Microsoft XP SP2 blocks even DHTML
 

We are testing the Beta release of service pack 2 and seeing that it is successfully blocking popups, even DHTML ones like Maxcash uses. There is going to be some significant pain felt when this thing goes live.

Does anyone know of any sites using a Java based or a layer ad solution to counter the anti pop up blockers? We would like to test that as well.

http://www.privatexxx.org/pages/mainindex.html Notice the little popup on the right.

wow, that's big news

Wouldn't be more productive in the long run instead of trying to defeat people who don't want popups to design better creatives of the kind they do tolerate?

I guess people like me will just have to disable Java and Macromedia Flash when everyone starts that bullshit.

its going to interesting to see how "everyone" will handle this :)

This is an interesting issue. Webmasters (you guys are webmasters right? Not just porn surfers?) who believe that the endusers should be able to control consoles. Part of me says ok, yes consoles are annoying as hell and I would like them squashed. The other part of me knows first hand the revenue they generate. This revenue is something that webmasters benefit from.

So if in fact Microsoft and others are successful at ending all marketing done in this manner, and as a result you the webmasters sees a decline in the productivity of your traffic, will that be acceptable to you?

You can also take this further, what if endusers decided to widely just use software solutions to rip all images from a site and skip looking at text? Would you be supportive of this as well? Or if site owners and webmasters utilized solutions to counter this, would there be a similar discussion over how this is unfair because it counters the obvious wishes of the endusers?

I am very mindful of taking care of the surfers. Especially in the niche market, there is NOT an endless supply of surfers. We have a limited universe of potential customers and pissing them off is not something we strive to do. It really comes down to a balancing test of what is fair to both parties. There is a reason why we DO utilize consoles but DO NOT utilize prechecked cross sells.

Please discuss this some more, I am interested to understand this issue more fully.

ok, here is my personal opinion

This concept has been going around in my head for quite some time now. You need to have a fair and reasonable way to produce revenue from your product(s), including paying affiliates that may have sent the signup. Many affiliates look at the raw payout dollar and send traffic to the programs with the highest payouts/productivity (it is not uncommon knowledge that some programs ?reverse-shave? and have differing ways of showing their stats in the best possible light)

The revenue generated generally comes from the surfer?s pocketbook. How much is a surfer worth and how much are they willing to spend for a site? After you realize that, yes, trials do convert better than full joins, however, many of those surfers also cancel before the end of the trial, so how can this program afford to pay me X per signup and be able to cover all of the losses (cancellations/fraud)? And you realize how once you look at the sites terms and conditions, precked crossells on the signup page, the surfer cancellation process, etc? does the consumer really expect (and can afford) to get charged $150 within 3 days for their porn membership?

Many affiliates that complain about tours containing consoles send their surfers to the slaughter in other ways?

My analogy in your situation is, yes, you run the supermarket, and you want people to have to walk by the impulse and high margin items before they reach the staple items/loss-leaders. Your store, your rules, not unreasonable. However, 3 days later, your surfers do not begin getting charged for a 39.95 loaf of bread that gets delivered on a monthly basis to the shopping cart they were using.

There is a balance

bump

Corvett are you referring to us? We don't use prechecked cross sells and never have.

Not at all, quite the opposite. I apologize if my post made that misimpression. I was speaking in general terms. Cliffs notes of my post:

Affiliates may complain about consoles, but they also generally want high payouts, which program owners are able to provide by generating revenue from the surfers that these affiliates send.

There are, imo, ?fair and reasonable? ways to generate that revenue, and ?gouging short-term gain? ways

Imo Consoles are a fair ray to generate revenue

I'd have to agree with you completely on this one scoreman...

I REALLY hate being forced to do or not do something by Bill & company, the monster of marketing...

I am looking for a solution to this and I'm sure it will happen, only a matter of time...



I think the key in what you said above was the balance part, when allowed to have a marketing tool some people act like tools and ABUSE the shit out of it, this is why we are where we are...

a nice un-intrusive popunder or exit thanking them for visiting or asking if they'd like anything else, imo, is decent advertising practice, however I also know that some people like to CJ the surfer to death...

again, back to balance....unfortunately it appears is if Big Brother Bill wants to dictate HOW we market...this is what really pisses me off...

oh well, will just waste a bit more of my time to find a solution...it's not like Bill's products are so tight they can't be worked around a bit ;)

are we looking to an end of DHTML tags? :(

That's a good thing ... popups are sooo annoying