Site Updates: New Navigation and Text-Based Advertising [Archive]

Jason Dunn

11-22-2003, 11:00 PM

Pocket PC Thoughts, like any good Web site, continues to evolve - and we always hope it's a good evolution, not a devolution. ;-) First up, we've changed our shopping navigation a little - now we have three choices for shopping: hardware (Tek 'n Toys), software (Handango), and "The Mall" will be a zone where we'll have all sorts of goodies for sale, including the much-coveted <a href="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/subscribe/microlight.htm">Pocket PC Thoughts micro light</a>, some other PPCT goodies, and affiliate links for you to use when buying Vaja cases, etc. We hope that when you need to buy hardware and software for your Pocket PC, you'll support us by using these links. Thank you! :-) <img src="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/images/web/2003/scrnshot.gif" /> The other update is an experiment with a new type of advertising. First off, it's not spyware or anything that is on your computer that is causing the text link you see above in the screen shot (thanks Lurch!) - it's a Javascript function that dynamically scans the text on a page, then creates in-line text links based on the content. Right now you can only find it on reviews. You can <a href="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/articles.php?action=expand,20791">see what it looks like in action</a> - notice the word "software" is underlined. When you hover over that word, a small text blocks hovers over it telling you what the ad is about. When you click that hyperlinked word, it launches a new browser window, and Pocket PC Thoughts makes a small amount of money. Note that in this case, only clicks count - we don't get paid for showing the ad, only when you click on it. I like this type of ad, because it's contextual, relevant, and low-key. I'd like to know what the rest of you think about it. So why are we doing it? You've all probably noticed the sheer number of times that the <a href="http://www.muvee.com/?promo=jdunn">muvee banner loads</a>, and as much as I like the program, when you see that banner it means that not only do we not have any paying advertising of our own to load, it also means that Tribal Fusion doesn't have anything for us either. While I'm deeply thankful for the support that our regular advertisers have shown us, the truth is there's not that many of them, so we're trying out this new system to see if it will help drive some income for the site. No, we're not in danger of shutting down, but a regular income stream that we can rely on would be very helpful. Astute readers will also have noticed we've launched Google Adsense as well - this is another "pay per click" type of advertising effort. I know there's a lot of confusion and misinformation about online advertising, and what it means when you block ads on a site, so I'll do up a little educational piece on this in the coming weeks. UPDATE: <a href="http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/subscribe.php">Subscribers</a> now have the ability to turn off these text ads if they wish.

Dazbot

11-22-2003, 11:18 PM

Will subscribers see this advertising, even if we have disabled ads?

JustinGTP

11-22-2003, 11:18 PM

Jason,

I would like to say that I think that the advertising you are doing on your website is getting much better and I think that you are understanding that people do not like flashy ads anymore, especially those "winner" ads.

I like the Google Adsense, they are on a lot of webpages, I guess because of the low-key, as you mentioned, advertising that it signals. Angelfire is taking on with this, and nearly every website has that running on it now.

I am glad that you have not decided to use popups, as those are incredibly annoying and that I feel deters new comers from coming to the site. I do not mind the text advertising at all, its just there, and if I want to click, then I can, it does not affect the way I read the review or article, thumbs up there! :waytogo:

One thing that I have noticed though, is the fact that the Google Adsense banners have gone from a non disturbing white that went well with the background, to a now very dark blue. Is this you changing it to go with the site? I thought that it was much nicer the white, its less distracting. Then again, maybe you need people to notice it more.

Most of the ads I actually click on because they are atleast relevant; however, the "Winner" banner is not - and that is so bright and flashy! Lets just hope you can get more banner ad sponsors to get us some more useful information and you some more money!

All in all, I think that its going in the right direction, which I like to hear :D

-Justin.

Dave Beauvais

11-22-2003, 11:20 PM

I think this form of advertising is a pretty good idea but this implementation seems to only work in Internet Exploder. I can't get the ads to even show up in Firebird (http://www.mozilla.org/products/firebird/), let alone click on them. It's less distracting that annoying animated banner ads and doesn't have the same bandwidth penalty that serving graphic ads does.

derosnec

11-22-2003, 11:52 PM

Doesn't appear to work with Mozilla.
Also, I may be a bit dim but the screenshot of 'where to buy' is no where near the 'software' inline that I believe you are talking about (heaven forbid, I had to read the article to find it :D )

An interesting direction in advertising. So long that every second word doesnt become an in-line, then this could be quite nifty!

sponge

11-22-2003, 11:55 PM

Yikes. I'm glad it doesn't work in Mozilla. I have a habit of tracing my mouse as I read stuff, and having boxes pop up everywhere will be painful. Love those google ads though.

GregWard

11-23-2003, 12:18 AM

For info - neither the underlining nor the pop-ups work in Opera 6 either.

Foo Fighter

11-23-2003, 12:35 AM

I think the reason why you guys can't see these ads is because they are MS Smart Tags, which would only work in IE6.

Jason Dunn

11-23-2003, 12:44 AM

Will subscribers see this advertising, even if we have disabled ads?

Right now, yes. I'll have to see how easy/hard it would be for us to allow subscribers to turn them off...

Mike Temporale

11-23-2003, 01:00 AM

Jason Dunn

11-23-2003, 01:32 AM

I think the new ad's are great. I love being a member of a site where the admin cares what the readers and community think about the advertising. And the fact that you have spent this much time and energy into finding ways of keeping the advertising un-obtrusive.

Keep up the great work! :way to go: 8)

Thanks, I appreciate the encouragement. It's always a balancing act, finding ways to keep the revenue levels up so I can keep running the site, without alienating the readership. :-)

Mike Temporale

11-23-2003, 02:28 AM

You've all probably noticed the sheer number of times that the muvee banner loads (http://www.muvee.com/?promo=jdunn), and as much as I like the program, when you see that banner it means that not only do we not have any paying advertising of our own to load, it also means that Tribal Fusion doesn't have anything for us either.

You should try to fill some of those free cycles with ad's for SPT or other ( soon to be released? ) Thoughts Media sites.

Just a suggestion. :D

Thinkingmandavid

11-23-2003, 03:41 AM

Jason Dunn wrote
it's a Javascript function that dynamically scans the text on a page, then creates in-line text links based on the content. Right now you can only find it on reviews. You can see what it looks like in action - notice the word "software" is underlined. When you hover over that word, a small text blocks hovers over it telling you what the ad is about. When you click that hyperlinked word, it launches a new browser window, and Pocket PC Thoughts makes a small amount of money

I think this is a great idea and will make the reading and shopping experience more user friendly here at ppcthoughts.
1. It doesnt interfere with the reading that is going on of an article,
2. It allows for us to 'take a peek' at the ad information.

Blue Rocket wrote
I think the new ad's are great. I love being a member of a site where the admin cares what the readers and community think about the advertising. And the fact that you have spent this much time and energy into finding ways of keeping the advertising un-obtrusive
This is a good way to control the advertising that is done on this site without it becoming cluttered in our viewing experience.
Instead of stuffing a bunch of info on one page, it is 'hidden' in links which gives a greater user experience.

Jonathan1

11-23-2003, 04:08 AM

Thank for not making it compatible with Firebird. :D Keep up the good work. ;)

OSUKid7

11-23-2003, 04:24 AM

Yikes. I'm glad it doesn't work in Mozilla. I have a habit of tracing my mouse as I read stuff, and having boxes pop up everywhere will be painful. Love those google ads though.

I absolutely hate this type of advertising. I also trace when I read, and I hate having these boxes pop up. No one clicks on them anyway. This is the worst new type of advertising since pop-ups.

Seriously, if you guys turn this off for subscribers I might seriously think about spending the money to subscribe. :devilboy:

Jason Dunn

11-23-2003, 04:25 AM

Thank for not making it compatible with Firebird. :D Keep up the good work. ;)

Gee, thanks for your support. :?

Tom W.M.

11-23-2003, 05:15 AM

I think the reason why you guys can't see these ads is because they are MS Smart Tags, which would only work in IE6.
Smart tags? *shudder*

I'm sure glad that Smart Tags don't work in Netscape or MozillaFirebird. I tried reading that review in IE, and I think that the way they pop up would drive me crazy!

Edit: BTW, Jason, there doesn't seem to be a .menu_shop_row declaration in the stylesheet I'm getting in Firebird, but there is one in the IE version.

OSUKid7

11-23-2003, 05:23 AM

I think the reason why you guys can't see these ads is because they are MS Smart Tags, which would only work in IE6.
Smart tags? *shudder*

I'm sure glad that Smart Tags don't work in Netscape or MozillaFirebird. I tried reading that review in IE, and I think that the way they pop up would drive me crazy!

No...I don't think they're smart tags, but I could be wrong. They sure don't look like smart tags though.

Tom W.M.

11-23-2003, 05:30 AM

No...I don't think they're smart tags, but I could be wrong. They sure don't look like smart tags though.
Yeah, I thought SmartTags inserted a purple dotted underline underneath the word or phrase they are afflicting. It's one reason that web developers are so set against the idea.

Pat Logsdon

11-23-2003, 05:49 AM

For info - neither the underlining nor the pop-ups work in Opera 6 either.
They don't work in Opera 7, either.

11-23-2003, 06:02 AM

To be honest, I usually have the ads switched off because I'm totally sick of crap advertising. It's the biggest evil in the US as far as I'm concerned and there's just no escape. TV, radio, spam, newspapers, websites, it's driving me bonkers.

Having said that, I'm interested in PPC accessories and software so targeted ads in that area are not a problem to me. I like a lot of the companies that make PPC products and I want them to do well. I've bought several items from ads I saw here.

If this proves to be a way to get access to PPC specific information, from companies that are interested in helping out PPCT as well as selling their products, then I think it's a great idea.

Haven't seen the Sprint ad for a while, has it finished now? Shame they featured the terrible Hitachi thing and that even worse Samsung then stop when they finally get something of interest - Treo 600. I'm not a POS fan, but the new Treo is a marketable product when the other two were not.

Jason, why so few developers advertising here? Is business so good they don't need to advertise? Your rates way too high? They're all broke? Heck, where's HP, Dell and the rest? I bet the readers here buy a ton of PPCs and PPC stuff every year, I'd think these companies would want to take advantage of that. It's hard to imagine more focused advertising to this market than here, Dale Coffing's place and Brighthand. For someone selling any PDA related product, every single view of the ad is a potential buyer.

darrylb

11-23-2003, 06:13 AM

Jason, why so few developers advertising here? Is business so good they don't need to advertise? Your rates way too high? They're all broke? Heck, where's HP, Dell and the rest? I bet the readers here buy a ton of PPCs and PPC stuff every year, I'd think these companies would want to take advantage of that. It's hard to imagine more focused advertising to this market than here, Dale Coffing's place and Brighthand. For someone selling any PDA related product, every single view of the ad is a potential buyer.

I agree, but as a small developer, I can say that there aint boat-loads of money in PPC apps. Some of us do it for small change that wont pay for much in terms of advertising.

I cant speak for the bigger guys, but I suspect that if they are making a good living off it, they may think they dont need to advertise.

Personally I would like to advertise, but finding something that suits my (currently meagre) budget is difficult. Especially when the advertising has to pay for itself several times over - which can mean that in real terms you need to double or triple (or more) your sales rate - which is unlikely from the advertising I can afford, even on a site like PPCT.

sub_tex

11-23-2003, 06:51 AM

I have to agree with the others who dislike this type of advertising. It's one thing to have annoying animated banners all around the text you're trying to read and entirely different thing to have useless links that aren't even links for the article at all. They're just more ways to advertise.

HOWEVER. . .

I do think there's a line between what non-paying readers see and what us subscribers do. If it needs to be on the non-subscriber page, then fine. But I subscribe to web sites so that I DON'T have to see ads. Ads are used to bring in revenue right? Well considering that I never click on ads, subscribing is a sure way to know you got my money! This should definitely be an option to turn off for paying viewers.

For all others, tough luck! It's pretty much impossible to run a high traffic site and NOT use advertising. Deal with it. Or, put your money where your mouth is and help out the site so you won't have to see these ads.

Jason Dunn

11-23-2003, 07:41 AM

Jason Dunn

11-23-2003, 07:52 AM

Haven't seen the Sprint ad for a while, has it finished now?

Yes, they have finished. The Sprint campaign was VERY good to us - it was the single largest advertising contract we've had to date, and I'm very thankful to Tribal Fusion for including us in the campaign. Sprint is also the largest advertiser that we've ever had, which leads me into your next question...

Jason, why so few developers advertising here? Is business so good they don't need to advertise? Your rates way too high? They're all broke? Heck, where's HP, Dell and the rest?

That's the million-dollar question, isn't it? ;-) I'm deeply grateful to the companies like SYWARE, CNetX, Two Peaks, WebIS, and others who faithfully support this site. In terms of OEMs, I've never had an OEM want to advertise on this site - and every time I've tried to make headway with that, I get nowhere. I think the real problem is that advertising on an enthusiast Web site just isn't seen as being "proper" - OEMs will advertise in magazines and mainstream sites, but a "small" enthusiast site? No way - they won't even consider it. Heck, I can't even get companies like Toshbia to return my email messages requesting loaner hardware for review, let alone asking them to support the site with advertising money.

It's a really tough situtuation for me, which is why I'm so thankful for the people who subscribe to support the site, and the companies who return to advertise with us again and again. If it weren't for you and them, I would have pulled the plug well over a year ago...

Jason Dunn

11-23-2003, 07:54 AM

This should definitely be an option to turn off for paying viewers.

I agree - I want to stand behind my comittment to letting subscribers turn off advertising if they don't want to see it. I've asked our guru Fabrizio if it's possible...

Tom W.M.

11-23-2003, 08:25 AM

I tried reading that review in IE, and I think that the way they pop up would drive me crazy!
They only pop up when you move your mouse over the word. If you don't want to see the pop-up, don't move your mouse over the word. Why is this so complicated to understand? I seriously don't understand the complaining I'm seeing here. Pop-ups are evil because they pop-up regardless of whether or not you want to see them - this is mouse-driven, hence it's a voluntary ad.
Like others have mentioned, I often trace text when I read it. If there were a short delay between mouseover and the time the description pops up, this wouldn't be a problem, as my cursor leaves a word pretty quickly. You could do this pretty easily with JavaScript.

I do find it quite telling though that everyone complaining is also not a subscriber, which tells me how they really feel about supporting this site. If I had 11,000 subscribers, heck, I sure wouldn't need to do ANY advertising.
That's pretty rude. I would like to be a subscriber, but I don't have much money right now, and being a subscriber wouldn't do much for me, since I lack a way of accessing the mobile forums. I do try to support this site by clicking on banner ads. I have no problem with any number of banner ads, as long as they don't flash or make sounds.

Thanks for fixing the stylesheet, by the way.

dangerwit

11-23-2003, 08:49 AM

Many people simply don't subscribe because most of what is on the net for advocate sites are free. This "smart tagging" is misleading to visitors because they think it is a normal link, but when they hover or click, BAM, advertising. You good folks can't see the problem, and I can't see how you see it is no different from a "sleeping" pop-up ad... no worries, just different viewpoints.

Sub-tex has the best point:
But I subscribe to web sites so that I DON'T have to see ads. Ads are used to bring in revenue right? Well considering that I never click on ads, subscribing is a sure way to know you got my money! This should definitely be an option to turn off for paying viewers.

I like the targeted ads and have actually clicked on them a few times. I'm generally NOT an ad clicker.

Not that it matters, my take is this: either you run a site as a business or you don't. One way makes it a job where you try to generate profit, the other you hope someday the site will pay its own bills. :) It's like... oh, martial arts. For 7 years I taught without pay, literally. Now I'm running it as a non-profit, so I can pay the bills and pay for special events.

I don't know if there is a middle ground in either, and that's a tough situation for site owner AND visitors. It's hard for some people to understand, and some never will... but that's okay.

Even tougher if you start to chastise your potential customers. The abuse on others in the boards by admins is why I don't subscribe, not because of the advertising. I come back because this is one of the best sites around for news and updates regarding the delicious PPCs.

*Phil

juni

11-23-2003, 08:56 AM

derosnec

11-23-2003, 10:48 AM

I think it is easy enough to sport the linked words, even if you do read with your mouse (which I do).
In all honesty, I don't see anything to complain about, in fact, I am quite happy the PPCT goes through so much effort to please its subscribers and non-subscribers.

yslee

11-23-2003, 11:31 AM

Jason, do you really have this feeling that there's a significant people here who don't support your site and are out to destroy it? What you said in your previous post doesn't sit very well with me. It's a bit like George Bush's false dichotomy; if we're not subscribers, we're not interested at all in supporting your site.

DavidHorn

11-23-2003, 03:24 PM

I have to chip in here and say that I think this is a fantastic idea... I'm not a huge fan of banner ads at the best of time and far prefer Google-style ads with text over something that screams "Click Me!"

As I use a tablet and don't follow the words with the pen, I don't suffer the problem with them showing up while I'm reading. Secondly, it's difficult to mistake them for a normal hyperlink because they're green instead of blue.

If there were more in that article, I think I'd have waved my mouse over them just to see what they were offering. I had a bit of a disagreement with Jason over the introduction of the subscriber services, but this is one type of advertising I'd (believe it or not) like to see more of, and am now contemplating introducing something similar into PocketGamer. Well done... the only thing I'd suggest is to make them targeted to the word and specifically to Pocket PC stuff.

Mike Temporale

11-23-2003, 03:32 PM

...the only thing I'd suggest is to make them targeted to the word and specifically to Pocket PC stuff.

I wouldn't restrict it to just PPC, I would like to see Techie/gadget stuff in general. This site may be PPCT, but there is a lot of talk around here about ipod's, SmartPhones, SPOT Watches, etc...

sponge

11-23-2003, 04:08 PM

Let's put it this way: if we didn't care about the site we'd just go on somewhere else and never express our concerns. I remember people saying that they didn't want the member logo to divide the community, but isn't that what's being inferred somewhat?

dangerwit

11-23-2003, 07:26 PM

JustinGTP

11-23-2003, 08:13 PM

Hmm.

You never did answer my question about the dark blue Google Adsense banner. :|

-Justin.

Dave Beauvais

11-23-2003, 08:34 PM

Hmm. You never did answer my question about the dark blue Google Adsense banner. :|
:roll:

Google AdSense ad colors can be customized (https://www.google.com/adsense/faq#account7) by the account owner, so I would assume Jason or someone else on the admin team changed the colors to something they liked better.

Jason Dunn

11-23-2003, 09:04 PM

This should definitely be an option to turn off for paying viewers.

This has now been enabled thanks to the wizardry of Fabrizio - if ads are turned off in your subscriber control panel, ALL ads are off now, including the text-based ads.

bjornkeizers

11-23-2003, 09:44 PM

I was wondering what that green stuff was! Well, at least it's better then popups. And if it gets too annoying [underlining every third word..] I'll just use opera.

Jason Dunn

11-23-2003, 09:53 PM

Yeah well, because of the increasing number of banner ads and popups (I especially hate those), and I don't mean this site only - it is pretty decent when it comes to ads, I let Norton Internet Security block all advertising. So I don't care one way or the other if you insert more ads. ;)

You know Juni, normally I get completely enraged when I see people admitting that they block our ads. And I was very close to banning your account today - you block my ads, I block your account. Seems fair right?

Then I visited your site and see that you're also a content creator - you create skins, and you ask people to support you in that work. That's nice that you don't have any ads on your main site - it looks like it's hosted by your ISP, and you have a comment page hosted by a third-party service that has ads. So it doesn't look like you have any out-of-pocket expenses at all. I wish that were my situation, but I'm paying $500 CND a month just for Web hosting. Then factor in the countless hours I spend working on the site, the hundreds I spend buying prizes for site visitors, the hundreds I spend on shipping prizes out to people...the list goes on.

If you were paying $500 a month for hosting your site because tens of thousands of people visited every day, would you shut it down, or would you put up ads to help keep it going? Think about that. That's the decision I had to make when this site started our as a hobbyist Blog, and suddenly I was paying $300 USD in bandwidth costs. Shut down the site, or take it to the next level and try to make a real go of it?

Anyway, my point is that as a content creator you know what it's like to have people appreciate your work, and support what you do. You create skins - I create words. We both rely on the support of people who appreciate what we do. You rely on donations, I rely on advertising and subscribers. I certainly don't expect everyone to subscribe, but I do expect them to "donate" a few KB of their bandwidth to let a few ads load. If they click on them, all the better, but even letting them load helps me keep this site running. I try very hard to keep the advertising non-instrusive, and I've turned down more requests for pop-ups, pop-unders, full-page ads, etc. than you can possibly know. I'm constantly trying to find the balance between earning the income I need to keep the site alive, and keeping it a fun, useful place for everyone. All I ask is that people let the banner ads load.

Yet you won't even do that. Doesn't quite seem fair, does it?

So, to prove that walk the walk, I donated 10 Euros to your site to show that I appreciate what you do for the Pocket PC community, even if you don't appreciate what we do here at Pocket PC Thoughts.

bjornkeizers

11-23-2003, 09:59 PM

You know Juni, normally I get completely enraged when I see people admitting that they block our ads. And I was very close to banning your account today - you block my ads, I block your account. Seems fair right?

Whoa, hold it right there sport. I'm starting to feel more then a little offended by your attitude and rhetoric.

Not everyone is out to get you, you know? You're being more then a little paranoid. I have popup blocking software active all the time because I don't like people using MY bandwith to annoy me. In essence, you're paying for ads to annoy you.

Now, I only block popups - I keep the banner ads, but only because theyre useful sometimes. I totally understand if people with a 56k connection block ads to save bandwidth. Those all singing, all dancing 50k flash ads can take ages to load, and if you're paying by the minute, that adds up to a nice figure at the end of the year.

If you don't like that, then fine.

Jason Dunn

11-23-2003, 10:00 PM

Jason, do you really have this feeling that there's a significant people here who don't support your site and are out to destroy it?

When I see someone like Juni telling me that he's blocking 100% of my ads, denying me ANY income earning potential, but still visiting the site and costing me bandwidth, yes, it is rather discouraging because if everyone did what he's doing, I'd be forced to shut down in a matter of days. It's difficult not to get discouraged when someone thinks so little of your work that they actually stop you from earning the income you need to keep doing what you love.

What you said in your previous post doesn't sit very well with me. It's a bit like George Bush's false dichotomy; if we're not subscribers, we're not interested at all in supporting your site.

I apologize if that was the way it came across - it was merely an observation. I've noticed that there's a small, but vocal, contingent of users here who feel that everything on the Internet should be free, I shouldn't run ads, and they have the "right" to both block our ads AND participate in the site. To me, that's simply theft - taking bandwidth and server resources, without "giving back" by letting the ads load.

I believe very strongly that there are 1000's of people who support this site in different ways without being subscribers, and I apologize if I came across sounding any other way.

Jason Dunn

11-23-2003, 10:02 PM

...the only thing I'd suggest is to make them targeted to the word and specifically to Pocket PC stuff.

I wish that were possible, but it's not - we're beholden to whatever links Tribal Fusion comes up with for the words.

Jason Dunn

11-23-2003, 10:03 PM

And if it gets too annoying [underlining every third word..] I'll just use opera.

That won't happen - it can be set for 4 to 10 words total for the entire page, so you'll never see a whole bunch of links in a short block of text. I wouldn't let this type of ad ruin the site, don't worry. :wink:

Jason Dunn

11-23-2003, 10:08 PM

Not everyone is out to get you, you know? You're being more then a little paranoid.

If someone admits that they're blocking all the ads on my site, thus denying me the ability to earn any income, doesn't that mean that, yes, they're "out to get me"? Sure it does. If 100% of the PPCT visitors blocked ads, the site would shut down, period. To pretend that something isn't harmful just because a few people do it is lunacy. Wrong is wrong, regardless of scale.

I have popup blocking software active all the time because I don't like people using MY bandwith to annoy me.

I run a pop-up blocker too. Pop-up ads cross the line between valid support of a site and visitor irritation. I've never seen a site that has pop-up ads only, so I still support the site by letting the other ads load (and I usually click on them too).

bjornkeizers

11-23-2003, 10:09 PM

Sounds reasonable. I can live with 10 or so words per page. They don't bother me. I actually wish I could use some of those great deals, but since it's all US only - us europeans are out of luck :-( We see all the ads, but we get none of the great deals and rebates.

Ever thought about getting some european advertisers?

Jason Dunn

11-23-2003, 10:16 PM

Ever thought about getting some european advertisers?

Sure, I'll take advertisers from EVERYWHERE. ;-) The best thing Europeans can do is talk to companies they buy from and say "Hey, become a sponsor on Pocket PC Thoughts." :mrgreen:

bjornkeizers

11-23-2003, 10:18 PM

You've always offended me too bjornkeizers, so I guess we're even. :wink: But I saw some words that would apply here once...

"If you don't like that, then fine." -bjornkeizers

*grins* You and I are never, ever, going to agree on any single topic - and that's one of the reasons why I visit this site, truth be known. That and the news. I'm a regular over at Pocketmatrix, and they'll tell you I'm an opinionated, overbearing SOB most of the time. I have my opinions, you have yours. So does the rest of the population. I love discussions and heated debates. I'll tell you what I think, and expect to get as good as I give.

If someone admits that they're blocking all the ads on my site, thus denying me the ability to earn any income, doesn't that mean that, yes, they're "out to get me"? Sure it does. If 100% of the PPCT visitors blocked ads, the site would shut down, period. To pretend that something isn't harmful just because a few people do it is lunacy. Wrong is wrong, regardless of scale.

No, it doesn't. It's nothing personal. It's just that people who are on the internet a long time get fed up with seeing all those ads. I've been here now for.. say 20 minutes. I've seen several pages and have loaded probably .. oh let's say 10 ads. Banner ads are about 15 kb each, so seeing ten different ones means I use 150 kb bandwidth. To me, that's peanuts - I have cable and everything loads just fine. But to someone with a wireless connection, or a slow 56k connection, it will add maybe half a second to every page they load. You object to big sigs because of bandwidth reasons - some of us object to big ads because of that same reason.

Jason Dunn

11-23-2003, 10:28 PM

No, it doesn't. It's nothing personal. It's just that people who are on the internet a long time get fed up with seeing all those ads.

It IS personal, because it's affecting this site, which affects my income, which affects my lifestyle and my ability to support my family. Make no mistake, what is merely a button click to one person is deeply offensive on the other end. I know that few, if any, people are thinking "I'm going to block these ads and do my part to put Pocket PC Thoughts out of busienss!". :lol: It's not personal in that manner. But regardless of the motivation of someone's actions, it's the result that counts - and blocking ads is a hurtful thing to do to this site. That's the bottom line.

bjornkeizers

11-23-2003, 10:37 PM

See? That sounds a lot less hostile towards the non-subscribers and people with banner blockers. If you had said that in the first place instead of ..

You know Juni, normally I get completely enraged when I see people admitting that they block our ads. And I was very close to banning your account today

... we wouldn't be having this discussion. I totally understand you being a little upset about not getting the revenue you need from ads, and blockers are indeed a problem, but attacking people like that isn't the way to go get your point across.

yslee

11-23-2003, 11:20 PM

Ah, I too understand the frustration, but blowing up like that isn't entirely endearing. Not the first time I've seen you do that either. :wink: I'm with bjornkeizers, there are better ways of getting your point across.

And just to add, I like the colour scheme of the Google Ads, nice contrast!

JustinGTP

11-23-2003, 11:29 PM

If I know a site has popups, then I wont go to that site again, its terribly annoying.

But, on this site, I can choose to read the ads and click on them at my choosing, they don't force themselves in front of me. Thats why I return here - the content and most of the people are great. And the ads create some entertainment if they are good ones :)

Maybe I should look into some popup blocking software. I kind of like banner ads, everyone has to earn someway right? I just dont like popups.

:D

-Justin.

Dave Beauvais

11-23-2003, 11:34 PM

If you're running Internet Explorer, the free Google Toolbar (http://toolbar.google.com/) has a great pop-up blocker in addition to giving you a quick and easy way to do Google searches and even auto-fill some forms. When I used IE, I ran the Google Toolbar for several months and really liked it a lot.

spg

11-23-2003, 11:48 PM

Well I was thinking I would stay out of this thread, but I have to say a couple things...

First off, I completely agree with those who do not like popup ads. Frankly, those things drive me crazy. Even if it is fun to hit the Orbitz baseball... I don't like it interfering with my browsing. :-)

Second, I really think anyone getting mad at Jason in this situation is not being very reasonable (You are entitled to your own opinion of course). I know from experience that running a popular community web-site is not a cheap, nor an easy thing to do. Especially when you are trying to make a living doing it. For me, I'm not in that situation, but I know I would not be making enough money off of my site for it to support me. For Jason, this is his business, and when you block ads it takes away any chance he has for making money. People today easily accept ads on the radio and TV, as it keeps them free and allows the DJs and the stations to make money. Why is it that people can't accept the same thing on another free medium - the internet? I have to tell you, Jason pays more attention to keeping ads from being annoying than almost any other webmaster I know. He even posts about new things to get feedback on them... show me where Cnet or Yahoo or anyone else does that type of thing.

I know I am kinda ranting here... but when I see people telling Jason bluntly that they are blocking his ads, like they are proud of it or something, It makes me kinda mad. Keep in mind... this is like someone walking up to you and saying "Ok, you've done the work, and I'm going to enjoy that work... but I'm not going to pay you." You know what? If someone did this in an offline situation... they would get sued almost immediately. Now I admit that the web is a little different situation... but doesn't the same idea apply?

dangerwit

11-24-2003, 12:16 AM

Spg, most websites are free as you said, so suing is out of the question. I've learned that many folks we meet we find 'unreasonable'. :)

What we all aren't understanding is the reason behind the site, and it should be made clear. If Jason is running the site to earn a profit, wouldn't it change your viewpoints on the links? How can you blame someone if this is (a) an income source, and/or (b) his sole income source?

The ad-blocker thing is just like the TiVo/ReplayTV/VCRs vs. Television stations. If it's good and relevant advertising, I don't fast-forward thru the ads. Most cases, though, I'm not interested in panty liners or Barbie's latest set of wheels. We throw out junk mail all the time without even looking at it -- but I'm not 'out to get them'. I don't really care for billboards, so I ignore them best I can, but I'm not out to get them. Unless we feel like wasting our breath on a never-ending argument, we may want to drop that one; in the end, consumers won on the VCR front and probably will continue to win their right to do whatever they want with advertising.

I think almost anyone who solely runs a website loses money unless they have clients or other form of sustenance. I lost money for years until I got clients on board and supported my free sites (which are finally coming up, again, after 7 years).

You either run a website as a hobby or a business -- Jason is trying to tell us which he's doing. Motivations behind "hobby vs business" are an enitrely different thing, and irrelevant in this thread I think.

*Phil

uiop_z

11-24-2003, 02:41 AM

well this is quite an interesting discussion, and I can't help but post my thoughts.

First, blocking ads is wrong. When you visit a site you agree to view that site as the author intended it, including ads. Just taking the content while actively blocking ads is just a step above stealing. This also includes pop-up ads. I don't particularly see anything hypocritical about juni's actions (he's just being a free-loader), but I do think it's hypocritical to block pop-up ads, and lambast others for blocking banner ads. If you don't like a sites advertising methods, the solution is simple: don't visit that site. Modifying the content is not acceptable, because what is considered unacceptable is a very subjective matter. While you may detest pop-ups, I find them preferable to other alternatives.

I personally don't detest pop-up ads all that much. When employed correctly the ad occupies a separate space from the actual content of the site, and the site layout need not accomodate banner ads that detract from the actual content of the site. The kind of ads that I really detest are the product placement type of ads, and unfortunately this is what this site seems to be moving towards, both with these smart tags, affiliate links, and "sponsored" posts (tek-n-toys). Call me old fashioned, but I like the content to be distinct from and separte from the advertising, and at least maintain the appearance of impartiality. I do recognize the need to generate revenue, but I hope other methods could be found than to pollute the content that makes this site what it is. I don't even mind the click-through type ads that yahoo uses...

I particulary dislike those posts about tek-n-toys and I thought I'd elaborate a bit on why. Firstly those posts aren't really "news", "thoughts", "rants", "views", or "raves", and as such shouldn't occupy the same space as the actual content. It'd be much preferable, imho, to have a huge banner or almost any other type of ad than to include it together with the acutal news posts. Secondly, the "discuss" link is noticably absent from these posts. I'm not sure of the exact reasoning behind this, but one consequence of this is that better deals cannot be posted to in the discussion.

These are just some comments and my own personal views, and not meant to attack or denigrate this site. It is my belief that constructive critisism is very usful in helping in making a site better, and hope you take my comments as such. Also, considering that this site has no problems being self-righteous towards other companies and products, I would hope that you could accept critisism better, without taking it so personally.

sublime

11-24-2003, 02:57 AM

Oh snap! If I would have known that buying software through this site's Handango store would support the site, I would not have bought it at the regular site. Dammit! That wasn't listed on the subscription notice, so I plead ignorance.

:(

Jason Dunn

11-24-2003, 03:14 AM

You either run a website as a hobby or a business -- Jason is trying to tell us which he's doing. Motivations behind "hobby vs business" are an enitrely different thing, and irrelevant in this thread I think.

Just to clear things up: Pocket PC Thoughts is a business that also happens to be a personal passion, but it had it's roots as a personal hobby site. It's more or less a full time job, and it earns a part-time, if somewhat unstable, income. :-) I'm not at the point that I could focus all my efforts on running my Web sitesm, but who knows, maybe someday I can. :-)

Jeff Rutledge

11-24-2003, 03:42 AM

I personally have no problem with this. It totally fits with what I see as this site's philosophy towards ads. That being that you need to take action before you're taken somewhere else (click a banner, click a tag, etc.). That suits me fine. I don't like ads that take me somewhere without me asking it to (e.g. popups).

I've always believed that Jason should do whatever he has to do to keep this site going. I wouldn't be surprised if one day it means putting up with something I don't care for, but that's certainly not today.

accursedcosine

11-24-2003, 03:46 AM

You know Juni, normally I get completely enraged when I see people admitting that they block our ads. And I was very close to banning your account today - you block my ads, I block your account. Seems fair right?

Actually, yes. The way the Internet works is based on an open network of computers receiving and accepting connections. Take the worms that attack the Internet, for instance. I don't want them accessing my machines, so I block them at the firewall level at the border of the machines that I control. You are perfectly free to do the same on your end, refusing connections from machines that don't load your ads. (This is not really that hard to implement technically.)

What I find offensive is when site owners are angered by "their" bandwidth being taken by users that block ads. By placing a server on the Internet and accepting public connections over http, you're agreeing to bear all costs related to your end of the transaction. (Remember that everyone that connects to your site has a bandwidth bill, too! In fact, people accessing it over GPRS probably have a higher bandwidth bill than you do. Who has more moral authority then to block the ads?) The content on the server is yours, but by accepting and answering connections on port 80, you agree to bear all costs of transmission - that's the fundamental principle of the net. If it bothers you, stop offering web pages to those what don't follow whatever content delivery policies you set.

It's like setting up a huge A-frame display board in a mall with a short story that you wrote and a big "sponsored by such and such" logo at the top, then walking away; then, in the future, becoming angered by people that ignored the logo at the top and went straight to reading the story. If you want people to see the logo as a condition of reading the story, you've gotta set up some sort of check and balance system - like an employee standing by the story gently reminding people of the sponsor, or putting the story under a big sheet of paper that has the company name logo that must be lifted to read the actual story.

If you choose to participate in the Internet, please participate with integrity and respect. I visit this site because I believe it does exactly that and provides me with a variety of news about the Pocket PC scene; I have bought a variety of products as a result of reviews and/or advertising on this site. Complaining about a client that chooses to only load some of the images on the page is counterproductive and only serves to demonstrate a selfish approach to the careful balance between client and server that has made the Internet what it is today.

And no, for the record, I don't block banner ads - only popups.

-AC

Jason Dunn

11-24-2003, 04:33 AM

I'm stepping away from this discussion because I think I've explained my points well enough and further posts won't express anything new. I can't convince the "everything should be free" people that I deserve to earn a living any more than they can convince me I should forsake paying my mortgage and sacrifice myself to the idea of a "free Internet" and pay my heating bill with good will. :wink: The Internet as an adcademic-based bastion of learning and knowledge exchange is dead. The Internet today is a commercial beast that demands to be fed: bandwidth is not free, and sites either scale commercially or they die. I've chosen to do so rather than shut down the site, and if I'm criticised for doing that, so be it.

The one thing that does make me chuckle is that other sites (like infoSync World) have implemented this type of advertising, and they of course would never enter into a discussion with their readers about the merits of the ads. Neither would Brighthand or any other Pocket PC site that I'm aware of. I hope that regardless of whether or not we agree, you'd at least appreciate the willingless I have to try and keep the readership informed about changes and why we're doing them.

You're welcome to continue this discussion as you see fit, but it's certainly no longer about the IntelliTXT ads and has no bearing upon the original post that I made.

Janak Parekh

11-24-2003, 05:01 AM

You are perfectly free to do the same on your end, refusing connections from machines that don't load your ads. (This is not really that hard to implement technically.)
Actually, it is much, much harder than that. It's not difficult to build an ad-blocker that would either make the HTTP request to download the ad and immediately disconnect, avoiding the bandwidth cost, or even more simply to download the ad and not display it.

In fact, people accessing it over GPRS probably have a higher bandwidth bill than you do.
Well, not necessarily. GPRS is increasingly becoming cheaper. Second, the mobile frontpage/forums don't have any ads.

Complaining about a client that chooses to only load some of the images on the page is counterproductive and only serves to demonstrate a selfish approach to the careful balance between client and server that has made the Internet what it is today.
Jason isn't talking about violating theoretical principles of the Internet here; he's talking about what's "fair". I mean, you could technically DDOS the site with a few machines given today's client bandwidth, but just because you could technically do it, and within Internet protocol standards, is it "fair"? Setting up a email worm that eats up bandwidth is technically not any violation of any protocols, but it's not fair either. The Internet is just a set of standards, like the phone system, the TV system, etc., but we place expectations on how we feel those standards should be used.

--janak

Jason Dunn

11-24-2003, 05:29 AM

I've been reading through my comments and I'm really coming across as complaining too much - I want to REALLY thank everyone who has subscribed and the sponsors who support this site month after month. We're doing ok, and Pocket PC Thoughts will be around for a long time to come. :way to go:

juni

11-24-2003, 06:47 AM

Then I visited your site and see that you're also a content creator - you create skins, and you ask people to support you in that work. That's nice that you don't have any ads on your main site - it looks like it's hosted by your ISP, and you have a comment page hosted by a third-party service that has ads. So it doesn't look like you have any out-of-pocket expenses at all. I wish that were my situation, but I'm paying $500 CND a month just for Web hosting. Then factor in the countless hours I spend working on the site, the hundreds I spend buying prizes for site visitors, the hundreds I spend on shipping prizes out to people...the list goes on.

I'm only using the third-party service for my comments page since I couldn't find any free guestbook pages that would work on Pocket IE without ads. I would host it on my own page but my ISP won't let me run any kind of scripts :(. I do spend countless hours on making skins for free for people to use, never charging a dime.

we both rely on the support of people who appreciate what we do. You rely on donations

Nah, not really, I do have a "real" job too.

but I do expect them to "donate" a few KB of their bandwidth to let a few ads load

I'm not 100% sure, but when you have Norton Internet Security running it does actually loads the ads - it just doesn't display them to you. And on another note...I do visit this site at work and I'm not blocking any ads here so I do know what they look like. :)

So, to prove that walk the walk, I donated 10 Euros to your site to show that I appreciate what you do for the Pocket PC community, even if you don't appreciate what we do here at Pocket PC Thoughts.

Thank you! In all these years I've been doing skins (ever since the Ipag 3600 came out, when was that?) you are the second one to ever donate anything! So, so far I've made exactly 15$ from making countless of skins over the years. ;)

And I do appreciate this site, I've read reviews and actually bought things that have been recommended in them. And this is the premiere site for getting pocket pc news. I suppose you don't make any money out of that but at least the vendors do. I think it is a great site - but you did ask for opinions about the new ads and I told the thruth - I think they are annoying (just as annoying as I find the ones on my own comments page - but what can I do...the 15$ in revenues I've generated over the years won't allwo me to host my own site).

Jason Dunn

11-24-2003, 06:50 AM

Nah, not really, I do have a "real" job too.

Well, my work for Spb is part time, and the rest of my income has to come from the Web sites that I run. So try to put yourself in my shoes for a few days would you? If you relied on banner ads loading to pay your bills and put food on your table, how would you feel if someone was bragging that they were blocking one of your few sources of income? That's all I'm asking you to do - try to see this from my point of view. You don't seem willing to do that though... :|

juni

11-24-2003, 07:07 AM

That's all I'm asking you to do - try to see this from my point of view. You don't seem willing to do that though.

I do see it from your point of view. I remember this discussion from years back on various theme and skin sites - how to keep the site running since people don't generally like ads? Most sites went to a subscription-based model, like you did, but apparently that doesn't pay the bills anyway (or am I wrong?).

You know, I generally don't even see ads (without even blocking them). I can count the times I've clicked on an ad on one hand...and this site was one of those - I think it was a case-ad.

My first post does seem a bit like bragging - I'm sorry - it was badly formulated.

Stik

11-24-2003, 09:02 AM

PPCThoughts Lite Subscriber - $2.00 a month :way to go:

I find more pocket change under my couch cushions every month. 8O

Thats less than ONE Big Mac a month ( USD ) :roll:

PPCThoughts Community, Information and Entertainment value? :popcorn:

Priceless! :idea:

aff_dan

11-24-2003, 11:13 AM

:D I'm glad it doesn't work in Mozilla. I have a habit of tracing my mouse as I read stuff, and having boxes pop up everywhere will be painful. Love those google ads though.

aff_dan,
http://www.marketingtops.com[/url]

sub_tex

11-24-2003, 04:12 PM

You know, after reading through all 7 pages of this thread I got all inspired to upgrade my subscriber account.

Then I saw that there was no middle ground between Full ($36/yr) and lifetime ($120 flat). 8O

Is there no way to be a lifetime subscriber but pay it monthly over that first year? (maybe allowing Full subscriber benefits until the $129 is paid and THEN giving the lifetime benefits?)

I would do that in a heartbeat. But parting with $120 in one sitting? My pockets are too shallow. :oops:

Jason Dunn

11-24-2003, 06:26 PM

You know, after reading through all 7 pages of this thread I got all inspired to upgrade my subscriber account.

You're a gentleman and a scholar. :D

Then I saw that there was no middle ground between Full ($36/yr) and lifetime ($120 flat). 8O Is there no way to be a lifetime subscriber but pay it monthly over that first year? (maybe allowing Full subscriber benefits until the $129 is paid and THEN giving the lifetime benefits?)

Right now, no, I'm afraid there's no way. One of the problems I face is a per-transaction cost. For example, with PayPal and with 2checkout (our credit card processing compnay), I pay a fee for EVERY transaction they process - which is why the "montly" subscriptions are really billed yearly. It would add about $10 to the cost of the lifetime subscription if I were to bill it in 12 increments. I don't like the idea of that, because that's $10 that the vendor is getting (not me), so I haven't gone that route. It might be possible to break it up into three pieces or something similar. Or bill it monthly but have it be $130 total. Would that interest you?

The other complication is what do I do if someone cancels paying for their lifetime subscription after six months...do I give them half a lifetime subscription? :lol: Very complicated stuff...

Regardless, I deeply appreciate your desire to support this site further.

dangerwit

11-24-2003, 07:22 PM

Jason isn't talking about violating theoretical principles of the Internet here; he's talking about what's "fair". I mean, you could technically DDOS the site with a few machines given today's client bandwidth, but just because you could technically do it, and within Internet protocol standards, is it "fair"? Setting up a email worm that eats up bandwidth is technically not any violation of any protocols, but it's not fair either. The Internet is just a set of standards, like the phone system, the TV system, etc., but we place expectations on how we feel those standards should be used.

Trying to define "fair" is like nailing jello to the wall. It's much too relative. For example, I am insulted by the types of commercials on TV, and that to watch a 60 minute show, I am subjugated to 15+ minutes of advertising.

That said, it doesn't keep me awake at night. And this new advertising shouldn't keep anyone here awake at night either -- if you don't like the links, ignore them.

Jason made it clear what the purpose of the site is -- I think his goal is consistent with his actions.

Remember, if you don't like what's on, change the channel, it's your right. (Then again, so is complaining about what's on.) :)

Just be glad that Jason and the others are engaging in this discussion. If he didn't care, he wouldn't respond to any of us.

*Phil

sub_tex

11-24-2003, 09:41 PM

It might be possible to break it up into three pieces or something similar. Or bill it monthly but have it be $130 total. Would that interest you?

That's what, $11 a month? That's fine. If you can get that up and running I'll do the lifetime subscription.

The other complication is what do I do if someone cancels paying for their lifetime subscription after six months...do I give them half a lifetime subscription? :lol: Very complicated stuff...

Perhaps some kind of early termination fee? It scarily reminds me of cell phone companies (*shudder*), but it would be in fact, a contract of sorts that the person would be agreeing to, so it's not a bad thing. Especially if you're giving them the option of monthly for it.

Either way, you'll need some fine print there. :wink:

:deal: