We suck, Flash sucks, business sucks

Our pretty new Flash ads have got up a few readers' noses. Here are some complaints:

Subject: Flash Ads

I have to agree with the letter posted on your site today. The flashing, moving, colour changing is really p*ssing me off. It is hard to read anything on you site with all that going on on my screen. Please let your advertisers know how your readers feel. You have a great site and it would be my loss if I stopped going to you web site, but I can get similar information from other sources that have less offensive advertising on their pages.

Thank you for your time and a useful web site,

Steve Coulber

Subject: INQUIRER flash ads provoke old-tech reaction

Don't blame the advertisers. Blame the site. Whether it's justifiable or not, you risk losing readers.

As I've said before, Google-style cleanliness was one of the things that attracted me to the Inquirer. The content then kept me, of course; but now I have to balance the content against the advertising.

At home, I just click on "no" when Explorer asks me if I want to see crap. But it's annoying, and I have to click an ever-increasing number of times. At work, I can't avoid the crap.

For many people, moving ads make your content almost impossible to read without being put off. Unfortunately this also applies to animated GIFs. This is something that print publications are proof against.

Anyone know of a utility to make GIFs only display one frame?

Roger Turner

Subject: flash ads

Hey,

You missed the real story here - if the trend towards flash ads continues and not enough useful content is produced in flash, people (at least knowledgable web users) will simply stop using the plug-in. Why bother with a plug-in if it is mainly used for ads. I think there is a real chance that this fate may befall flash.

Cheers,
Tom

Here's some input on the minefield that is benchmarks.

Subject: Re: HPQ's ES45 1.26GHz Alpha benchmarked

A picture is worth a thousand words, particularly when somebody has been using the mathematical equivalent of Photoshop on it.

1) If you're going to compare with IBM, at least use their best result, which is 814, 1266 for the P690 1.3GHz

2) HP also have a new PA-RISC chip coming out. I wonder why the don't release 'preliminary' numbers for that as well

3) Sun - This is for a chip which has been hasn't been shipping for around 6 months. Sun's best is currently 610, 827

4) No Intel? Intel are currently at 922,901. OK it's 32 bit - which is sort of an excuse, but only just

So.. as before with Intel, and DEC/CPQ/HPQ in the past or with _any_ benchmarketing slide.. when you make up the chart, leave out anybody who shows you up.

They're still good numbers, but if the picture speaks a thousand words.. then a person speaking those words was talking b*llocks

Cheers!

Peter Evans

Subject: Hello Mike

Following your "Davros" story on BTi, I thought i`d mention my recent experiences of them.

I had been asking to be returned to a "working" dialup number, after being forced onto the "leper" dialup number given to "heavy users" almost 12 months ago. My complaints ran from about September last year, and involved Trading Standards getting copies of correspondence (nothing done via them though), the ISPA, and BTi direct.

A complaint via the ISPA is supposed to be responded to within 5 days per the ISPA terms and conditions, but BTi took over 2 months. I asked the ISPA to kick BTi out for breach of their terms and conditions, as well as several other points, like the honesty in advertising clauses... The ISPA did nothing to "punish" BTi.

My usage patterns have changed considerably, but BTi refused to return me to a working dialup number.

More recently it got to the stage where it was taking me over 20 minutes (regularly) to connect, and on the 15th May I moved to another ISP, AlphaPhe, which was based on the old RedHotAnt platform. I changed my BTi subscription to pay-as-you-go, with effect of the next payment date of 27th May. I think I used BTi twice after signing up with AlphaPhe (both times on the day after I signed up - I had a problem with mail - forgotten to change my NAT settings :-} )

I was rather miffed (bloody furious to be honest !) to receive a threatening letter from BTi on 31st May, four days AFTER my account had dropped to PAYG, and after almost 2 weeks of zero usage, to say I was in breach of their terms and conditions for overuse !

I still await a reply from their "abuse" team regarding a resolution of this matter - I had been offered a one months' refund (they offer that to all lepers on the "barely usable" dialup number to leave them), which I initially accepted, but following their threatening email and having seen no sign of the refund, I rejected the offer - I felt the stress caused and my time wasted for over 6 months for a crap service was worth more than that !

In addition to all this, in order to get "proof" that you have commited the "offence" they are accusing you of under their terms and conditions, they insist you have to pay the £10 fee under the Data Protection Act.

One final note - AlphaPhe has my wholehearted recommendation as an ISP - I`ve been on the net since about 1994, and it`s faster and more consistently reliable than any ISP I have used since I started. They have the occasional authentication problem (i`ve seen it 3 times), but it always seem to fix itself within 15 minutes.

Best regards,

Colin

Here's a selection on XBox Vs PS2, invcluding one form the interestingly-named You Suck, who may be Korean.

Subject: Xbox vs PS2 Kudos on a great website I read it for the first time about 3 months ago and have been reading it daily since. One thing I think you should have pointed out in your article. While MS may be hated by many as greedy monopolists, don't forget Sony music. I would group most of the big wigs in the music industry as worse than MS. They are milking the artists to real in huge profits. MS at least came up with Windows on there own (hmmm…well maybe not exactly nevermind). They developed a “non-CD” a “defective” CD that could not bear the CD logo, and who paid for this development? Consumers of course through the buying of Sony products, but who really paid for it? People like myself. Who never purchased a CD player because they had a computer with a nice set of speakers. Sony has left me with a very bad taste in my mouth, and although I'd love to buy a PS2 for the games I think I will go with an Xbox because Sony has basically pushed MS to lose 150 dollars a box which if someone just told me the story I would think that MS was playing the game and forcing Sony to lose 150 dollars a box and not vice versa. Not to mention Sony is going to force people to fork out more cash for an Ethernet card and hard drive.

Josh

Subject: Sony, Microsoft set to clash for hearts, minds, wallets

Thought this article was pretty weak. You make no attempt to come up with any numbers to support your many claims. Example: "Right or wrong, people trust Sony and they associate the brand with high-quality consumer goods and legitimate business practices". It's just a bunch of hot air. You cite nothing to establish what public attitudes of Sony vs. Microsoft are. The rest of it is equally tendentious.

So what was the point of your article? Did you just have nothing better to do the afternoon you wrote it? Come on, get off your ignorant ass and do some homework before you decide to write one of these things.

You suck

Subject: Sony, Microsoft set to clash for hearts, minds, wallets

First off, that's a mighty interesting story.

In the gaming world there are the three obvious players, and Nintendo doesn't seem interested in the online world right now. But if you take a close look at what went on at the big games conference this month, E3, there were a few news snippets that catch the eye, especially when talking about Microshaft.

First of all, Mr Gates seems to like spending money - lots of money, with $2 Billion put aside for the development of Xbox live as the online offering is called, as well as the mooted fortune on marketing. I may be wrong, but gamers don't care about the money, they care about the games, yet Microsoft keeps pulling facts and figures out of the corporate hat to try and impress us button bashers into buying into Xbox. And that is a big mistake - gaming is about winning hearts, not minds. I don't care about how many onscreen colours I can have, or how advanced the texture mapping is - all the bells and whistles possible don't make a great game. Microsoft needs to treat us like customers, not another bunch of analysts. The Japanese Xbox launch was a classic example of how to piss customers off, and it seems that more attention was paid to getting Microsoft employees to queue overnight to buy a console (much to the bemusement of the local press) than launching games that the Japanese like to play. (Note to Bill: a remake of a year old PS2 title is not compelling, its a mistake)

Secondly, the business plan for Xbox live is classic Microsoft, and it amazes me that they think us consumers can't see that they are playing the same tricks as in the PC world. It's all about tying us in - OK, no company doesn't want to elicit consumer loyalty with various amounts of arm twisting - but Bill and pals make it so obvious. Let me explain. Xbox live will consist of an annual subscription of $49.99, which includes a starter kit. It's unclear whether the rest of the revenue model is paying per-play, by subscription to a particular game 'world', or for how long you spend online battling the minions of darkness. But however it works, Bill and the gang will be making sure that all your money goes to those who need it.

"We provide the hosting, the networking, the bandwidth, the security, the billing, the operations and all of the rest," said Microsoft's Allard out at E3.

Presumably that's along with the hardware, peripherals and software too. Is it just me, or is this sounding like a gaming version of the .Net portal strategy that is creeping up on the computing world? At least Sony and Nintendo give the illusion of choice - if I want to play my PS2 online then I am sure I will be paying Sony for the privilege, but at least I get to choose my own ISP to do it through. Xbox live offers no such illusion, and it's broadband only route is a real two fingers to the European market in its current state. Redmond seems to be totally ignorant that this big brother approach probably does more than anything else to set people against it. I guess this makes me sound like a bit of a tree-hugger. Oh well.

So how is this different to Sony, who also want its console to become a central hub of our online world? Well, the 'sledgehammer to crack a nut' approach has been replaced with Sony's Zen-like approach it has used since day one - if you make something useful, and people will want it. Or even better, make people think that its cool and desirable, and they'll buy it along with the t-shirt, lunchbox and whole lifestyle. Apple have done it in the absence of market share, and Sony is the king of this approach.

And I think this is they key difference that will always give Sony the upper hand in this ongoing console competition. Microsoft tell you how cool they are, but Sony let you find it out for yourself.

John Ozimek

And for those that have got this far, here's a wee roundup from Alex.

Subject: Dear Mike

Too bad your name isn't "John", eh? Well, I'm going to sound off on a few subjects in this one. First up is Uncle Fester.

From the photos, it looks like he's been reading the Evil Genius for Dummies" book. Those poses revel that he's been coached the Marketing Department.

Next up, would be the Voles console debacle. I thought they were losing more than $150 per Xbox. Oh well. Either way, all I can say is "Welcome to the Jungle" were Sony is still the king.

Then there's the letter from your reader "Steve" about the Flash ads. If Steve feels like paying for your cost of doing business, then I'm all for removing the ads. If not, tell Steve to go get bent and deal with it. I don't like them either but, I've learned how to ignore plenty of things in this life. Now, if you start doing pop-up (or under) ads, then I'm going to have to launch a DDoS against you. Nothing personal, it's only business :-)

And finally, your link of the day to the "IBM labels diversity a strategic imperative" story, the truth has never been told in business like this statement: golf is the game of business. As I have found out to my companies demise, it seems like if you plan on moving up the "ladder", you need to play golf. Now, that's really nice that IBM has the $$ to put putting greens at their locations but for those of us that came to this country with nothing (zip, zilch, nada) and grew up poor, golf was always the game of the white rich guy who should be spending time at home fucking his wife and helping raise a family instead of blowing money and time with his "buddies" on the links (I'm not bitter, really). What about baseball? Or football (American, that is) or hockey? What's the matter with these sports and why does business discriminate against them? The reason is that these are "group" activities, and in big business, that spells out g-r-u-n-t. Playing golf is more of a "single" activity. Planning and scheming require as little exposure as possible. As the Beatles sang, "I, me, mine". That's the TRUE motto of big business. Anyway, I'm done ranting for this morning. Have a lovely day. Adios.

Alex Cruz

µ