New Ultra-Intrusive Pop-up Ads Introduced 1068
CrashRide writes "According to this story at AdAge.com, Unicast is attempting to introduce a new on-line ad format that takes over the entire screen of the PC for about 15 seconds and must be closed by the viewer. "The ultra-intrusive new format opens when a user is on one page of a Web site and clicks a link to go to another page on the same site. Instead of seeing that new page, the user sees an ad that fills the entire screen.""
Unicast should be Unicastrated (Score:5, Interesting)
Ok So I'm not going to stop using the net, I will continue to do what I always have done. When a website resorts to these Ad tactics, I either a) give them money to stop as is the case with slashdot. ONLY if the content on the site is worth the price they are asking though b) use the handy features of phoenix to make the site usable, block ads from this server, nuke this image, dont allow pop ups or javascripts. or c) stop using the site all together.
I imagine these ads will piss off users and confuse the hell out of net illiterate types, to the point where they just stop visiting that site. What good is running a website and selling advertising space if NOBODY is watching anymore? Seems to me if sites are so desperate for advertising dollars, there is a better, less intrusive way to do it. Or maybe they should call it quits.
I like my slashdot subscription, but im curious if they makes more money from me removing the ads or from me viewing the ads?
This article said the ads would be 300k. Imagine some poor sap on dialup who has to download that crap when he is quickly clicking through links and subjected to 4 or 5 of these stupid things.
If I ever get one of these awful ads shoved in my face, I assure you I will not be coming back for seconds.
Re:Unicast should be Unicastrated (Score:5, Funny)
Hehe, yeah, I would wait at LEAST 2 to 3 seconds before coming back.
Re:Unicast should be Unicastrated (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Unicast should be Unicastrated (Score:5, Informative)
http://dion.swamp.dk/dl/userContent.css
Read a bit about it here:
http://dion.swamp.dk/stuff.html
Re:Unicast should be Unicastrated (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Unicast should be Unicastrated (Score:5, Informative)
Unicast Superstitial - Slashdot em here!! (Score:5, Informative)
Basically it looks like a full screen java script pop-up with flash content. Fortunately, Konqueror immediately complained about java script wanting to open a new window (I have it set to prompt), so it looks like these won't be much of a problem for the clueful user.
Still, the fact that a company is expending effort in the development of more intrusive advertising is reprehensible. Therefore....
Slashdot them here [unicast.com]
Hehe... (Score:5, Insightful)
Pays to browse with just about everything turned off/not installed.
I think the best defense against this sort of thing is to email the company in the pop-up add telling them you saw the add and because of it you are instigating a 6 month boycott of their product. Company gets enough of those, and they might rethink their adverting methods.
Excellent question (Score:3)
MrCaseyB,"I like my slashdot subscription, but I'm curious if they makes more money from me removing the ads or from me viewing the ads?"
Would It be better if I just gave in and clicked a couple dozen ads a day on a site I liked and wanted to support, or does micropayment scheme work out better ?
This is like the VOD, a pipe dream, the bandwidth isn't there, and why would the customer front the bill for it anyways ? Maybe it is time for a vi
Re:Unicast should be Unicastrated (Score:5, Insightful)
TV ads work, even in an age of remotes and Tivos, because TV is a passive medium. To flip to another channel or hit the "Skip 30" button takes effort from an non-interactive individual (even as small of an effort as using the remote is.) I've been known to watch commercial breaks on taped programs just because I'm too zoned out to notice, which says as much about the program as it does me. Inertia works against active ad avoidance on the TV.
The Internet, however, is a very interactive medium. Since the death of push, the only time I'm not interacting with the browser is when I'm streaming audio or video. Since I'm so interactive, it take very little effort for me to alt-tab to a new browser window or alt-f4 to kill the pop-up (if it even makes it that far with Mozilla.) Since I'm already interacting, inertia actually works for active ad avoidance.
Ultimately, this ad format will fail, not because it's too intrusive, but because it's too annoying. It's annoying enough that people will find a way to block the ads. Internet advertisers need to find a way to make their ads intrusive without being annoying, and full-screen pop-ups that steal focus are not the answer.
A while back, I compared the ratio of ad space to editorial content on Slashdot as compared to other media. For example, magazine ads are relative benign, you don't see people rising up demanding ways to get around magazine ads. But where /. has less than 1% of it's space devoted to ads, a magazine might have 33-50%. Those ads are intrusive, in that they're always there in front of the reader, but they're not too annoying. It helps that they're also highly targeted, you don't see ads for bridal dresses in a video game magazine.
Re:Unicast should be Unicastrated (Score:5, Insightful)
So there, I can bitch about all ads, all the time if I want to! I can't do as much about the magazine ads, though...
Really, though, let's not pretend that ads in our real life aren't without their cost.
Sounds Like (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Sounds Like (Score:3, Insightful)
Personally, I don't block banner ad images because they aren't really that intrusive. I do, however, have pop-ups blocked in Mozilla.
Intrusive Ad Business Model (Score:5, Funny)
2. ??
3. Profit
Makes sense to me.
"Ultra-Intrusive" my ass (Score:5, Funny)
otherwise you leave yourself no room once they do develop ass prodding software in ads.
It's too late for that... (Score:5, Funny)
People ask me about realplayer all the time... (Score:4, Insightful)
I am not the IT guy so I cannot tell them what to do, so I simply discourage them strongly. I tell them that, "RealPlayer is broken. It doesn't work anymore. The company died in the dotbomb. It is dangerous. It is created by terrorists. It destroys computers. You should never install it, and tell your friend that they should not use it. We can't play RealPlayer on our system. It was used on the old C-3PO operating system. Our computer doesn't support it. It is full of viruses. IT WILL KILL YOUR COMPUTER."
I hate lying to people. Hate it. However the urge to play anything, and I mean anything, no matter how inane, by their corporate buddy in another cubicle is SOOO STRONG (I mean moth to bug zapper strong) that they simply cannot exsist witout RealPlayer. After all, you are telling them not to do something, and they want to see that guy light his own flatulence. You see why you lose in that situation.
However, if you don't tell people a thousand reasons IN THE MOST EXTREME TERMS why they should not use RealPlayer, then the little moron will dodge your advice and install the danged thing. Then they will come to you with a computer that is half the speed that it was before and screws with you at all times. Then THEY START THE REAL LYING.
"I didn't install RealPlayer! No I didn't! You told me I shouldn't so I didn't!"
-TWO MINUTES LATER-
"Okay... Well, I just HAAAAD to see that baby dancing video! I saw it on an Ally McBeal rerun and it was soooo cute!"
It amazes me how many people have come to me for casual advice and then utterly bypass it to their own detriment. It is one thing to not know and accidentally install RealPlayer. It is another thing to ask, and then after hearing "EVIL! EVIL! EVIL!" from a person who knows, and still install it.
Re:"Ultra-Intrusive" my ass (Score:4, Funny)
Ultra-Intrusive
Ultra-Wide-Intrusive
Ultra-Fa
Ultra-Fast-Wide-Intrustive160
Ultra-Fast-Wide-Intrustive320
Re:"Ultra-Intrusive" my ass (Score:5, Funny)
Anybody else expecting the phrase 'with wings' to appear in that one?
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re:So? (Score:5, Insightful)
Now *that* would be ultra intrusive...
Re:So? (Score:3, Funny)
Yeah, they used to tie up Vinny and throw him on my porch every Sunday. He was a really nice guy with a real talent for breaking arms and hammering toes when I skimmed passed the Classified section or glanced pass one of those ad boxes on the bottom right.
Unfortunately, he suffered from splinters and abrasions after the rainy seasons when my wooden porch fell into disrepair; and, when the new paper boy started throwing him in the cact
I remember popups ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I remember popups ... (Score:3, Informative)
When asked about the new Unicast full-screen format, Chuck Gafvert, AOL's vice president of ad technologies and sales engineering, e-mailed back that "we are looking at a variety of ad formats -- including Unicast -- that advance advertiser interests without in any way negatively affecting the member experience. We look forward to expanding our ad
Re:I remember popups ... (Score:3, Informative)
I have memories of popups as well but Mozilla (or mostly Galeon in my case) deals with them so well that I don't even know of their existence.
Some time ago blocking popups wasn't always so succesful because some sites relied on users' ability to see popups. I remember one common use was a username/password popup but I think they have mostly disappeared. Because site designers know that they can't rel
Re:I remember popups ... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I remember popups ... (Score:5, Informative)
I'm still not sure if popups actually exist out there. I guess I have to go fire up IE and check it out sometime :)
Thanks, team Mozilla!!
Re:I remember popups ... (Score:3, Informative)
Set mozilla script permissions (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Set mozilla script permissions (Score:3, Informative)
It covers the Start bar (Windows XP), but I still have the control box to close the stupid thing at least.
Also, I have my user.js file set to keep windows from opening in a new window, but that didn't stop the ad from opening in it's own window.
Try it yourself here http://www.unicast.com/gallery/index.asp# [unicast.com]
Requested popup? (Score:5, Interesting)
hmmmm...since you have to CLICK on it, would this be considered a "requested popup," something that pheonix, and mozilla allow? I'm sure the great team of programmers will still beat it,but until they do, this will be annoying!
I can just see it... (Score:5, Funny)
You begin freaking out but that doesn't compare to the reaction your boss is going to have when he walks by...
Re:I can just see it... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:I can just see it... (Score:3, Funny)
You should try viagra.
Re:I can just see it... (Score:3, Insightful)
ITYM, "when she walks by ..."
Actually, doesn't have to be your boss; it's almost worse if it's the summer intern. Either way, with "workplace environment" law you're pretty well done for.
Re:I can just see it... (Score:5, Funny)
Almost happened, I just looked at the demo gallery for unicast.com, and a Volvo popped up on the screen.
Re:I can just see it... (Score:4, Funny)
Disabling JavaScript window resizes (Score:3, Redundant)
If it gets obnoxious enough, people will find ways around it.
Re:Disabling JavaScript window resizes (Score:4, Informative)
Nice one with no thought. (Score:5, Insightful)
1. make sure a user of a website is forced to see at least one ad for 15 seconds.
2. make sure the user goes "wtf is this shit?" and go find a better site without that kind of crap.
even if it becomes pervasive, and 90% of sites use this kind of 'feature' in its ads, it'll force people over to the sites who don't... which will in turn increase their traffic and own ad revenue.
tards!
Re:Nice one with no thought. (Score:5, Funny)
Here's a great story. The other day, I realized it was high time I ran ad-aware and cleaned up. It found about 30 spyware apps that had found their way on to my box and proceeded to clean them up. I rebooted. Nothing. It would load 2k all the way, but nothing would start. Rebooted safe mode, ran my boy Norton through there, no errors found. Reboot normal mode. Nothing. To date, I've NEVER had a 2k problem this bad. Visual C++ programming, 3d studio, a ton of other high profile, system-hogging programs, and nothing this bad, ever. I'm 100% sure it had something to do with the spyware removal. Something deliberate and malicious. The basic, underhanded message seems to be "wipe our spyware, we'll make your machine unusable"..
So..reinstalled 2k, updated, patched, drivers installed..about 2 minutes into use..messenger service message comes in..oh fuck, forgot to block that..the message is an ad..telling me I can, for $29.99, buy a program that will BLOCK MESSENGER SERVICE ADS. At this point I'm so full of rage that I'm punching the cat. I don't know what to be more furious over..the delivery method they employed..or the fact that they're charging $29.99 to bust out at most 10 clicks of a mouse..I send them a STRONGLY worded letter..and offered them my "change your background image" software for $49.99 and that I'd throw in my "boot up sound changer" for free..still no reply.
This was ours..all of this..before they took it and raped it and bastardized it. This was our geekly little hobby and now I'm ashamed of it. I question if it's even worth fighting for.
I'm not worried (Score:3, Insightful)
Don't the game sites already do this? (Score:5, Funny)
Don't see the point of a pop-up. However I have set my Mac to emit a large belch every time it smacks down a popup for me. I like that.
Re:Don't the game sites already do this? (Score:5, Informative)
Great, now I'll Need a TiVO to Browse the Web... (Score:5, Funny)
Flickering, too? (Score:5, Funny)
Old News (Score:4, Funny)
Of course, this is not through personal experence.
Of course.
This is wonderful (Score:5, Interesting)
Garbage like this just makes b0rken browsers like IE less and less tolerable to Joe User. Making Joe unhappy with IE is good because the sites the rest of us need to use will be less and less able to count on IE as some "universal standard."
As the French Revolutionaries put it, "The worse, the better."
Re:This is wonderful (Score:3, Interesting)
Ok, yeah, it can't do it by default. So what? There are innumerable popup blockers which vary from blocking all new windows unless you hold down some key (like Popup Stopper [panicware.com]) to COM wrappers that do pretty much what Mozilla does (one of which is Crazy Browser [crazybrowser.com]) to proxy filters that filter out unwanted popups, ads, and more (such as Proxomitron [proxomitron.org]. The last of which filters out far, far more than what Mozilla does, although it could be used w
Re:This is wonderful (Score:3, Funny)
My personal kneejerk reaction is that MS has some vested interest in allowing popups. While this seems plausible, I haven't figured out all the intermediate steps, between "1. Allow popups" and "8. Profit!".
EEK! That's too big (Score:5, Insightful)
If their going to force people to spend 1 minute to download an ad (plus a forced 15 seconds to view the ad), they had better come up with a way to reimburse people, either financially, or with MUCH better content.
the victim (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:the victim (Score:5, Interesting)
The insideous part of this is that it doesn't require any scripting on the client side. In todays database served web pages, all that has to happen is that each link is really a link to an ad, and passes to the ad a reference to the actual content that should be displayed afterward. That reference may be an actual URL, or just a symbol that only the server can decipher.
This will all be taken care of on the server side. Ex: Slashdot main page is displayed. Instead of a link taking you to an article, it links directyl to a full page ad, but as part of a hidden form the real destination page is passed. So you click the link to see the full article, you first see a full page ad, then the ad sends you to the article page.
All the client ever sees is standard HTML, and a header with a "refresh content" directive with a 15 second delay.
The best you could hope for here is that a browser, upon recieving an HTML header with a reload directive would immediately jump to the new URL and not display the ad's URL. Of course, the web server could have an extension that would literally lock you out of the content until the 15 seconds were up. To be more malicious, the server may be set to lock you out of the entire site for progressively longer periods if it detects you are bypassing the ads. You might find that you are barred from a site for 24 hours because you refuse to generate a revenue stream for them.
The short of it all: This may very well be the Internet killer that everyone has feared.
We can block pop-ups. we can filter images, we can block most spam, but we can't get around this ad scheme, at least no completely.
Re:the victim (Score:3, Insightful)
unfortunately, most marketroids won't understand that those people who use popup blockers find it morally objectionable to purchase products advertised in them. they could think of it this way: by still allowing these people to see whatever content (and standard banner ads too no doubt), they're effectively saving themselves 300K of bandwidth per page hit.
now the thousand dollar challenge
Freedom (Score:3, Interesting)
The most dissapointing thing is I think adult sites have been doing this for a while now. So it really isnt new.
Anyways this technology doesnt really affect me as I dont have the features enabled to take advantage of their new ads.
They're free to do what they want with their sites but we're also free not to view their sites.
I think that with AOL reducing pop-up ads that you wont see too many of this format.
i've seen this... (Score:3, Interesting)
If he's any indication of whether or not these things work, well, I think this won't go over well with people at all. It may turn some people off of the advertised products. In any case, use mozilla or netscape with pop-up blockers...and don't set msn.com to be your homepage *sigh*.
Note to self: (Score:5, Insightful)
And this is new? (Score:3, Interesting)
At least if this is a genuine pop-up, you can use a pop-up blocking utility to kill it. With the interstitial ads there's no way around it because they're actually integrated into the page.
Full screen advertizing (Score:5, Funny)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Support Think Geek [thinkgeek.com]
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
it will go away eventually as it is deemed ineffective. Unfortunately all the IE users are going to be stuck in the meantime. Another plus for mozilla.
Nothing new (Score:5, Funny)
The Pornification of the Net - thanks Unicast! (Score:5, Insightful)
Except that there is just one tiny problem... porn sites have a carrot that can entice their prospective patrons into looking past such distractions: PORN. Most web sites don't offer anything that has such a powerful and nearly universal appeal.
I predict that this new advertising paradigm will have a half life measurable in weeks...
Eventually, people won't visit your site anymore (Score:5, Insightful)
You use, you lose. Would Google be search engine king if it had pop-ups, flash animation, things zipping across the screen, or 15 second full screen ads? I refuse to sink to the level to even answer such a simple common-sense question.
Those ads probably cost more and therefore generate more initial revenue for anyone visiting the sites that use them. But if you make enough surfers annoyed (as this will), eventually they won't come to your site anymore.
--
Slashdolt
Been there (Score:4, Interesting)
Talk about killing the goose and all that. Piss your readers off. Maybe Wired should go with the Salon model (view an ad, get a few pages).
Hacking? (Score:4, Interesting)
Now more than ever, you'll need this... (Score:3, Informative)
How to Uninstall Flash Manually (for Linux users) [macromedia.com]
Direct link to Win32 Uninstaller [macromedia.com]
It's your computer... (Score:4, Funny)
Phoenix/Firebird - blocked [texturizer.net]
Opera - blocked [opera.com]
Mozilla - blocked [mozilla.org]
Netscape - blocked [netscape.com]
IE - oh thats a feature.
Eep! (Score:5, Funny)
Let's hope no one combines this pop-up technology with.. THE LINK. (you know which one I'm talking about.)
Having that image full screen for a mandatory 15 seconds.. *shudder*
Imagine "The Link" Being Displayed Like This (Score:3, Funny)
Wouldn't that be a nightmare?
-Lucas
Gallery of Examples at Unicast... (Score:5, Informative)
Unicast has their gallery of examples here [unicast.com]. See the examples for "full-screen superstitials" -- Unicast's name for their format.
Unicast claims these ads will be *less* annoying than pop-ups, because, rather than open new windows you have to close, this ad format temporarily takes over the existing window, and people are used to this style (think TV commercials).
And, for those posters who wonder what types of sites would consider using this...Unicast has a list here [unicast.com].
Indeed. (Score:5, Funny)
"We believe that just like in television, the creative you build is what gets shown, the technology should not get in the way," said Allie Savarino, senior vice president for global marketing, Unicast.
Heh. I agree wholeheartedly on the point of technology not getting in the way--if what they do annoys me, I'll work around it, regardless of whatever technology they employ to keep me from doing so. The marketroids may not yet realize it, but computer geeks know how to use technology, too!
I'd say that this is like biting the hand that feeds you, but it's really more like biting the ass that flaps at you from a passing car's window. It's a really, really bad idea, the execution is almost guaranteed to be ugly, and in the end, the marketer's face is gonna be in a whole lot worse shape than the geek's ass...
One more time? (Score:3, Funny)
Run that by me again?
How can this POSSIBLY be thought to be new? (Score:3, Insightful)
I guess I'll just have to alias the entire unicast.com domain to the good old 127.0.0.1 IP address in
Microsoft already has such an advert.... (Score:5, Funny)
Surely these adverts can be killed on Windows by pressing ALT F4 or CTRL ALT DEL then kill the window.
Evil ads (Score:5, Informative)
It basically works by acting as a local proxy on your computer. As web requests comes down, it rewrites the http stream on the fly to get rid of objectionable commands (blink tags, status line scrollers, background midi music, popups, etc). All filters are 100% customizable, but the ones it comes with do a great job.
Not as easy to block as you might think... (Score:5, Insightful)
A simple pop-up blocker that blocks ALL pop-ups won't help, cause you'll click on the link and nothing will happen. A pop-up blocker that blocks unrequested pop-ups but allows those you "asked for" with a click won't stop them, they'll show up ('cause they appeared as a result of a click).
Finally, something that recognizes, even for "requested" pop-ups, that it's a fiendish full-screen hijacker pop-up, won't help too much if it simply resizes the window, shoves it into your current tab, etc. It'll still have to dig into the pop-up data to figure out what link to go to next (which might not be obvious, could be randomly obfuscated, etc.) Plus, they could put a bunch of links into the pop-up, for more information, to get on a mailing list, etc., and only one of them (which one??) would continue you through to the original link.
Basically, you can turn 'em off, but you can't get to the content w/out living with it. And there are LOTS of ways they can prevent you from getting there, automatically, without seeing their ad.
(at least, this is what I'd expect, as I haven't seen any of these yet. but I haven't yet seen anyone come up with a way to skip the interstitials (there's that word again!) on, say, salon.com.)
Be thankful for Privoxy...here are some nice rules (Score:4, Informative)
This just makes me more thankful for Privoxy [privoxy.org]. As an example, here are some fun rules I created. (Note, the regexps should be all on one line, regardless of what your browser displays.)
Remove IGN interstitials: this skips them for the most part. I'm sure it can be modified for other places. (I pay for IGN Insider and shouldn't be subjected to this. Granted recently they've introduced a feature to switch off ads for insiders, but this is still a useful example.)
Just add +filter{ign} to your default.action.
Here's another one that makes a certain site you might be reading look considerably nicer:
Of course, you should support any sites that you like. As I said, I subscribe to IGN, as they provide a great deal of extra content for insiders, in addition to an already great site.
But ads still suck.
Does anyone else see the irony here? (Score:3, Insightful)
Like that's ever going to happen.
Then again, we are talking AOL customers, here...
Text ads are the best (Score:3, Insightful)
This kind of ultra-intrusive advertising is a TV style advertising that will not work on the web, since the web user is not expecting to accept information pushed onto him like a TV user does.
Will advertisers stop at nothing... (Score:3, Insightful)
Did you read the "whitepaper"?? (Score:4, Interesting)
According to their "research" 78% of people find pop-ups annoying, but only 30% of people found the full-screen interstitials annoying. 59% found them "entertaining"...
The sad thing is that with our culture, I am starting to believe those numbers...
-sker
NOT NEW (Score:5, Insightful)
As do many other sites, including yahoo groups, when you click on reading the next group, they first take you to an add and you have to click again to go to the real site.
Re:pop up killlers (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously, this is nothing new...suddenly changing the size of the popup ad makes it innovative?
Re:pop up killlers (Score:4, Insightful)
That's how these people "think".
They also think annoying people will get them to buy their advertizers' products.
For the good of society, I should be allowed shoot whoever I see fit.
Re:pop up killlers (Score:5, Interesting)
This is more effective than you might think - look at x10. They were the first company to carpet-bomb the web with popups, everybody hates them, yet they are pretty successful at selling their product. Also consider loud, annoying TV commercials. They are universally despised and hated, yet everybody remembers that Crazy Eddie has the best prices on electronics.
Re:pop up killlers (Score:4, Informative)
commit yourself to being ad-free (Score:5, Interesting)
why should the bombardment stop? don't demand advertising silence from the advertisers - they're making too much money to give it up - demand it from yourself.
for the last five years, i have been persuing a policy of personal advertising exposure reduction. my formula for it is simple:
- kill your television. if you haven't figgured out that programming is just the coating to get you to swallow the ads... well, you're not paying attention then! donate yr tv to the women's shelter or something. if you must get the content (say, 6 pm buffy) nab it from bittorrent.
- commit to ad-free radio there are ad-free and ad-reduced radio stations out there such as your state provider (cbc, bbc &c). your local university probably has a good radio station (the one in my town is awesome! [cjsw.com])
- don't be a billboard, eschew visible branding you pay $20 more for the shirt with the nike swoosh on it. why pay them to be their billboard? de-logo-ize your stuff and avoid purchasing items with large, visible logos. (you may argue about band tee shirts now, if you wish
:>)
- avoid points programs does every store have to have a points card now? don't play! the "savings" and bonuses you reap do not represent a decrease in the retailer's profit but, rather, an increase in the median price of services and products offered. the primary purpose of the campaigns is to gather data on you for future marketing and advertising campaigns. don't participate.
obviously those aren't hard "rules" (who the hell am i to tell you what to do?), but if you want to live with less advertising, it's a good way to start. the most important suggestion i can make is to spend a fair amount of time deciding how you classify different kinds of advertising and what you want to achieve. what do you think of classified ads? band tee shirts? the chrome logo on your car? think this stuff through early on!Re:commit yourself to being ad-free (Score:4, Interesting)
1. Telephone sales:
- Leave person waiting. That is, first ansver, let him/her start up then say "oh, just a sec..." and go take a bath. I'm not talking quick shower here, take a real long soaker. Then go back and see if they're still there. I have actually never experienced a person calling back after this treatment. It also works great for busy people as you don't have to waste time on the phone.
- Blow off some steam. I know this isn't nice to the poor people on the other end of the line, but hey! They called me!
2. Advertising material and catalogs:
- The bin-trick. Have a special bin available near your mailbox or wherever you get your mail. Now simply shake your newspaper over it before you read it. I also use it to sort out the other folders and stuff dumping in unaddressed. I don't recycle this, I use it in my fireplace. Hey, it's free!
- Readdressing. In many cases you can readdress the material and dump it back in the mail. "Return to sender" is my favorite. Be sure it ends up at a real mailbox and not in some no-go end address or the work will have been for nothing. If you don't accept the mail, the company sending it will have to pay for the return postage!!!
There are tonns of other stuff one can do, if one has some energy to waste... Maby someone has some ideas I haven't thought of? Post em!
Oh, and don't say shooting at the mailboy with BB-gunns or stuff. I've tried that, and it hurts to be shot at. (I was doing the delivery...)
Re:pop up killlers (Score:4, Interesting)
"The only format that loads completely before it is allowed to play, the Full Screen Superstitial is guaranteed to play perfectly for every consumer, every time. "
Unless you're using Opera with pop-ups disabled. And their examples don't download completely before playing anyway.
They must be so proud of themselves.
Re:pop up killlers (Score:3, Interesting)
A. Do like IGN does and make the ad something you view on your way to another page, which you cant really 'block' per se.
B. Do like this one forum website does (the name of which escapes me) and detect if the popup is being received or not, and if its not being shown, simply cripple the page until you disable the popup blocker. Diabolical I tell you.
The kinds of people who come up with this stuff should get another job. Really, I wonder if they are people who are
Re:pop up killlers (Score:5, Interesting)
The average Joe User really has no clue.
Yesterday, I sold my 10th $50 service to "remove Gator [gator.com] and its associated crap" in this month alone. The customer was complaining that their AOL connection had slowed down substantially. Little did they know that Gator (and it's friends) was sucking up the bandwidth in order to install all kinds of crap. This particular user had installed a popup blocker in order to simply use the PC. When I turned off the popup blocker, I was astounded at just how many popups they were getting. Phenomenal.
Someone needs to develop a DNS/hosts update service that will allow automatic updates to the hosts file in order to block these sick companies. Until then, I'll be happy charging $50 to "fix it".
I love rich, non-technical people.
Re:pop up killlers (Score:5, Informative)
I even keep a current copy on my website right here [7deadlysins.ath.cx]. Really makes a difference in page loading times.
Re:Trouble with hostsfile (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:pop up killlers (Score:5, Informative)
Go here [lavasoft.de] and download AdAware. It'll do the work for you.
Re:pop up killlers (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:pop up killlers (Score:4, Informative)
Yeah, and I didn't drive my car ttoday, I just got into my automobile instead.
Javascript+CSS=DHTML.
Re:pop up killlers (Score:5, Interesting)
Approach 1: If the ad is an interstitial, the user is clicking a link. So it's not an unrequested popup -- it's a requested popup. Many popup blockers won't prevent requested popups. Also, since the user is clicking a link, I'd put this page in between the main page and the requested page, so the user HAS to see this page on his way to the other page -- people with popup blockers will have no choice but to permit the popup. I'd open up a new, maximized window, stripping out all useful browser controls, and I'd use Javascript to time a redirect to the new page, probably using a form post so I could track info about the click-through. Then, I'd have a close button on the new page (but not on the interstitial!) for when the client is done viewing the content.
Approach number 2: Let's say that isn't gung-ho enough, and we figure out that some people are still figuring out a way to wiggle around the interstitial. No problem, we use Java, and the new Swing tools which let you pop up windows that look like normal system windows (even if it's a web app). Then, we proceed to take over the whole screen and capture all mouse input for the fifteen seconds. Since it's a Java window and not a popup, the browser doesn't interfere. For people using IE, there's probably a way to do this with ActiveX although I'd have to read up on it. I'd choose one or the other based on the browser the person is running. Clicking the link would call a function in the applet or active X control which pops up the ad. When the ad is done, it could interact with Javascript and let the calling page know it was finished, and forward the user on to the requested page. I think I'd do this using a requested popup window with the applet/activeX object embedded in it. Then, that window would be the one that got forwarded.
Basically, I think that any company that can hire a sufficiently talented, unscrupulous (or starving) developer can open up a can of popup whoop-ass whether the rest of us like it or not.
Pretty much the only thing you can do is ban sites that resort to such sleazy bullshit.
Re:Opera 1, Unicast none (Score:3, Informative)
YMMV once they come up with actual ads, since they can make the eventual receiving page enforce the pop-up. However, I'm sure that Opera [opera.com] will come up with something to handle it (popup spoofing? we'll pretend that the popup actuall opened).
Re:IE Users (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Use your hosts file... (Score:3, Informative)
I suggest you check out http://pgl.yoyo.org/adservers
They're currently blocking 971 FQDN's that are serving up ads. I'm using their list on my DNS... while I still see popups, it's exceptionally fun to see a DNS/no resolve error instead of an irritating flashing picture. ^_^
Re:Just another case of Marketing being stupid. (Score:4, Informative)
I've worked in product marketing and know firsthand that such "research" can be highly misleading. Generally, these results come from focus groups where you bring people in (for pay) to evaluate an ad or campaign or whatever. When being asked to view an ad, then answer a series of questions, people invariably tend to be more favortably inclined because of the context of their experience--i.e. "I'm at a focus group to look at ads."
If they are on their own time, and attempting to access whatever content and are delayed by an unexpected ad which hinders them, the effect is almost universally negative.
And I'll only mention the psychological desire to please the questioner in passing (ever notice how they always pay for focus group participation and ply you with tasty goodies before showing you the "exciting new ads that our client wants to share with you").
If you've ever wondered why so much marketing seems so blatently stupid, a lot of it has a lot to do with the ubiquitous "focus group" system. it's a classic case of the "Emperor's New Clothes." Market research firms tend to wind up being supportive of the hypothesis as a simple matter of survival. They usually don't cheat the numbers per se, but they stack the deck ridiculously in their favor.
If I were to set up an objective test for these ads, I'd tell the participants that the objective is to "read all the slashdot articles of interest to you" (or whatever) and then interrupt them with the ads. Although even this method is flawed (most people are savvy enough to know what's being tested), I would bet that the results would be different.
Most focus groups are a scam. They exist to cover Marketers' asses and rubber stamp their ideas because they're too gutless to innovate.