Slashdot Mirror


Floaters are the New Pop-Ups

windowpain writes "A prior Slashdot article discussed the ever-increasing ability of pop-up ads to break through adblocking software. Now the New York Times (registration required) is reporting that pop-ups are pooped out, replaced by those annoying "floaters" that are even more resistant to conventional pop-up blocking software. From the article: 'Not to be confused with pop-up ads, which open new windows and clutter virtual desktops, these floaters, or overlays, or popovers (no one can agree on a name), can evade the pop-up blockers that many Web browsers have incorporated. In the last year, according to Nielsen/NetRatings, which collects and analyzes data on Web advertising, the frequency of these ads has risen markedly, by almost 32 percent from December 2003 to December 2004, while pop-ups in that period declined by 41 percent.'"

16 of 613 comments (clear)

  1. Floaters are not evil. by FTL · · Score: 5, Insightful
    There's no problem with floaters, they are no more evil than with blinking text, bad colour schemes or any other number of ugly special effects. They are simply an attribute of the website. If you don't like them (I hate them), click the back button and go somewhere else.

    The problem with popups is that clicking the back button was not enough, one had to clean up the mess -- sometimes a mess that would keep respawning itself. Floaters look superficially similar to popups, but floaters are completely contained within the window. That makes them just another (usually bad) design feature.

    --
    Slashdot monitor for your Mozilla sidebar or Active Desktop.
  2. "Remove this object" by sl8r · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There's a nice lil extension to firefox called "Remove this object" that gets rid of those stupid "floaters" (i call 'em div layers, only cos that's what they are).

  3. Even more annoying ... by cablepokerface · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... are the 'in-between' pages with advertising. You are reading an article, want to go from page 2 to 3 and boom, you end up on a completely different page.

  4. CSS + Javascript by rdc_uk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ultimately, what is required is for the browser (whichever one) to control what elements of CSS and Javascript sites are allowed to use.

    Ergo; the user can simply dissallow CSS allowing flying elements ("float"-ing is a different thing, you see).

    There needs to be a definite shift from the web-site having "control" unless the browser is patched to snatch it back, towards the web-page being permitted to do its thing within certain boundaries (boundaries that the user is in control of).

    The rush to provide "web applications" runs contary to this; web pages are DATA, not programs and the further we go from that state, the more invasive mal-intentioned pages can be (example; ActiveX)

  5. Sollution. by Tetsugaku-San · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Turn off Flash - I've never found a convincing argument to have it other than the odd well made animation - and these are few and far between, turning flash on and off should be a lot easier but aprt from that -it works.

  6. Who does this? Why do they do it? by Mirk · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I just don't get it. What kind of moronic company would pay money to "advertise" its product by irritating the heck out of everyone who sees it? If there is a more cast-iron way of making me hate a product so much that I will never buy it, it's by having it get in my face when I am trying to read something.

    These "floaters" remind me of that childish thing where someone leaps around thrusting their hands in front of your face going, "Not touching! Can't get mad!" Oh, yeah. That behaviour is really going to make me want to buy your product.

    Since "floater" is (in England, anyway) slang for a turd that can't be flushed away, the name is at least appropriate.

    --

    --
    What short sigs we have -
    One hundred and twenty chars!
    Too short for haiku.
  7. Re:Hey! by Neph · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Would you prefer to have everything like NYTimes.com instead?

    Damn it all to hell, TEXT ADS! In a space on the side of the screen! Google figured this out years ago, how long is it going to take for the penny to drop with the rest of these bozos? How hard is it to understand that maximizing annoyances your potential customer base is not good for business?

    Seriously. Why does this have to be so difficult? The fact that people are developping countermeasures to your advertising should be lighting a bulb, however dim, somewhere in your mind. What could it mean? Whatever could it mean?

  8. Re:Not a problem by suso · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Heh, isn't that the way it goes with almost all technology. New technologies cause new problems that would not be a problem on old technologies. Its as if we are moving in reverse rather than forward.

  9. Re:Not a problem by R.D.Olivaw · · Score: 5, Insightful
    There's alwasy some pricks trying to ruin the web for everyone else.

    I hate pop-ups and floaters as much as the next guy but c'mon, you're on their website! It's not like they're sticking their ads on every website you visit withotut he site's approval. If you don't like their business model, do not visit the sites. simple.

  10. Re:Not a problem by arkanes · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's a hard concept for advertisers to grasp, but annoying people doesn't work when they have the power to easily turn you off. A few years ago, pop up blocking was a pretty technical thing and you needed to be a geek to have it. Then it moved into the mainstream. Same will happen here. People don't bother to block adds which are unobtrusive and non-annoying. Use those, and all will be well.

  11. Re:Not a problem by shird · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yes thats most definately true. However many sites previously used popups to display such content and yet the world hasnt come to an end with the introduction of popup blockers.

    Menus and dialogs etc are tricky though, as the browser cant detect when the user has requested it or not, and in some cases you may want it even when you don't manually request it.

    Perhaps instead would be a way where you could hold ctrl and click a layer and it would disappear. Too many times Ive seen ads with the little 'x' to close button hidden away, one of these days the ads will start not bothering to even have close buttons. Or the close buttons will count as a click.

    I think theres an extension for Firefox that lets you dismiss elements like this already actually.

    --
    I.O.U One Sig.
  12. Re:Not a problem by JSBiff · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Perhaps instead would be a way where you could hold ctrl and click a layer and it would disappear.


    That is definitely a better solution. You still have to see the ad initially, but it at least returns control to the user. I'm all about user-control when it comes to the web. Control of your browser and your computer should rest with *you*, not some random, untrusted site on the public internet.
  13. Just avoid these sites by Toy+G · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Ads too annoying? Change your information sources. This has already happened: remember that we used to love Altavista, then everybody switched over to Google because it was ad-free... We used to love portals, then they went ad-crazy, and we switched to a number of different tools (aggregators, google, etc). Sometimes down the line, one has to think "Is the information on this site worth all the hassle?". The more they push ads down our throat, the more we will look for (or build) alternatives... just think about RIAA's "success" against p2p.

    --
    -- Let's go Viridian.
  14. Re:Not a problem by CoderBob · · Score: 4, Insightful
    One thing bothers me about your argument:
    If you disallow divs to overlap any other content, then you have just disabled a lot of non-offending uses of dhtml. For example, drop down menus that don't use flash (really, I'd rather have dhtml menus than flash menus). Lots of different types of animation effects (like, for example, maybe a web-app would use a 'slide-out' notifier to alert you when you have new messages, like when using a web-forum with private messaging built in).

    Why do we even need drop-down menus on websites? Whatever happened to decently laid out sites that didn't contact the server every 10 seconds to see if there was an update? Web-forums with private messages? Let them notify me of a new message when I request a new page. Real-time dynamic content does not belong in a browser window.

    Maybe I'm just old fashioned here, but I don't see "the web" as something I want to turn into application software. Not over HTTP. Leave my HTTP alone, let me browse through information, maybe hit some server-side app here and there for quasi-dynamic content. Enough with the client-side stuff. The only thing I can even see running client side is a validation script that just checks to see values are entered into a form. Not that they are right (other than format, like ###-###-#### for a US phone #). Other than that, keep it on your damn server.

  15. The next level of blocking by Animats · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Browsers need some work to deal with this. Firefox has some real opportunities here.

    First, we need to get Flash under user control. This may require implementing an open-source Flash player, or beating hard on Macromedia. Flash animations need to respond to a "block all images from this site" right-click. All animations should come up static, dimmed, and silent, requiring user action to activate them. This keeps the annoyance level down.

    Then we need to make page ownership hierarchical. If a page opens another window, the new window is considered a child of the parent window. When the parent window closes, so must the child.

    Further, child windows should be restricted to the area of the parent window. They must be in front of the parent, and they must have some minimal overlap. (Restricting them to the parent window frame is probably too restrictive, but requiring some overlap means they can't move freely around the screen.)

  16. Re:Not a problem by coopaq · · Score: 3, Insightful
    If you don't like their business model, do not visit the sites. simple.

    This is a tired response. Nothing you can do about new sites you've never been to. You get annoyed when a popover shows up.

    When you've been reading a site for years with interesting content and some new PHB ads popovers to the site you are going to have to find a way to block the popover less you be annoyed.

    I'm sorry, but unplugging the interent and shutting it all down and walking away is a weak response to a new problem that needs to get licked.

    The issue deserves attention.