If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Drum)   Spamming the Internet with ads disguised as information only loses marketers millions every year. "Content marketers" -- we award you no points, and may God have mercy on your souls   ( thedrum.com) divider line
    More: Obvious, Advertising, content marketing, Marketing, Content Marketing Institute, soap operas, brand journalism, customer acquisition cost, savvy content marketers  
•       •       •

1254 clicks; posted to Business » on 05 Feb 2018 at 10:05 AM (23 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



38 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2018-02-05 08:56:58 AM  
They don't have souls.
 
2018-02-05 09:23:23 AM  
It's Not News, It's Fark.
 
2018-02-05 10:21:48 AM  
One weird trick discovered by a mom that this Wall Street investor says will bankrupt your retirement account is something Millennials can use to pay off their mortgages that Obama obtained for them while a woman with a big butt danced in the background.
 
2018-02-05 10:26:05 AM  
The Cluetrain Manifesto is still valid, nearly 20 years later.

If I need something that you sell, just let me see the information about it.

If the point of your advertising it to create demand where none exists naturally, then fark you.
 
2018-02-05 10:30:17 AM  
You mean there's not really a brilliant startup in the vicinity of my ISP's gateway router that's disrupting a $200 billion dollar industry?
 
2018-02-05 10:33:37 AM  
Seriously though, I've used Adblockers and No Script forever, and now that websites are restricting access to people like me, I've realized I'm fine with ads. I can ignore them just as easily. It's really not that big a deal.
 
2018-02-05 10:38:33 AM  

FrancoFile: 20 years later


Twenty years later. That reminds me that I graduated from high school nearly twenty years ago.

I miss my Latin teacher. We gave her pictures of our cats and she put them on the wall. My Popo was right there with them all. She taught me English grammar better than any English teacher ever did (you see, to get a good grade in Latin you must translate into proper English). I doubt she is still alive and that makes me sad.

I once said that Quintus was on the ceiling and she chided me that he was not Spiderman. He was on the roof.

/then i went to college and had a dirty old man for Latin
//it escalated quickly
 
2018-02-05 10:42:47 AM  
Damn!  I was hoping eggs were good for me again.
 
2018-02-05 10:45:27 AM  
Why are you looking here for the dime you lost over there, Bazooka Joe?
'Cause the light is better here.
 
2018-02-05 10:49:31 AM  

H31N0US: Seriously though, I've used Adblockers and No Script forever, and now that websites are restricting access to people like me, I've realized I'm fine with ads. I can ignore them just as easily. It's really not that big a deal.


Different strokes, and all that. Websites get to be bloated whores linking to 18 different sites just to load a 3 paragraph article. I'll uMatrix the crap out of it to the point that only what I actually asked for is loaded, or I just don't go there anymore. Ads can be simple, non-intrusive, and harmless but I can't trust any website to actually keep to those standards, and I'll end up with malware popups and autoplay videos in the middle of an article.
 
2018-02-05 10:55:43 AM  

H31N0US: Seriously though, I've used Adblockers and No Script forever, and now that websites are restricting access to people like me, I've realized I'm fine with ads. I can ignore them just as easily. It's really not that big a deal.

I've never had a problem with ads per se so long as they were well-behaved. As in, if they abide by these commandments:

• Thou shalt not advertiseth porn nor other explicit material nor anything of questionable legality, for mine browser cache and hard drive are sacred unto me and mayest be seen by mine youngsters and/or employers.

• Thou shalt not interposeth thine ad between mine screen foreground (including its mouse-click layer) and any actual content that mayest be on the page.

• Thou shalt not maketh unto me any sound whatsoever, not even a click, without my express permission.

• Thou shalt not auto-playeth thine video ad, even if in silence. AnimGif is okay, as is minor CSS3 animation of ad elements to get mine attention. This doth also apply to content: even if thy site is a news site and thy news story doth contain video, thou shalt not causeth it to play, especially with audio, until I asketh it to.

• Thou shalt not in thine greed help thyself to more than ½% of my CPU time nor memory space on a per-ad basis, and no more than 5% combined for all the ads which may sojourn with thine ad on the web page that the website hath given unto me.

• Thou shalt most definitely not infectest mine OS with malware nor spyware, for my lawyers will not hold him guiltless whose ads infectest mine OS with malware nor spyware.

Not all-inclusive, but these are a start.

How about an Ethical Website Advertising Alliance organization that advertisers may join if they abide by these commandments, and if so, their advertising sources are automatically whitelisted by default by adblockers who join the alliance? Any violation of the commandments results in immediate removal from the cloud-based whitelist.
 
2018-02-05 11:05:42 AM  

FrancoFile: The Cluetrain Manifesto is still valid, nearly 20 years later.


So I didn't read the book, but from the wiki, this jumped out at me "The work examines the impact of the Internet on marketing, claiming that conventional marketing techniques are rendered obsolete by the online "conversations" that consumers have and that companies need to join"

So they support consumers following Tide on Instagram and vloggers hawking shiat in their youtube content? Someone just the other day here posted Dear Mommy Blogger which seems to put an end to this nonsense.
 
2018-02-05 11:13:03 AM  

Sophont: H31N0US: Seriously though, I've used Adblockers and No Script forever, and now that websites are restricting access to people like me, I've realized I'm fine with ads. I can ignore them just as easily. It's really not that big a deal.

Different strokes, and all that. Websites get to be bloated whores linking to 18 different sites just to load a 3 paragraph article. I'll uMatrix the crap out of it to the point that only what I actually asked for is loaded, or I just don't go there anymore. Ads can be simple, non-intrusive, and harmless but I can't trust any website to actually keep to those standards, and I'll end up with malware popups and autoplay videos in the middle of an article.


So much this. It would also help if they could stop linking to ads scripts that try and infect your computer with viruses and other malware, simply because they are too lazy or incompetent to check the contents and want a quick buck. There some sites you simply can't trust to let everything load.
 
2018-02-05 11:16:21 AM  
If people would stop using at blockers and people would stop dumping cookies to get into paid websites, expecting to get someone else's hard work for free, the overly intrusive ads will slowly fade away.

Good publishers hate them. But when confronted in a meeting, they are told "come up with $250k or we have to lay off three people"...   digital managers get pushed to do things contrary to their views.
 
2018-02-05 11:23:51 AM  

paulleah: the overly intrusive ads will slowly fade away.


Ahahhahahahahahaha. And paying for cable meant their would be less commercials.

paulleah: Good publishers hate them. But when confronted in a meeting, they are told "come up with $250k or we have to lay off three people"... digital managers get pushed to do things contrary to their views.


No, by this point those people have already been laid off and their jobs outsourced to India, because that's cheaper regardless of the ads they're putting out.
 
2018-02-05 11:33:35 AM  

paulleah: If people would stop using at blockers and people would stop dumping cookies to get into paid websites, expecting to get someone else's hard work for free, the overly intrusive ads will slowly fade away.

Good publishers hate them. But when confronted in a meeting, they are told "come up with $250k or we have to lay off three people"...   digital managers get pushed to do things contrary to their views.


img.fark.netView Full Size


Javascript bombs will never fade away.
 
2018-02-05 11:34:37 AM  

COMALite J: H31N0US: How about an Ethical Website Advertising Alliance organization that advertisers may join if they abide by these commandments, and if so, their advertising sources are automatically whitelisted by default by adblockers who join the alliance? Any violation of the commandments results in immediate removal from the cloud-based whitelist.


The reason is simple: such advertising doesn't work.  There is a reason they're doing this intrusive crap.

Something's got to give, eventually.
 
2018-02-05 11:42:18 AM  

FrancoFile: The Cluetrain Manifesto is still valid, nearly 20 years later.

If I need something that you sell, just let me see the information about it.

If the point of your advertising it to create demand where none exists naturally, then fark you.


This. I love the Extra History and J. A. Townsend and Son youtube channels and both started as ad campaigns. However, one was started as an ad campaign for a video game based on the Second Punic War so they were given money to do a video series, the other talks about the history of food, cooking, and everyday life in the late 17th - 19th centuries to sell re-enactment supplies. There is an advertising component but they are upfront about it and the information content is worthwhile. You do not disguise the ads as information, you use the information to put the ad in front of your customers and are honest about what part of the content is an ad.
 
2018-02-05 11:51:50 AM  

Cajnik: FrancoFile: The Cluetrain Manifesto is still valid, nearly 20 years later.

So I didn't read the book, but from the wiki, this jumped out at me "The work examines the impact of the Internet on marketing, claiming that conventional marketing techniques are rendered obsolete by the online "conversations" that consumers have and that companies need to join"

So they support consumers following Tide on Instagram and vloggers hawking shiat in their youtube content? Someone just the other day here posted Dear Mommy Blogger which seems to put an end to this nonsense.


Mmm, not really.  Although none of that existed when they wrote the book.

They're talking about social media 0.9 -- forums, bulletin boards, comment sections.  Honest engagement by a company with self-identified interested customers & potential customers.

You go to www.widget-lovers-forums.com and post a question about the Platinum Unicorn line of widgets from Acme, Inc.  An employee of Acme is watching the boards, and posts with an answer.  Other members of the forum chime in, confirming the veracity of the answer, offering their experience & opinions, etc.  You are then able to make an informed decision about purchasing a Platinum Unicorn 490XL, and most likely will be much happier about the entire process of deciding what to buy, buying, and owning than you would be in the traditional advertising paradigm.  It's a multi-directional honest conversation, not a 1-way appeal-to-emotion slick-talking sales process.

I think they'd argue that the polished sponsored mommy blogger stuff is a reversion to the old ways of selling and is really no different than sponsored content in Readers Digest or Redbook.
 
2018-02-05 11:52:38 AM  
Subby, you left out the word 'no' between 'have' and 'mercy' in your headline.
 
2018-02-05 11:57:55 AM  
Just as dumb as those radio ads that pretend to be a host/DJ who totally works at the station you're listening to and has something really cool to tell you about (that costs money). Ok guy who've I've never heard before making a point to rustle papers right next to the microphone, clearly you are the most legit.

Honest question: Has anyone actually seen an ad that made them want to get the thing they were advertising, that they weren't already thinking about getting before?

Online I saw an ad for one of those super flashlights/laser pointers that can probably blind people and I was momentarily tempted, and offline I see food on the front of cooking magazines that I want to eat, but that's about it.
 
2018-02-05 12:08:02 PM  

COMALite J: I've never had a problem with ads per se so long as they were well-behaved


I have Adblock Plus set to allow this type of ad, but it seems like no one uses them.
 
2018-02-05 12:10:16 PM  

FrancoFile: Cajnik: FrancoFile: The Cluetrain Manifesto is still valid, nearly 20 years later.

So I didn't read the book, but from the wiki, this jumped out at me "The work examines the impact of the Internet on marketing, claiming that conventional marketing techniques are rendered obsolete by the online "conversations" that consumers have and that companies need to join"

So they support consumers following Tide on Instagram and vloggers hawking shiat in their youtube content? Someone just the other day here posted Dear Mommy Blogger which seems to put an end to this nonsense.

Mmm, not really.  Although none of that existed when they wrote the book.

They're talking about social media 0.9 -- forums, bulletin boards, comment sections.  Honest engagement by a company with self-identified interested customers & potential customers.

You go to www.widget-lovers-forums.com and post a question about the Platinum Unicorn line of widgets from Acme, Inc.  An employee of Acme is watching the boards, and posts with an answer.  Other members of the forum chime in, confirming the veracity of the answer, offering their experience & opinions, etc.  You are then able to make an informed decision about purchasing a Platinum Unicorn 490XL, and most likely will be much happier about the entire process of deciding what to buy, buying, and owning than you would be in the traditional advertising paradigm.  It's a multi-directional honest conversation, not a 1-way appeal-to-emotion slick-talking sales process.

I think they'd argue that the polished sponsored mommy blogger stuff is a reversion to the old ways of selling and is really no different than sponsored content in Readers Digest or Redbook.


Interesting take, thanks. So it's like finding the one old guy who works at Home Depot who actually knows their stuff. That's relevant to purchasing
 
2018-02-05 12:14:49 PM  
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2018-02-05 12:48:59 PM  
Okay, three points:

1) Intel did not become wildly successful because of the Intel Inside marketing campaign. They got that way by being the best positioned processor company to supply the personal computer revolution. Unlike some older computer hardware companies that chose to focus on supercomputers and mainframes (cough cough IBM cough cough), Intel had the foresight to make powerful yet cheap enough processors so that everyone could have one.

2) Remember that the 90's was still well within that period of time where computer power was routinely doubling every two or three years. If you used computers in your job or in any significant capacity at your home you could hardly afford not to go out and buy a new processor every few years. Imagine what the car industry would be like if cars doubled in value but got cheaper and more affordable every few years. Intel could have done no advertising at all and still had blockbuster growth and profits.

3)  Ads are still the number one vector for malware and other computer attacks. Site owners don't have responsibility for the ads they serve or oversight over what ads are served. As long as that continues there's no incentive anywhere in the system to keep malware out of ad channels. It's worse that that even, here are some very safe ad networks, but these pay worse than ad networks that are more likely and capable of farking over your computer with malware. There's a negative incentive for everyone in the system to serve malicious ads to end users.
 
2018-02-05 01:04:28 PM  
Hear, farking hear.
 
2018-02-05 01:17:02 PM  

facepalm.jpg: Okay, three points:

1) Intel did not become wildly successful because of the Intel Inside marketing campaign. They got that way by being the best positioned processor company to supply the personal computer revolution. Unlike some older computer hardware companies that chose to focus on supercomputers and mainframes (cough cough IBM cough cough), Intel had the foresight to make powerful yet cheap enough processors so that everyone could have one.

2) Remember that the 90's was still well within that period of time where computer power was routinely doubling every two or three years. If you used computers in your job or in any significant capacity at your home you could hardly afford not to go out and buy a new processor every few years. Imagine what the car industry would be like if cars doubled in value but got cheaper and more affordable every few years. Intel could have done no advertising at all and still had blockbuster growth and profits.

3)  Ads are still the number one vector for malware and other computer attacks. Site owners don't have responsibility for the ads they serve or oversight over what ads are served. As long as that continues there's no incentive anywhere in the system to keep malware out of ad channels. It's worse that that even, here are some very safe ad networks, but these pay worse than ad networks that are more likely and capable of farking over your computer with malware. There's a negative incentive for everyone in the system to serve malicious ads to end users.

Agreed with your third point, but Intel's success was also due to being a bit dishonest when IBM asked them about a 16-bit internal 8-bit external CPU for their PC. Intel was practically at death's door then because Zilog's Z-80 was kicking the Intel 8080's (and 8085) @$$ in the 8-bit CP/M realm. and of course the Tandy / Radio Shack TRS-80 line used only Zilog chips, as did the CP/M add-on card for Apple ][+ computers. Both the Intel 8085 and Zilog Z-80 were fully software compatible with the 8080 and so would run CP/M, but both extended the 8080 instruction set in incompatible ways. The Z-80 had much more additional instructions than the 8085 did, and became more popular, with more software and even OSes (such as TRSDOS-80) being written to take advantage of them and so would not run on an 8080 nor 8085.

When IBM came knocking to several companies for both a CPU (they were cheap and wanted it to be 8-bit-external even though 16-bit-internal so that they could market it as 16-bit) and OS for their new PC, they asked both Zilog and Intel about the new CPUs they had available.

Zilog had already made the Z-8000 series that expanded the Z-80 to sixteen-bit architecture and instruction sets while keeping a Z-80 compatible mode for backwards compatibility. The Z-8001 was fully 16-bit inside and out, but they were also planning a Z-8002 which would be 8-bit external while still being 16-bit internally and fully software-compatible with the Z-8001.

Intel likewise had their 8086 fully-16-bit CPU successor to the 8080 and 8085, and were also planning an eight-bit-external version, the 8088.

Neither Intel nor Zilog actually had their 16/8-bit versions ready when IBM came calling, yet as I understand it, Zilog was honest about that fact and gave an honest timetable as to when one would be ready, but Intel bald-faced lied and said that their 8088 was fully ready to go (it wasn't). So IBM went with them, and that was all she wrote for Zilog, who soon faded into obscurity.

A similar thing happened with the OSes with Bill Gates lying that he had a 16-bit 8088-compatible OS ready to go, when he didn't (he had to rush out afterwards and buy 86-DOS neé QDOS from Seattle Computer Systems for $50k), while the CP/M people truthfully said that their CP/M-86 was almost but not quite ready. MS-DOS became the official IBM PC OS, and while CP/M-86 did become available for it, it was too little too late.
 
2018-02-05 01:29:51 PM  
Part of the trouble is that marketing types think people actually want to see ads, and will gladly devote their entire attention to them if only they can twist the right knobs and pull the right levers.

This is virtually complete bollocks, because aside from Superbowl Sunday advertisements aren't the content the viewer has come to see - they're what's getting in the way of the content and keeping the viewer from seeing it.

The other part of the trouble, as mentioned above, is that internet advertising networks are a pipeline running malware direct into your computer.

I personally use an ad-blocker and noscript, and I don't see that changing until these ad serving networks curate their advertising to cut out the malware injectors, browser hijackers, popups, popunders, et cetera ad nauseam

/So, basically never
 
2018-02-05 01:35:37 PM  

Cajnik: FrancoFile: Cajnik: FrancoFile: The Cluetrain Manifesto is still valid, nearly 20 years later.

So I didn't read the book, but from the wiki, this jumped out at me "The work examines the impact of the Internet on marketing, claiming that conventional marketing techniques are rendered obsolete by the online "conversations" that consumers have and that companies need to join"

So they support consumers following Tide on Instagram and vloggers hawking shiat in their youtube content? Someone just the other day here posted Dear Mommy Blogger which seems to put an end to this nonsense.

Mmm, not really.  Although none of that existed when they wrote the book.

They're talking about social media 0.9 -- forums, bulletin boards, comment sections.  Honest engagement by a company with self-identified interested customers & potential customers.

You go to www.widget-lovers-forums.com and post a question about the Platinum Unicorn line of widgets from Acme, Inc.  An employee of Acme is watching the boards, and posts with an answer.  Other members of the forum chime in, confirming the veracity of the answer, offering their experience & opinions, etc.  You are then able to make an informed decision about purchasing a Platinum Unicorn 490XL, and most likely will be much happier about the entire process of deciding what to buy, buying, and owning than you would be in the traditional advertising paradigm.  It's a multi-directional honest conversation, not a 1-way appeal-to-emotion slick-talking sales process.

I think they'd argue that the polished sponsored mommy blogger stuff is a reversion to the old ways of selling and is really no different than sponsored content in Readers Digest or Redbook.

Interesting take, thanks. So it's like finding the one old guy who works at Home Depot who actually knows their stuff. That's relevant to purchasing


images.duckduckgo.comView Full Size
 
2018-02-05 02:00:32 PM  

H31N0US: You mean there's not really a brilliant startup in the vicinity of my ISP's gateway router that's disrupting a $200 billion dollar industry?


Or that there isn't this new rule in Lake St Louis that's infuriating drivers?
 
2018-02-05 02:46:52 PM  

facepalm.jpg: Okay, three points:

1) Intel did not become wildly successful because of the Intel Inside marketing campaign. They got that way by being the best positioned processor company to supply the personal computer revolution. Unlike some older computer hardware companies that chose to focus on supercomputers and mainframes (cough cough IBM cough cough), Intel had the foresight to make powerful yet cheap enough processors so that everyone could have one.

2) Remember that the 90's was still well within that period of time where computer power was routinely doubling every two or three years. If you used computers in your job or in any significant capacity at your home you could hardly afford not to go out and buy a new processor every few years. Imagine what the car industry would be like if cars doubled in value but got cheaper and more affordable every few years. Intel could have done no advertising at all and still had blockbuster growth and profits.

3)  Ads are still the number one vector for malware and other computer attacks. Site owners don't have responsibility for the ads they serve or oversight over what ads are served. As long as that continues there's no incentive anywhere in the system to keep malware out of ad channels. It's worse that that even, here are some very safe ad networks, but these pay worse than ad networks that are more likely and capable of farking over your computer with malware. There's a negative incentive for everyone in the system to serve malicious ads to end users.


I'm going to have to ummm. go ahead and disagree with you on #1.

That "Intel Inside" campaign was hugely successful.  It drove billions of dollars in sales by itself.  I have seen countless purchasing orders for millions of dollars in corporate purchasing that specified "Intel Inside", which I thought was stupid thing to put in purchase orders, but they did.

And I can't be the only one who saw that in it's heyday.

I also fielded calls where people lamented not getting that "Intel Inside" because their Windows ME was misbehaving.

People thought the brand was "Intel Inside" and those people drove billions in purchases.
 
2018-02-05 03:18:06 PM  

Sophont: paulleah: the overly intrusive ads will slowly fade away.

Ahahhahahahahahaha. And paying for cable meant their would be less commercials.

paulleah: Good publishers hate them. But when confronted in a meeting, they are told "come up with $250k or we have to lay off three people"... digital managers get pushed to do things contrary to their views.

No, by this point those people have already been laid off and their jobs outsourced to India, because that's cheaper regardless of the ads they're putting out.


This is decidedly untrue.  There are hundreds (maybe thousands) of people working in local media right now that can make decisions of exactly what ad strategies to employ to save jobs and improve revenue. They can do it within days and they can do it with little to no oversight.  They have to hit a number. Period.  They hate these kinds of ads, but are forced to use them to hit their numbers.

I'm telling you, if people were not such a-holes and took 1/2 second to figure out where content comes from and how its paid for, they would stop demanding everything to free to access and free of ads.
 
2018-02-05 03:38:05 PM  

Robo Beat: Part of the trouble is that marketing types think people actually want to see ads, and will gladly devote their entire attention to them if only they can twist the right knobs and pull the right levers.

This is virtually complete bollocks, because aside from Superbowl Sunday advertisements aren't the content the viewer has come to see - they're what's getting in the way of the content and keeping the viewer from seeing it.

The other part of the trouble, as mentioned above, is that internet advertising networks are a pipeline running malware direct into your computer.

I personally use an ad-blocker and noscript, and I don't see that changing until these ad serving networks curate their advertising to cut out the malware injectors, browser hijackers, popups, popunders, et cetera ad nauseam

/So, basically never


Yup!

Add to this the fact that some people might have a limited download cap.  Especially when it comes to cellphones (although ISPs can sometime suck for this too).   Each ad might be a few kb but there's so many it adds up (and let's be honest...most can be quite heavy, especially when we get into autoplay videos.)

Basically that means that *I* pay for the bandwidth they are taking up to advertise to me...fark that.
 
2018-02-05 04:15:26 PM  

COMALite J: facepalm.jpg: Okay, three points:

1) Intel did not become wildly successful because of the Intel Inside marketing campaign. They got that way by being the best positioned processor company to supply the personal computer revolution. Unlike some older computer hardware companies that chose to focus on supercomputers and mainframes (cough cough IBM cough cough), Intel had the foresight to make powerful yet cheap enough processors so that everyone could have one.

2) Remember that the 90's was still well within that period of time where computer power was routinely doubling every two or three years. If you used computers in your job or in any significant capacity at your home you could hardly afford not to go out and buy a new processor every few years. Imagine what the car industry would be like if cars doubled in value but got cheaper and more affordable every few years. Intel could have done no advertising at all and still had blockbuster growth and profits.

3)  Ads are still the number one vector for malware and other computer attacks. Site owners don't have responsibility for the ads they serve or oversight over what ads are served. As long as that continues there's no incentive anywhere in the system to keep malware out of ad channels. It's worse that that even, here are some very safe ad networks, but these pay worse than ad networks that are more likely and capable of farking over your computer with malware. There's a negative incentive for everyone in the system to serve malicious ads to end users.
Agreed with your third point, but Intel's success was also due to being a bit dishonest when IBM asked them about a 16-bit internal 8-bit external CPU for their PC. Intel was practically at death's door then because Zilog's Z-80 was kicking the Intel 8080's (and 8085) @$$ in the 8-bit CP/M realm. and of course the Tandy / Radio Shack TRS-80 line used only Zilog chips, as did the CP/M add-on card for Apple ][+ computers. Both the Intel 8085 and Zilog Z-80 were fully software compatible with the 8080 and so would run CP/M, but both extended the 8080 instruction set in incompatible ways. The Z-80 had much more additional instructions than the 8085 did, and became more popular, with more software and even OSes (such as TRSDOS-80) being written to take advantage of them and so would not run on an 8080 nor 8085.

When IBM came knocking to several companies for both a CPU (they were cheap and wanted it to be 8-bit-external even though 16-bit-internal so that they could market it as 16-bit) and OS for their new PC, they asked both Zilog and Intel about the new CPUs they had available.

Zilog had already made the Z-8000 series that expanded the Z-80 to sixteen-bit architecture and instruction sets while keeping a Z-80 compatible mode for backwards compatibility. The Z-8001 was fully 16-bit inside and out, but they were also planning a Z-8002 which would be 8-bit external while still being 16-bit internally and fully software-compatible with the Z-8001.

Intel likewise had their 8086 fully-16-bit CPU successor to the 8080 and 8085, and were also planning an eight-bit-external version, the 8088.

Neither Intel nor Zilog actually had their 16/8-bit versions ready when IBM came calling, yet as I understand it, Zilog was honest about that fact and gave an honest timetable as to when one would be ready, but Intel bald-faced lied and said that their 8088 was fully ready to go (it wasn't). So IBM went with them, and that was all she wrote for Zilog, who soon faded into obscurity.

A similar thing happened with the OSes with Bill Gates lying that he had a 16-bit 8088-compatible OS ready to go, when he didn't (he had to rush out afterwards and buy 86-DOS neé QDOS from Seattle Computer Systems for $50k), while the CP/M people truthfully said that their CP/M-86 was almost but not quite ready. MS-DOS became the official IBM PC OS, and while CP/M-86 did become available for it, it was too little too late.


Zilog was owned by Exxon at the time and that may have played a part in IBM's decision.
 
2018-02-05 04:27:52 PM  

paulleah: This is decidedly untrue. There are hundreds (maybe thousands) of people working in local media right now that can make decisions of exactly what ad strategies to employ to save jobs and improve revenue. They can do it within days and they can do it with little to no oversight. They have to hit a number. Period. They hate these kinds of ads, but are forced to use them to hit their numbers.

I'm telling you, if people were not such a-holes and took 1/2 second to figure out where content comes from and how its paid for, they would stop demanding everything to free to access and free of ads.


I'm one of those people, and I don't see the situation you're describing. I see the ad strategies coming from on high, because they, supposedly, make money, as bit by bit it gets outsourced regardless of what the locals are doing or actually want. Had the pleasure of watching an idiot marketeer full of corporate buzzwords about digital ads saving the company get promoted multiple times, while his few contributions were outsourcing and being unable to articulate exactly why anyone would want to come to us for digital ads. This stuff is happening regardless of what the customers want, and will continue to. Blaming the customer is just a scapegoat, because they ALWAYS want it free. It's like complaining you can't run an exposed circuit through water. You farking deal with it.
 
2018-02-05 05:21:55 PM  
No subby, it does more than that.  It generates seething rage as well.
 
2018-02-05 08:24:37 PM  

Sophont: paulleah: This is decidedly untrue. There are hundreds (maybe thousands) of people working in local media right now that can make decisions of exactly what ad strategies to employ to save jobs and improve revenue. They can do it within days and they can do it with little to no oversight. They have to hit a number. Period. They hate these kinds of ads, but are forced to use them to hit their numbers.

I'm telling you, if people were not such a-holes and took 1/2 second to figure out where content comes from and how its paid for, they would stop demanding everything to free to access and free of ads.

I'm one of those people, and I don't see the situation you're describing. I see the ad strategies coming from on high, because they, supposedly, make money, as bit by bit it gets outsourced regardless of what the locals are doing or actually want. Had the pleasure of watching an idiot marketeer full of corporate buzzwords about digital ads saving the company get promoted multiple times, while his few contributions were outsourcing and being unable to articulate exactly why anyone would want to come to us for digital ads. This stuff is happening regardless of what the customers want, and will continue to. Blaming the customer is just a scapegoat, because they ALWAYS want it free. It's like complaining you can't run an exposed circuit through water. You farking deal with it.


Then you need to get yourself into a position where you control the ad strategy...  You say you are one of those people, then the next sentence is saying you are not.

Trust me.  Numbers rule.  If you can do it without the annoying stuff, you do.  No sane person wants to piss off the user base.  We watch that very closely.  Everything us weighted.  How many people leave if we do this, how much more revenue do we get if we employ that.

There is a peak where you piss off the fewest customers and get the greatest revenue.  Good directors of digital strategy constantly adjust to hit that peak.

If you can get a little bit of cooperation from users, you can scootch that peak back in favor of customers and less in favor of the nitwits that want to piss everyone off for an extra 5cents CPM or some half-witted scheme they heard about at a conference.

Been doing this for 23 years. Kind of understand it pretty well by now.
 
2018-02-05 09:56:56 PM  

paulleah: Trust me. Numbers rule. If you can do it without the annoying stuff, you do. No sane person wants to piss off the user base. We watch that very closely. Everything us weighted. How many people leave if we do this, how much more revenue do we get if we employ that.


paulleah: the nitwits that want to piss everyone off for an extra 5cents CPM or some half-witted scheme they heard about at a conference.


Only 6 years in, but those are the only nitwits I've ever seen in control of the strategy. They wouldn't listen to me. Glad to see your situation is different.
 
Displayed 38 of 38 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report