About advertising on MacDailyNews (request for feedback)

We are trying out some new forms of advertising, as you may have noticed. The latest is “IntelliTXT” which we started testing yesterday evening. A user must mouse-over an IntelliTXT word (green, double underlined) to view an advertisement, which makes IntelliTXT is a 100% user-driven form of advertising. We like ads that the user can control. IntelliTXT works in real-time and is the last piece to load on page. IntelliTXT comes into play long after the article has been written and posted to the website.

Our interstitial test went well, but based upon reader feedback, we decided not to utilize that form of advertising. We are looking for a form of advertising that can offset the revenue from other forms of current advertising that we wish to discontinue.

Thank you for your patience while we test out these ads and thank you for patronizing our sponsors without whom we would not be here today.

Please let us know what you think of the IntelliTXT ads below.

Some readers have asked if they can support MacDailyNews and iPodDailyNews by making a donation via PayPal. Yes, you can, by clicking the blue banner below. Thank you to all who’ve donated in the past and thanks in advance if you decide to make a donation today.

Advertisements:
Get the new iMac with Intel Core Duo for as low as $31 A MONTH with Free shipping!
Get the MacBook Pro with Intel Core Duo for as low as $47 A MONTH with Free Shipping!
Apple’s new Mac mini. Intel Core, up to 4 times faster. Starting at just $599. Free shipping.
Apple’s brand new iPod Hi-Fi speaker system. Home stereo. Reinvented. Available now for $349 with free shipping.
iPod. 15,000 songs. 25,000 photos. 150 hours of video. The new iPod. 30GB and 60GB models start at just $299. Free shipping.
Connect iPod to your television set with the iPod AV Cable. Just $19.
iPod Radio Remote. Listen to FM radio on your iPod and control everything with a convenient wired remote. Just $49.

117 Comments

  1. MDN – For what it’s worth, I personally do not mind the IntelliTXT ads. However, if most people find them annoying, then you are doing the right thing in trying to find other ways of advertising to support your (and our ” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />) site.

    My biggest annoyance are pop-ups, pop-unders, whatever they are called. Unfortunately not all of us work for enlightened employeers.

    Thank you for listening to what your readers have to say. You guys / gals are doing a great job!!!

    Thanks again.

    Peace.

  2. For the record:

    Most annoying ads:
    Pop-up/pop-under ads
    Blinking ads/ads with lots of annoying animation
    Ads that pull you to a field in the ad to fill something in (had a few last week)
    Ads for Lamisil (didn’t see them, but “ewww” is right)

    Best kind of ads:
    IntelliTXT ads
    Sidebar ads that don’t get in the way
    Ads with sexy women

  3. Much prefer these to the pop-unders – some of which can’t even be closed from the taskbar (Have to use a PC at work).

    In that situation, I have to force-quit the app to get rid of the ad without clicking on it.

  4. Intellitext ads don’t bother me at all. I think that they are a welcomed alternative to the screen clutter and visual distraction that other publicity schemes entail.

    I’ve seen lots of complaints about them from people who can’t seem to read without pointing at the words (a process which they might not realize is slowing down their reading speed and making the text’s meaning harder to grasp because of that slow down).

    Depending on how the publicity is paid for (based on clicks or based on valid leads), this ad scheme could be defeating itself or it could work quite well. If valid leads are sought, then the scheme works well for the above average reader who will make a voluntary jump to the proposed ad but the average readers will be the more likely to click on these links and, unless the ad is aimed at naive buyers, all these clicks are just gonna be useless noise to the merchant. (but that may also be acceptable if the avalanche of clicks also includes the valid leads).
    If, on the other hand, the objective is simply to generate as many “clicks” as possible, then the intellitext approach will work very well. Discriminating people (who will also be the ones who know how to read) will not be bothered and the grade 3 readers will be drawned to (and perhaps annoyed by) the intellitext links.
    Being in the former category, and not caring much for the “annoyed”, I definitely approve of intellitext ads especially if they are used “instead” of the other forms of publicity.

  5. I’m not exactly sure what you mean by “interstitial” ads. Whatever they are, they are fine by me. By that, I was OK with the site as it existed before the IntelliTXT ads.

    I DO NOT like the IntelliTXT ads at all! They are just too “in your face”. They dedtract from reading the article. They pop up if you accidently mouse over them. And what’s with the Dell popup ads? Like anyone here gives a rats ass for Dell?

    The PayPal link is OK.

    MDN, lose the InelliTXT ads. What you had before was good! Keep the PayPal link.

    Just my 2¢.

  6. I love MDN. It makes my day at work go by quicker.

    As far as the advertising goes, I dont mind the regular old fashion banner ads. If you have to have the intelli ads, just make it only one underline not two.

    Please als leave you donat button somewhere on the site that I can easily find..

  7. Just the fact that MDN cares enough to ask for our feedback earns brownie points in my book.

    The most annoying advertisements are pop ups and click throughs. Anything else is fair game.

    IntelliTXT ads are fine.

  8. A few underlined words don’t hurt me and you don’t place ads in the middle of the text as others do and I havn’t got any pop ups or unders lately, either. I got the pop up blocker on but there was an annoying pop under i remember. Glad you got rid of it.

  9. IntelliTXT sucks Sucks SUCKS!!!

    GET RID OF THEM!!!

    Like a speed reader who slides their hand back and forth across a printed page, I have a habit of moving my mouse back and forth as I read. so when I hit these things accidentally, a stupid window pops up to cover what I’m reading. HELLO! It’s a POP-UP AD!

  10. Underlined, italicized, shadowed, embossed, engraved, outlined, and bold formats are visually annoying and make reading text a pain.

    If you want to continue to advertise I would prefer that the links be identified in normal size and unembellished, but identified only by a specific color (e.g. green). Links to other non-advertiser sites (i.e. other blogs, magazines, newspapers, etc.) would also be normal size and unembellished, but identified by a specific color (e.g. blue).

  11. The bills have gotta be paid, and people deserve to be paid, especially the ones running MacDaily News.

    My opinions run like this:
    – Keep ads as user controllable as possible.
    – Nothing (please oh please) that “pops-up”
    – Try not to interrupt the main body of the page with ads. (I realize that’s probably prime[$$$] space.)

    Thank you ladies and gentlemen at MDN!!!!

  12. My business is advertising, so I’m not going have the negative knee jerk reaction that I’ve seen on these boards. However…. the relevance of the ads to this readership need improving. Internet users have come to expect relevance in the messages presented and that is where your “test” fails. Example: in the article about Apple’s New York Store Cube entrance, where it mentions the hardware used to hold the glass together (the items Jobs was complaining about) there are two relevance problems.
    1. The hardware being referenced is obviously a mechanical connector or support of some kind, and the pop up had no association with that type of hardware; and
    2. The pop up was an ad for HP Servers (or something like that), which is not a mechanical connector and is not of much interest to readers at a rabid pro-Mac, pro-Apple news and discussion site.

    Make the rollover ads relevant to the typical profile of MDN visitors and you might find us appreciating them a bit more. As they are now, they are very annoying.

  13. Seems to me MDN should be increasing it’s ad revenue by finding ways to attract more readers, rather than finding ways to annoy and scare readers away. The more readers you have, the more potential click-throughs and the more you can charge for ad space.

    I find the green double-underlined IntelliTXT ads are annoying and interfere with easy reading of the printed article, making the experience less enjoying. Those IntelliTXT ads are one of the reasons I stopped frequenting MacNN.

    They would be a little less annoying if they didn’t automatically pop up an ad when you accidentally mouse over the link. If they only popped up when you click on them, THAT would be opting in. Having ads pop up from accidental user interaction is annoying and presumptuous.

    How far are you going to take this MDN? Are you going to start putting IntelliTXT ads in user comments and headlines next? Let’s see. Ads above the article, check. Ads to the right of articles, check. Ads below articles, check. Ads to the left of articles, check. Where else can we put ads then? I know, how about ads IN the articles? BRILLIANT! C’mon, enough is enough already. Quit abusing your readership’s loyalty.

    ROFLMAO! The MDN magic word is “paid”.

  14. I wouldn’t hate these ads so much if they were a bit smarter about the context they are advertising in. I find myself accidentally clicking on these things and they open up to items that have NOTHING to do with the interests I have or the article I’m reading. You are already over advertising on this site. I recommend that you just do what you do best, which is gather info about Mac industry news and live with the revenue that brings in.

    If you want more money, start more sites, grow your emprire. You can only advertise so much on a single web site.

    Now, if you are planning on replacing the density of static ads you have now with these roll-over ads, I think I’d be more open to it. But this need you have to add loads of advertising is overkill.

  15. Is natural selection occuring here ?

    Idiots who can’t read without their hands will defect the site leaving only interesting people on the forums. Will we finally be rid of our pet trolls ?

    Ho! but wait, if that happens, nobody’s gonna click the ads and MDN will have to bring back pop-unders and other crap that’s a lot worse than intellitext.

    Come on people, here’s a way to get rid of the most irritating forms of publicity, why complain so much. Better is the enemy of good (and you’ll end up with bad if you keep complaining).

    MW: showed. as i whish their mother had showed them how to read.

    (god I hate that alternate form of “shown”).

  16. Can you do some other form of revenue? For example, isn’t there some way that if we click through your website, you get a percentage of iTunes revenue? Or Amazon.com revenue? Just keep on reminding us readers and we’ll do it.

    And I’m not sure if this will work as well, but what about merchandise? Shirts, mugs, etc. etc. Will that work?!?

    I just hate seeing all the ads and these new intellitxt ads are annoying (makes the articles harder to read).

  17. I don’t mind a few IntelliTXT ads, especially if they could replace the ads below the article and above user comments, those are more obtrusive than the intelliTXT ads. If they are just being added, it seems the things are getting overwhelming and it’s harding to find what you came for.

  18. This is a free site so if they need to raise revenue from advertizing then so be it. Of course it is annoying but a neccessary evil for probably the best mac news coverage.

    If a lot of people find the adverts too noxoius they will go elsewhere and MDN will have to find other methods.

  19. As an aside, and in support of MDN,
    we have massive amounts of advertising in newspapers and magazines, in theaters, on certain DVD’s, billboards, and even advertising within movies and television shows.(product placements).

    Advertising, whether you like it or not, is absolutely, totally, pervasive. Even pay HBO advertises its own shows. It is simply inescapable in a capitalistic society. Of all the sites Apple-related or not, that I view, this is the site that without fail, people bitch about ads. Get over it. Do you want this site to charge $10 a month instead? I sure as hell don’t.

  20. The ads suck.
    —————
    —————

    Apple computer does not even advertise here, no big name companies advertise here? Why?

    Instead of turning away readers with your tonz of adz, why not attract better and more readers and get a better group of advertisers.

    Or do they know something you don´t? Such as visitors to this website are not buyers….just like to come here to add their 2 cents opinion over and over using different names.

    ————
    And we readers are what make MDN. People may read the headline and part of the story once, but they come back again and again to read the comments.

  21. Anything that interrupts the flow of a story or tries to draw my attention away from something I’d like to read and is wholly unrelated to what I’m reading will annoy me to no end.

    1) Pop-ups / Pop-unders (even though they “pop-under” there’s still a slight blip as they disappear behind the page that is visually distracting) – this also includes the intellitxt auto-pop inserts in stories. I’d rather those be clickable as someone else mentioned above so that inadvertent mouse movements don’t cause an unintended interruption. I had already disabled those in my Hosts file because of other sites’ use and still don’t like ’em.

    2) Flashing or blinking ads – especially those that have no way to stop the blinking or flashing. Yes, I can refresh the page and hope another one doesn’t appear in its place that might be even worse, but that still means my reading experience has been interrupted.

    I know you folks have to at least make enough $$$ to keep the site running, and I appreciate your efforts to get feedback on how best to keep things “free” around here.

    And ya know, I might be wiling to fork over a few dollars a month if you wanted to create an alternate version of the site – something of an alternate “ad-void” version that would allow me to read stories and respond with comments in an ad-free environment, safe in the knowledge that I was still contributing to the site’s bottom line without the threat of constant interruption.

  22. I don’t mind the idea of inline ads, as long as they are optional, clearly marked, and don’t interefere with quality or performance. It is about quality that I complain about these ads. The double underline is graphically obtrusive and jarring on the eye, making the surrounding text hard to read. How about something cleaner looking such as a single green line? Real links are in blue, with already clicked on links generally in reddish. The idea isn’t bad, but the execution is.

  23. With 1300 ads on each page, one would think you’r doing fine…

    If the bandwidth costs are too high, you have a crappy service provider, considering it’s all text… Or, you need to streamline the code (it’s riddled with flaws – so many, it’s disgusting (and every single one of those ad related flaws should be fixable!).

    At any rate, I am thoroughly convinced you think that MDN should be a source of revenue, not just cover it’s costs… get real day jobs (if you haven;t already), and just maintain this site as a hobby, and stop being a greedy bastige!

    That’s my two cents!

  24. I don’t like the IntelliTXT ads at all. If you accidentally mouse over them, they don’t go away if you move your mouse. You have to click the close box or somewhere else.

    I would mind them less if they did not remain open.

    Just get rid of the popup and popunder ads as well as animated ads and any ads with music.

  25. I think the thing MDN needs to learn is it is not HOW the ads are presented to readers, it’s HOW MANY ads are presented. If you are telling us that the IntelliTXT ads will REPLACE some of your existing ads, then it’s easy to understand. If you are telling us (as I think you are) that these IntelliTXT ads will be in ADDITION TO the hundreds of ads already on the page, then no… readers are not going to be happy with that.

    I have NEVER seen a site as ad-ridden as this one. I CERTAINLY understand the need to make money with MDN, but there becomes a point when the advertisements circumvent the usability of the site, and I think MDN passed that point about 6 months ago. And I’m not even including the interstitial ads recently experimented with. Considering how quickly they were pulled, I can imagine the page hits for MDN took a huge dip to demand quick action like that. Kudos to them for that.

    As a reference, my pals kid me about reading Mac news sites so often. I once had an MDN page on my screen when someone walked by. He said it looked like I was reading an online version of our free, local “Penny Trader” magazine because “of all the goddam ads on that page.” My friends giggled and giggled about how silly the site looked with all the ads. “Where’s the content? Can you even SEE it. Oh, there is is, under the WINDOWS SERVER ad! Wow… to be a Mac news site, it appears all their advertising is geared toward Windows users!”

    I think those comments from non-MDN people should speak volumes about MDN’s outlook of finding and retaining new readers.

    With all that said, there at least 4 other Mac news sites with as much content and very minimal advertising and fairly active forums. Unless MDN intends to use some of this ad revenue to upgrade their conent management system to something people enjoy using, then I should think they have about 6 more months of people accepting mediocre content displayed in a mediocre layout plastered with ads, and cannot so much as even chat, use an avatar, send a private message, or even register and login.

    Yikes.

  26. Can’t stand the IntelliTXT ads on any site I visit. I tend to circle the area of the page I am reading with my mouse and it always triggers the ad. These types of ads have *never* been useful to me.

    Until IntelliTXT, pop-unders were my major gripe with this site. After that is the occasional ad with sound. I know you typically pull those when people complain, but I never encounter these on other sites. To be fair, it has been a while since I saw one here too.

    This site has never seemed to be short on ads. I am surprised that you are looking for ways to stuff more advertising on it.

  27. I think the IntelliTXT ads are ingenious. However, they make the site feel “cheap”. If I had stumbled upon MDN after the implementation of IntelliTXT, I would probably have moved right along without giving you much thought. As it is, I’ll continue to frequent MDN either way you go.

  28. MDN’s content is great. What is greatly lacking is the format of the website.

    The only changes to MDN I have seen have always been ad-related. Why not change the webite itself to be more like your competition?

    I would like to see a much more robust comment system. Also, user profiles would be nice. I would also like to block certain users’ comments.

    The editorialization is great. I love the sarcasm and inside jokes.

    If you build a more robust service, then people could pay for it and eliminate the ads they hate so much. If you don’t pay, then you get to enjoy all the ads.

  29. Like most, I’ve learned to put up with the ads because I love the site. MDN doesn’t require paid membership, so they have to do SOMETHING. I, for one, would not mind a membership model — in fact I’d support it. But in the meantime, ads make sense. Somebody has to pay for all this, right? (And no, the IntelliTXt stuff doesn’t bug me at all.)

  30. Personally I don’t mind the intellitext much, but I really appreciate MacDailyNews giving us some transparency here and letting us know what is going on. You make it feel a lot more community based that way. You guys do tend to have a lot of ads, are you getting revenue based more on views or clicks or what? How does the revenue for this new intellitext thing work, is it based on mouseovers or clicks or per page served? If I knew for sure (and I hope others are with me on this) every story or so I could just open an add or two into a new tab and ignore it if it helps out and will help the site keep going. . . maybe even with less ads in the future.

  31. I find a pop-under to be less irritating that to try to read articles with the intellitext links in them. Accidentally mousing over one of those links is like walking thru a mine field… they pop up, then take a while before they go away again… I don’t frequent other sites that use intellitext because I find them that irritating.

  32. Oh, only 20 ads per page…. nice.
    No wonder you get dire click thru rates.

    Here’s a tip – less _is_ more.

    My fave few sites has one advert on the entire site and it’s for a product that they’ve tried and endorse.

  33. The IntelliTXT ads are fine, and I think they’re a clever idea. They represent a good balance.

    Unfortunately they’re buggy. When you position your mouse of a double-underlined link, the message pops up. Okay so far. But then if you move the mouse a few pixels (but still have it over the text), the popup should remain visible. Instead, it disappears and then appears again. Looks a tad amateurish.

    Fix the bug, and I’ll cast my vote for IntelliTXT. Otherwise I’m voting for Ross Perot because he’s funny and he’s “all ears.”

  34. “Please let us know what you think of the IntelliTXT ads below.”

    I have not seen them- due probably to my use of Pithhelmet and SafariBlock, or something. Anyway, I’ve never seen them, and don’t enjoy the thought of having to. But, for what it’s worth, they are totally blockable, apparently.

  35. I hate IntelliTXT almost as much as pop-up/under/in ads — when the first one popped up this morning, my knee-jerk reation was to close the window and delete MDN from my RSS feeds.

    The IntelliTXT ads themselves are intrusive, popping up over the text I’m trying to read. They are even worse in Safari, they blink on and off a couple times.

    The worst part is that IntelliTXT is not especially context-sensitive — it seems to match on just a single keyword, so most of what pops up on my screen is totally unrelated to the story, to Apple, and to my life & work.

    The banners don’t bother me, as long as they’re not abusively animated. When I see one that interests me, I click through on it; if it doesn’t interest me, I can ignore it. My personal preference is text-only Google ads; they are reasonably targeted and are the least invasive ad scheme I’ve come across.

  36. Love MDN, but the “greenies” have GOT to GO!! I’ve seen this PC-looking junk on other sites and wondered if/when it was gonna infect any of my favorites. Sad to see you guys considering it.

    I wish you all the best, and while I fully understand the need to pay the bills…

    I vote a vehement and unqualified NO to the greenies on the screenies.

  37. Personally I don’t mind the intellitext much, i am much more concerned with the moaning faced gits above me who need to chill out abit.

    The new ads are aviodable which is cool, much better than pop-unders etall

    cheers

    Hugh

  38. The new features are ok as far as advertising goes. In fact, I actually do some click throughs for an ad once in awhile if I see something interesting.

    BUT I HATE THOSE DAMN POP-UPS. MY TOOLBAR AND BROWSER ONLY CATCH ABOUT HALF. HATE HATE HATE THOSE POP-UPS!

  39. The new ads don’t bother me much and they won’t keep me from the site, and I undesatand that you’ve gotta make a buck to keep the site running. They’re less annoying than the popunders, which did make me think about staying away until I got used to the once-a-day annoyance.

  40. I have to weigh in on the dislike side. My experience with them is negative and as an interaction designer I have to say they intrude on how articles are browsed and read.

    Initial Experience
    When I first saw the links I assumed they were similar to the common acronym link and expected that when I hovered over the link I would get additional, relevant information. Instead I got an advertisement which did not match my expectation.

    Browsing and Reading Behvior
    1) I enter the article page by using the mouse to click on a link. Then because the cursor is in the way I move it to the side; I do this subconcsiously and do not pay attention to the path the cursor travels or where it lands. As such I’ve accidentally triggered the ads which end up obscuring what I’m reading.

    2) Once I’ve moved my mouse out of my direct line of site I do not take my hand off the mouse. As such I sometimes subcounsciously move the mouse around a bit or otherwise shift the cursor position which once again accidentally triggers the ads which is distracting and sometimes covers what I want to read.

    3) I have a wide monitor and often keep my browser wide. On sites like MDN with expanding text columns I will often select the line above the one I am reading and continue to move the selection down as I read. Since I do not pay attention to where the cursor is, this too will lead to accidentally triggering the pop ups.

    Summary
    The ad links create a mine field through out the text which, if I don’t want to see them, require me to think about how I am reading which takes away from my primary objective which is to read the article and think about it’s content. Generally speaking in interaction design you want to eliminate as much need for congnitive processing on the part of user which is not directly related to accomplishing the task.
    When an ad is accidentally triggered it draws the attention away from the users primary focus and may even physically hinder the task by obscurring what they are trying to read.

    Suggestions
    From an interaction perspective, advertisements on the edges of the article are the least intrusive to the act of reading an article which is the users primary purpose for coming to the page. I would stick with those. As I look at the article on this page (viewed at 1280×1024) the content takes up about 20% of the page and the rest is advertising. I have no way of knowing how much additional revenue these links may provide but, once again from a UI perspective, it seems that everytime you try adding additional advertising now a days you get a lot of negative feedback. That would indicate that you’ve gone as far in that direction as you can and may need to look at alternative forms of revenue.

  41. I think the inteliTXT is totally fine as long as it is differentiated (green double underline) from regular links.

    I would be interested in an Ad-free version of the site that required a _reasonable_ annual fee. I think monthly would be too much administration for you all and a hastle. But I’d pay $5 a year or something like that to support MDN. I would not pay $20 because the content is just too readily available from other sources, but I like the commentary and the work you all do to get the stories all in one place.

    I really dislike the pop-unders but what drives me totally from a site are ads disguised as stories (OWC realeases new hard drive) and ads that interfear with the website – like hover over and require closing or skipping to continue.

  42. MDN said: “Please let us know what you think of the IntelliTXT ads below.”

    I didn’t see any below, but plenty in the text! heh, heh…

    HATE pop-ups/unders – also, animated, etc. ads. This seems a little less intrusive.

    MDN Magic Word: sshh, “Three”, repeat – “three”, as in 3 ads per article would be enough…

  43. My feedback: I hate it. I find it immensely distracting, and makes the copied story bits and the MDN takes difficult to read. It also seems a little strange to me that 90% of these ads are running directly atop someone else’s words, a copy of someone else’s work (the copy & pasted story bits). I assume it all falls under Fair Use, although I have to wonder if if this is really done in the intended spirit of fair use. I’ll leave that one for the ethicists among us to debate!

    I will stop coming by here if they become a permanent feature, not so much because of any moral outrage about the cheapness of it all or the greed factor, but mainly because it makes the reading such a PITA.

  44. IntelliTXT Sucks. I might be able to put up with it, IF, IF They are not on every page. On other pages with IntelliTXT are every two or three words, and are annoying. If they are limited to one every two or three lines I could deal with it. Maybe.

    P.S. I no longer read the webpages that have the IntelliTXT every few words.

  45. I don’t care much for IntelliTXT, especially when ad for Dell keeps on showing up. I prefer all text ad like Google AdSense and Hotkeys.

    I use google groups for one web site I setup. The ads show up in right column. Not too bad.

    I also have a web site with Hotkeys. I won’t quit my day job and probably won’t pay for the web server hosting fee for MDN, but with low traffic web site, it does provide nice extra income.

  46. I hate the intellitext ads more than anything. if you are scrolling with the arrow keys, or you mouse around the ads pop up and are distracting

    it’s very low rent. very, very low rent.

    Only PC sites, and the dying mac sites, use intellitext. It is well hated in the web circles. A fad which will fail.

    Seriously, you have more advertisements on your website than a NASCAR car.

    Either raise your prices or deal with the revenue you have. But adding even more ads, especially in the body of the text itself.

  47. I agree with MacUser.

    I’ve stopped going to sites with intellitext, including a couple Mac sites.

    Itellitext sucks like nobodies business. MDN will quickly become a ghost town.

    How many ads do you people need to make money? The site is about 60-70% ads as is. Or is this pure greed?

    DON’T SPYMAC YOURSELF. SERIOUSLY.

    SpyMac, the largest Mac community is a ghost town nowadays because they got greedy and cared more about advertisers than their community.

    MDN runs the same risk. DON’T SPYMAC YOURSELF. Because once we are gone, we are gone.

  48. These IntelliTXT ads are the second most annoying form of advertising, just below flashing banners. Even if you don’t want to see them, if you just run the mouse across the screen, they sometimes pop up.

  49. I want more ads. Lots more. I especially like the pop up ones. The
    _____ ——– — _______
    animated ones where you can kill things are cool too. I don’t know why
    ——– — —
    people get so upset over ads. Here’s a thought, can you do the ones that
    ______ _____ — —
    float down the page like on Netscape? Those are sick. You could have
    —- ____ ____
    dragons and clouds and jet fighters floating all over the page.
    ______ ——
    Anyway, I vote for more ads. Cram as many of those suckers as you can
    — ___ ——
    on a page. I don’t like to read the content as much as I like to look at the
    —- _______ —
    cool ads.
    ——-

  50. This space sponsored by:
    Drink a Pepsi!
    Drive a Ford!
    Eat at Pizza Hut.
    Buy Nike shoes.
    Jocky Shorts are the best.
    Folgers coffee is mmmm-mmmmmm good.
    And if you are ever in Vegas stay at the Mandalay Bay.

    I just made $50 for posting that here.
    Companies write me and I will post your product name here, too.

  51. IntelliTXT is cheesy advertising at its worst, and nearly as annoying as flashing/animated ads. MDN’s implementation of IntelliTXT has been a blessing in disguise, however, as i found they can be blocked by SafariBlock (which i also use to block any form of flashing/animated advertising). Also speeds up page loading as you don’t need to wait for a bunch of animated ads to load.

    So if you want me to see your advertising, it best not flash nor use IntelliTXT. ” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”grin” style=”border:0;” />

    To block IntelliTXT, goto the SafariBlock preferences and add:

    *intellitxt.com*

    Works for ALL sites, not just MDN!

  52. MDN (heart) Microsoft, for those of you without Mac OS X:

    “You really have to admire Microsoft for its proficiency at what it does. You also have to admire the proficiency of sharks, scorpions, and black widow spiders. ” — Sean Dugan

    in an article about Microsoft’s “smartlinks”:

    ComputerUser.com – Net Ventures – Who owns the Web? Well, nobody–except maybe Microsoft.

    Yes, how soon do we forget? MDN, you do yourself a disservice by using web advertising engendered by Microsoft.

    Why don’t you go back to selling T-shirts??

  53. Once I discovered what the intellitxt hyperlinks were I avoided them at all cost. They are nothing more than pop-ups. The only thing they do is annoy me by occasionally blocking text I am trying to read if I happen to inadvertently let my cursor pass over one. I am more concerned with the amount of CPU cycles MacDailyNews is consuming when I have multiple tabs open which causes Safari to pause and hiccup. This doesn’t seem to happen on most other news sites I visit and I believe it has to do with the amount of animated ads.

  54. MacDailyNews + IntelliText = Jump the Shark

    Seriously guys, the site is tacky enough with all of the ads. Enough is enough.

    What, you think you’re going to be millionaries from this site?

    Keep putting more ads online, and we’ll leave in record numbers. There are tons of Apple news sites, most with duplicate stories. And your editorials, while funny and passionate, are no Daring Fireball.

    Don’t over-reach. You’re at your limit right now.

  55. This is not the way to generate revenue. This is a way to drive away readers. I find sites with Intellitxt to be incredible obtrusive and annoying because no longer are the (numerous) ads confined to the sidelines for the most part, now they are literally shoved down my throat. I’m one of those that “reads” with my cursor and as I’m moving through a paragraph, *BANG* an obnoxious ad for something I’m never going to buy pops up. I’ve already started reading this site less. This site is lousy with advertisments. No more. I count like 20 ads on this page alone.

  56. IntelliTXT = Yuck

    The number one reason I come to this site is for news and information and it is my favorite Apple news site, I do glance over at the ads on the side every now and then, but I’m here for the news content… Cluttering up the content makes it distracting and difficult to read as well as aesthetically unpleasing…

    We’re all Apple fans here, and we’re big fans of the beautiful, clean and simple design of Apple. The best way to lose readers is make your website look like Microsoft packaging, just keep adding crap to the layout until none of it is comprehensible.

    My suggestion is to take note from that “What if Microsoft designed the iPod box” parody video that was here awhile back. That says it all.

    Another note, seeing hyperlinks in text, I’ve been trained that a hyperlink means “more information on this item”, not “buy this crap”. When I’m interested in a linked word and I instinctively click on it expecting more information, but I instead end up at a store selling stuff, I feel like I’ve been hijacked and hoodwinked and it leaves a sour taste in my mouth.

  57. Count me AGAINST so-called “IntelliText” ads.

    Personally I firmly believe that web pages need to be EASIER to read – and IntelliText makes them much harder to read.

    The only way I would endorse them is if I had an option to turn them off (globally, just once).

  58. This site, respectfully, is turning into a joke with all of the advertisements.

    Want feedback?

    Go ask the folks at:
    Spymac
    MacNet2
    MacNN, MacMinute, etc.

    They pissed off their readers and community, and they are pathetic nowadays.

    Count me as one of the many votes that this site should dump intelitext and cut the number of ads in half.

    Seriously, the site looks like shit nowadays.

  59. I appreciate all the work you guys do for the site, and I know that your bills must be huge, but I’m sure there’s another way, this IntelliTXT thing is just so annoying it hurts!

    MDN Magic word: ‘Married’. As in… ah forget it.

  60. intellitext ads is the worst idea ever, I didn’t think sites MDN would ever include them.

    Aside from slowing down the loading of pages, the main problem I have with them is that they break the ethical line between ads and content.

    Articles and content MUST remain separated from the ads, at all cost. You are undermining your journalistic integrity by integrating ads into your articles.

    Whatever happens, I hope you never add intelitxt ads to the user comments…

    As for people saying “just install this or that software to block intellitxt”… Well MDN won’t get their ads revenue if we all do this.

    And I’m against some form of elitism where less knowledgeable people are the ones getting all the annoying ads, while “the initiated” get around it.

  61. Here’s a 2-cent question, MDN.

    Did you know, when 3rd party software is employed to block your advertising, it also blocks your Magic Word anti-comment-spam mechanism??

    If you don’t get rid of the ads, then you will not have an audience spicing things up, which, I’m sure is one of the big draws to this site.

    MDN Ghost town… just has been already said.

    Now you’ll know the whys and wherefores before it happens.

  62. IntelliTXT ads = GOOD
    static image ads = GOOD

    pop-unders = BAD
    crazy animated ads = BAD
    pop-ups = VERY BAD

    I also HATE the ads that prevent you from scrolling down the page until you’ve clicked into the window (which launches a pop-up). Those really are a waste of time – I always hit command-W before the ad is visible, so all you’re doing is wasting my time and annoying me. Oh, and making me wait to read your article.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.