PDA

View Full Version : Make the web faster?



mhollis
27th February 2004, 02:07 PM
I just tried out Ricardo Batista's Speed Maniac (http://batista.org/product.html), which blocks most adverts on the top, sides, and so on, as well as (selectively) Flash, JavaScript, graphics not in your cache and graphics larger than a certain size.

It works with any browser and really speeds things up, especially for dialup. I'm using Safari and haven't had a minimal advert experience since I was using Netscape Communicator and an advert-killing plug-in for it under System 9.

Not sure if I'll buy it but it's definitely worth a look, especially if you don't have broadband.

jameso
28th February 2004, 10:11 AM
are there ethical question involved in using add blockers?

jameso

Byrd
28th February 2004, 10:45 AM
Originally posted by jameso@Feb 28 2004, 10:11 AM
are there ethical question involved in using add blockers?

jameso
No, as even the next version of MS IE is going to allow to you disable ads and pop-ups :D You can do it now of course (using the software as described), but this is supposedly a feature! for Microsoft.

jameso
28th February 2004, 10:58 AM
And Microsoft is the authority on ethics? This is all flame bait but i am curious too see if any one cares abut add blocking.

jameso

Disko
28th February 2004, 12:54 PM
There's a difference between ad blocking, popup blocking and third party ad blocking.

Pop up blocking is what Safari does - and what i agree with, as it stops an intrusive form of advertisement.
ad blocking i do not agree with, because advertising helps keep many sites on the net.
third party ad blocking... well, i'm still unsure about that one.

Currawong
28th February 2004, 06:14 PM
If you don't mind fiddling a bit on the command line, you can install Privoxy, which blocks just about everything. It quatered the load speed of say, Versiontracker by wiping out all the ads.

mhollis
1st March 2004, 01:59 AM
Originally posted by Disko@Feb 28 2004, 12:54 PM
ad blocking i do not agree with, because advertising helps keep many sites on the net.
third party ad blocking... well, i'm still unsure about that one.
Most ad sales these days are to third party handlers. Were you to initiate ads on your website in order to help pay for bandwidth, you might hire a third party to handle them for you. Those tend to be the most annoying of all ads with animations that draw the eye away from the content, which is the reason why I am interested in your site in the first place.

If your advertisements get too annoying, I stay away entirely.

In this particular case, I usually have something worthwhile to ad to the conversation. I imagine in my addled mind that I am actually adding value to the content of the site, so I don't feel too bad about blocking advertisements on your website. I do that on the OS X FAQ Forums (http://forums.osxfaq.com/index.php), which have started using an advertisement in order to pay for bandwidth. At this writing, I have 1145 posts on that site, all within the last year and one half.

I believe that one has the right to block ads and to manage one's own experience while on the Worldwide Web. Ricardo's program does not block all advertisements, but it does block a lot of them, which makes my experience better. We're fairly innundated with commercial messages here in the US and I'm plenty happy to ignore some of them.

mhollis
1st March 2004, 02:00 AM
Most ad sales these days are to third party handlers. Were you to initiate ads on your website in order to help pay for bandwidth, you might hire a third party to handle them for you. Those tend to be the most annoying of all ads with animations that draw the eye away from the content, which is the reason why I am interested in your site in the first place.

If your advertisements get too annoying, I stay away entirely.

In this particular case, I usually have something worthwhile to add to the conversation. I imagine in my addled mind that I am actually adding value to the content of the site, so I don't feel too bad about blocking advertisements on your website. I do that on the OS X FAQ Forums (http://forums.osxfaq.com/index.php), which have started using an advertisement in order to pay for bandwidth. At this writing, I have 1145 posts on that site, all within the last year and one half.

I believe that one has the right to block ads and to manage one's own experience while on the Worldwide Web. Ricardo's program does not block all advertisements, but it does block a lot of them, which makes my experience better. We're fairly innundated with commercial messages here in the US and I'm plenty happy to ignore some of them.

kim jong il
1st March 2004, 08:01 AM
Right, this is a curly one. Yes, mhollis we have a right to manage our web experience. Yes, Disko is right. Advertising revenue DOES keep many sites on the web. Yes, businesses have the right to use this medium to promote and sell their product. Yes, there are limits to what is reasonable.

EDIT 1. jameso makes some good points a couple of posts down too.

SPAM bots should be smarter. SPAM mailers should be cleverer. Porno popups should be universally outlawed. Sponsored software is good because you get unlimited use for free. The downside on this one is that due to low budgets and small teams, development can be slow with incremental improvements rather than annual releases. On this one I really believe it is wrong to alter code to remove these (sponsored that is).

No one should seriously object to vodaphone, optus or telstra advertising at a mobile phone forum (larf, they could talk about talking) :blink: or online marketplace, or aussie post advertising at ebay.

cleverly returning to the thread topic.........

Server software could be cleverer and do a primary connection test based on the home page, assess bandwidth and then......... The clever web designer has included content (both site and advertising) appropriate to the bandwidth estimated by the server. Sound too hard? Not really. low and high should do. Even with adsl, if you've got a dog of a connection you will not want to wait half an hour while that 1 meg animation loads, OK, 500K, or those changing animated java thingys (are these embedded, you know all variation/applets loaded with page or loaded as required, as is, I know, the case in certain instances?) (yes, I HAVE led a sheltered life) This could/might/would/maybe generate performance boosts for those restricted to 56 kbps and other slow connections.

EDIT 2 (3/3/04) Having said this I just happened to see at the jpl/NASA site yesterday, a little button at the top of the page 'low bandwidth', so I'm guessing this is probably common.

Sorry, where was i...... Nup, lost it.....

OK, furthermore

This will sound silly to some, but I have found with a high speed connection (and the lovely multitasking mac OSX) that ad's, while still possessing all the faults described earlier, are still intrusive but far more managable. BANG, cop that, gone. They load quickly, you get rid of them quickly. With dialup it's a battle sometimes to kill the popup before it spawns. Click.....Click, click clickclickclick. What is going on? What?, I didn't like the news so I might just want to gamble? If I don't want don't want to gamble you think I might be interested in people, petz and watersportz? (sic) I mean, what are these people thinking?

Just an opinion, sorry about the lack of a conclusion. It's late, I'm tired ('knackered' for the americans) and I just don't seem to be quite 100% on top of it.

cheers, kim

jameso
1st March 2004, 11:26 AM
Well, i tend to think that pop-up blocking is fine, this is my computer and i should say when new windows are opened, i do not want my computer randomly displaying new information on the screen with out my interaction.

After that i say bring on the ads, especially if they keep great sites free.

mhollis, how can you say that your input into the site out-weights the web-master's right to put advertising onto HIS webpage? What makes your posts so important that it allows you to deprive the web-master of his right to pay for bandwidth?

If your asking a server to display a page on your computer you have (IMHO) a moral right to display all content embedded in the page they send. if you have a problem with what you are seeing then do not visit that site.

Some people would say that pop-up advertising would be included with that and they are right, you have the same moral obligation to display the advertisement but (here is a personal opinion for you) as they are disruptive to (my) work i see no obligation to have them on screen. As it is also unsolicited (I did not open that window, i did not ask for that page) it should be included under the SPAM description.

But then there is the 3rd kind of advertising that most (all?) mac users never see and that is spyware (THE COMPANY FORMALLY KNOW AS GATOR WAS A SPYWARE COMPANY.... !!!!) related. This is the bigest problem as pop-up are being phased out on most respectable websites and will be compleately removed (i would hazard too guess) when XP SP2 come out, built in pop-up blocker and all. This form of advertising, is an invasion of your privacy/space and should be considered unsolicited advertising (SPAM)

Just remember if embedded advertising stops working they (the collective 'they' of marketers) will just work out another way to plague us with the same old content. If the marketers loose this battle (and bandwidth is not free) then we (the collective we of everyone) will be paying lots for website access.

You should consider how your selfish attitude will effect the rest of us.

That said, no one is ever going to stop you installing an add blocker as it is YOUR computer and it is YOUR right to use it as you wish. That right will only get taken away with the implementation of Trusted Computing or some other software/hardware combo that is as yet unheard of by us.

This is all IMHO and i do not wish to offend.

jameso

Also i got about halfway thru correcting this and gave up so if there are any major errors or inconsistencies with my argument just remember i am tasmania. =)

mhollis
1st March 2004, 01:26 PM
Originally posted by jameso@Mar 1 2004, 11:26 AM
mhollis, how can you say that your input into the site out-weights the web-master's right to put advertising onto HIS webpage? What makes your posts so important that it allows you to deprive the web-master of his right to pay for bandwidth?

If your asking a server to display a page on your computer you have (IMHO) a moral right to display all content embedded in the page they send. if you have a problem with what you are seeing then do not visit that site.
I am saying that webmasters do have a right to put up advertising on their sites. I am also saying that I have a similar right to block most of it -- Mind you, not all ad blockers block all ads and furthermore most of the ads that are blocked are of the most annoying variety.

And since I actually do add useful commentary to a website, my occasional bit of help does increase the odds that the site will grow and have more hits.

I do not believe that I am being immoral in blocking ads, I am merely modifying my experience, same as if I used Lynx.

jameso
1st March 2004, 01:33 PM
Originally posted by mhollis@Mar 1 2004, 01:26 PM
I am also saying that I have a similar right to block most of it
Most (not all, and not forums.macosxhints.com) of the sites now include a "Do not use add blocking software on this forum" in the terms and conditions that you agree to follow when you sign up. would you still block ads if you agreed to something like this?

jameso

mhollis
2nd March 2004, 12:07 AM
Originally posted by jameso@Mar 1 2004, 01:33 PM
would you still block ads if you agreed to something like this?
The shareware that I have does have a provision to disable itself, however I pay them $10 yearly, which effectively blocks adverts from their side.

I may seem odd, but I do register shareware and I do pay for sites that have considerable value. Mac OS X Hints is one site where I contribute little, gain lots. Thus, I think they are very worthy of my "hardly earned" cash.

kim jong il
2nd March 2004, 06:40 AM
jameso, I am guessing now that the term 'third party popup advertisers' you mean, for example: you click on a link to a page about pickling olives (it's european because you want it authentic), the page opens and then....... the online casino pops up as well.

What is going on?

I suspect that advertisers and other businesses/site admins use interest sites as a means of generating hits.

A possible example:

online casino exec: what do you reckon housewives might be interested in?

flunky: sex?

online casino exec: no, ones with disposable income, older women

flunky: sex??

online casino exec: you idiot.

flunky: food preserving?

online casino exec: great, good idea, we can use that......

flunky: what are you on about?

online casino exec: we just embed a link in an....... olive pickling page!! to a respawning popup that takes them to OUR site, think of the potential........


cheers, kim :blink:

jameso
2nd March 2004, 09:44 AM
the way i see it, pop ups are any add/content that is opened up in a new window, i get just as unhappy when a web site only works in a popup window.

those online casino pop up don't tend to happen as often on osx because they are related with spy-ware. anything spy-ware related is spam

if some one wants to add some commercial content into a page that i would like to see (I am asking to see, this is not a right, this is a privilege) who am i to turn down his right to do that?

mhollis, i am glad that you donate to website and pay shareware fees, this is the best way to support the community. also, no one is about to take your right away to view content as you wish. All the webmaster is doing is asking you to consider getting services and/or products through the advertisements on there page, is that unreasonable? sure some adds are off topic but they are getting better all the time.

Kim made a good point about how no one should object to phone company displaying adds on a mobile phone forum, you are objecting in the most useless of way to all content. If you don't like adds on the sites you visit, tell the webmaster, see if you can work something out, open up a thread say you are not happy about it. If you block the adds at your end how is it ever going to change?

jameso

stevejay
11th March 2004, 11:41 AM
Originally posted by jameso@Feb 28 2004, 11:11 AM
are there ethical question involved in using add blockers?

jameso
If you're an advertiser, or a host dependent on advertising, then obviously you might think ad blocking unethical, but really, it's no different to making a cuppa while Blue Healers cuts to a break (NO! I DON'T WATCH BLUE HEALERS, my family does, though.)

However, I met a TV ad exec once who insisted this was a breach of the licence for using Free To Air TV services. I pointed out that without informing the audience of this before EVERY ad break, his point was a load of bollocks, but it's how many in the ad industry apparently view ignoring ads or spooling through them on a video tape.

I personally reckon actual advertisers have a conflict of interest commenting on this at all, those financially dependent on advertising MAY have a conflict, and for the rest of us "end users," there is the caveat implicit in common sense, that if you aren't told explicitly that you MUST NOT block the ads on the site you are viewing, you are entitled to block the ads. It seems pretty simple to me, and unless the law is changed to override this, I'll keep treating advertising as my "coffee break."

stevejay
11th March 2004, 11:42 AM
EDIT: Whoops, sorry, I got a server error and posted again, but apparently it HAD taken my post. Mods or Admins may feel free to remove this second copy.


Originally posted by jameso@Feb 28 2004, 11:11 AM
are there ethical question involved in using add blockers?

jameso
If you're an advertiser, or a host dependent on advertising, then obviously you might think ad blocking unethical, but really, it's no different to making a cuppa while Blue Healers cuts to a break (NO! I DON'T WATCH BLUE HEALERS, my family does, though.)

However, I met a TV ad exec once who insisted this was a breach of the licence for using Free To Air TV services. I pointed out that without informing the audience of this before EVERY ad break, his point was a load of bollocks, but it's how many in the ad industry apparently view ignoring ads or spooling through them on a video tape.

I personally reckon actual advertisers have a conflict of interest commenting on this at all, those financially dependent on advertising MAY have a conflict, and for the rest of us "end users," there is the caveat implicit in common sense, that if you aren't told explicitly that you MUST NOT block the ads on the site you are viewing, you are entitled to block the ads. It seems pretty simple to me, and unless the law is changed to override this, I'll keep treating advertising as my "coffee break."

mhollis
11th March 2004, 03:14 PM
Originally posted by stevejay@Mar 11 2004, 11:42 AM
However, I met a TV ad exec once who insisted this was a breach of the licence for using Free To Air TV services. I pointed out that without informing the audience of this before EVERY ad break, his point was a load of bollocks, but it's how many in the ad industry apparently view ignoring ads or spooling through them on a video tape.
In the US there is certainly no such regulation in television. And advertisers are doing their darndest to try to keep you from fast-forwarding or skipping your videotape machine or your TiVo device by making their advertisements "interesting." I know, I used to make ads and one could say that much of what I make (the lead-off intro into a nightly news show for a major US network) is an ad -- or at least a promo.

Of course what one person calls "interesting" is another fellow's "uninteresting."

The advertising model of payment presupposes receptiveness to advertisements. I think that presupposition is dangerous if the majority of the ads are for stuff the viewer won't buy or has no interest. I also sometimes wonder at the "create a need" point of view of advertisers.

I note that, in this forum, there are a lot of people who are interested in Macintosh computers and that many of those interested in those computers are looking on the used market for older machines. While this only indirectly helps out Apple, one could say that Apple's marketing campaigns have influenced many of the users here.

But what Apple does do is deliver on their promise: To innovate and to create an enjoyable experience for the users of their gear.

Thus, I do find myself more receptive to Apple's ads than, say, Dell's

But I can honestly say that I don't watch all of anyone's ads.

Herbie
12th March 2004, 03:52 AM
I use a .css file which blocks most ads. Easier than installing a third party piece of software and since I built the file I know what's in it.