Slashdot Mirror
Unicast Claims Success With Internet Commercials
LightForce3 writes "Remember that trial run of full-motion commercials on sites like ESPN.com and MSN? The BBC reports that Unicast, whose caching technology makes these ads work, is claiming a strong favorable response from Internet users who viewed the advertisements. It looks like they could now be making long-term deals with clients (the article mentions Forbes.com and weather.com). As a dialup user, I am less than thrilled about the idea of an extra 2 MB download each time I visit one of these sites."
Can anybody tell me how this "caching technology" works? It looks like they cache video while a user visits several pages on a given site, and when everything is loaded, the video is played back. How do they make sure the caching operation keeps storing stuff while a user jumps from page to page? As far I know, when you switch to a new page, any javascript/java/activeX code on the old page is stopped and its data is deleted.
:-)
Frames could be an option (have a invisible subframe keeping on storing stuff), but this would mess with the URLs, which I think is not the case here.
Any insights? Thanks!
At least its free, some people pay for that kind of treatment ;)
Seriously though, I'm guessing you've read the Observer article on Sunday and now have yourself an opinion. But you are being far too general and reactionary here, your gripe is actually with the American government and its war machine, not with the people of America.
Just my two-penneth
Will Adblock be able to block these ads. It would be usefull if it did.
As annoying as ads may be, I'd rather have a site with heavy full motion ads and quality content than no ads and poor content.
After all, content producers need to get paid, and ads are among the few ways to achieve that without subscription services. As long as there are no feasible ways to internationally pay for content safely I'll put up with ads rather than loose the information I can get completely.
.: Max Romantschuk
As a dialup user, I am less than thrilled about the idea of an extra 2 MB download each time I visit one of these sites."
Maybe you could set your Internet Options to restrict the space for temporary files to be less than 2 MB?
An online survey of more than 3,500 users who saw the ads found that just 28% said they were annoying
Ok, first of all, I'm pretty sure that number is way too low. But even if it's correct, would you place a technology on your website that's proven to annoy at least 1/3 of your potential customers?
Underholdning.info
An online survey of more than 3,500 users who saw the ads found that just 28% said they were annoying.
That's almost a third of those surveyed found the advertisments annoying. Who would want to piss off a third of thier users?
And how do they count the number of users so annoyed that they go off the site and don't bother filling in the survey?
Tk
At some point, somewhere, the entire internet will be found to be illegal.
Never ask the sales person how good their product is, all you'll get is whatever they can spout off the top of their head as the newest sales line.
So true. This is the problem with the advertising industry as a whole. The people telling you how effective the advertising is are the same people selling you the advertising. People, wake up! Believing them is not a good idea. It never ceases to amaze me how intelligent business people are hoodwinked by the advertising charletans. Even before the click through debacle. Now that we have seen how that littel beauty worked, surely this kind of crap cannot be taken seriously?
"The first thing to do when you find yourself in a hole is stop digging."
As a media worker, I am not against advertising...
I only wonder 1 thing... Couldn't these ActiveX, JVM 1.1 geniuses who "invents" a thing which will result in more users filtering ads, code a small (64kb) bandwidth test BEFORE sending them 2mb?
With the proliferation of adverts on every spot you can imagine (I can't even enjoy the view on a public bus ride no more with the massive eye-searing ads bombed across the windows), there has to be a point at which the average consumer no longer conciously registers an ad. So then what's the point of advertising?
Junkbuster
works for most modern Operating systems and Windows based operating systems.
we added it at work and it made a 20% reduction in bandwidth use on it's own.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Where? I haven't seen ONE of them... But then I use FireFox with Adblock and Flash Click to view plugins ;)
Corporatism != Free Market
I notice that you are not a subscriber, so does that mean that you enjoy posting and taking part in this site without paying for it by allowing items to be advertised to you? For many sites the only way that they can make money from their content is to have people pay for it either directly or in advertising potential, but many of the people currently on the internet, and it seems to be mostly made up of longer term users, feel that they have a right to view a website without paying for it.
On the same note, something someone said to me a few days back struck a cord. The vast majority of the moaning on here about NYtimes articles requiring you to register to view them comes from people who have registered on slashdot. Repeat after me, you do not have a right to circumvent the cost factor of these websites, if the NYtimes says it has to sell your personal information on, then you still have the choice of wether or not to sign up and give them that info. Its not as if they are doing it behind your back, its one of the terms of the signup.
Focus groups will say anything for sweet, sweet candy.
And finding one kind of intrusive web add less annoying than another is like finding Gallagher less annoying than Pauly Shore.
-Carolyn
Like Daddy always said: if you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance, baffle 'em with bullshit.
To begin, if you enjoy using Opera by all means don't change. Opera is a very good browser with some very good features. I tried it, an use it to test my site dev given its adherence to web standards.
My main browser is Firefox/Firebird/BigBird/Bird/etc etc. I install one of the smallest icon themes I can find, hide both of the toolbars, and place all the needed buttons on one horizontal. I then install mouse gestures, ADblock and Click to view flash and RSS reader. I have a very large screen area, IMHO, far bigger then Opera, and only the features I need.
But as I said, Opera is still one very good product.
Privoxy makes it pretty easy to boycott ads...
Now, if it was easy/cheap to set up a transparent proxy (so that your grandma could do it) then ad/commercial boycotting could be so effective that you'd have to start swiping your credit card to surf a site (pay-per-page).
Like many others, I use Privoxy along with Squid so that I cache everything that is static non-ads.
I need a TiVo for my car. Pause live traffic now.
They do. Unicast and a couple of the others use a bandwidth checker to figure out if it's worth it to actually worth it to start downloading. It's how they're avoiding the problem of users lacking broadband. It's basically a "speed check" (I've used it in campaigns for Compaq...so you get the sense that this has been around since 2000/2001).
Question then: has anyone experienced any bandwidth problems that are associated with these types of ads?
---- Please be nice in case my Slashdot karma ~= my real life karma.
Actually it's trivially easy to do that, assuming you only need to divide people into "slow, fast, superfast" connections.
You just feed them a very large yet invisible background image on their first visit, and have a program feeding the image. Program knows how long it took to feed the image, therefore which category the user is *probably* in, and puts the IP address in a database and a cookie on the machine.
If the cookie is there you put that speed value in the DB (again with the IP address).
Over time you get a nice database full of IP addresses and the speeds at which their users surf.
You can also do the same inside Flash and simply branch in your preloading process based on connection speed. I've actually done that before in Flash5, it would be easier with MX.
I would be surprised if the full-motion ad types don't do something similar as the ads become more widespread. You obviously don't want to feed a dialup user 2MB, they will probably click away. But you *would* want to feed them a 50K version of the ad.
Of course, it would be so much nicer for everyone if browsers sent a Connection-Speed header.
This Like That - fun with words!