Google has rolled out a new AdSense script that will load the company's ubiquitous contextual ads significantly faster than in the past. Last year, at a conference in Silicon Valley, the company acknowledged that AdSense text ads can account for as much as 12 per cent of a webpage's load time. And we thought to ourselves: "That' …
Or for even better performance
just add Google to your favorite ad blocker
Or just block iFrames in NoScript.
Eating too much PR
This is not ready for primetime as they have not finished making sure it works in all of the browsers. Have no idea why they are publicising it or you are recycling their PR without a disclaimer on there.
The remarkable thing...
"The remarkable thing is that it works and it's very fast"
The remarkable thing is that they didn't do it like this the first time, and so drove us all to install an ad blocker to try and avoid the lag
Not paying attention
For a minute I thought Google were going to offer a way to block their bandwidth wasting ad cack, how stupid of me to think that. Nope, they're just going to make it easier and more efficient to load their bandwidth wasting ad cack!
RE: Not paying attention
At risk of stating the obvious, how exactly do you expect them to stay in business without "their bandwidth wasting ad cack"? In case you haven't been "paying attention" the entire time, adverts are their main revenue stream. Perhaps you'd like to pay a monthly subscription to Google in order to use their search engine? Or maybe PAYG searches are more your thing?
I wonder if they're down voting because they disagree with my point (kindly explain your reasoning) or because they just don't like ads (and are therefore idiots because they are down-voting for entirely the wrong reason)?
For the record, I don't like ads (what consumer does?) but I know why they're there and I tolerate and generally ignore them because they enable "free" (as in beer) goods and services. You're reading this comment on just such a "free" service.
Is this reasoning actually beyond the comprehension of some people?
How about a nice easy example?
Without them, we'd all be paying for our email accounts (either by paying for a hosted service or by running our own servers) or we would be stuck with whatever our current ISP happens to provide us, with no option to carry the address over to the next provider.
It's been done many times before, not sure why they didn't think of it - a startup I worked at years ago followed the same strategy.
Problem is that a lot of browsers treat iframe content coming from a different domain as malicious and just block it....
It is perfectly reasonable for browsers to mistrust iframes: they are non-DOM aliens allowed to stay for this kind of hack.
No problem when running NoScript
Only 12%, they say, sometimes with busy links to AdSense or DoubleClick there seems enough time to pour a coffee.
But NoScript cures the problems on Firefox.
I do accept advertisement banners, but no Flash or JS. I'm sorry, please switch to animated GIFs if you want to reach me.
Animated GIFs can fuck right off too. Static text or images are the only adverts that I'd not block.
If the ads load quicker then they can put more of them on the page :-(
I guess, never used adsense, if u use it, it lacks with default browsers, dont think it matters that much whether the site loads 5 or 15 ads...
Let's hope they fix the code that has been causing JS errors (even in Chrome) for months, possibly years- they don't seem to have given a toss about it until now...
You can bet this gets reported with a slightly breathless, masturbatory excitement in the reality distortion envelope that surrounds various marketing publications as a huge leap forward that users have been positively begging the industry for since the stone age.
The industry's vanity press never ceases to amaze with its endless self deceit, trying to convince anyone that will listen that not only do users enjoy ads, but they actually sit around getting their rocks off on the latest ad-tech and discussing the brilliance of campaigns rather than say picking their nose or something equally useful.
For an industry that supposedly lives and dies on knowing what we all think before we even think it, they are truly remarkable in their inability to see how the rest of humanity really perceives their tacky, irritating and energy wasting little business.
"AdSense is on millions of websites"
It is quite amazing how quickly one becomes unaware of, and forgets the advantages of domain blocking, ad blocking, cookie control and and script filtering.
Of course there is a downside to all this ad blocking, product X from company Y remains a mystery unless I actually look for it. This usually leads to social exclusion from those lofty intellectual conversations concerning consumerism and which pointless faddy doodad one should buy next.
Get advertisers to change code
by setting a more advantageous tariff on the new version - maybe temporarily. Just a thought.
But then again again, I don't think that most online ads make an impression on me. This is bad news for advert-sponsored operations. I know the 1970s are a long time ago but I think I'd look at adverts more if there were pretty women in them more often. And the Far East is a long way away, but quite recently, maybe still, there were adverts in magazines like Personal Computer World where a USB hub or a network card was being held in the graceful hand of a slender East Asian lass in a leotard. Obvious drawbacks are the jolt of unexpected objectification of a human being in a technical publication, the jolt of static electricity liable to interfere with the delicate electronic workings of the product, if only from the nylon, and probably making the thing look larger than it is by having a petite person show it to us, which isn't a virtue in most electronics. But, honestly, they'd probably get me to look.
I'm not sure who this picture is, today I'm going to assume that it represents a dirty old man.
Who this picture is
I think it's a comedian called Jimmy Edwards, probably in the long-dead, and rather tedious, sitcom "Whack-O".
Don't worry ad blocking fans
You'll soon be joining the great unclued masses in bad performance when Google gets their way with SPDY, where it's the server who decides what to push down the pipe..
Didn't they say the new Chrome already uses this magical new protocol (secretly) 9 times out of 10?
with an small educational non-profit site....
GAS provides a small, but useful, income to help defray some of the site's costs.
With general good hygiene, there is no real need to be scared of iframes, flash or JS.
So thanks Google.