Ace Metrix scores ads based on perceived effectiveness by a selection of randomly selected viewers, which it says are “representative of the U.S. TV viewing audience.” Apple’s Siri ad, which you can see below, scored a 652 overall out of a total possible 950 points, which tallied from respondent scores on criteria such as relevance, persuasion, watchability, information, etc. Apple’s 652 was 8 percent higher than the average score for ads in the same tech-oriented category.

Other ads that did well include spots from Pillsbury, Coca-Cola, Nintendo and Duracell. Santa was featured in 35 new ads during the holiday 2011 season, including Apple’s, and each of those campaigns performed above their category average.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• NewNet Q4: Platform mania and social commerce shakeout
• NewNet Q4: Platform mania and social commerce shakeout
• Envisioning future strategies for Sony’s success

Ads were also introduced by Skype in its most recent beta version of the Skype for Mac client. The ads in all cases are only seen by users who don’t have a Skype account with active Skype Credit, subscription calling or a Premium plan. Skype is clearly looking to monetize the activity of users from whom it isn’t directly collecting any revenue, and at least it isn’t introducing ads without adding any useful features that appeal to end users.

Skype for iPhone gains Bluetooth headset support for the iPhone 4, iPhone 3GS, and iPod touch 4G, and Skype for iPad will now support Bluetooth headsets on the iPad 2. Skype for iPhone users will also finally be able to view incoming emoticons and send outgoing emoticons, as well. On the iPhone, video call quality will be improved via image stabilization, and there’s also a brand new interface that improves a bit over the original. That should help ease any nausea you may be experiencing from walk-and-talk video calls. There are also bug fixes in both versions, like one that probably plugs the recently discovered hole that allowed access to your Address Book contacts for potential theft.

So Skype is offering a spoonful of sugar to help the advertising medicine go down, but are users interested in this prescription? Let us know if you think the improvements make the ads worth stomaching, or if you’ll be sticking with an older version on your device.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Connected Consumer Q2: Digital music meets the cloud; e-book growth explodes
• Flash analysis: Steve Jobs
• Connected world: the consumer technology revolution

The first bit of news probably doesn’t come as a surprise to Apple, which has launched the iPhone on multiple carriers in multiple clients around the world, and no doubt knows that when network choice is an option, it can attract more customers. The Verizon iPhone likely contributed significantly to Apple’s 11-percent gain when it comes to ad impressions as measured by Millenial. iOS now accounts for 31 percent of measured ad impressions, compared to Android’s 48-percent piece of the pie. This is the first time iOS has made real upward progress against Android since Google’s OS started rising in the ranks late last year. Despite Android’s overall win in ad impressions, the iPhone is still the device that racks up the most hits, with 19.42 percent of total impressions. The next closest device is the BlackBerry Curve, with only 5.37 percent.

While the data probably doesn’t indicate iOS will ever rise to overtake Android again (despite possible iPhone availability to T-Mobile customers if the proposed AT&T acquisition of goes through), it is a good sign that predictions of a single dominant global smartphone platform are overstating things. Even discounting any possibility of cheaper devices or multi-network support, the iPhone is holding its own with a platform that, on paper, should have much better reach.

Apple also appears to remain the platform of choice for developers hoping to entice app buyers. iOS remained the top platform in terms of revenue, with 47 percent of the overall smartphone revenue generation picture. Android is the next closest platform with 36 percent of the total, and RIM comes in a distant third with only 7 percent. The disparity probably accounts for the continued lead enjoyed by Apple in terms of mobile app library and quality.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Facebook Built an App for Feature Phones. Should You?
• A Media Tablet Forecast, 2011 – 2015
• A Global Mobile Handset Platform Forecast, 2011 – 2015

The theme itself is actually kind of garish, as you might expect from something completely focused on selling you a single product. It’s all about the Scion brand, and I suppose it might appeal to a few new Scion owners, but I can’t imagine many others lining up to download the theme. But of course, the theme itself isn’t really what’s interesting here. It’s the fact that Toyota has decided to treat the jailbreak community as a legitimate entity worthy of some marketing spend.

In a blog post on the Toyota campaign, Modmyi.com addresses many of the reasons behind Toyota’s decision to embrace jailbreakers. According to the site, roughly 8 or 9 percent of all iDevices worldwide are jailbroken, which translates into around 10 to 15 million. That’s a very sizeable group of potential customers essentially being ignored by the corporate world. That reach, combined with the ability to do things you could never do with a vanilla iPhone, like completely reskin every aspect of the system’s user interface or even get around limitations such as the absence of Flash, makes a jailbroken iDevice more attractive to advertisers, in many ways, than one that isn’t hacked.

But it’s precisely because this strategy circumvents Apple entirely that Cupertino isn’t likely to take this new development in stride. It’s true that jailbreaking has become a little more legitimate recently, as the DMCA ruled that the process of jailbreaking isn’t illegal — even if it isn’t definitely “legal,” either. But Apple still doesn’t condone or approve of jailbreaking in any way, takes steps to prevent it from happening, and continues to warn that it may void your device’s warranty. And since major companies funneling advertising dollars into the jailbreak economy potentially prevents Apple from collecting some of those revenues itself, I’d be surprised if the company allowed this sort of thing to become commonplace without a challenge. Apple could also levy punishments against companies that take this route, maybe by barring Toyota from legitimate App Store access, for instance.

In fact, this partnership between Toyota and Cydia (there is a financial agreement between the two entities) could become a lightning rod for the jailbreak community. Apple has been content to play a relatively tame game of cat and mouse with jailbreakers until now (unlike Sony, which immediately went after jailbreaker Geohot for attempting to open the platform in court), but the more jailbreaking is able to circumvent its ability to generate revenue for iOS, the more likely it becomes that Apple will devote more resources to stopping the practice altogether.

Calls to Toyota and attempts to contact Apple regarding this issue haven’t yet produced a response. We’ll update if and when any official comment is forthcoming.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Research in Motion Faces Challenges Moving to QNX
• How to Reach Mobile Shoppers This Holiday Season
• Who Will Be Impacted if Windows Phone Thrives?

Related content from GigaOM Pro (sub req’d):

• Can Anyone Really Compete With the iPad?
• Five Things Needed for a 48 Million iPad Market
• In Q3, the Tablet and 4G Were the Big Stories

So why the controversy? Apple prohibits publishers from offering more attractive (read: cheaper) subscription deals to customers outside the walls of the iOS App Store. Whatever publishers offer outside the App Store must be matched (or bettered) inside the App Store. Oh and just one more thing; Apple will not hand over to publishers the personal details of customers making in-app purchases/subscriptions without the permission of those customers. This last point is great news for consumer privacy, but another nail in the coffin for publishers accustomed to using said data in valuable advertising deals.

If you’ve ever subscribed to a magazine or newspaper you know how it works: A subscription card often asks for far more than just your name, address and credit card number. Those mini questionnaires publishers require of their subscribers supply them with a huge variety of valuable information they can use when selling space to advertisers. In fact, advertisers now demand it; after all, they want to be sure they’re placing their ads strategically — and therefore, spending their money wisely.

It matters not one jot if a publication acquires a few thousand subscribers through the App Store; without the typically-concomitant subscriber data, advertisers will be less inclined to buy space in any iOS publication.

How Did We Get Here?

Much publishing today is less concerned with quality than it is with quantity. The more copies there are of a magazine in circulation — or clicks on a web page — the more eyeballs see accompanying ads. In a world where, more than ever before, readers have more choice of content, but less time to engage with it, for many publishers, the key to generating appreciable revenue lies not in value, but in volume.

And I’m not talking small-time publishers here; in early February, Business Insider revealed AOL CEO Tim Armstrong’s guide to his network’s editors, titled “The AOL Way”, in which the editorial priorities of the company are laid-bare; on a page directing editors in how to decide what topics should be covered, “Editorial Integrity” (in other words, editorial quality) is ranked last, after “Traffic Potential,” “Revenue/Profit” and “Turnaround Time.”

Changing the Game

Online publishing’s focus on advertising, sponsorship and syndication is problematic, for viewers and for Apple as a company that wants to provide worthwhile content for users of its platforms. Great quality content, in this model, is of little use to publishers, despite the fact that it happens to be precisely the thing readers actually want.

Apple, I think, has noticed this problem, and is now taking positive steps to solve it. Apple wants to ensure that publishing on the iPad is never anything less than top quality, where the paramount priorities of publishers lie always in ensuring the quality of their content.

Hard Work for Big Returns

You see, with the rules as they stand today, the only way publishers can be successful in the App Store is by concentrating on producing the very best content. And that won’t happen because they place “Editorial Integrity” in first place on a PowerPoint slide. Publishers will have to commit themselves to produce nothing less than the very best content in the industry. It will take a lot of investment, a lot of insanely hard work and, for some publishers, a serious restructuring of their editorial staff and policies. None of that is easy or cheap, and, for publishers used to and dependent upon advertising revenue, it must seem a ludicrous proposition.

Apple has established a sales and distribution platform that emphasizes content sales and subscriptions over advertising, but if the company really wants to help publishers embrace the “content is king” philosophy, I think they need to do much more to assist in content creation and promotion. However, it begins with giving publishers with something that is still sorely-missing; top-flight iOS publishing tools made available — for free — to all publishers and authors everywhere. iOS is a publishing platform bursting with potential. Apple needs to give content creators an easy — and powerful — set of tools for leveraging it. Its iAd Producer application for the Mac might be a good place to start.

In the end, I believe most publishers genuinely respect their readers and care about the quality of their content; and I suspect they would happily unshackle themselves from their reliance on advertising revenue if only subscriptions and sales revenues could take its place. Apple has provided a tantalizing new path for publishers to tread, provided they don’t just throw their hands up and walk away citing Apple’s greed as a way to take the easy way out.

Related content from GigaOM Pro (sub req’d):

• Platform Makers Placing Big Bets on In-App Payments
• 5 Ways Apple’s In-App Purchase Rule Could Come Back to Bite
• What App Distributors Can Learn from the Ringtone Craze

The iPads start with video and music synced wirelessly on all devices, with each individual tablet displaying one part of the greater picture. Audience members are then invited to interact with the display. They can change the playback speed of both audio and video on each iPad, and also adjust screen brightness and choose what melody is being played. The experience essentially puts individual audience members in the role of DJ.

As people interact with the installation, video and audio get out of sync. The challenge is then to try to work together to get it back to its original state, just like how humans have to work together to try to negate some of our effect on the environment. Of course, the iPad itself uses some pretty toxic materials in its construction, isn’t user upgradeable, and can’t be recycled locally, and the project uses 25 of them, but who’s counting?

iProject25 was created by Taq, a composer who worked with Konami on the game BeatMania and his friend Simon Mayer, who heads a German design firm. Programmer Mui Iwase handled the iOS coding of the app used on the iPads. It’s a great example of the iPad being used for artistic purposes, but its creators believe it also demonstrates another way businesses might take advantage of Apple’s tablet for promotional efforts. What do you think? Wouldn’t you want to play with a giant wall of iPads if you ran into one in your local mall, for instance?

Related content from GigaOM Pro (sub req’d):

• App Developers: Are You Ready for HTML5 and Metered Data?
• Five Things Needed for a 48 Million iPad Market
• How to Market Your iPhone App: A Developer’s Guide

Apple won Marketer of the Year only once in the past ten years, but it was also a contender for the top honor nearly every year this decade, according to AdAge. The marketing publication cites many reasons for its victory, among them the launch of iAd, and the continued success of its brick-and-mortar stores.

Maybe the most significant piece of marketing savvy shown by Apple during the past year was its management of the “Antennagate“ scandal that threatened to tarnish its highly polished quality control reputation. Jobs and Co. avoided disastrous and long-lasting effects by offering free cases to affected customers, while at the same time, not actually admitting that there was anything really wrong with the device through clever double-speak.

The Advertising Legacy

If you want to talk about the last decade as a whole, though, you have to look back to its earlier marketing moves that have become so iconic. Remember the iPod silhouette ads? They debuted in Oct. 2003, and became iconic enough to inspire countless spoofs. The ads also featured songs, often by relatively unknown artists. Being picked as the track for an iPod commercial could make your career. Apple’s marketing could incidentally make a musician successful.

And if it’s entertaining ad campaigns you’re after, it’s hard to do better than Apple’s “Get a Mac” ads, known by the “I’m a Mac, and I’m a PC” tagline used in each. Though Apple dropped this campaign last year, it began in 2006, and more than 70 ads appeared in the series. Justin Long and John Hodgman, who played Mac and PC respectively, became more widely recognized for these roles than for their parts in film and television shows. Timed as they were to take advantage of the disaster that was Windows Vista, they probably did more for the Mac’s growth than anything had before.

Last, but not least, is Apple’s ”There’s an app for that,” the company’s recently certified trademark, which became synonymous with Apple’s App Store, and by extension, with the iPhone. It’s also possibly the most parodied and reused tagline in history, at least measured in terms of blog and newspaper article headlines, and derivative marketing campaigns.

The Brand

Say what you will about Apple; it’s done amazing things to secure its brand identity. The phenomenon of the fanboy is a well-documented one, and has even prompted attention from filmmakers. The loyalty Apple users feel for their preferred electronics vendor is unmatched by any other group.

Why does Apple attract such adamant defenders? I’d argue that it’s their continued commitment to quality. Apple won’t release a product that it thinks feels or seems cheap, no matter what the revenue benefits would be. The company’s never even tried something like starting an offshoot budget brand, as HP has with its Compaq acquisition. And say what you will about the iPhone 4′s antenna problems, but it’s still far and away the best phone I’ve ever owned.

That commitment to quality is closely tied to Apple’s customer service. Both on the phone and in person at the Apple Store, the resources the company has dedicated to making all of its representative-customer interactions as pleasant as possible has really paid off. Of course, there are exceptions, and people will no doubt cite many examples of poor service from Apple reps. But on the whole, AppleCare provides far less reason to complain than do many similar services offered by its competitors.

Jobs Himself

As we saw yesterday, a large part of Apple’s marketing success can be attributed to its charismatic leader, Steve Jobs. He seems to be unable to censor himself in direct interactions, something reflected in the famous Steve Jobs personal email replies that may or may not actually come from Apple’s PR department. Whether or not they do is besides the point.

Steve Jobs is part celebrity and part CEO. Even while maintaining an air of mystery and insisting on absolute secrecy regarding future product releases, he seems also to be available to customers and without a filter on his personal feelings. It’s an odd combination that’s obviously a winner with consumers, and it garners Apple a lot of press (see the thousands of articles about yesterday’s quarterly conference call circulating the web if you needed any more proof).

Can it Carry On?

So that’s how Apple achieved its place of prominence as Marketer of the Decade. But can it continue to reign? That’ll depend on its ability to maintain a high level of success with its advertising, brand and yes, even its CEO.

The advertising has already taken a turn for the worse, in my opinion. Apple seems unwilling to go out on a ledge and poke at rivals (plus it’s becoming the big fish anyway, and it looks bad to knock the competition from on high) or even to celebrate what makes it different by using indie acts for background music. The sentimentality of the FaceTime ads seems to be missing the edge that got Apple to where it is now. Maybe Apple’s customer base, as it ages, will appreciate the new direction, but I’m afraid it could lead to even more vanilla offerings.

Where Apple is safest is its brand image. Products continue to come out that provide a very high level of user experience, with relatively few frustrations. The iPad is a great recent example, as is the iPhone 4 if you leave aside for a second any antenna issues.

As for continuing to have an enigmatic and charismatic corporate leader who also provides a great public face for the company, that’s completely up in the air. Steve Jobs is obviously one of a kind, but it’s possible the corporate culture he’s fostered at Apple will produce a worthy successor from within the ranks.

What do you think is the main reason for Apple’s marketing success? Any or all of the above, or something not listed here?

Related content from GigaOM Pro (sub req’d):

• How iAd and the iPad Will Change Mobile Marketing
• Report: The In-App Advertising Landscape
• How to Market Your iPhone App: A Developer’s Guide

To complete the study, Nielsen surveyed over 5,000 owners of portable devices, including the Kindle, smartphones, netbooks and more in addition to the iPad. Of those polled, 400 owned an iPad, and the majority of those 400 were young males: 65 percent were male, and 63 percent aged 35 or younger.

Surprisingly, they weren’t among the most wealthy respondents, despite having enough disposable income to drop on Apple’s fairly pricey tablet. That honor went to Kindle users, 44 percent of whom made $80,000 or more. Only 39 percent of iPad owners fell into that bracket, and 37 percent of iPhone owners.

Despite being slightly less well-off, iPad owners were more likely to interact with an ad. 39 percent of iPad users said the found ads on the device “new and interesting.” They’re also more likely to buy something based on advertising found on-device. That’s great news for newspaper and magazine publishers, who are hoping that iPad versions of their publications (and subscriptions for those) will revitalize their ailing industry.

Advertisers targeting the platform really couldn’t ask for a better audience than relatively wealthy, young men who are receptive to your message. With stats like these, the iPad could be the key to finally unlocking the massive potential of online advertising. Make no mistake, in terms of mobile advertising endeavors, iAd is the one to watch.

Related content from GigaOM Pro (sub req’d):

• How to Measure Social Media Advertising
• Unlocking Social Media Ad Spending
• Report: U.S. Mobile Venture Capital Investment, Q2 2010

Millenial used to be number three, but that changed when Google acquired the largest, AdMob, and Apple acquired the second largest, Quattro, which it recently shuttered in favor of its own iAd platform. That means the closest to unbiased numbers regarding mobile ads that we’re likely to get are probably from Millenial.

In July 2010, Apple led the pack with 35 percent of all mobile ad impressions and 55 percent of smartphone ads. Smartphones overall accounted for just about half of all mobile ad impressions, with 49 percent of that pie. Connected devices — including the Nintendo DS and Sony PSP among others — accounted for another 19 percent, while feature phones saw only 32 percent of the ads. It’s yet another sign that the dumb phone is on its way out, at least as a viable means of revenue for advertisers.

In the smartphone arena, Apple’s lead is still quite commanding. The next closest platform in term of ad impressions served is Android, and it accounted for only 19 percent of the smartphone share. Next closest was RIM, with BlackBerry devices seeing 16 percent of all ads. Finally, Microsoft’s Windows Mobile came in a distant fourth with 4 percent. All other platforms combined added up to 6 percent.

The success of Apple’s platform becomes very apparent when you take into consideration how developers are prioritizing ad targeting. Of those targeting multiple platforms, 100 percent are intent on supporting Apple’s iOS. Android is next closest with 75 percent of developers, and RIM is next with only 46 percent. Twenty-nine percent target Symbian, which is still a major player in the Asian market, and 21 percent employ Java. Finally, 17 percent target other platforms, including Windows Mobile.

These numbers reflect the sales success of the iPhone and its various competitors to date, but Android’s ever-expanding reach has the platform poised to takeover that majority share sooner rather than later. I predict a parity between or a reversal of the top two spots, at least in terms of developer support, by this time next year, based on the trajectory of Google’s mobile OS to date and the success of phones like the Droid and its successors.

Related GigaOM Pro Research: Report: The In-App Advertising Landscape

Pursuant to that goal, Apple recently changed the terms of its developer agreement to keep out third-party analytics companies like Flurry who regularly produce reports on market share and the App Store based on data gathered from other advertisers working in the App Store ecosystem.

Here’s the relevant section of the developer agreement, as posted by All Things D:

3.3.9 You and Your Applications may not collect, use, or disclose to any third party, user or device data without prior user consent, and then only under the following conditions:

The collection, use or disclosure is necessary in order to provide a service or function that is directly relevant to the use of the Application. For example, without Apple’s prior written consent, You may not use third party analytics software in Your Application to collect and send device data to a third party for aggregation, processing, or analysis.

The collection, use or disclosure is for the purpose of serving advertising to Your Application; is provided to an independent advertising service provider whose primary business is serving mobile ads (for example, an advertising service provider owned by or affiliated with a developer or distributor of mobile devices, mobile operating systems or development environments other than Apple would not qualify as independent); and the disclosure is limited to UDID, user location data, and other data specifically designated by Apple as available for advertising purposes.

Now it shouldn’t shut down all competition, as you can use your advertising stats to sell ad space, but only for that purpose, and only at Apple’s discretion. That’s right, Apple gets final say on whether or not you can share the data you collect through advertising. And the terms are cloudy enough to allow for the prevention of use of these statistics by large companies that also happen to have advertising arms which aren’t their primary business, like, say Google and AdMob.

It’s one thing to try to block out competitors, and that’s a question better left to anti-trust inquiries, but to purposefully try to obfuscate the attempts of third party research and analysis firms in order to better control every aspect of your marketplace, internal and external, is downright discomfiting. One thing’s clear: Apple is nervous about the upcoming war with Google over the mobile market, and it’s doing everything it can to make sure the public can’t interpret that war in a way it finds unflattering.

Related GigaOM Pro Research: Why 2010 Still Won’t Be the Year of Mobile Advertising

A new “iAd” service, which is said to be in the pipeline for an April 7 reveal to the Madison Avenue crowd, according to “executives familiar with the plan” speaking to MediaPost, will be built on top of the framework provided by the Quattro purchase. The sources also quote Steve Jobs as saying the service will be “revolutionary” and “our next big thing.”

No other details are forthcoming as of yet, but it does seem clear that Apple intends to take on Google in the mobile advertising space, and it likely intends to do so by waging the war on home turf. Who better to serve ads to Apple’s mobile devices than Apple itself? Tailoring content to the iPad, iPhone and iPod touch should be easy enough, especially given that Apple has access to more of the iPhone OS than do third-party developers and advertisers.

It may seem like an unexpected move from Apple to move into the advertising business, but it actually fits the company’s M.O. quite well. Think about iTunes and music, iTunes and video content, and now the iBookstore and books. In each case, Apple offered a beleaguered industry a way out of a financially disastrous situation. In doing so, it opened up new revenue streams, and made sure the content desires of its hardware user base were met.

Locking down the mobile advertising market doesn’t necessarily cater to users in the same way, but it does fit the other criteria. Advertisers have been struggling following the gradual and continuing weakening of print media and television, and so far, online ads have only met with limited success and have yet to take off in the way its predecessors did. For companies still looking to find that sweet spot in which it is possible to really sell to web-connected audiences, Apple, with its inside knowledge of mobile web user habits and history of commodifying what once was free (i.e. the Internet, via apps) will look like a very fine prospect indeed.

I’m not generally one to dole out business advice, but if Apple does roll out some kind of iAds platform early next month, get in on the ground floor if you’re in the advertising space. Just look at what Cupertino has already done in terms of making advertisers vie for space in magazines launching on the iPad. Now imagine what it can do when advertising is its primary focus, not just a tangential benefit.

Related GigaOM Pro Research (sub req’d):

Why 2010 Still Won’t Be the Year of Mobile Advertising

The first week of the new year brought definitive word that Apple has purchased Quattro Wireless, a competing platform, for what has been reported to be in the $300 million range. The rumor that Apple was interested in AdMob seems far more likely now. But the two factors that made me question Apple’s interest in AdMod remain relevant to the Quattro deal.

There are at least three possible reasons Apple might buy a mobile advertising company. First, mobile advertising is clearly a growing business, particularly on devices like the iPhone. Second, because Apple owns the iPhone and controls the app distribution process, it might make sense to build ad delivery capability right into the iPhone SDK and iTunes App Store, as a premium or value-added service to developers. Include the right code in your app, ads will be automatically embedded, and you’ll make 70 percent of all ad revenue just like you do from app sales. With app sales, in-app purchasing, and advertising, Apple can now offer a 360-degree mobile app monetization solution. Third, mobile analytics can provide tremendous insights to Apple and its developer community about usage data, trends, and demographics.

There are two other possibilities that are perhaps less obvious, but far more interesting. One relates to a new device, the other to a competitive threat.

It is now widely expected that Apple will release a tablet-style computer at its media event scheduled for January 27. The Wall Street Journal has reported that Apple will discuss “mobile products” at the event, which suggests the event is about more than the rumored iSlate. Clearly, a mobile ad network falls into the mobile products category. And Apple has been rumored to be courting book, magazine and newspaper publishers to produce content for the new device. It wouldn’t be surprising if, during a round of meetings with publishers, Apple learned that an advertising platform would be a key requirement for their participation. The new content wrapper I expect to be included in Apple’s mobile products event – sort of an iTunes LP for traditional print publications — might very well include an integrated Quattro Wireless ad platform as a major enticement for publishers.

That last possibility is really intriguing to me, and has the potential to have a major disruptive force on the wireless industry. As rumors of the Google Nexus One first arose, there was significant speculation that it would be sold as an unlocked device for something between $199-599. On January 5, we learned that the new Android phone would be available in the U.S. on T-mobile immediately for $179 with a two-year contract, and $529 unlocked, and that it would be available later this year on Verizon, likely for similar prices. This means that the business model employed by the carriers and device manufacturers — in which carriers subsidize the cost of the hardware in exchange for a two-year service contract — remains intact. For now.

In launching the Nexus One, Google announced that it could only be purchased through the new Google phone store on the web. Which means that Google is effectively an authorized reseller of the carriers and gets paid a bounty for every contract customer they deliver. Consumers cannot get the Nexus One directly through the carriers. When Apple launched the iPhone, conventional wisdom was that it had rewritten the rules, but Google has taken it several steps further. Like Apple, it controls the hardware and software, and while Apple exerted significant influence on AT&T, you can still go directly through AT&T to get the iPhone. Not so with Google, who now has even greater leverage with the carriers in dictating terms.

In no way is Google beholden to the carriers. It can sell an unlocked phone for any price it wants. Google isn’t likely to sell the phone for a loss, so the low carrier-subsidized and higher unlocked prices make perfect sense. But Google can subsidize the phone another way. Since they control the hardware, software, and consumer relationship, they could easily offer an unlocked version of the phone at a very low price — perhaps even lower than the carrier price — by selling a version that features advertising delivered via its new AdMob platform. There are likely many people who would rather endure ads on their mobile devices than commit to a two-year contract. Now that Google has AdMob and a phone they completely control, it can conduct extensive research on the potential profitability of such an approach, while still collecting carrier subsidies. If the ads perform – and the bet here is that they do — Google could release not just an unlocked phone, but one that doesn’t even need the wireless carriers. Google Voice and Wi-Fi will do just fine in many instances, and Google could pull a WhisperNet for off-net needs.

Which leads us back to Apple. If Google offered the Nexus One and other Android phones at 3 price points — unlocked with no ads (highest), carrier subsidized, and ad subsidized (lowest) — it would be a huge competitive advantage. At the very least, Apple may need a similar ability to go head-to-head, something that Quattro may offer, should sales or market share suffer. And in the competitive arena, now that Google is selling a mobile device in direct competition to Apple, should Apple be required to allow Google Voice on the iPhone?

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Mobile Q4: All Eyes Were on Android, 4G and the Rising Tablet Tide
• Report: A Mobile Video Market Overview

While the iPhone gains momentum like the juggernaut it appears to be, the App Store has continued to draw criticism, and yet, developers are still flocking to the platform. The result is that fart apps aren’t cutting it anymore, and every developer must bring their ‘A’ game if they want to have a chance at making it in this business. As with the rest of the business world in this economy, making it as an iPhone App Developer also means being able to evolve.

Gas Cubby evolved as many others have done, and began offering a Lite version that allowed the user to judge for themselves, while logging up to 5 records. But now they’ve taken it to the next level with the free version supported through targeted ads by FRAM (a division of Honeywell). Gas Cubby represents a solid and proven automobile maintenance tracking application for the iPhone platform — something that likely would’ve taken a company like Honeywell a significant amount of time to bring to market and cultivate to Gas Cubby’s level of accomplishment.

What makes this partnership interesting is that it’s one-to-one. The ads within the application aren’t coming from some ad service that rotates several ‘targeted’ graphics, but rather represent a unique collaboration of developer and product manufacturer. The graphics and landing page are all customized to coordinate with Gas Cubby, rather than trying to fit a square peg into a round hole with a link out to a general product page. Tapping one of the ‘Tough Guard’ ads for instance, loads an in-app browser page for FRAM oil filters with information on how to buy. It’s all very well integrated and doesn’t distract from the task at hand.

For Honeywell, they can now target users who care enough about their vehicles that they track all of its data. And thanks to the partnership with App Cubby, they’ve got an insider’s knowledge of the iPhone platform and the landscape of the App Store. The combination sure appears to be a solid match-up that will likely benefit both parties.

If you have yet to pull the trigger on Gas Cubby, you no longer have an excuse not to with Gas Cubby by FRAM. It’s a terrific way to track the health and maintenance of your vehicle, without missing anything important that could lead to more costly expenses. Of course the non ad-supported full version is still available for $6.99.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Green IT’s Q4 Winners: Wind Power, Solar Power, Smart Energy
• Report: Cleantech’s Third-Quarter Growing Pains
• Report: An Assessment of the Lighting Control Market Segment

According to AdMob, there were 25.3 million unique iPhone OS users in their network in November, a unique user being one that has seen at least one ad request in a given month. That represents less than half the 60 million or so iPhone OS devices that have been sold, but it’s still a valid sample measuring change, change that favors Apple, at least for now.

As previously reported, the iPhone in Japan has come to represent nearly half the smartphone market, so that’s in keeping with what AdMob reports in Japan this year. France saw a big jump too, which could be a result of the end of carrier exclusivity. While China is also up, the lackluster official launch of the iPhone, only 5,000 units sold, likely has little to do with that growth. Gray-market, often pre-owned iPhones will continue to dominate iPhone sales in China into 2010, but that’s not biggest problem for Apple; that would be continued growth in the U.S.

Not that 100 percent growth is bad, but in the U.S. iPhone OS devices have likely reached a saturation point, at least compared to other countries. For those pining for a Verizon iPhone, this relative slowing of growth should be a strong incentive for Apple to abandon its exclusivity agreement with AT&T. Another incentive would be competition from Android.

AdMob shows Android traffic up dramatically over the year. For November, Android accounted for 27 percent of ad requests, up from 20 percent in October, with 88 percent of traffic generated in the US. Expect that to change in 2010 with a profusion of Android devices and deals being made domestically and internationally. While 2009 may have been the year of iPhone OS, unless Apple abandons carrier exclusivity 2010 may belong to Google.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• Mobile Q4: All Eyes Were on Android, 4G and the Rising Tablet Tide
• Report: A Mobile Video Market Overview

That’s according to “people familiar with the matter” speaking to Bloomberg. It isn’t clear which side of the deal the source was on, but he or she declined to go on record since the proposed talks were never made public. Apple is said to have contacted AdMob “a few weeks” before Google made its successful $750 million bid for the firm.

If true, the rumors point to the increasingly fierce competition between two major players in the mobile phone game. Google’s Android is being adopted by more and more manufacturers and distributed on more devices everyday. To have a piece not only of the revenue from the use of Android apps and devices, but also from the advertising that appears on those phones, is a huge boon for the search giant.

It’s unclear why Apple’s bid didn’t succeed, if it was indeed made. It’s possible that Google made a better offer while Apple was still in talks with AdMob, or that the advertising firm used the Apple offer as a bargaining tool in enticing Google. All of the companies involved in both deals declined to comment on the reports made by the anonymous source.

Acquiring a mobile ad firm would have been a bit of a departure for Apple, which is still a hardware manufacturer first and foremost, but it is a logical move for Cupertino to make. Many of the ads AdMob displays in mobile apps direct users back to other programs in the App Store, so essentially Apple would just be closing the loop and taking in additional revenue by promoting its own revenue-generating software delivery method. Plus, it could probably use the company to place hardware ads as well, promoting less successful products through the massively popular iPhone.

If Apple is genuinely interested in getting into online advertising, it could attempt another acquisition, or it may start hiring staff with the necessary skill sets. I’d hazard a guess that if the computer maker did make a failed bid for AdMob, it’ll be twice shy about getting into the game now, since Google now controls an intimidating 30 percent to 40 percent of the mobile advertising market. It’d be hard to gain a solid foothold at this point.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• How to Market Your iPhone App: A Developer’s Guide
• Report: U.S. Mobile Venture Capital Investment, Q2 2010
• Report: The In-App Advertising Landscape