Ad problems fixed -- game on!

Good news for everyone who's been having issues with the experimental ad! The problem was officially dogpiled and it looks like we've managed to patch things up by pulling the Flash and replacing it with something much more browser friendly.

Just a quick word to our readers: we're sorry for the trouble caused, but thanks and much love for being good sports. We got a ton of really interesting and useful feedback, and we know you wouldn't care if you didn't love Engadget and have high standards for our site. (Of course, we'd also like to give a shout out to everyone on the business side who jumped in to help out and fix this thing.) So, you know, feel free to disengage your ad blockers, the coast is clear.

[Andir3.0 @ Nov 21st 2007 2:37PM]

I actually thought it was funny and creative when I disabled the ad-block to watch it.

[rock99rock @ Nov 21st 2007 2:46PM]

Did you say disable Adblock? now that you told me about it.... I find it difficult to act like that didn't happen. I love this thing. Less clutter. Less commercialism. Less crap.

[rzlmlchm009 @ Nov 21st 2007 3:22PM]

I agree. My web pages still load much quicker when the Adblock is enabled. Sorry, keepin' it on.

[Speeddemon2008 @ Nov 21st 2007 3:56PM]

Yeah I'm with you, I found it funny when I disabled adblock. It is staying on though. It speeds up my internet, my computer, and stops all the flashing ads that hurt my eyes. Oh btw there is an addon for adblock called element hider. It allows you to disable certain parts of websites at will. I use it to streamline the look of myspace.

[Andrew @ Nov 21st 2007 6:16PM]

Why would I want to remove AdBlock?

[Andir3.0 @ Nov 21st 2007 6:25PM]

I disabled it to see what all the fuss was... but it was almost immediately re-enabled.

You can watch it in action on YouTube though :)
http://youtube.com/watch?v=RZ7SWFxx0WE

[jason @ Nov 21st 2007 2:38PM]

adblock FTW

[Nathan @ Nov 21st 2007 4:46PM]

I actually have decided to disable AdBlock on sites I read regularly (IE: Engadget, Autoblog, Autobloggreen) however if there is an annoying ad like yesterday's, it's going back on for minimum 1 week.

That way I win if it's annoying and intrusive and Engadget wins if it's not.

For the bulk of websites none of this applies, AdBlock is my way of dealing with that bandwidth crunch slated to start in 2010 as reported yesterday on this blog. I'll leave that chunk of the tubes open for suckers who don't know about AdBlock.

[chezzo @ Nov 21st 2007 5:22PM]

Is there a way to turn off adblock for certain websites?
I love Engadget, and don't mind watching ads to support it, but not if it mean turning adblock on and off every time I go on it.

[G @ Nov 21st 2007 2:39PM]

Think i'll keep Adblock on, just in case ;) Engadget looks so purdy without ads!

but thanks for sorting the issue guys, most sites would just leave it and hope the "pester power" gets them more revenue. Even if you dont actually care, this gives the impression that you care...and thats good enough for me.

Keep up the most excellent work,

G

[aaronbareford @ Nov 21st 2007 2:40PM]

Now the ad's boring :( I thought it was quite good the old ad, oh well :)

[David Clark @ Nov 21st 2007 2:41PM]

Disengage adblocking? Why? So I can listen to another tired Mac ad bash my personal choice of an operating system that is particularly useful in my professional field and personal life?

[AzrealJG @ Nov 21st 2007 2:54PM]

Yeah, I'd probably be a little more receptive to a Mac Ad that told me what Mac's did, instead of constantly slagging the competition.

[Andir3.0 @ Nov 21st 2007 2:55PM]

You don't have to listen to it ;)

[David Clark @ Nov 21st 2007 2:56PM]

Actually, after a certain timeout, it started playing automatically. So..

[Andir3.0 @ Nov 21st 2007 3:04PM]

So... when you listen to the radio or watch TV, do you mute the commercials or do you feel like you MUST listen to them?

[David Clark @ Nov 21st 2007 3:18PM]

?? I don't mute the commercials. But most of the commercials don't infer that I'm a dumbass, except those stupid Hardees commercials -- which is why I refuse to eat there.

[Khris @ Nov 21st 2007 2:42PM]

I've used FireFox with adblock for so long now, I don't even remember how to turn it off. ;)

[UKNigel @ Nov 21st 2007 3:41PM]

I just started using it yesterday after getting fed up with the ad, since it kept auto-playing after a not very long timeout. Extremely annoying. And yet I think I too "forgot" how to turn it off already.

Blocking ads has become almost addictive.

[Jack @ Nov 21st 2007 2:45PM]

I knew u guys were always nice :)

but adblock is not going off :)

its a cruel world out there !

[mdnetguru @ Nov 21st 2007 2:53PM]

I personally liked the ad, kudos to those who try new things. Status quo gets us nowhere people. And at least it wasn't one of those screen takeover ads. Two blog posts about an Apple ad? Apple def got their money's worth from you guys.

Remember engadget, the loudest people in any group are the minority. If it messed up their computers, maybe they should take the ads advice and upgrade :)

[Ryan Block @ Nov 21st 2007 2:55PM]

Except it was crashing Mac browsers, too! It wasn't a platform issue, it was a problem with the ad itself.

[anonymouspimp @ Nov 21st 2007 3:15PM]

Look... I personally prefer PC/Windows over Apple. (I'm actually pro-Apple too, as a consumer, i love competition!)

But if it was an anti-Apple, Windows advertisement crapping up my engadget experience, i'd have written them an email just as fast.

I also don't think the "minority" was as small as you think. Sounds like it was screwing a lot of people's browsers/PCs up.

[mdnetguru @ Nov 21st 2007 2:53PM]

You think Engadget's biased in FAVOR of Sony?

[Ryan Block @ Nov 21st 2007 2:54PM]

Yeah, I understand what you're saying, but you guys realize that we kind of run on the honor system, right?

We give our content away for free on the site and in full, unabridged RSS, and in return we serve ads. Yes, you can block those (and no, we're not going to make a big stink about it), but do realize that the more people that block ads, the worse off Engadget is. Not to be dramatic, but if enough people blocked ads Engadget would cease to exist, so use your best judgment.

[Andir3.0 @ Nov 21st 2007 3:02PM]

Who do you blame, the advertising companies for making obnoxious ads or the users that actually buy the product being sold enforcing the idea that these ads work?

Anyway, advertising has gotten ridiculous and ad-block is proof of that. If advertisements weren't so intrusive, people wouldn't even install it. I know you guys have no control over it but I really thought that Mac ad was hilarious and well done [I do Actionscript programming in my spare time and I never thought about syncing two banners in such a way. It was brilliant ;)]

[Wwhat @ Nov 21st 2007 3:22PM]

Aren't the articles basically all ads?
And don't you get kickbacks for them?
Be honest..

[Jared @ Nov 21st 2007 3:28PM]

I love how you tell us to block ads, and then tell us to unblock ads so we can be fed information on what apple thinks we should buy. I've been running adblock in different forms for 3 years. The marketers did it themselves when they started using popups

[Ryan Block @ Nov 21st 2007 3:41PM]

Wwhat, absolutely not. Never. We follow the same editorial standards as the New York Times, and the Wall St. Journal.

I don't think you understand how severe an accusation like that is to someone who writes and reviews for a living.

[RC @ Nov 21st 2007 4:29PM]

So, what you're saying is....continue to use adblockers on Gizmodo?

[dpk @ Nov 21st 2007 5:44PM]

I'm not an adblocking nazi, but I do adblock when I see an annoying ad. The old version of Adblock would let you just click below the ad you want to remove, and add just that one. The new version doesn't seem to do that (at least, not by default). So when there's an annoying ad, I end up blocking a lot of things trying to catch just the one.

Anyway, I guess the moral of the story is: Don't let an obnoxious ad on the site, because it only serves to encourage people to install and run ad blocking software. Keep 'em civil and most people won't care.

[zfurie @ Nov 21st 2007 6:32PM]

I treat this website like some good ole friend after a minor understanding.

Didnt use adblock on it, just disabled Flash temporarily.

[zfurie @ Nov 21st 2007 6:34PM]

MISunderstanding I mean.

[dragonmonster @ Nov 22nd 2007 1:46PM]

Hi, I'm Kyle Hanson from Illinois, and I may be a troll, but even trolls hate to get spammed. So please don't spam my email address, which is [e-mail]

[joey @ Nov 21st 2007 2:59PM]

To those who leave their ad block thing on, the less ads you see, the less funds engadget gets to run its site. Don't be so selfish. Its like saying "I quit my job, But I still expect my paycheck every Friday!"

[David Clark @ Nov 21st 2007 3:02PM]

I block the flash ads. I still see the static ads.

[sk8rpro @ Nov 21st 2007 3:05PM]

Who are you to impose what people do with their own computers? It's a great technology! If you want to see ads, be my guest. :)

And what's with the paycheck analogy? It doesn't really fit because most of us never even worked for Engadget.

[rzlmlchm009 @ Nov 21st 2007 3:27PM]

I love reading Engadget and all, but if my blocking of ads puts them under, then I'll probably just move on to one of the my many other favorite sites out there that don't bother me about ads.

[sk8rpro @ Nov 21st 2007 3:00PM]

I could never tell the difference, I always had AdBlock on!

My question today is, "What's an ad?"

[anonymouspimp @ Nov 21st 2007 3:03PM]

I will always remember that it was an Apple ad on engadget that turned me on to IE7Pro with Ad Blocker.

I will never have to looks at stupid ads again. For this, I can never re-pay you.

Unfortunately its a double edged sword. :( And the less annoying edge totally wins.

I still totally wub you guys tho.

[Sir Vilhelm @ Nov 21st 2007 4:46PM]

Yes yes yes, me too. Never heard of it before yesterday...

[bob e @ Nov 21st 2007 3:13PM]

I use IE7Pro to block the offensive advertising. I thought the ad was atrocious when unblocked to check.

I wonder if advertisers still pay per impression and do they realize most Engadget readers probably block their ads.

I didn't use one until that really homely chick on the at&t ads started showing up. She was so ugly it drove me to get an ad blocker.

[Sporkinum @ Nov 21st 2007 7:25PM]

It's not just the ad impressions. They track with cookies too. That's why I block about 98% of the cookies that are sent to my machine as well. In the privacy settings in Firefox, I have it set to accept cookies, but to ask me every time. I usually only allow session cookies and use the cookie button on the status bar for finer grained control. If I block cookies for a site, they are blocked all the time.

Also, be sure to check the blockable items for a page. There will be non-visible things to block, like scripts and 1 pixel gifs that are not part of the website.

I about twitch when I have to help someone with their PC and there are ads.

BTW, if a site goes under because of lack of ad revenue, it's usually no great loss as there are about 14,000 other sites with that information still available. That will probably never be a problem though. Most people can't be bothered to change from what they know.

[david @ Nov 21st 2007 3:14PM]

This is sad, it's not like this is the only site who is running the ad, people with shit-tastic computers and browsers shouldn't ruin a clever ad for the rest of us.

Get with the times, your p3 800 and ie 6 won't cut it anymore.

[Jon @ Nov 21st 2007 4:09PM]

@David
A Dell D620 running an Intel Core 2 Duo T5600 @ 1.83 GHz per core and Windows XP is pretty craptacular I know, but it's my work laptop. I figure it should be able to handle a Flash web ad, no?

you fail-

[anonymouspimp @ Nov 21st 2007 3:22PM]

P4 2.66GHz
1GB RAM
w/ IE7 (now with IE7Pro! haha)

That is my computer at work, where I first noticed the problem. My comp at home blows my shitty work PC out of the water. The ad looped at home, too.

The only thing that is "shit-tastic" is your blind hatred for competition and your man-love for Bill Gates (or your penis envy for Steve Jobs). Either way, grow up.

[scabby @ Nov 21st 2007 3:35PM]

I entirely disagree with the commercial and advertisement model. Honestly, ads and commercials piss me off. Want people to buy your product? Give samples of it to media outlets (like Engadget), and oh yeah, make it a solid product. These companies are plugging holes in their market coverage by slamming out mediocre products, which then require massive advertising campaigns to cover up blemishes.

If companies want their product to succeed in any environment not filled with mocha-frappuchino-slurping emo hipsters, they should:
- make a solid product
- give product samples to review sites
- provide simple product comparisons, which admittedly work best for me (a la OSX vs Vista vs Ubuntu vs...). I buy lots of computer equipment for several companies and I want to know quickly why I should care, without you proselytizing to me.
- keep it simple: "Here's what our product does, here's what their product does..."

I understand I'm probably in the tiny minority of users who likes to keep their head basically uncluttered, but... until an ad can call me what I want to know, companies that bombard me with their crappy ads can shove it, and I'll stick to my Adblock thank you very much.

[JJMoho @ Nov 21st 2007 3:55PM]

A quick question for those who appose advertising: How would you propose Engadget should pay the bills? Assuming their business is sustained by more than love and magic dust, what model would you propose for them to stay in business?

Would you be willing pay a subscription fee? I personally wouldn't want to.

Maybe people should create a blog where people put together the content for free and make it available without ads. Great. Where is that site and why are you here?

I don't like ads anymore than anyone but everything has a cost. If you think that's negotiable try not paying your rent for a while. I'm sure your landlord's cool.

[Herman Manfred @ Nov 21st 2007 4:40PM]

There is nothing wrong with ads. Web sites used to have ads. Nice colorful pretty static ads.

But now they have shows. Loud intrusive shows. And Engadget has/had so many that, even without that monster show, they significantly affected my use of my computer.

I don't want shows.

I don't mind ads.

I can't easily have ads and no shows without harming my use of sites that have shows I =want= to see (like YouTube for Flash shows).

So I now (as of last night) choose not to have either.

I have regained a small but significant part of my computer - everything I do is faster now.

This is good.

[John @ Nov 21st 2007 4:15PM]

I don't use adblocker most of the time. Engadget is a site that has more than hosting fees to pay, and it gets the money from people who want their ads displayed rather than taking money directly from me. The apple ad was just obnoxious with the massive "DON'T GIVE UP ON VISTA" text. The actual main ad itself wasn't so bad, as without sound it wasn't there to insult me. But really, your ad contract people should really think about doing stuff like that more carefully, because in the end, who pays you does change how you work.