Slashdot Mirror
Google to Distribute Image Ads, Plans Email List Service
comforteagle writes "For the next shot in the search engine advertising war Google has launched image ads in addition to their popular text AdSense program. From Google's explanation page: 'Image ads will show in rotation with text ads. On a page by page basis, Google's technology determines whether text ads or image ads are likely to make you more money, and serves the best ads to your page.'" Another reader writes: "eWEEK.com is reporting that Google has begun testing a new mailing list service, Google Groups 2, sure to go head-to-head with Yahoo Groups. It eventually will replace what is today only a Usenet archive. Users of the new beta can start their own mailing lists (public or private) and in typical Google fashion, it is promising to put search front and center (even hinting at postings being included in Web search one day)."
sure to go head-to-head with Yahoo Groups. It eventually will replace what is today only a Usenet archive
"only" a Usenet archive? Yeah, those are a dime-a-dozen.
Google is not placing the ads on THEIR page, only on sites that use the AdSense service.
stuff
I hope they don't get rid of the usenet archive, that thing is a life saver for me and fellow IT workers. I don't think their is a better collection of help anywhere on the internet. If Google Groups goes it will be a sad day in Internet histroy and Google will loose a lot of my respect.
I worry that a number of people are going to only read the summary listed above and not realize that this if for their "Adsense" program which allows you to place Google ads on your website. Nothing has been said about putting image ads on Google's own search engine site.
RTFA, it has nothing to do with their search page and the ads that are displayed there.
AdSense is a service that Google provides to web publishers; basically they let other people use Google's advertising technology on their web site. There is no mention anywhere that Google itself will be using images in the ads on their search page.
What?
Uh. The ads are served from somewhere. Not only could you edit your hosts file or block the images from that destination in almost every common browser (IE, Mozilla, Firebird, Opera, etc), but you could also grab Firebird and install 'Adblock', a great utility that allows wildcarding of domains from which to block ad-banners.
Catches most stuff for me right now, and I've only got like 10 filters.
>(please, please, static images only).
.JPEG, .GIF, or .PNG format. Animated images will not be accepted.
What are the image ad requirements?
Format: All images you load must be in a
Size: You may choose from four standard ad sizes: Banner (468 x 60), Leaderboard (728 x 90), Inline Rectangle (300 x 250), and Skyscraper (120 x 600) (see examples here). Please note that we may resize your image slightly to accommodate your destination URL and the 'Ads by Google' feedback link, which can alter the proportions of your image. If you'd like to retain your image's original proportions, you may adjust your image sizes before you upload them (learn more.)
Image content: Your images must be relevant to your advertised concepts and products. For example, an Ad Group containing keywords like 'roses,' 'tulips,' and 'carnations' would call for floral-related images. We strongly recommend that you also include some descriptive text and a call to action to reinforce your ad's message.
Please note that we will only accept family safe images. For more details about acceptable image ads content, read the Google AdWords Editorial Guidelines.
Save the following in a text file:
Import the file into your AdBlock: Tools -> AdBlock -> Preferences -> AdBlock Options -> Import Filters
Blocks most annoying ads. The power of regular expressions!
Hmmm... one of Google's founders is from Soviet Russia. The origins of this ad scheme are starting to make sense to me now.
Why is this a troll? Ad Muncher 4.5 does this. You can set it to display alternate text or no text at all. I haven't seen a Google text ad in months.
I'm sorry but do Google text ads bother you that much? I actually find them useful and have wound up buying a few products from them. If you don't like them are they that hard to ignore? I don't recall ever seeing a Google text ad popping up with "Smack the Monkey and win $50!" in a flashing javascript banner that causes epileptic seizures.
I don't see any reason to block Google ads. They are useful and (more to the point) they provide pretty much the sole revenue stream to our favorite company. Why the hell would you block them?
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
I couldn't agree more. We've become so used to thinking Internet ad's == bad. But really, for me that's because of a handful of things...
... especially the ads they try to disguise as articles.
1) Intrusive ads (pop up/unders)
2) Ads which take longer to download than the content
3) Mis-leading ads
4) Completely random ads.
Personally I've never cared or complained about the Slashdot banner ads, or a myriad of other well executed ads. But I won't even consider browsing to MSN.com anymore because of the intrusiveness
Personally, I like to buy things, I don't always know everything I want to buy upfront, advertising targetted to my demographic is not something I see any reason to shun... especially seeing as it's revenue is what allows for alot of content.
Interestingly enough, internet advertisers have consolidated a lot in the past few years. I can tell you this since I use adblock and I have noticed that once you have about 5 domains wildcarded, you will block 99% of all ads.
l ick*
*adsdk.com*
*atdmt.com*
*qksrv.net*
*doublec
*valueclick*
Throw in ads.osdn.com for this site and a few other specialized ones and you're pretty much set. The one domain that is rather annoying is yimg.com (yahoo images) because they use it for both their advertisements and their normal site images and the URLs are sometimes difficult to distinguish.
I don't even notice ads/porn when they do appear, but if you can block them and prevent from displaying and even downloading at all, why wouldn't you? I don't find them useful.
The question is, if you don't notice them, why -would- you block them, when others have pointed out that they are relevant, and support a company who is providing a service to you? You say that you don't find them useful, but if you are blocking the ads, you don't find them at all, and can't really evaluate whether they are useful or not. You are assuming that because they are an ad, they aren't useful, but that isn't the case. The ads google provides are to services directly related to the search you have performed.
No sympathy here. If that's the best Google can do, then they can die for all I care. There's always someone else.
This is foolish. It is a shortsighted view at best. If a model does not work, it will die. From everything you have said, you like uncluttered, simple results, and probably a similar interface. Google provides both of these things for free. The least you can do is show a little support. If google does go under, sure, there may be someone else, but they're going to look at google's fate and say, well, that didn't work, so we're going to have to be more invasive, or less simple, or charge for our service...or whatever. None of which are better than simply letting relevant ads work for you.
Companies aren't going to provide search capabilities as a charity, so service users are going to have to support them in one manner or another. Simple relevant text ads may not be as good as no ads at all, but I can't think of a better alternative that will ensure that a good compromise between perfection and realism can continue. Unless you can, show some support.