well, think of it this way. (don't hold your breath, this is a bit long)
<example>
If an ad for X-10 popups in front of you while your trying to get the latest headlines from MSNBC.com because you're there for the news, does it annoy you?
Now, if a 3x2.5 ad in the corner of your local newspaper is advertising for X-10, while your reading the newspaper, does that get in your way?
</example>
that's a quick example of marketing have the reverse sale effect... you lose a sale instead of garner one.
Now, let's say you read the paper looking for the latest local CompUSA, BestBuy, Sears, Target or [insert department store] ad here, and an X-10 add is on the same page...
does that same X-10 ad have a negative effect on your experience reading that paper?
</example>
Chances are, there are going to be people who are using newspapers (or other print media) to specifically find ads, are going to look at the other ones that present themselves too.
News media is a time-honored, proven marketing vehicle. Think of your average user who doesn't even know to click on blue underlines... what are they going to do when a popup/under or other marketing ploy disrupts their web surfing...? Probably get pissed off, or scared, and close every thing down.
Now this particular information doesn't necessarily apply to banner ads, well, not unless you put up one of those stupid treeloot Click the Monkey to win ads, no one _except_ a novice user is probably going to click it.
It's just not effective right now.
I think the best use of online ads right now are simple, static sidebar ads (with NO animation) that imitate newspaper ads. They're unobtrusive and non-intimidating.
And yet the problem remains... where's that ad being served up, who's tracking you hitting it, and what are they doing with that data.
As my first post indicated, I hope this at least gets marketroids (to steal Tack's word) to stop push-push-pushing ads and other intrusive advertising all over the internet.
damn... if you made it to this line, don't forget to take a breath now.
Hopefully this will start a trend in the downfall of web banners, popups/unders and shoshkeles. (ducks)
Don't get me wrong, I work at an Ad Agency, as their senior interactive developer, but the proliferation of advertising on the internet without supporting revenue streams has always seemed a little silly to me.
at least more common advertising mediums actually show positive ROI when executed well.
I don't care how innovative your flash banner, pop-under, or mouse trailer is, it's not going to make me more inclined to purchase your products.
True, it may build brand recognition, and increase word-of-mouth talk about a particular company or item, but where's the proof in the pudding?
please stop calling it a trilogy...
((6 / 2) == 3) != ("trilogy")
per the printed compendium of the whole LOTR itself, they state LOTR is often misnomered as a trilogy, when in fact it is 6 volumes AND all the additional appendices, maps etc...
has provided much more in-depth information regarding this upgrade, including a complete step-by-step on (what's currently) Page 4 of the board... (posted 12-29-01 01:02 PM)
more likely I would think that if these so-called "plants" actually existed, they would be more likely to have purpose in garnering interest from the geek population in order to drive additional sales because "our product can be messed with to make it better without having to pay for incremental upgrades"...
etcetera etcetera...
I think these people just love doing what I love doing... taking things apart, putting them back together, and hopefully, not ending up with spare parts at the end.:)
I gotta say, as totally irresponible as his statements were, he sure did find an easy way to come up with the fastest, cheapest, most thorough QA department in the world.
losing revenue to pirating via MP3's or illegal copies being distributed as the real thing?
Well, they're only doing 2 things...
1: eliminating a segment of the population that will buy their CD's (since they won't be able to play them, so why buy them)
2: lighting a fire under every geeks' ass to get "cracking" on these CDs... so we'll have MP3's from them anyway.
and they aren't really preventing anyone who'd be serious about copying the CD's for pirating anyway, just making things more difficult for the typical end user who wants to take his music on his morning runs with him.
of course, don't forget the copy protection mechanism should be covered under the DMCA, so making MP3's will make you a terrorist!
Yes, network administrators have to be vigilant about their own security, and put in place whatever measures are necessary to ensure the integrity of their data (and their companies)
My only wish would be specific legislation proposing limited liability in cases where a 3rd party piece of software was used and an exploit found and used against said software before a security warning is made known, or security patch is made available by the vendor.
If the administrators have done their job and have all their software up to the best spec they can, but are subjected to liability against themselves for an error in a piece of software they put their trust in.. it's bad news.
Especially if the client dictates the software to be used for securing the data... man, it's just bad karma.
In the meantime, keep using multiple levels of security. Screw the overhead if you've got sensitive data...
Apple can both save on shipping costs and bill their new iMac's as semi-portable...
hell, they're small enough now that with a retracting power cord and wireless mouse/keyboard that they might as well be.
With some depthwise space savings from the removal of the CRT, and the removal of the weight from the glass, they could throw a cord retractor and keyboard/mouse dock on the back of the thing...
Anyhow, it's about time, I think that's going to be a killer machine. (As long as I don't buy an iMac and get a dead friggin pixel in the center of my screen)
Crappy UI aside, OS/2 Warp 3 was one of the most rock solid, fast systems I ever got to use, and it was that way long before NT ever came around.
Having noce worked at a large Air Conditioning company (who will remain anonymous, but who has their name on a large [and non-airconditioned DOH!] dome in Syracuse NY USA) we used to run upwards of 100 OS/2 machines for the sole purpose of maintaining the entire international email system, and it worked, by-and-large very very well. Had IBM early on worked to improve the UI, enhance the kernel and memory access, beef up hardware support and come up with a serious file/print server to compete with M$'s (then new) NT 4, they might still be using it today.
As it were, NT 4 Wks and Server came out and had a faster kernel, way fast networking and a friendlier (~laff~) UI... so we switched. Switched so much in fact that we pared it down to 20 or so NT boxes for the price of 100 OS/2's...
As far as I'm concerned, IBM had the desktop arena by the balls and totally blew it. (no pun intended)
So hats off to you eCom, I'll give you all the credit in the world, but methinks M$ is far too entrenched, and Mac OS X and Linux far too visible with developers to give OS/2 a real shot at the desktop or development platforms right now.
By this time in history, sysadmins of windows networks and email servers who have a majority of users running Outlook should already have setup their systems to be unaffected by this type of worm.
Things like this can simply be disabled at the root by disallowing suspect extensions, like.scr at the server level.
C'mon, why would you need to email screensavers around anyway... zip it and save some bandwidth.
True, many people need to send every other type of attachment, and it doesn't fix the basic problem M$ has with security in their products, but if the sysadmins don't do their job, it just help guarantee the proliferation of these things.
Slashdot Mirror
well, think of it this way. (don't hold your breath, this is a bit long)
<example>
If an ad for X-10 popups in front of you while your trying to get the latest headlines from MSNBC.com because you're there for the news, does it annoy you?
Now, if a 3x2.5 ad in the corner of your local newspaper is advertising for X-10, while your reading the newspaper, does that get in your way?
</example>
that's a quick example of marketing have the reverse sale effect... you lose a sale instead of garner one.
Now, let's say you read the paper looking for the latest local CompUSA, BestBuy, Sears, Target or [insert department store] ad here, and an X-10 add is on the same page...
does that same X-10 ad have a negative effect on your experience reading that paper?
</example>
Chances are, there are going to be people who are using newspapers (or other print media) to specifically find ads, are going to look at the other ones that present themselves too.
News media is a time-honored, proven marketing vehicle. Think of your average user who doesn't even know to click on blue underlines... what are they going to do when a popup/under or other marketing ploy disrupts their web surfing...? Probably get pissed off, or scared, and close every thing down.
Now this particular information doesn't necessarily apply to banner ads, well, not unless you put up one of those stupid treeloot Click the Monkey to win ads, no one _except_ a novice user is probably going to click it.
It's just not effective right now.
I think the best use of online ads right now are simple, static sidebar ads (with NO animation) that imitate newspaper ads. They're unobtrusive and non-intimidating.
And yet the problem remains... where's that ad being served up, who's tracking you hitting it, and what are they doing with that data.
As my first post indicated, I hope this at least gets marketroids (to steal Tack's word) to stop push-push-pushing ads and other intrusive advertising all over the internet.
damn... if you made it to this line, don't forget to take a breath now.
Hopefully this will start a trend in the downfall of web banners, popups/unders and shoshkeles. (ducks)
Don't get me wrong, I work at an Ad Agency, as their senior interactive developer, but the proliferation of advertising on the internet without supporting revenue streams has always seemed a little silly to me.
at least more common advertising mediums actually show positive ROI when executed well.
I don't care how innovative your flash banner, pop-under, or mouse trailer is, it's not going to make me more inclined to purchase your products.
True, it may build brand recognition, and increase word-of-mouth talk about a particular company or item, but where's the proof in the pudding?
Lossy compression... although I believe I will stick with LZip for now, as I find it MUCH faster when compressing large files.
but who in a large, city government sponsored network is going to fight against throwing a couple or three carnivore's into their network anyway?
hrmm... now to think about it... who at my ISP would fight about that either?
someone, quick call Ridley... this has GOT to be the most references in a single /. article to Blade Runner (from an article not thus related)
:)
yeah yeah, go ahead an mod me OT... it's ok, I'll see you coming with the new eyes I just got thru eBay...
please stop calling it a trilogy...
((6 / 2) == 3) != ("trilogy")
per the printed compendium of the whole LOTR itself, they state LOTR is often misnomered as a trilogy, when in fact it is 6 volumes AND all the additional appendices, maps etc...
well of course it will be more forgiving than the Microsoft version, you won't have to call to activate your songs...
:)
has provided much more in-depth information regarding this upgrade, including a complete step-by-step on (what's currently) Page 4 of the board... (posted 12-29-01 01:02 PM)
more likely I would think that if these so-called "plants" actually existed, they would be more likely to have purpose in garnering interest from the geek population in order to drive additional sales because "our product can be messed with to make it better without having to pay for incremental upgrades"...
:)
etcetera etcetera...
I think these people just love doing what I love doing... taking things apart, putting them back together, and hopefully, not ending up with spare parts at the end.
weren't you off to see the fam?
:)
but if you were skimming, you may have missed it:
"...The fact is kids need to build things. They need to find out just what firecrackers will do to the insides of a dead frog..."
Interesting idea, I think I shall have to find out what does happen.
(ducks)
:)
I gotta say, as totally irresponible as his statements were, he sure did find an easy way to come up with the fastest, cheapest, most thorough QA department in the world.
now I have to learn C, so I can write 3.21, so I can keep my quake2 server from being hacked! :)
Merry Christmas to me!
does it scale well enough for corporate video conferencing?
well, you can be assured they'll get laid now, since we know how badly convicted felons in prison treat warez kiddies.
:)
yeah, I think a moderation system for these bugs would work.
XP PnP Bug (Score 5:Total Fuckup)
2.4.15 FS Corruption (Score 4:Don't install this)
Sol.exe crashes on launch (Score -1:Troll)
losing revenue to pirating via MP3's or illegal copies being distributed as the real thing?
Well, they're only doing 2 things...
1: eliminating a segment of the population that will buy their CD's (since they won't be able to play them, so why buy them)
2: lighting a fire under every geeks' ass to get "cracking" on these CDs... so we'll have MP3's from them anyway.
and they aren't really preventing anyone who'd be serious about copying the CD's for pirating anyway, just making things more difficult for the typical end user who wants to take his music on his morning runs with him.
of course, don't forget the copy protection mechanism should be covered under the DMCA, so making MP3's will make you a terrorist!
-nt
The Lamest Disclaimer on the Net ?
so once big brother gets his hands on it, the tool of choise for personal privacy protection is going to be a fly swatter?
:)
No, not from experience, from common sense and knowledge of current law.
I've watched a small company get into serious trouble for themselves from what was billed as a "secure" solution, but wasn't.
For using this 3rd party's software, the company was being pursued for damages perceived by the client when a hole was discovered.
Yes, network administrators have to be vigilant about their own security, and put in place whatever measures are necessary to ensure the integrity of their data (and their companies)
My only wish would be specific legislation proposing limited liability in cases where a 3rd party piece of software was used and an exploit found and used against said software before a security warning is made known, or security patch is made available by the vendor.
If the administrators have done their job and have all their software up to the best spec they can, but are subjected to liability against themselves for an error in a piece of software they put their trust in.. it's bad news.
Especially if the client dictates the software to be used for securing the data... man, it's just bad karma.
In the meantime, keep using multiple levels of security. Screw the overhead if you've got sensitive data...
Apple can both save on shipping costs and bill their new iMac's as semi-portable...
hell, they're small enough now that with a retracting power cord and wireless mouse/keyboard that they might as well be.
With some depthwise space savings from the removal of the CRT, and the removal of the weight from the glass, they could throw a cord retractor and keyboard/mouse dock on the back of the thing...
Anyhow, it's about time, I think that's going to be a killer machine. (As long as I don't buy an iMac and get a dead friggin pixel in the center of my screen)
Crappy UI aside, OS/2 Warp 3 was one of the most rock solid, fast systems I ever got to use, and it was that way long before NT ever came around.
Having noce worked at a large Air Conditioning company (who will remain anonymous, but who has their name on a large [and non-airconditioned DOH!] dome in Syracuse NY USA) we used to run upwards of 100 OS/2 machines for the sole purpose of maintaining the entire international email system, and it worked, by-and-large very very well. Had IBM early on worked to improve the UI, enhance the kernel and memory access, beef up hardware support and come up with a serious file/print server to compete with M$'s (then new) NT 4, they might still be using it today.
As it were, NT 4 Wks and Server came out and had a faster kernel, way fast networking and a friendlier (~laff~) UI... so we switched. Switched so much in fact that we pared it down to 20 or so NT boxes for the price of 100 OS/2's...
As far as I'm concerned, IBM had the desktop arena by the balls and totally blew it. (no pun intended)
So hats off to you eCom, I'll give you all the credit in the world, but methinks M$ is far too entrenched, and Mac OS X and Linux far too visible with developers to give OS/2 a real shot at the desktop or development platforms right now.
By this time in history, sysadmins of windows networks and email servers who have a majority of users running Outlook should already have setup their systems to be unaffected by this type of worm.
.scr at the server level.
Things like this can simply be disabled at the root by disallowing suspect extensions, like
C'mon, why would you need to email screensavers around anyway... zip it and save some bandwidth.
True, many people need to send every other type of attachment, and it doesn't fix the basic problem M$ has with security in their products, but if the sysadmins don't do their job, it just help guarantee the proliferation of these things.
that's my 2 cents; and I'd like a rebate.