| 3:56 am on Oct 30, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Been looking into this further & seems these "Hover Ads" are DHTML windows. I also stumbled across a popup killer ap that claims to be able to stop them (called PopupWar Pro).
Anyone got on comments / experience regarding the merits of using DHTML popups?
| 4:16 am on Oct 30, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I think I've seen what you're talking about on weather.com I actually find these to be a little more annoying than pop-ups (which don't bother me unless they're pornographic or 15 of them on one page). It seems like they slow weather.com down a bit and for a while, I couldn't even get the site to display unless I stopped it from loading fully. Of course, that could have been a bug with Opera....
| 4:41 am on Oct 30, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Funny, I find them less annoying myself. Yes, most of the current blockers are unable to block those. The best ones I've seen were little commercial snippets, and I actually watched them because they were entertaining. The rest though are using the same approach as the annoying pop-ups. They aren't limiting them to one per visit and are very poorly done. If these become popular, IMO blockers will be modified to kill them as well. It's a shame you can't eliminate all the people who abuse these techniques turning them from an effective marketing medium into a total annoyance.
| 9:20 am on Oct 30, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Hmm...I find them more annoying. Yesterday I saw a page with an ad for BMW completely obscuring what I wanted to read. Finally I noticed a tiny little cross with a color very close to the ad's background color which eventually closed it.
| 5:03 pm on Oct 30, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I usually find them more annoying because with a popup you have a window you can always terminate easily. The DHTML popups never actually have to close or give you the option to close. Most of them now make you watch their stupid animation before displaying a small close button. And some interject music or sound effects on you, which is almost always annoying.
The sad part is that people actually click on these ads. There has to be some kind of ROI or else we wouldn't see all of this spam. I wish there was an easy way to educate people to not click on spam.
| 5:24 pm on Oct 30, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|There has to be some kind of ROI or else we wouldn't see all of this spam. |
I am not so sure these types of ad are so ROI focused as we've become used to. In the UK I am mainly seeing these ads being run by huge companies to back up their offline branding campaigns.
In the last month I've had ads from one of the mobile networks, a major high street bank and a large ISP - all of which were recognisable from their TV ads.
| 5:32 pm on Oct 30, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I can't stand these ads. I have flashed disabled, and now I'm looking for a way to block dhtml because of these ads. If they become more popular, it will create a new market for software and broswers that have the option to block this type of code.
| 5:45 pm on Oct 30, 2003 (gmt 0)|
>I actually find these to be a little more annoying than pop-ups
>I can't stand these ads.
HATE 'em! ...to put it mildly.
| 5:57 pm on Oct 30, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|I actually find these to be a little more annoying than pop-ups |
I found that when I used normal pop-ups in the past page impressions on a site would typically fall by 10-20% with these hover ads I have no compelling evidence that impressions have dropped at all. I find it surprising but those are my findings.
| 5:58 pm on Oct 30, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I agree the ads don't have to give an option to close, but neither do chromeless popup windows on IE. All the ads I've seen so far had a box with an X to close them immediately. I didn't have to go chase a window around or find multiple ones in between and underneath the windows I had open already. Most people would rather not see any ads but site owners have bills to pay. So, we need to tolerate some ads or be willing to start paying fees for access to websites.
| 6:09 pm on Oct 30, 2003 (gmt 0)|
>site owners have bills to pay. So, we need to tolerate some ads
I'm a site owner and have been partially sponsor/ad supported since '95-96. No pop-ups, no exit consoles, not even any of the larger IAB standard formats. IMO, intrusive creative is a weak, gut-less response to the demands of advertisers at the expense of your traffic. There are ways to strike a balance.
| 6:11 pm on Oct 30, 2003 (gmt 0)|
olias, maybe your users have non-dhtml ssupported browsers. ;)
bluesky, I've seen many dhtml ads where the close button isn't immediately available or that it moves along with the animation, making it harder to close.
When I was talking about ROI on spam, I meant all spam (email, window popups, dhtml popups). If no one ever clicked on annoying popups on principal we wouldn't be in this mess. There are ways to display ads that do not interfere with the user experience. I don't have a problem with ads in the layout of a page, except if they flash like they are trying to cause seizures and stop me from being able to focus on reading the page.
Also, opening up one of these dhtml popups could render a site useless to someone with a disability. Imagine one of those ads that take over the whole screen but you need to hit a small X to close it.
Added: and thanks rcjordan, well said.
| 6:26 pm on Oct 30, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|olias, maybe your users have non-dhtml ssupported browsers. ;) |
Shhhhh, I don't want the advertisers to know that! ;)
| 11:00 pm on Oct 30, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|intrusive creative is a weak, gut-less response to the demands of advertisers at the expense of your traffic. |
ok, but how do you REALLY feel?
| 11:19 pm on Oct 30, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I hate the ones that float around the whole page. You have to wait a second or two for the thing to stop so you can close it.
I saw one on a major newspaper's site that looked exactly like an article. I bet it fooled a good amount of people.
| 11:42 pm on Oct 30, 2003 (gmt 0)|
For the people that hate them, do you also hate commercials on TV too? Does that stop you from watching your favorite programs? If a site has free content it has to make money some how. I see no difference between the new ads then commercials to support my free content that I love so much.
| 1:03 am on Oct 31, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|do you also hate commercials on TV too? |
More than anything!
| 1:22 am on Oct 31, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Google toolbar seems to stop the ads on weather.com
| 2:18 am on Oct 31, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I wish that popup windows weren't so prevalently associated with advertising/spam. I am looking to free my site from all my iframes and use SSI, but I have one navigation index (A-Z) that has to be in a different iframe to work (because the other page moves, and the iframe allows the navigation to stay in the same location while the already loaded index moves up or down). I would like to use a popup window or even a hover window for the navigation so that it could be like toolbars in applications like Word, Fireworks, etc. where they can float but still appear over the page. If these darn popup weren't associated with advertising I wouldn't have to worry that my good solution to this iframe will be misinterpreted and closed, although the navigation would help people rather than sell a product. Oh well, guess I can either keep the iframe or try the popup knowing many, many people will close it. If anyone has an idea of another, better method to accomplish this, please let me know. I only looked at this topic b/c I thought maybe hover ads would be better than popups, but they appear to be no better and perhaps worse.
Have a Blessed Evening
| 2:39 am on Oct 31, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|do you also hate commercials on TV too |
Yes. Stopped watching tv because of them.
I rent DVDs, however....
| 2:47 am on Oct 31, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Glad to see this thread has got some discussion going.
I think rcjordon's post summed up how hacked off most of us get with the mis-use of popups by advertisers.
Traditional popup windows, DHTML windows/hover ads or whatever - all technologies can be abused. But putting that aside, do members feel DHTML hover windows are OK to use for 'legit' popups on a site - e.g. a prompt to join a mail list.
| 3:18 am on Oct 31, 2003 (gmt 0)|
|do you also hate commercials on TV too? |
Yup, that is why us men keep the remote handy. As soon as that commercial comes on, we're off to another channel for a couple of minutes, one without commercials. The same applies to popups. Problem is, with popups, we're not coming back to see the rest of the show! ;)
| 4:52 am on Oct 31, 2003 (gmt 0)|
It's not just men with the remote these days ;) Also popular are any devices that remove commercials when recording, so that says alot.
I predict the next level of firewalls will do intelligent html code filtering, not just knocking out animated images, flash and popups. With some good code rules, it's going to be fairly straightforward to strip out most dhtml effects. Slow downs from filtering would have been a problem years ago, but not with today's cheap cpu power.
Actually it looks like these filters already exist - www.itshield.com and www.tooto.com's Zero PopUp claim to filter floating ads.
I cannot believe the level of advertisements I experience when I browse on someone else's PC. I have totally forgotten how insane it's gotten out there.
Consumers are going to fight back, and fight back hard.
| 6:12 am on Oct 31, 2003 (gmt 0)|
From now on.. whenever there's a new communications innovation, will uncontrolled advertising ruin it?
| 7:29 am on Oct 31, 2003 (gmt 0)|
--Consumers are going to fight back, and fight back hard.--
They'll go and do as they are told. Except for the occasional detour, they always do. For every door that's closed, several more open up. We're all selling something. (whether popups are in our personal arsenal or not)
| 7:36 am on Oct 31, 2003 (gmt 0)|
USA consumers just killed tens of thousands of telemarketer jobs without a worry about unemployment rates, etc. Spammers are next (at least for laws on the books, not talking about enforcement issues). Abusive online ads will be next if they continue at the trend they are going at.
| 10:04 am on Oct 31, 2003 (gmt 0)|
As soon as I see it, I am looking for the little X to close it :)
| 10:27 am on Oct 31, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Tv commercials are annoying, but at least they don't appear at the same time with a show! They are IN BETWEEN, in commercial brakes. But pop-ups and hover ads interfere with the page content, sometimes hiding the text, sometimes making page to load slower. All webmasters have bills to pay, but there are alternatives to annoying forms of ads. At least if you care about your visitors and want them to return, not just make some $$$.
Fastclick for example has a new way to display ads: intersitials. I kinda like those: when you go from one page to another, there is an advertising page in between. You can either look at that sponsor page, or you have an option to skip it and go directly to the page you need. Just like on TV: after you are done viewing one part of the show, here comes a commercial block, and then another part! Very logical and good alternative to popups and hovers.
And those intersitials pay good, too!
| 11:28 am on Oct 31, 2003 (gmt 0)|
TV Commercial is not "in between" - it interferes with a show much more than any ad on a site. In case of the very same interstitials, DHTML etc you can always opt to close it and proceed. On TV you're forced to WAIT till it ends
| This 48 message thread spans 2 pages: 48 (  2 ) > > |