ll see some efforts towards this direction as well.

Will the iPhone require Apple to take a more controlling stake in mobile advertising? A recent rumor has emerged saying that Apple is acquiring Quattro Wireless, an advertising company that is considered to be a competitor to AdMob. While the rumor is unconfirmed and the reasons behind Apple’s purported interest are unknown, it makes for some interesting speculation as to what Apple may have in mind for its advertising future.

In the middle of the rumored acquisition talk is a battle of pride, glory and industry dominance. Google acquired Quattro Wireless competitor AdMob before Apple could close the deal, with some saying that this slap in the face caused Apple to “steal” music search tool LaLa from Google before an acquisition was complete. The ongoing spat may have led to Apple’s supposed acquisition of QuattroWireless, but there’s likely much more to the story than just a company feud.

Apple is in a powerful position as far as mobile devices go, having created and successfully marketed the iPhone on a global scale. Focusing on its platform capabilities, Apple is primed to take the mobile economy in a number of directions. Building out its mobile platform means the furthered generation of an app marketplace that could sustain developers, publishers and service providers. Improving on the device itself will help Apple to retain its customer base in the face of oncoming competitors in the smartphone industry.

Google could become a major contender in the mobile space, as its own Android operating system stands to create a viable marketplace to harbor developers as well. The ability to monetize one’s mobile platform is at the forefront of discussions surrounding smartphones at this point, as the meeting of enterprise and consumerism happily plays out in the havens of wireless service providers.

The point here is that Apple could very well take a larger stance in mobile marketing that occurs around its platform and app marketplace. Early on it appeared as though Apple were moving in this direction, having worked closely with a number of mobile advertising firms towards experimental marketing campaigns associated with native apps on the iPhone. With the growth of the iPhone app market, however, the ability for third parties to take advantage of access to iPhone customers gave revenue opportunities to all parties involved.

Being the middle man, Apple could really benefit from having a more established ad network through which third parties could run campaigns, either unifying the experience for end users or simply extending additional options to advertisers and app developers.

Regardless of what Apple’s plans are, the company is forced to take a closer look at the system operating independently of its own “cult” world, as well as the system it has helped to create and standardize. So far, Apple has announced plans to make iTunes available via the Internet, marking the small but obviously necessary steps Apple is taking to become more convenient for its consumers. Keeping a focus on the consumers will continue to help Apple in whatever ideas it has towards the integration of an ad network.

There’s a lot of trademarking going on lately. Between Apple’s iSlate and iGuide, and HP’s Zeen and Airlife, it’s relatively obvious that efforts towards making new and sexy mobile devices is a focus for both of these companies. Apple already has a dominating presence in the mobile device arena, and it’s been this way for quite a few years now. Having established those standards, however, the rest of the world has been steadily trying to catch up.

What will happen in the next year or so will be full of wonder and excitement, as more manufacturers look to create their own mobile devices featuring innovative designs, new options for integrated communication functionality, and associated networks and cloud-based services to make the operation of your new mobile device a thoughtless activity.

Appealing to consumer convenience, businesses are finding themselves anxious to monetize the mobile industry. A new long tail has been created, with revenue opportunities coming from mobile application platforms, virtual goods, the localization of contextually shared content and search-turned-recommendations based on the aforementioned revenue streams.

Creating mobile extensions of nearly everything we already do on a daily basis can be big business, especially when it comes to the centralization of services into a single device. This lends itself to a necessity for the centralization of other things, such as finances, mobile access to the Internet, and a desire for improved mobile technology overall. The rapid expansion of money-making opportunities gives several businesses a strong desire to enter the market early and strong. This is evidenced by both Apple and HP more recently, with Google, T-Mobile, Verizon and Microsoft being heavily involved in pushing these trends as well.

For consumers, I still think a major concern will revolve around the privacy factor. The ability for any of these major companies to monopolize the industry or even the information you need for personal purposes is imminent, especially as many consumers find the upcoming services to be rather cnonvenient. Personal mobile devices are certainly the way of the future, and a new economy will rise along with them.

Google is talking about offering first-run TV shows on YouTube for a fee, similar to the Amazon or iTunes model.  For $1.99, you could view the latest episode of your favorite show, the day after it aired on network television.

The catch? It’s a streaming video. Unlike iTunes or Amazon, you have to watch it as a streaming video. The video won’t reside on your hard drive.

Sources say the site’s negotiations with the networks and studios that own the shows are preliminary. But both sides seem optimistic, since models for such deals already exist. No comment from YouTube.

The biggest stumbling block may be consumers. That’s because Google (GOOG) is talking about streaming the shows instead of letting consumers download them to their computers, as both Apple (AAPL) and Amazon (AMZN) do. But the networks and studios, which control pricing, will want to sell the streamed shows at the same price as downloads; they fear that offering them at a different price will force them to go back and rework their existing deals.

Executives at YouTube and TV insist that the disparity is simply a perception problem and cite studies showing that most people who download TV episodes only watch them once, anyway. But that’s a tough sell.

Now, the reason I will occasionally buy shows from iTunes is that I then have the freedom to watch them on my phone, my iPod, my TV, or my laptop. I can watch the show on an airplane because it’s local to my device. Personally, I hate the idea of paying $1.99 for streaming content. So until they figure things out, I’ll definitely stick to free Hulu for the television that I miss and downloading episodes from iTunes for television on the go.

__

Cheers!
Tweet Michelle @writetechnology, send her technology news at michelle[at]writetech[dot]net, visit her wine blog when you’re thirsty, and drop by her day job.