calm them ******************** ads down a bit
for the record I said calm down a bit, I am happy for the ads to be there but they seem to be very big and bandwidth intensive, CRC jumping round on my screen is a bit annoying,a static ad would get my attention just as much. Glad i’m not browsing on my phone!!
(i may just have paid a visit to the rules section)Posted 9 years agoFunkyDuncMember
“a static ad would get my attention just as much.”
I hope I don’t get banished for this one but…. I use the flashy ness as a mental add blocker. ie if its flashing or moving it aint worth looking at!
Have to agree though I would use this website on my PDA…. apart from all the extra crap you have to download….Posted 9 years ago
But if all adds were stationary would the total number of clicks be less?
In short.. Yes. Most certainly. Evidentially and backed up by lots of studies and research primarily done by google.
Human vision is tuned to pick up small movements. It goes back to the ape in the grass who out of the corner of his eye notices the grass move in a funny way…. ah yes! It’s a lion! When the ad moves your attention is drawn to it on a subconscious level whether you like it or not.Posted 9 years ago
Static ads are less effective – fact!
Static ads don’t fare as well as ads with movement, ’tis true, there are endless studies to back that up. That shaking thing that the current CR ad uses to attract your attention feels dirty though. Anything moving in that way in your peripheral vision causes an involuntary reaction. Attracting people with information and interesting content is one thing, shocking them into looking at the ad is of questionable benefit though, as it must alienate some potential clickers. Just my thoughts. Ultimately it’s the advertisers call, if it works for them then they’ll be happy, and presumably so will those that click on the ad. As for this site, it needs clicks not just ad presence to stay afloat, so if an advertiser’s tactics work, then why would they want to stop them? I do wonder if there’s a limit though in the attention/annoyance battle. If there is a limit then this site it nowhere near it compared to others, none of the ads here effect or cover the content for a start. Anyone complaining about distracting ads here should look elsewhere for examples of REALLY distracting ads. You don’t HAVE to click on any of the adverts on this site to dismiss them and get at the content, and long may that continue.
I’d better go read the rules to make sure I’m not upsetting anyone…
For those stressing about load speed on their phones or pdas, this site seems to load plenty fast enough on handhelds. Give it a go… it works very well on the iPhone at least.Posted 9 years agoaracerSubscriber
Why doesn’t everybody click lots on the static ads and avoid clicking on the flash ads? If the stats change so might the ads (hope that’s an allowable comment, Mark!)
Given the ads aren’t the problem they have been in terms of processor usage (thanks to Mark et al being proactive in getting CRC etc. to make them more sensible), out of curiosity I tried opening 20 threads in tabs. CPU usage is still <10% for Firefox, and whilst I’m on a more powerful computer than I used to have, it’s decidedly middle of the range rather than top end. I’d suggest it’s you that has the problem – though not quite sure why you need to open 20 threads in tabs in the first place.Posted 9 years ago
I’d like to add that I think the “top & right” ad placement on the new site is far better for readers than the “top, left, right & elsewhere” of the old site. Also, once you’re into reading a long thread in the forum the ads are scrolled up off the top of the window anyway. The reader/advertiser balance seems good to me.Posted 9 years ago
i was running QEMU with windows in a box installing AVG and browsing the itunes store whilst downloading Glasvegas, on a linux laptop which was also trying to run stuff over a really slow connection (about 0.7mb) on the other side of the world where CRC don’t deliver and JEJames han’t been invented yet. I did what I normally do which is to scan the forum and open a load to read while i have a cup of tea at breakfast. All I got was firefox slowing down and the flashing ads appearing all over my screen as i tried to change tabs. It looked worse than some of those sights that you get to by accident on the internet.
Just tried to look at 10 and it was still hurting it with other stuff turned off.
Look at google and see the strides they have made in light weight web pages that really do work well over tight connections without compromising on content or quality.
It just means now this site is off limits when i’m using a mobile as a modem.Posted 9 years ago
I’d like to add that I think the “top & right” ad placement on the new site is far better for readers than the “top, left, right & elsewhere” of the old site. Also, once you’re into reading a long thread in the forum the ads are scrolled up off the top of the window anyway.
True, but how far down the page is the first post on a thread now?Posted 9 years ago
The topic ‘calm them ******************** ads down a bit’ is closed to new replies.