Obnoxious Aperture Ad

How long do we have to put up with the obnoxious Aperture pop-up ad

blocking our view of the site?

As a subscriber, you shouldn't be seeing that . You might want to sign out and log back in to ensure that the server recognize you as a subscriber.

two questions...

 

1) Why would Aperture think that taking over a person's computer would result in good will toward their company?

 

2) Why would Photo.net think that taking over a person's computer would reult in good will toward their site?

Yeah, if you guys don't want to drive people away from the site it might be a good idea to cease and desist that sort of advertising. Don't go down that route, Phil & co - you should know that it just pisses people off.

yes, let us pursue the logic of this

 

1) subscribers, already a part of this site do not see this ad

 

2) a new person arriving at the site has his computer taken over for a minute or more (if on high speed hookup maybe less but on dialup for a long time)

 

3) the newbie first venturing on the site will be so enthralled by having his computer comandeered by Aperture that he will be really hot to subscribe to this site

 

4) this will increase the numbers of subscribers

An Ad free log in page for subscriber might help. Something like: http://member.photo.net. I saw the Ad every time before I signed in.

it seems that if you turn off Java and Java script it will solve the problem

Let's put things in perspective here - hopefully.

 

Nobody is having their computer taken over by an ad. The ad makes viewing this site more difficult, it doesn't start using your computer to control rockets or anything.

 

Ads need not be a nuisance for you, install ad blocking software.

 

Use a browser that easily lets you block ads - firefox in conjuntion with the adblock extension is extremely good.

 

At the end of the day the site has to make money to stay afloat, ads are one avenue by which they can achieve that, and are probably the best paying avenue - Should we expect the staff to finance the site from their own pockets?

 

Is it really worth getting so annoyed about? Take control, don't be a sheep.

Companies that advertise this way aren't looking for goodwill, they're simply looking for exposure and the chance to strongly imprint their name in people's minds. In fact, they're partly hoping to generate some discussion, which serves to further spread their name subliminally amongst all the other users who were not even touched by the original ad (like me). I still don't fully believe the "science" behind this, but apparently it works somehow. It's an old technique that goes back many decades- think of the genuinely obnoxious TV ads - loud, brash, ultra-hard sell ones - particularly the ones that come on later at night (for Australians, think Joyce Mayne; for Americans, maybe Cal Worthington, though my memory is rusty) - ads that make you want to firebomb the company's premisis. Yet, apparently, when we least expect it, we'll find ourselves using those companies ahead of other ones purely because we've got their name thrust deep in our mushy brains, courtesy of their horrible and intrusive ads. With actual subliminal advertising being illegal in most countries, this method which on the surface appears to be the exact opposite of subliminal works just as effectively towards placing messages deep in our minds. Outside the context of Photo.Net, we'll have forgotten all about Aperture's nasty ads. Hmmm. Not bloody likely!

There's no such thing as bad publicity...unless you're Michael Jackson I guess.

I added "apple.com" to the sites my firewall blocks.

Just remember the quality of the software is inversely proportional to the quantity and aggression of the advertising.

 

Good products just don't need costly advertising.

On this evening we should give thanks and pray that we do not have to see David Spade's ugly face and pathetic whining voice selling Capital One credit cards on the website.

 

However bad the present ads are, some advertising exec somewhere is probably staying up late and snorting a nose full trying find new ways to annoy us and take our money.

Yahoo and other sites have the same "problem". There are some ADs which are somewhat resource intensive.

 

Incidentally, even though I can block it if I want, I sitll see the ad every time I come to the site. I do show up as logged in since the button next to My Workspace says LOGOUT.

 

Many companies believe that very flashy ads make people talke about them (good or bad) therefore, they take any and all publicity about it. Whether we like it or not.

I am a member of photo.net but I usually do not log in when I just want to see what is new and to read some interesting posts. Now I am forced to log in every time and loose time in the process because I dont want to see black devil from Aperture all over the text. Please tell the advertiser that I shall not buy Aperture. Never. Under no circumstances. I hate such adverising and the only thing I can do is not to buy from those guys.

 

Regards, Marko

>>Please tell the advertiser that I shall not buy Aperture. Never. Under no circumstances. I hate such adverising and the only thing I can do is not to buy from those guys.<<

 

I think you should tell Apple. Have you written to them? Direct communication it's best.

That Apeture ad is pissing me off. It is the same as one of the kids jamming some picture in front of your face while reading the newspaper. It is extremely rude and the kid only did it once.

I hate that ad.