Google Unveils Flash Ads 225
Gailin writes "Google has announced and given some examples of their new Flash based ads. They seem to vary from average size to full screen-width Flash advertisements, with some interactive abilities. 'Gadget ads can incorporate real-time data feeds, images, video and much more in a single creative unit and can be developed using Flash, HTML or a combination of both. Designed to act more like content than a typical ad, they run on the Google(TM) content network, competing alongside text, image and video ads for placement. They support both cost-per-click and cost-per-impression pricing models, and offer a variety of contextual, site, geographic and demographic targeting options to ensure the ads reach relevant users with precision and scale.'"
Bandwidth & The Beginning of the End (Score:5, Insightful)
So tell me, when I'm trying to use MySpace to reply to a distant friend & my browser slows to a crawl because there's five flash video advertisements of a lonely girl on a webcam waiting to talk to me--that's the kind of experience you want to proliferate through to every site using Google Ads?
How will this affect people on slow connections like out in the boonies operating on a 56k phone line connection? I'm kind of afraid those users are just going to be squished & that Google will leave it to the sites themselves to figure that out while the sites themselves will expect Google to take care of it.
Wait, did you hear that? I believe that was the sound of every single router and switch crying out in anguish.
Ads that are designed to appeal to my eye & take up obnoxious amounts of bandwidth? It must be
In all seriousness, this is all very bad news to me. A bloated delivery system (by definition it must be since it provides 'content rich' functionality) being forced to a large percent of the internet in the name of delivery unsolicited advertisement. And it's all legal and--get this--is unveiled like it's a new great feature.
The simple concept of character based content delivery system is dead.
Well fuck (Score:5, Insightful)
Adblock+ & NoScript for the win.
How are these different than any other site's ads? (Score:2, Insightful)
These are the same busy, annoying ads that other sites have plastered all over...putting them next to a paragraph where the ad's designers justify their use of "artistic" flashing/blinking colors makes them no better than the aforementioned "Punch the monkey, win a ringtone" ads found elsewhere.
My hope is that Google bigshots will see what an ugly, terrible effect these have on what their former, critically-acclaimed, clean, simple interface, and will do an about-face.
I do realize how slim the odds of that happening actually are...I guess when one's pupils/irises turn into dollar signs like in the cartoons, one's vision tends to become a bit impaired.
Re:Bandwidth & The Beginning of the End (Score:4, Insightful)
The simple answer is that a lot of people are going to end up installing browser extensions that do the "click to run flash object" thing. And if they can't figure that out, I'm having a hard time feeling such pity if they are "squished".
Re:hmm (Score:2, Insightful)
Thank you, Google (Score:5, Insightful)
A large, clear, well-defined target is always appreciated.
Re:hmm (Score:4, Insightful)
Google has forgotten its roots. Sure it might look good in the short term..a new product for more revenue.. But Google will lose in the long term as others offer a clean alternative to Google.
People want uncluttered.
Re:X86-64 (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:hmm (Score:5, Insightful)
This could be the first and last straw (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:How does this violate the do no evil credo? (Score:2, Insightful)
Even if you think that, it's all for the purpose of pushing ads. And maybe they are guilty of profiting off of the works of others. I'm not saying Google isn't evil, they may do questionable things. I was just saying that I don't see how offering flash ads makes them evil.
Text ads can be abused, but Google has policies as to what types of ads are acceptable
Likewise, flash ads aren't evil in themselves, it all depends what kind of behavior they allow. If they allow ads that look like windows dialogs saying "virus detected, click here." Then that is unethical. But the sample ads linked to in the OP didn't seem abusive.
But some people seem to dislike the use of flash for flash's sake. Which is what I meant in pointing out that Slashdot hosts flash ads.
Re:Well fuck (Score:3, Insightful)
that, in itself, is pretty much evil.
now, for your 'reward' of being a paid eyeball, we'll serve you some content. or let you think you're getting content.
(anyone notice the google websearch - the thing that made them famous - is mostly taken over by commercial BUY/SELL vendors no matter what the search term is?)
advertising companies are always evil. we just are slowly seeing the devil for what it really is. slowly, but surely.
Re:This could be the first and last straw (Score:3, Insightful)
Ads are not content. (Score:4, Insightful)
My feeling on ads is nicely summed up by banksy [banksy.co.uk]:
whether you see it or not is yours. It belongs to you.
It's yours to take, re-arrange and re-use.
Asking for permission is like asking to keep a rock someone just threw at your head.