The ad on top of the page that says like "Two minute facts" or something is really making my computer slow. Im using firefox and I have almost a gig of ram, so it isn't my computer. Does anyone else have this issue?
Printable View
The ad on top of the page that says like "Two minute facts" or something is really making my computer slow. Im using firefox and I have almost a gig of ram, so it isn't my computer. Does anyone else have this issue?
I've not had that problem. Why not just AdBlock them out?
Because that's against the AUP.
Remix, is this the ad? If so, it's not causing a problem here. It might be your Flash plugin.
I have never seen that ad before... Does it appear in the top right like all the Microsoft ones?
ironicaly, that's the ad that showed when I pulled this thread up.... I've had issues with some ads in the past being flash heavy causing a slowdown.... but since our server caches everything now, it's only slow once.
-tg
Yes that ad. And if I could I would adblock it, but it is not ad blockable :mad:Quote:
Originally Posted by penagate
Are you sure? I think I've got it blocked.Quote:
Originally Posted by |2eM!x
It's not really, is it?Quote:
Originally Posted by penagate
Its actually in the second to last item in the AUP:
Ads pay for the site maintenance and upgrades. Its not too much to put up with when considering how much help you get in return. :)Quote:
You will not attempt to access any protected sections of the sites or Forums, nor make use of any hacks, cracks, bug exploits, etc. to bypass or modify the features of the forum software at any Jupitermedia site.
We could always do an Ad free site but then it would cost you a subscription ($) to gain access for some specified duration.
I actually like things the way they are and the new adition of the player instead of a basic Ad. :thumb:
I'm well aware of the importance to Ads to the continued running of free sites. But how do the Ads actually conferr money to the site? Is it the number of times they're clicked on? number of times they're viewed? number of times they are accessed from the host site?
I don't know how AdBlock works (I'm pretty noob about web things), but if it's loading the ad but just not displaying it then is that going to actually affect the revenues?
to me that suggests just not trying to get round the vBulletin code.Quote:
to bypass or modify the features of the forum software
I'm not trying to be contrary just curious as to how it actually affects it :)
The revenue from Ad's presumably depends on each case, and we are not privy to that kind of information.
As to blocking the Ad's, it is bypassing the features of the forum. If the number of page views for Ad's go down, the advertisers will be less likely to want to come here - and as such the site income will go down. Due to the continued growth of the site, we cannot expect JM to lose income and keep the site running to the standard we expect.
As the adverts we get are all pretty well focused at developers, they often show things that are useful to us - I currently have a web-hosting one on screen, which could be very useful for me in a month or so.
I liked the one on the 2 minute tip in medial player format. Its informative and directly targeted to our members as something that they will actually want to click on and learn about. I think we should have more of that type of Ads (in the concerned space and not that I want more real estate taken up by ads ;)). :D
Would caching the ads not have the same effect?Quote:
Originally Posted by si_the_geek
Surely the page impressions would remain the same. I'm just trying to get an idea of where the line between the stuff that just effects my computer and the stuff that gets sent back to the web servers is.
You are assuming that the Ad's don't communicate with a server, and are "allowed" to be cached. I have no idea if either of these are true, but the simple truth is that blocking Ad's is not allowed - see posts by Brad in this forum for a more accurate explanation.
I dont mind the normal ads..But I won't allow this stupid ad to crash my system..Quote:
Originally Posted by si_the_geek
It is not the ad that is the problem, but the add-in to your browser. Change browsers.Quote:
Originally Posted by |2eM!x
To address some other questions --
Ads cover the cost of running the site. Yes, if you block ads and tell us that, then we are likely to ban you. The key is to not tell us and we'd not know. Don't tell others either though, because that will get you banned too if we find out.
How ads generate revenue is dependent upon how the ad and sales person determine the measurements. This can be by display an ad a certain number of times (which means if some one blocks it, they are simpy making everyone else see it more), or by click throughs, or by time duration on the site. There are other metrics as well that can be used.
A lot of ad blockers simply block certain images and file types that come from certain URLs. Most ads are served separate from the standard page, so page views dont' change if ads are blocked.
As to the real impact of a bunch of people blocking ads.... more ads or more creative ads like the sticky posts. Revenue has to be generated to cover the costs of bandwidth, servers, and such. So ads need to be displayed and clicked on or else something else will have to be done to generate revenue. Simple business. It is just like the reasons that television shows don't want VCRs and DVRs that can skip commercials. It means they don't get the revenue for the commercials and thus they could be forced to make everything reality-based television with low-budgets. No SG-1, no Dr. Who, no CSI, No Lost.... only low-budget junk.... We don't want that on TV and we don't want it here.... :D
Brad!
With all do respect Brad, that is not acceptable suggestion. If someone designs something - he/she better make sure that their new piece of art is compatible with most popular softwares. But recommending to change it... Please.Quote:
Originally Posted by brad jones
BTW, I use IE (and IE only) and have very fast system but even for me delays were noticable - without that ad respond is almost instantaneous and with the ad it takes few (about 5-10) seconds. Personally I can leave with that but absolutely no add shall eat my system's resources. This is similar to what was happening @CodeGuru few months ago.
Also, VCRs and DVRs are under federal regulations.
Cheers for the post and explaining it, Brad :thumb:
I hadn't even tried to block them until Remix's post - blame him (:D j/k)
Anyway, they're all reinstated - I just wished they something relevant to the hobbiests amongst us (though I suppose those ads would pull in much money - ho hum)
I completely agree with you :thumb:Quote:
Originally Posted by RhinoBull
Agreed +1 :wave:Quote:
Originally Posted by RhinoBull
Quote:
Originally Posted by brad jones
Ouch..:) I would rather change forum + gender before I do that, glad it is not slowing down the plug-in in Linux yet...:)
- ØØ -
Guys -
Just my standard reminder...
I use this forum too and thus I get the ads too. As such, I understand the issue with slow ads and such. (I don't get the issue with the forum crashing, but then I only use one add-in in Firefox for RSS feeds). If an ad takes a long time to load for you, it is likely taking a long time to load for me.
When an ad causes issues, do report it here in feedback. I don't control the ads, but I influence those that do. Your comments in the feedback forum also have the potential to influence. Whenever I get more than one person raising an issue about an ad, I generally forward that information directly to the ad/sales people. They will then follow up with the people that created the ad or make changes internally.
As always, the more descriptive you can be when reporting ad issues, the better.
Brad!
Brad, I really like the media player type ad with the 2 minute tips as its very convienent and directly targeted to our members here. Can we always have them as they come out?
I don't really understand what's being advertised with that thing - some tips-n-tricks ???
In my opinion it could appear as a link in the "VB Wire News" section.
Or perhaps create new forum (or subforum) to post only "media player type" threads but only as a link to a "real thing".
I had a feeling that post of mine may bring some responses. I would rather see a tip/trick then a ad about Sun or some other hardware vendor that I will never need.
If it was in vwire section then it would be a visible and would require you to open a new instance of the page/player.
If I was to choose I would pick "light ad" vs that thing - at least it doesn't eat resources.
That's the whole point - if I want to I click on it but don't load it without asking - you're basically stressing up my system.Quote:
Originally Posted by RobDog888
True, but thats a bug I think with this being the first player type ad and only affecting some members and not all.
I'm sure it affects MOST of us - not some of us - it's just that not everybody feels like telling. Also, lots of people would never return if they notice some serious "slow downs". So, I think publishing this sort of "ads" in such way will only hurt.
It is promoting an article on a different site that belongs to Jupitermedia - it is an internal promotion for that article and the new content type of video. We have several videos now that you can watch. The newest are listed on the front of Codeguru.com.Quote:
Originally Posted by RhinoBull
It any ad is eating a ton of resources, let me know and I'll report it so that someone can look to see if it can be cleaned up.
Brad!
Well, we all know that changing forums would be hard for you, so you might as well try the easier change ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by NoteMe
The ad loads for 3-5 seconds and it is really annoying. Let me choose to let the ad load, I dont watch them anyways so whats the point. :rolleyes:
The point is that without them there's no site to visit. You'd be trying to post on an empty lot.
-rasies hand-Quote:
Originally Posted by RhinoBull
Well...it used to until flash got screwed somehow in firefox, been meaning to fix it. But on my laptop I have experienced everything from a sluggish computer to firefox acctually crashing.
Btw, to the admins, any site that heavly relys on ads for income is a bad site imo. A good user driven site is supported by the users, not by advertising. Don't even say stuff like "well without ads we wouldn't be here" when I have seen several sites do successful without and ads, such as ohh its a big mmorpg, played mostly by people who are intrested in anime (I think its called gaiaonline or something). Where do they get their funds then you may be asking? Simple, from the users, prehaps have a 'premium' user account system for 10-20$/month and your account will be oped out of the ad system if your that concerned about money?
If you know any multi-national corporations which publish 30+ internet forums that are solely supported by user subscription fees, please post their corporate names. We're always willing to learn.
I don't see a delay, at all... And actually, I've watched them too.Quote:
Well...it used to until flash got screwed somehow in firefox
Expert-Exchange did everything you're suggesting and most devs I know hate it now. If I see it pop up in google search, I don't even bother clicking the link. It's a dead result to me and I actually get a little pissed when I click a result that takes me there.
A few ads don't bother me in the slightest. I don't know how often you use allapi.net (I beleive it was formerly mentalis?), but I went over there one day and the ads have gone from flashing "Congratulations" in a seizure like way to smilies that talk. Atleast the ads here are relative to what I'm doing. People give me hell all the time when my computer starts saying "Hey, smilies now have the ability to talk. Click here to download" or every now and then I get the flash ad of the cackling clown...
If it's because Fx has a bug with flash, use IE for a week or so until they fix it. It's not going to kill you. The internet isn't going to bend to your every request or discomfort.
I agree with 7Halo here. I saw the ad for the first time a few mins ago, and didn't see any slow down (i use firefox almost exclusively). Personally i like the ads here, and appreciate the minimalistic approach you all have taken. I browse codeguru evey now and then, and i'm always glad to come back here :).
Oh how true. When I am at CG I feel like its a newspaper type layout with all the ads and minimal content.
When I come back to vbf its like night and day. VBF #1 :thumb:
Would you like a side of spyware with those fries?Quote:
Originally Posted by sevenhalo
It wont kill me, itll kill my computer ;).
Expert-Exchange isn't that bad, sometimes though they don't have answers to the peoples problems. I'm not asking it to bend, I'm offering alternatives. And well, you probably know what I am going to do.
Also, I am on dial-up at home. Your probably thinking..."So what?". So thats a max of 5-7kb/s download or upload speed, which begs someone to ask the question "How big really are those ads?". Do the math here.
@JPnyc
I figured as much, you would twist my words. I didn't say that they would soley be supported by donations, I'm saying that can be an option for users to be oped out of the ad system if they pay a monthly fee. And the normal visitors/users would still see the ads, you would still make big $$$ off them, and everyones happy. Your happy, the users are happy. Then will we be ONE big happy family.
I really didn't want to get involved but, this all boils down to the question, do website owners really have the right to force users to view, or control what is on another users computer? Basically, do they control whats on another users computer? (I don't think thats what I'm trying to say but I'm in a hurry right now.)
I use an IE shell and I haven't had a single piece of malware on any pc I own for 2 yrs. I regularly scan with 3-4 different scanners of different companies, both online and local.
We're not forcing anyone to view anything. Even if we wanted to, there's no way we could. We don't have that power.
Your suggestion makes perfect sense to you, because you're not involved in this business. If you were, it would've occurred to you, while you were formulating the idea, that advertisers wouldn't be too excited about buying space on a forum which allows a portion of the userbase to opt-out, even for a fee. It's not helping THEM any, is it? All it does for them is cut down the potential audience. They'd take it elsewhere, or want to cut the ad rate considerably.
Advertising is a high output, low reward, equation. You might need to reach 100,000 potential clients, to get 50 returns out of it. That's the nature of the industry.
You do have a point JPnyc.
I know IE isn't that bad, I was making a paradoy (need to insert my stupid sense of humor whenever I can :(). But, somehow on every client computer I worked on, IE was riddled with useless toolbars and adware. -shrug-
But yeah I see where your comming from, do you do (ie do all PR handling yourselves) your own advertising or go through another company?
Unfortunately IE is the most commonly used browser by the average user, and the fact is it should really only be used by a pretty savvy user. Otherwise, it IS unsafe. What goes on out there is precisely the opposite of what should. My dad should be surfing with netscrape or firefox.
I recommend a gecko based browser, or better still, Opera, to people who are a bit less pc literate. More experienced users know how to configure IE so that it's quite secure. They also know what to avoid on the web.
Actually most of the advertisers come to us. We don't actively seek it, at this point. But I can tell you that the advertising rate changes with the number of hits on a site. That's why no-ads subscriptions would really hurt us. Technically it's not that hard to do separate versions of the forum, except for the payment processing. That part would be a major undertaking for us, since we're in no way equipped to handle it at present.
I'm Joe, by the way. Nice to meet you. :D
Grats on 1k posts :wave:
After that Fx Fodder bomb you just dropped, I have a feeling I'll be congratulating you on 2k posts in this thread as well. :lol:
Thanks, I hadn't even noticed. I joined this forum back when I was in I.T. school, to help me get through the vb section.
Acctually, if you sit down and write out the logic its not that diffucult, but yeah I can see what your talking about.
Hmm....-thinks-...
How about this run another forum, thats premium user only? Nah, that would never work? Would it?
Anyways, my general prefernce is open source/freeware. If its not open source then I generally don't use it (few exceptions). Like for example Fx, MySQL, and so forth.
I never have a problem with IE to be honest. But, I can't say the same for my dad :p.
I'm Nate (short for Nathan), feelings mutual. :)
And Joe you can probably understand my frustration, when someone tells me to go do something or download something....when the fastest you can download it is at 5kb/s.
Of course I understand. I'm a forum user too. That's how I came to have this job. I configured Dad's IE for him. He didn't want to learn a new browser (he's 79).
We're a big company and I don't get to do much back end stuff here, even though my training is more back end than front. We have separate deptartments for most everything that you can think of, and I'm the forums guy, as far as JM is concerned. I do write the front end hacks, like the ones we have here.
I respect the idea of the open source movement, but I'm coming from the other side of the equation. I've tried FF and thunderbird, and they don't suit me. To each his own. To me, they have poor memory management, and gecko breaks too easily with every bump in the road. I know that's because of poorly coded sites, but the reality is there ARE many badly coded sites on the web and that's not going to be any different tomorrow than it is today. I need a browser that just plows through it all, just like I would need a car (if i had still one) that does the same thing.
If I could afford a lambourghini countach, it wouldn't be of much use to me, even though i LOVE them. I wouldn't be able to drive it around NY. The roads here would destroy it in months, whereas a jeep would plow merrily along. But the roads in NY are what they are, and that won't change anytime soon. Same principle for me with browsers.
Interesting idea, k1ll3rdr4g0n. :thumb:Quote:
Originally Posted by k1ll3rdr4g0n
It actually makes lot of sense... Ads bring revenue if users click on it and they won't if we don't... So, if you wish to get something from someone like me that never clicks on any links unless I was searching for something very specific (or perhaps by accident) then your best shot at me is to make "show ads" optional and charge for that "option" - at least you can get few bucks - better than nothing...
The question, however, is - "Am I willing to pay?". I would experiment - nothing to loose really. :)
Yeah you noitced also fx isn't to good with memory. But damn just because she's fat doesn't mean she's to ugly to date if you know what I mean ;). I was acctually toying with the idea of making a console based web browser or making my own. It would be an intresting project for me, wouldn't be to hard either because it'll just be a html praser basiaclly without any extras like java/flash ect. Hard part would probably be filtering out the colors, but displaying text and tables shouldn't be too hard. But what I like about fx is the option to disable javascript and to disable java, there should be an option for disable flash to :).Quote:
Originally Posted by JPnyc
There is, in the shell I use. You can disable activeX, scripting, Java, sounds, video, images, on a per tab basis, or a global one, from the toolbar with a click. Flash can be disabled from the same place, however it can only be disabled globally, not per tab.
It also has an activeX download blocker that prevents and prompts if any site tries to DL an activeX program. You can also merge it with SP2 to get the protection of both.
Rhino, clicks have nothing to do with it. It's not a pay-per-click deal. As I explained above, we would have much to lose. I like to be able to give the users what they ask for whenever I can, but this isn't something we could do.
I ditched Internet Explorer for Netscape about 4 years ago. I got sick of its repeated crashing. I use Firefox as my main browser. Being a web developer and having installed the web developer extension, it helps a great deal.
I've only read the past couple of replies to this thread but my opinion is, is that browsers must adhere to standards if the web is to attain any kind of consistancy in the future. This way poor design will be punished and will soon disappear.
If you declare a class in C# or VB or Java and try and assign it to an instance of a dfferent class type it will fail. Thats a good thing .... Same should apply to web design.
I thought it was so I guess I missed your explanations somewhere along the "long threads"... Sorry. :ehh:Quote:
Originally Posted by JPnyc
We won't see a 'true' standard for awhile as the web is constantly changing with new addons such as java/flash/shockwave/other. (Just my opinion).Quote:
Originally Posted by visualAd
It's not an either/or proposition though. I think most people would agree that Opera's engine is standard's compliant, but you can't choke it near as easily as you can gecko. It's a hardier engine, more resilient, less fragile.
HTML/XHTML/CSS/js are standardQuote:
We won't see a 'true' standard for awhile as the web is constantly changing with new addons such as java/flash/shockwave/other. (Just my opinion).
I think he means a real world pragmatic standard.
Quote:
Originally Posted by big blue alien
What he said ;).Quote:
Originally Posted by JPnyc
I never really tried Opera, never got the intrest. But, I suppose I shall download it if you insist. :).
LOL, I'm not that pushy. It's free now though, so why they heck not? I have to have most every browser out there, or at least the ones that will run on windows.
sorry for such a late response.... I was at a Java conference last week :)
As to 'pay-to-avoid-ads'....
We've actually tried this as well as full subscription sites. The end results were that the communities (that were big) stated they wanted this, but when we set it up, the communities didn't support it. The results were that very few people took advantage of the subscriptions or the pay-to-avoid features. As a result, we are in the last stages of removing this from a lot of our content sites. On 'file sharing' type sites (like the jupitermedia graphics sites) the subscription model makes sense. On this type of site, it has been shown not to work. I also run jGuru which has a model for paying to remove the ads. We are about to remove that section because the number of people subscirbed is too small to support the added cost of maintaining the secondary look. That site even gives better searching and other features for the subscription fee. While people say that is what they want, what we've found, is that people would rather live with the ads rather then spend a few dollars - regardless of what they say.
So the bottom line is... don't expect a 'subscription to avoid ads' here. Our working with it in the past showed it wasn't worth messing with.
Brad
I personally wouldnt pay to use ANY site.
Ads dont bug me at all.. never had any problem with slowdowns etc...
In fact.. why not add another ad at the bottom... get a little more cash and up us to the newer vBulletin!!! :) teamxbox has it and its cool.. the quickreply is really quick
anyway we SHOULD get it free really since those of you who remember.. we were the giunea (sp?) pigs for all of Jon's testing.....