Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Yahoo, Adobe To Serve Ads In PDFs

kdawson posted more than 6 years ago | from the something-else-to-block dept.

Yahoo! 213

Placid writes to alert us to a new channel opening up between advertisers and our eyeballs: PDFs with context-sensitive text ads. The service is called "Ads for Adobe PDF Powered by Yahoo" and it goes into public beta today. The "ad-enabled" PDFs are served off of Adobe's servers. The article mentions viewing them in Acrobat or Reader but doesn't mention what happens when a non-Adobe PDF reader is used. The ads don't appear if the PDF is printed.

cancel ×

213 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

But when will they serve pron in PDFs? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21521141)

Mike Jittlov's "Meriday in the Morning" [asciipr0n.com]

        1:::::M:::::::::::::::::::::::MM:88::::::::::::M
        1:::::M::::::::::*88*::::::::::M:88::::::::::::::M
        1:::::M:::::::::88@@88:::::::::M::88::::::::::::::M
        1:::::MM::::::::88@@88:::::::::M:::8::::::::::::::*8
        1:::::MM:::::::::*88*::::::::::M:::::::::::::::::88@@
        1::::::MM:::::::::::::::::::::MM:::::::::::::::::88@@
        1:::::::MM:::::::::::::::::::MM::M::::::::::::::::*8
        1::::::::MMM::::::::::::::::MM:::MM:::::::::::::::M

Re:But when will they serve pron in PDFs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21522115)

          TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
          T                        T
          X  I Like Ponies!!!111!  X
          X                ,       X
          X               })`-=--. X
          X              }/  ._.-' X
          X     _.-=-...-'  /      X
          X  {{|   ,       |       X
   ______ X  {{\    |  \  /_       X
  /   O O\   }} \ ,'---'\___\      X
/        \                         X
/ _    \   \ LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
  I\____\   \        TT
  I I I I\__/        II
   \I_I_I/_         _II
           \ _ _ _ i IIo
            \----- i_IIO
             \       LL

Please control the human population, have sex with ponies!

01001000 01100101 01101100 01110000 01100011 01101111 01101110 01110100 01110010 01101111 01101100 01110100 01101000 01100101 01101000 01110101 01101101 01100001 01101110 01110000 01101111 01110000 01110101 01101100 01100001 01110100 01101001 01101111 01101110 00101100 01101000 01100001 01110110 01100101 01110011 01100101 01111000 01110111 01101001 01110100 01101000 01100001 01110000 01101111 01101110 01111001 00100001

SLASHDOT SUX0RZ (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21521143)

_0_
\''\
'=o='
.|!|
.| |
yahoo, adobe to serve goatse [goatse.ch]

So what?? (-1, Offtopic)

rodrigoandrade (713371) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521149)

Hey first post!

Ad "Enabled" (5, Funny)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521151)

Funny use of the word "enabled".

Yeah. Soon to be "Ad Disabled" once my proxy is updated.

Re:Ad "Enabled" (1)

Abreu (173023) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521239)

Has anyone tried to open these "Ad-enabled" .pdf's in KPDF (or any other free viewer)?

If the ads show there too, I am pretty sure there can be a way to disable them

Re:Ad "Enabled" (1, Informative)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521941)

The free, Foxit reader is small, fast and compatible - for the Winders crowd. It's also a portable app - put it on yer USB.

http://www.foxitsoftware.com/pdf/rd_intro.php [foxitsoftware.com]

"In the future all software will approach the condition of muzak"

Re:Ad "Enabled" (1)

abecede (1097981) | more than 6 years ago | (#21522547)

Yep. I guess the marketing guys come up with the nicest sounding words when it comes to worst things. Just like in "Digital RIGHTS Management" or "PATRIOT act".

How Long? (1)

tompatman (936656) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521155)

How long until the first page of TI's latest chip spec gets inserted with an ad while downloading?

Re:How Long? (3, Insightful)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521259)

The trade of advertising is now so near perfection that it is not easy to propose any improvement. But as every art ought to be exercised in due subordination to the public good, I cannot but propose it as a moral question to these masters of the public ear, whether they do not sometimes play too wantonly with our passions.

--Samuel Johnston

How long until TI's latest chip gets ads? (1)

mosel-saar-ruwer (732341) | more than 6 years ago | (#21522075)


How long until the first page of TI's latest chip spec gets inserted with an ad while downloading?

If they're gonna imbed advertising in the Virtual Machine [like the PDF* reader, or, God forbid, the Java/CLR/VMware VM's], then how long before some wiseass says, "Hey, let's embed the advertising stream in the silicon?"



[*I read somewhere that - while PostScript is Turing-complete - PDF is not Turing-complete.]

Re:How long until TI's latest chip gets ads? (1)

StarvingSE (875139) | more than 6 years ago | (#21522251)

This reminds me of the Bill Hick's bit on advertisers.. do a search in youtube and you'll find it. They really are turning into Satan's Little Helpers.

Seriously, do we really need more ads on EVERYTHING?? I understand the need to get a product's info out into the brain's of all americans, but there is something to be said of plastering them everywhere that has the space.

At least there's always a way to block electronic ads. The meatspace ads are the ones that really tick me off.

Just what I need... (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21521157)

Wait 5-10 seconds for my PDF reader to crank up just to display an ad.

What genius came up with this stellar idea?

Re:Just what I need... (3, Insightful)

gilesjuk (604902) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521269)

Yahoo are great at this sort of thing, annoying the hell out of net users. It's why I stopped using their services.

Adverts sure don't work for me. If there's something I want I will check for reviews and opinion, a brand and flashy adverts don't persuade me to part with my cash.

Re:Just what I need... (1)

snowraver1 (1052510) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521391)

Currently on my computer, Adobe reader is the single biggest pain in the ass. It gets used about once a month, but contantly wants to update (even when I check the box to not check for updates). About once a week I see the update icon in the corner, and I scream in a fit of rage,

Re:Just what I need... (1)

moranar (632206) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521631)

Not wishing to insult you nor call you ignorant, I will point out that you can get rid of those annoyances by a delicate, nay sapient use of msconfig.

Re:Just what I need... (4, Informative)

Thansal (999464) | more than 6 years ago | (#21522053)

Or though the quick and easy way of not using Adobe. /me points over to Foxit or any of the other free readers.

urgent need (4, Funny)

FranTaylor (164577) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521167)

Why do I suddenly feel an urgent need to rush to the store to buy some Lightspeed Briefs?

Re:urgent need (5, Funny)

saboola (655522) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521445)

Before you know it they are going to b ... Lightspeed briefs, style and comfort for the discriminating crotch. e interrupting my comment writing with ads.

Re:urgent need (1)

Adambomb (118938) | more than 6 years ago | (#21522275)

Hey now, No body is FORCING us to buy brand name merchandise at low low prices.. ... ...

*skitter*

Because the consumer asked for it. (4, Funny)

TheGeneration (228855) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521175)

Obviously Yahoo and Adobe are doing this because the constumer asked to have ads served to them. Clearly they had customers calling them daily "Where are my ads? I want ADS!!!"

I wish some of these tech companies would take a hint from craigslist. You can make money and have happy customers.

Re:Because the consumer asked for it. (2, Funny)

mackermacker (250587) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521263)

Are you saying tech companies should offer casual encounters with college girls and lonely housewives? Sounds like a plan to me, they win my vote!

Re:Because the consumer asked for it. (4, Insightful)

Abreu (173023) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521277)

Well, it depends on who do you consider their customers are... I think that Yahoo and Google provide a service to the public, but their true customers (the ones paying for the services) are the advertisers...

So yeah, their customers clamored for more ads.

That doesn't apply to Adobe (3, Insightful)

KWTm (808824) | more than 6 years ago | (#21522353)

Your comment is insightful, but doesn't apply to Adobe's current situation.

Yahoo and Google provide a service to the public, but their true customers (the ones paying for the services) are the advertisers...
Indeed, many people fail to realize that, when it comes to services supported by advertising, the public is the product, not the customer. This explains why companies may sometimes piss off the public despite the adage that "the customer is king."

However, Adobe has not been supported by ad revenue, at least not in a major way. They are now breaking into a new business model where they do have ad revenue, but that doesn't necessarily excuse any antagonization of the public just because "hey, now the public is the product, not the customer."

Re:Because the consumer asked for it. (5, Funny)

Carnildo (712617) | more than 6 years ago | (#21522529)

"God is dead" - Nietzsche, 1882

"Nietzsche is dead" - God, 1900

"Nietzsche is God" - The dead, 1918

Re:Because the consumer asked for it. (3, Insightful)

Orange Crush (934731) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521369)

Adobe gives Acrobat reader away for free. It charges money for its fancy publishing tools. So many of their paying customers are content creators that like getting paid . . . so yeah . . . I'll bet some of them actually asked for ads.

I read that as... (1)

DirtySouthAfrican (984664) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521431)

I read that as "Where are my aids? I want AIDS!!!" Maybe I've just seen too much advertising lately.

Re:Because the consumer asked for it. (1)

Etrias (1121031) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521833)

Yeah, but to make shit loads of money, you really need to piss off the people who use your product.

Sheesh (5, Insightful)

tritonman (998572) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521181)

So if PDF is supposed to be a publishing format, how can the view on the computer be different than the printed view? Why don't they just skip all this craziness and just ad-enable monitors.

Re:Sheesh (1)

carpe_noctem (457178) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521297)

Shhhhhh! Employees from HP and Dell might be reading!

Zounds!!!! Brilliant idea!!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21521303)

Why don't they just skip all this craziness and just ad-enable monitors.

You sir, are a genius!

Now excuse me while I steal your idea, rush out and patent it for myself and then sell it to Microsoft.

Re:Zounds!!!! Brilliant idea!!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21521743)

You're too late. Amazon was won the patent

Re:Sheesh (1)

Jonboy X (319895) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521313)

Why don't they just skip all this craziness and just ad-enable monitors.
Or glasses?

Or eyeballs?

Re:Sheesh (4, Insightful)

secPM_MS (1081961) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521403)

PDF is now a programmable display platform, not a publishing format. Its programmability is significant enough that it is a potential security threat to users, who view it as data, not as a potential executable. The extension to advertising is obvious. How else will this functionality be used?

This problem is no unique to pdf. The community swallowed the feature richness line and chose to ignore the old dictum, keep your data and your executables separate.

How would you like your XML? Would you like javascript as well? How about AJAX?

Re:Sheesh (1)

saintsfan (1171797) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521581)

i think you're absolutely right. something that companies seem to be routinely missing lately is focusing on their core competency. adobe is (was) not in the business of making money from add revenue, yet here they are. well, what the gold mine they thought they found was actually a drastic miscalculation nearly assuring everyone uses a third party viewer application (depending on the severity of the annoyance) as i highly doubt they can effectively insert an add into a pdf document that has to display on other viewers. these guys need to get a clue.

are they ready to get into the business of patching remote exploits now too? how about help desk when the application freezes every time a firewall prevents it from pulling adds?

what about companies that have paid for publisher- is it appropriate to display an add in front of their employees? do they think the corporate environment of high efficiency (gulp well i am am on /.) will allow their employees getting distracted like that? likely not. i started to notice something was awry when acrobat updater started executing every time i opened a pdf.

Re:Sheesh (1)

Grishnakh (216268) | more than 6 years ago | (#21522433)

i think you're absolutely right. something that companies seem to be routinely missing lately is focusing on their core competency. adobe is (was) not in the business of making money from add revenue, yet here they are. well, what the gold mine they thought they found was actually a drastic miscalculation nearly assuring everyone uses a third party viewer application (depending on the severity of the annoyance) as i highly doubt they can effectively insert an add into a pdf document that has to display on other viewers. these guys need to get a clue.

Personally, I think ads inside PDFs is a great idea for Adobe to make more money, and I have no problem with it whatsoever. They're a privately-owned entity and can do whatever they want.

As for third-party viewers, how many people use those? Sure, I and others use kpdf on KDE, and others use evince on GNOME, and some people might use a free viewer on Windows (I don't know which are available on that platform), but what percentage of PDF users does this constitute? A very small one. The vast majority of people use Windows as we all know, and the vast majority of PDF users use Adobe Acrobat (available on all platforms); that's just the way it is.

Knowing all this, this is a smart move by Adobe, in the vein of Microsoft. They have a virtual monopoly in PDF viewing; even though numerous free alternatives exist, most people don't know or don't care. So they're capitalizing on this position by adding adverts. A few highly annoyed people might get fed up and switch to a free viewer which ignores the ads, but the vast majority won't, just like the vast majority of IE users haven't switched to Firefox (or Konqueror or Opera etc.). In the end, Adobe will make lots of money with this, and that's what counts.

In the end, what it comes down to is: what are you going to do about it? Too many people bitch and complain about big corporations' antics, but they continue to purchase and use their products. Sure, a few people switch to Linux or other free products to free themselves of tyranny, but most people just make excuses ("I need to use XYZ application!") and continue to tolerate the bad behavior, and the corporations behave worse and worse when they see this, as they have no incentive to improve. Me? I've been using kpdf for years now, and I can't remember the last time I had to start up Adobe's reader because kpdf didn't work right (this was normal early on, but not for a while now), and I'll probably find a free Windows PDF viewer for the Windows machines I have to use at work, but I know that ~97% of everyone will be sticking with Adobe's Reader, so I'll be laughing at them while they suffer with ads.

Re:Sheesh (2, Informative)

tabdelgawad (590061) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521593)

According to TFA, the ads will be in a separate panel in the reader, so we'll have our identical display and printed views.

This is an option _publishers_ of content will have. I think it's a great idea, actually. I'm quite happy looking at a few ads to get the content of Slashdot, the NYT, Washington Post, Gmail, Google search, practically the whole subscription-free part of the internet. If this model allows some publishers to put out stuff for free that they previously charged for, I think that's great.

Re:Sheesh (1)

cybermage (112274) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521625)

Why don't they just skip all this craziness and just ad-enable monitors.

Damn you to hell sir!

I'm sure there's someone out there just waiting for this kind of ironic statement so they can claim it is a requested feature.

Hmmmm.... Perhaps I should just shut up and patent the idea.

Re:Sheesh (1)

noidentity (188756) | more than 6 years ago | (#21522479)

Maybe they'll be nice and add a printer friendly button on this new PDF viewer.

Don't give them ideas.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21522819)

I'm sure monitor manufacturer engineers hang on Slashdot too, and they could blurt out the idea to their PHBs over lunch, as an example of stupidity, but PHBs will actually think it's smartest idea they heard in a while and before you know it, the only monitor you can buy is the "Add-monitor".

Gee, what's next? (1)

Spy der Mann (805235) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521189)

Displaying ads in the excel file that you sent via yahoo mail?

Re:Gee, what's next? (1)

onetwentyone (882404) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521407)

Quiet you fool!! Advertisers could be listening as we speak!

Ya frickin hoo. (2, Interesting)

Radical Moderate (563286) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521203)

I run a computer lab on a large university, and we already have more problems getting PDFs to print than any other format...so now they're going to muck up the spec even more?! Thanks soooooooooooooooooo much guys.

Re:Ya frickin hoo. (5, Informative)

smooth wombat (796938) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521351)

more problems getting PDFs to print than any other format.


Explain how this is possible when the purpose of a pdf is to keep the original formatting of the document and be able to be printed and still retain that formatting. The ONLY problem I have ever encountered with pdf files is on a Lexmark printer where I had to set it to print pdfs as an image file. Other than that, no problems whatsoever.

For the record, my last job involved maintaining over 800 printers across the entire state with Lexmark and HP being the most common but also Xerox copiers/printers and Imagistic (ewwwww) multi-function machines thrown in.

My current job has 1/3 the number of printers yet we still encounter zero problems with pdf files.

If you have problems getting pdfs to print, there is something seriously wrong.

Re:Ya frickin hoo. (1)

vasqzr (619165) | more than 6 years ago | (#21522487)

PDF's are fun. Some are too complex to print on many printers. Or you get strange bugs with certain printer drivers such as characters and spacing being completely wrong.

Re:Ya frickin hoo. (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521549)

Really? Seriuosly? I've never had a problem printing a PDF in my life. I often use PDF when transporting documents from one place to another for printing, because things like changing the version of the word processor, or even just using a different printer with some word processors can have drastic results on how the document prints. When I went to get my self-designed wedding invitations printed, I brought the file on CD in about 4 different formats, and asked which ones they recommended I print from. Tgey said PDF was the best, as that's where they have the least number of printing problems.

Re:Ya frickin hoo. (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21522303)

PDFs usually print quickly with relatively fewer problems. Your printer/network is likely to blame here. I've experienced these issues on other networks before, but I'm not sure where the problems were. You might want to try tweaking a few default printer settings.

Slightly Offtopic but... (0, Redundant)

Bryansix (761547) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521219)

does anybody else experience a huge slowdown (and sometimes freezing) of IE when that Dice ad with all the stupid looking Avatars is on the screen?

Also, I think ads in PDF's are a bad idea. PDF's load too slowly as it is.

Re:Slightly Offtopic but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21521265)

no. you must be using an old version of firefox. try upgrading.

Re:Slightly Offtopic but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21521467)

Yes, but I haven't pinned it down to one single ad yet. I'm at the mercy of what I have for a workstation: WinXP, with MSIE 6.0, on an Intel Core 2 Duo

Yahoo: fuckin' evil (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21521223)

What the hell? Not only do I have to now download a fucking >2mb pdf just to read the news, but I have to do this on every fucking page of every fucking story? Not to mention having to wait five fucking minutes for each pdf to fucking load? What total fucking retard thought this was a good idea???

Thanks, yahell -you've finally pushed me into not only permanently surfing with adblock plus, but pushing adblock onto my friends too.

Re:Yahoo: fuckin' evil (1)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521315)

Advertising is a racket, like the movies and the brokerage business. You cannot be honest without admitting that its constructive contribution to humanity is exactly minus zero.

--F. Scott Fitzgerald

Drake, we are LEAVING! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21521751)

What no Bill Hicks?

By the way, if anyone here is in marketing or advertising...kill yourself. Thank you. Just planting seeds, planting seeds is all I'm doing. No joke here, really. Seriously, kill yourself, you have no rationalisation for what you do, you are Satan's little helpers. Kill yourself, kill yourself, kill yourself now. Now, back to the show. Seriously, I know the marketing people: 'There's gonna be a joke comin' up.' There's no fuckin' joke. Suck a tail pipe, hang yourself...borrow a pistol from an NRA buddy, do something...rid the world of your evil fuckin' presence.
Posting anonymously because it's not like someone else wouldn't have sooner or later if I hadn't. Also, I just designed a junk mail flyer for my employer that's going to be pissing off approximately 80,000 households in the near future and I don't think I deserve the karma :(

Uninstall Adobe's product and... (4, Informative)

CFBMoo1 (157453) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521245)

install Foxit if they start pumping out Ads to PDF files.

http://www.foxitsoftware.com/pdf/rd_intro.php [foxitsoftware.com]

Re:Uninstall Adobe's product and... (1)

Polysick (926605) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521559)

agreed. Foxit reader is what I use at home and at work. It's lightweight, ad free, doesn't bug you every 30 seconds for updates, and loads pdfs rather quickly.

Re:Uninstall Adobe's product and... (1)

hobo sapiens (893427) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521641)

Spot on.

I already use Foxit. It installs in the time it takes Adobe to load. If the ads are coming from Adobe's servers, then in theory the ads are in the reader. So get a different reader.

Adobe gives PDF a bad name, and that's saying something. Adobe, what do we hate about thee?

The invasive updater software. The amount of crap it puts on your Add/Remove Programs list in Windows (like every update). The other programs it nags you about installing whenever you update it (which is *way* too often if you let it check for updates). The time it takes to load all the language options EVERYTIME it starts, as if an English speaker cares about the myriad of Asian fonts; hey Adobe, did you know that my OS knows which language I speak? The fact that it seems to forget my settings every time it updates. And so on.

I'll say it again, Adobe sucks. Why does ANYONE even use it, regardless of ads? Same reason they use windows, I guess...it's sort of a default. Poor people. I hope they enjoy their ads and their sucky PDf reader.

Re:Uninstall Adobe's product and... (1)

Grishnakh (216268) | more than 6 years ago | (#21522575)

I'll say it again, Adobe sucks. Why does ANYONE even use it, regardless of ads? Same reason they use windows, I guess...it's sort of a default. Poor people. I hope they enjoy their ads and their sucky PDf reader.

I think Adobe is very smart to make this move; it'll make them lots of money for exactly the reason you cite here. Even though superior alternatives exist, the vast majority of people will continue to use Adobe's crappy PDF reader, and will see all these annoying ads.

If people are too dumb and lazy to abandon abusive software vendors, then why should those vendors not take advantage of them?

Re:Uninstall Adobe's product and... (1)

stinerman (812158) | more than 6 years ago | (#21522669)

Even though superior alternatives exist, the vast majority of people will continue to use Adobe's crappy PDF reader, and will see all these annoying ads.
That's mostly because the vast majority of people don't know there is an alternative. The big blue E is the Interweb. Adobe is to view the bank statement. Word is for typing letters.

That's about as far as it goes.

Re:Uninstall Adobe's product and... (1)

mcsuper5 (659016) | more than 6 years ago | (#21522653)

I was messing around with a Win2K install over the weekend, and wanted to view a pdf, spent a few minutes downloading the installer, and it aborted, explaining that I needed to update IE, couldn't find a hack to get around around it. I ended up downloading an older version of Acrobat Reader (Didn't know of Foxit and didn't have cygwin installed.) I couldn't figure out why I needed to update IE, the only thing I use it for is to download Firefox, well I guess this explains that:-(

Re:Uninstall Adobe's product and... (1)

GogglesPisano (199483) | more than 6 years ago | (#21522127)

I'm a big fan of the Foxit Reader - it's much less bulky and intrusive than the Adobe reader.

My only gripe is their lack of a plugin for Firefox. Many of the PDFs that I encounter are online, and it's more convenient (for me, at least) to view them inside of the browser instead of launching the program externally.

Of course, given recent events [slashdot.org] , no plugins may be a good thing...

Charming (2, Insightful)

overshoot (39700) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521281)

... one more rule for the firewall, anyone?

now with more annoyance (2, Insightful)

wizardforce (1005805) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521291)

dynamic ads require a source of data to work and that means they can probably be disabled by blacklisting the source servers, either that or they will actually start embedding ads into the PDFs themselves as "static content" that nothing short of aditing the PDF manually will solve.

Can i have the article in.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21521307)

PDF format please....

Re:Can i have the article in.... (1)

Ash-Fox (726320) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521735)

Can i have the article in....PDF format please....
Here you go [quickfox.org] .

Yahoo vs Google (5, Insightful)

jhfry (829244) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521389)

Google realizes that it cannot make money through advertising indefinately... so what does it do, it researches new ides to an extreme previously unheard of. Their ads are lightwight and unobtrusive. Essentially they are ad funded, but overall they are good to their users/customers.

Yahoo, who doesn't seem to get it, simply finds ways to put ads where they haven't been before. Great for the ad revenue, bad for their users.

Is there really anyone who hasn't figured out why Google is such a majority favorite? If not for google, I suspect that flash based ads would still be the standard, and everyone would be experiementing with streaming video ads or some crap like that. Thank god google came along and showed their competition that the business model doesn't require large, annoying ads, but instead a huge volume of well placed ads that appeal instead of repel the user!

If yahoo wan't ad's in PDF's, so be it... all the more reason for me to stick with google.

Re:Yahoo vs Google (1)

Andrew Nagy (985144) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521817)

Even worse, Yahoo accepts paid submission into their organic results. Google's policy is try to find what's relevant for the end-user. Yahoo!'s policy is allow people with money to buy relevance.

Re:Yahoo vs Google (1)

X_Bones (93097) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521843)

...except that Google has been serving Flash advertisements for quite a while now, and image advertisements for even longer.

Re:Yahoo vs Google (1)

jst4fun (767869) | more than 6 years ago | (#21522273)

Actually Yahoo had other income sources and Google is the one depending on Ad revenues..

Take any yahoo service they have free version and paid version. Its very hard to notice but their major income comes from other sources than ads...

Re:Yahoo vs Google (1)

bcattwoo (737354) | more than 6 years ago | (#21522883)

Yahoo, who doesn't seem to get it, simply finds ways to put ads where they haven't been before. Great for the ad revenue, bad for their users.

If yahoo wan't ad's in PDF's, so be it... all the more reason for me to stick with google.


It is up to the publishers whether they want the ads or not. If ads start showing up for you in PDFs blame the publisher of the PDF not Yahoo.

censored blog chock full of corepirate nazi ads (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21521433)

what a surprise?

micro management has never worked. it's an illness. tie that with life0cidal aggression & gangster style bullying, & what do we have? a greed/fear/ego based recipe for disaster.

we're intending for the nazis to give up/fail even further, in attempting to control the 'weather'.

http://video.google.com/videosearch?hl=en&q=video+cloud+spraying [google.com]
&oe=UTF-8&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wv&oi=property_suggestions&resnum=0&ct=property-revision&cd=1

the creators will prevail. as it has always been.

corepirate nazi execrable costs outweigh benefits
(Score:-)mynuts won, the king is a fink)
by ourselves on everyday 24/7

as there are no benefits, just more&more death/debt & disruption.

fortunately there's an 'army' of angels, coming yOUR way

do not be afraid/dismayed, it is the way it was meant to be. the only way out is up.

the little ones/innocents must/will be protected.

after the big flash, ALL of yOUR imaginary 'borders' may blur a bit?

for each of the creators' innocents harmed, there is a debt that must/will be repaid by you/us, as the perpetrators/minions of unprecedented evile, will not be available.

beware the illusionary smoke&mirrors.con

all is not lost/forgotten.

no need to fret (unless you're associated/joined at the hype with, unprecedented evile), it's all just a part of the creators' wwwildly popular, newclear powered, planet/population rescue initiative/mandate.

or, is it (literally) ground hog day, again? many of US are obviously not interested in how we appear (which is whoreabull) from the other side of the 'lens', or even from across the oceans.

vote with (what's left in) yOUR wallet. help bring an end to unprecedented evile's manifestation through yOUR owned felonious corepirate nazi glowbull warmongering execrable.

we still haven't read (here) about the 2/3'rds of you kids who are investigating/pursuing a spiritual/conscience/concious re-awakening, in amongst the 'stuff that matters'? another big surprise?

some of US should consider ourselves very fortunate to be among those scheduled to survive after the big flash/implementation of the creators' wwwildly popular planet/population rescue initiative/mandate.

it's right in the manual, 'world without end', etc....

as we all ?know?, change is inevitable, & denying/ignoring gravity, logic, morality, etc..., is only possible, on a temporary basis.

concern about the course of events that will occur should the life0cidal execrable fail to be intervened upon is in order.

'do not be dismayed' (also from the manual). however, it's ok/recommended, to not attempt to live under/accept, fauxking nazi felon greed/fear/ego based pr ?firm? scriptdead mindphuking hypenosys.

consult with/trust in yOUR creators. providing more than enough of everything for everyone (without any distracting/spiritdead personal gain motives), whilst badtolling unprecedented evile, using an unlimited supply of newclear power, since/until forever. see you there?

"If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land."

acroread gives the hint (javascript) (3, Insightful)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521465)

first time I saw jscript in acroread, I barfed.

it was also the last time I ran and installed acroread, too.

you listening adobe?

xpdf does the job just fine for me, now. are you happy, adobe? (I am!)

what is this going to do to corp america that often does NOT want anyone outside the company knowing that person A opened doc B? much less having outbound and inbound packets eat up your corp network b/w.

bright idea (not!).

then again, people DO seem to be running acroread (win or other version) and so maybe they just don't CARE that scripting and 'active things' happen just because they opened a doc.

Or how bout this? (2, Insightful)

Cathoderoytube (1088737) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521481)

Or better yet, how bout I use Open Office and get ad-free documents?
Somehow I don't see a professional document being very professional if adverts are included.

'So you see the fiscal outlook for this quarter were much larger than previous quarters this can be -what the?! Oh uhh, sorry folks, you'll have to bear with me. I clicked 'larger' and I'm being re-directed to a penis enlargement website. If everybody would please avert their eyes from the screen and maybe look at the non ad-laced budget forecast printout provided while I try to close these pop ups'

Preview (3, Interesting)

Jerry Rivers (881171) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521493)

I have a sneaking suspicion that this won't work in Preview in OS X. At least for a while 'til Apple can get revenue from it. Preview, for those not familiar with it, basically renders Adobe Reader pointless on a Mac, especially because it is about ten times faster than Reader. So for stuff that doesn't require Acrobat Pro, Preview rules.

Re:Preview (1)

Scrameustache (459504) | more than 6 years ago | (#21522015)

I have a sneaking suspicion that this won't work in Preview in OS X. At least for a while 'til Apple can get revenue from it. Preview, for those not familiar with it, basically renders Adobe Reader pointless on a Mac, especially because it is about ten times faster than Reader. So for stuff that doesn't require Acrobat Pro, Preview rules.
Indeed, and the lack of the flashing ads that the Adobe reader has stupidly added to the reader is another huge boost for Preview and another hint that this insane scheme won't affect the Mac community.

Re:Preview (1)

linumax (910946) | more than 6 years ago | (#21522289)

Give Skim [sourceforge.net] a try, you'll love it.
It's open source and allows:
  • Adding and editing notes
  • Highlighting important text
  • Making "snapshots" for easy reference
  • Interaction with LaTeX and PDFSync
  • ...
I use it a lot in classes for taking notes.

Re:Preview (1)

Jerry Rivers (881171) | more than 6 years ago | (#21522793)

Thanks for the tip, I'll check it out.

Preview does allow adding/editing annotations, plus limited text editing.

Re:Preview (1)

Sparks23 (412116) | more than 6 years ago | (#21522697)

The exception, unfortunately, is if you run across any DRM-encumbered PDF. Preview cannot display those; the only reason to have Reader around, as far as I can tell, is for those very rare situations where you have a DRM-encumbered PDF to view.

The old mantra: (1)

themushroom (197365) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521531)

Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should. This can't end well.

Shooting the Moon! (2, Funny)

eli pabst (948845) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521547)

Awesome! I was wondering how Adobe was going to make Acrobat Reader even more of a bloated monstrosity than it already is. What a better way to expand its memory footprint than to integrate some kind of ad management function. I hope they use Flash ads for this. I can smell the sweet aroma of burning RAM already!

come on already! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21521565)

ads, ads, ads, ads, ads! Does everyone have to put ads everywhere and on everything? Not long ago Geico was flying ads in our neighborhood using planes! I'm at the point now that the more obnoxious the ads, the more likely I will NOT use their products. It's already happening where too many ads cause people to glare over them and not even recognize them anymore. ADS are a nuisance and I for one never read them. I'm tired of them and if things dont slow down, we're going to have wallpaper ads in our offices. Stop the madness!!!!!

Re:come on already! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21522319)

Yes, I do quite DRINK COCA-COLA agree. This constant advertising DRINK COCA-COLA culture is getting totally DRINK COCA-COLA out of hand. It's high DRINK COCA-COLA time someone did something about it.

Now, if you'll DRINK COCA-COLA excuse me, I find myself feeling inexplicably thirsty...

Great. Now PDFs will be even slower and crappier (3, Insightful)

GnarlyDoug (1109205) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521589)

I hate PDFs. Every time I wind up having to open one of these things in a browser it just sucks. They load up slow. If they're large then I often times cannot even page forward. They're very laggy, and sometimes just plain lock up. The frustration with trying to read a PDF is already huge for me. I see this behavior on Windows and Mac boxes, and with various browsers as well, and it's not like I'm using ancient machines. Maybe other people have had different experiences? What am I missing here? PDF just seems broken to me already.

Anyway, now they want to add ads to these things? I really don't know what to say. I already consider PDFs to be on the verge of being totally unusable. This should push them right over the edge.

Re:Great. Now PDFs will be even slower and crappie (4, Insightful)

hobo sapiens (893427) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521857)

I used to feel that way. Then I started using Foxit PDF reader.

The problem isn't with PDF in itself. PDF is perceived as a problem for two reasons:

1) Adobe Acrobat. Get rid of it, for goodness sake. Use something else. PDF isn't slow, Adobe's crappy reader is slow.
2) Web developers cannot resist putting TPPs on websites. What's a TPP, you ask? A Totally Pointless PDF. People: if you have a website, there's one way to get me to NEVER read your content. How? By putting it in PDF. The ONE exception is this: if you have a book or reference manual, then that is an appropriate use of PDF. But tell me that I am downloading a PDF. Don't disguise your PDF as another web page by just putting it behind a normal link. When I click a link, unless I am warned that it's a PDF, I expect an HTML page. PDF just interrupts the flow of the web. Don't believe me? The just google usability and PDF. You'll get lots of stuff like this: http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20030714.html [useit.com] .

PDF is like other overused "web" technologies like flash: useful when used properly, and annoying as hell when overused.

Re:Great. Now PDFs will be even slower and crappie (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21522429)

That's why I uninstall the PDF plug-in, and just click/download the file like any other, then view it when I want in the viewer I want.

When you do this, your PDF browser and internet browser are different processes, which is good for many reasons: one app crash doesn't affect the other, and one app bottleneck doesn't affect the other, etc.

It's simple to do, and I highly recommend it.

Re:Great. Now PDFs will be even slower and crappie (1)

ComputerInsultant (722520) | more than 6 years ago | (#21522629)

You do not have to put up with Acrobat Reader. Take control of how your browser handles PDF files.

Use FireFox with the PDF Download add-on and Foxit Reader for display. In this configuration PDF files download without seizing the browser.

But do not under any circumstances load Acrobat reader. Acrobat reader will keep trying to override Foxit each time it runs.

This is not a perfect solution, as there are a web sites that link to PDF files without setting a mime type. Then Firefox tries to display the PDF as the web page. That is annoying, but just save the page source to a .pdf file, then fire up Foxit.

Didn't you have ad's? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21521705)

"Didn't you have ad's in the 20th century?"

"Well sure, but not in our dreams. Only on TV and radio. And in magazines. And movies. [And PDF files.] And at ball games and on buses and milk cartons and t-shirts and written on the sky. But not in dreams. No siree!"

Open standards. (2, Interesting)

Assassin bug (835070) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521741)

Keep up the fight for open standards and this becomes less of a problem.

Context-Sensitive?? (1)

bar_jebus (1194487) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521811)

I've never found ads to be context sensitive in slightest. If I search for "Racists", all I get is, "Get your Racists from Walmart! All the "Racists" you'll ever need, all for the lowest prices!". Completely useless.

Good! (1)

SlappyBastard (961143) | more than 6 years ago | (#21521925)

The sooner people figure out that PDF is a bloated and shitty format, the better.

Re:Good! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21522369)

Yeah! Word docs are sooo much better!

Re:Good! (1)

Grishnakh (216268) | more than 6 years ago | (#21522661)

The sooner people figure out that PDF is a bloated and shitty format, the better.

No, PDF is an excellent format. Adobe's Acrobat reader is bloated and shitty, but anyone dumb enough to be using that when there's so many great free alternatives available deserves to look at ads.

If I could post a poll, I would. (1)

jackpot777 (1159971) | more than 6 years ago | (#21522099)

I just want to get an inkling for what people think of the whole notion of advertising. I'll say what I think, and you let me know if that's how you think / don't think.

Advertising is great for letting me know there is new stuff out there, or for allowing me the occasional 'Eureka' moment (when I see something in meatspace that confuses me because I don't know what it's good for, then I see it being used on an ad so now at least I know its purpose).

But there are plenty of superfluous commercials. Advertising the electric company, for example. It's not as though I was going to NOT use electricity in my computer to post this reply. They're not the only ones. It's not as though I see adverts for a petrol company and I think "I'll use that instead of orange juice in my car."

If I'm in the market for something, I'll shop around. Look for opinions online, check out websites and magazines from independent test sources. Weigh up my options. I certainly don't base my 'desires' on catchphrases and logos. And because of this, I'm an advertiser's worst nightmare. I don't think I can ever be corerced into buying anything I didn't already want or don't need. No matter how many credit card offers I receive, I still refuse to run up a debt because the card has a picture of a polar bear on it, or I can get Reward Points (tm) that are worth less than the amount I'd be paying in interest if I did fall for the sales pitch.

So adverts in my PDFs? About as much use on me as pop-up adverts on the web. And my browser blocks those. If it becomes an annoyance, I'll look for software that stops the ads. Or read the PDFs offline. The worst it will be for me is a waste of screen area.

Dear Adobe, (0, Redundant)

DigitAl56K (805623) | more than 6 years ago | (#21522183)

Please stop raping the PDF format.

Thanks!

- The Internet.

P.S. Foxit [foxitsoftware.com] .

Wow. (1)

Monoliath (738369) | more than 6 years ago | (#21522203)

If this becomes standard, I'm not using PDFs anymore. Plain and simple. This whole "ahh we got you hooked on a format, ADVERTISEMENT TIME! MUAHAHAHA" attitude by software vendors is...retarded.

What a bunch of morons, way to kill off a document format...Adobe Tards (tm)

Next innovation from the marketing department: (1)

RHSC (1019802) | more than 6 years ago | (#21522295)

Anatomy-Targeted porn ads!

anytime you mouse over the racy parts of the stripper,
a targeted popup ad displays

"Oh my, look at the --- on her!... Oh, maybe I do need some anti-itch cream"
Another customer satisfied!

Inspired by the friendly ad gurus at Yahoo.com

Time for a repeat of the Bill Hicks quote... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21522397)

By the way, if anyone here is in advertising or marketing, kill yourself.

Just a little thought. I'm just trying to plant seeds. Maybe one day, they'll take root. I don't know. You try. You do what you can. Kill yourself.

Seriously, though. If you are, do. No, really. There's no rationalisation for what you do, and you are Satan's little helpers, okay? Kill yourself. Seriously. You are the ruiner of all things good, seriously. No, this is not a joke, if you're going: "There's going to be a joke coming." There's no fucking joke coming. You are Satan's spawn, filling the world with bile and garbage. You are fucked, and you are fucking us. Kill yourself, it's the only way to save your fucking soul. Kill yourself. Planting seeds.

See http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Bill_Hicks [wikiquote.org] for more...

Good Idea (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21522675)

I think it is a pretty decent idea. From the context it is talking about only PDFs created with a certain version of the software rather than regular adobe pro, which means you wouldn't use it for creating professional office documents, but distributable publications. It also makes some mention of the publisher being able to profit from it, this would be a cool way for someone to make a career of writing and distributing content without charging for it or hosting it on a server. They just wrap the content up as PDF with the ads and then it can travel through email or be posted anywhere and can be profitable through the proliferation of its usage.

With the rising cost of published books and the diminishment of the publishing industry due to internet usage, this may be a new way to profit from writing without having to make people pay for it.

Now rip me a new one for being a corporate shrew.

May be a mixed blessing (2, Interesting)

triffidsting (594096) | more than 6 years ago | (#21522797)

I know this is /., so yeah, we all hate ads... There is a possible upside though.

I'm a grad student, I do a lot of research for my classes online, and 90% of the papers I read are in PDF format. For the benefit being able to download these papers, I pay an annual fee for membership in IEEE & ACM to access their digital libraries. If they (ACM/IEEE) could recover their fees through showing ads in the pdfs, maybe I could forgo paying their membership fees and opt instead to download the ad-laden version.

Then again, who knows, they might try to have their cake and eat it too - by charging me a membership fee to access ad-laden pdf versions.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>