Jurai2PointOh
07/17/04, 11:23 PM
Jason is supressing truth and lieing to you, the loyal readers. His ORIGINAL post regarding ad space used by ap.net is below (he edited the post afterwards to hide his inability to do simple mathematics of calculating area)
Originally Posted by Jason Tate
Okay, do me a favor - go look up some copyright laws. You'll see that once a song is played on the radio, it enters what is known as public domain. You'll see that you are allowed to make a copy of said song, and distribute it as long as you are not asking for money, if you would like. The song I asked for was a live, radio recorded song - from a band that I happen to know and a band who gave me their new album before anyone else. I know for a fact that they are not upset about me having and or asking for a radio rip of one of their live acoustic songs. I never said downloading music you don't own is legal - is comprehensive reading difficult for you? Are you simply looking for what you wish/want me to be saying, and not at what I am realling asking for?
Now just to end this "ad" argument once and for all.
Here is the screen real estate used up by paid advertisements on the following sites (in pixels) this does not include pop ups, or pop unders, or moving flash ads, dhtml, etc., because they can be blocked, closed, and ignored. (All these numbers are in pixels used.)
AbsolutePunk.net: 795x746 (Total:1541 pixels used)
Yahoo.com:1116x522 (1668)
PunkNews.org:835x370 (1205)
PitchForkMedia.com:2366x894 (3260)
Fark.com:1017x872 (1889)
This is all included on the entire page, not based on resolution, or above the fold ads, etc. - if I did that, I could easily show how we show less ads to the regular user than most sites out there. Go back to feeling stupid, because this argument is DEAD and has proven time and time again - apparently no one is allowed to make money these days or they violate your definition of "true rockin websites."
since Jason seems to have problems with 4th grade level mathematics, I have done a proper evaluation of the ad space used between 3 sites, AP.NET, fark, and punknews (sites jason chose in his horribly bad and lacking of math skills comparison). This compares actual viewable space of the site (ie. the giant grey bars on ap.net dont get counted as part of the site, cuz they arent part of the site) I've also included jpg's with nice red rectangles over the adspace so you at home can compare too. These comparisons analyze only the initial space viewable when the page loads, my browser window was at 1529x1134 size when done.
lets start with the images so you can have them open for perusing
we have:
Absolutepunk.net
http://img17.exs.cx/img17/7818/apdotnet.jpg
Fark:
http://img17.exs.cx/img17/6758/fark.jpg
Punknews.org
http://img17.exs.cx/img17/6472/punknews.jpg
Ok so now that we have hte images open, lets look at the numbers shall we:
ABSOLUTEPUNK.NET
142x239 - 33938 pixels
198x382 - 75636 pixels
476x67 - 31892 pixels
141466 pixels
viewable space: 772x992 - 765824 pixels
RESULT:
18.47% adspace
FARK.COM
137x692 - 94804
474x84 - 39816
134620 pixels
viewable space: 1506x992 - 1493952
9.01% adspace
PUNKNEWS.ORG
483x77 - 37191 pixels
124x118 - 14632 pixels
119 x 92 - 10948 pixels
62771 pixels
viewable space: 1508x998 - 1504984
4.17% adspace
now correct me if i'm wrong, but 18.47% is much larger than 4.17% used by punknews, and 2x as large as the 9.01% used by fark. Summation: Tate can't face the fact that his site is infact a sellout to advertisements (and can't figure out that you figure out the size of a rectangle with multiplication, not adding the length+width).
Originally Posted by Jason Tate
Okay, do me a favor - go look up some copyright laws. You'll see that once a song is played on the radio, it enters what is known as public domain. You'll see that you are allowed to make a copy of said song, and distribute it as long as you are not asking for money, if you would like. The song I asked for was a live, radio recorded song - from a band that I happen to know and a band who gave me their new album before anyone else. I know for a fact that they are not upset about me having and or asking for a radio rip of one of their live acoustic songs. I never said downloading music you don't own is legal - is comprehensive reading difficult for you? Are you simply looking for what you wish/want me to be saying, and not at what I am realling asking for?
Now just to end this "ad" argument once and for all.
Here is the screen real estate used up by paid advertisements on the following sites (in pixels) this does not include pop ups, or pop unders, or moving flash ads, dhtml, etc., because they can be blocked, closed, and ignored. (All these numbers are in pixels used.)
AbsolutePunk.net: 795x746 (Total:1541 pixels used)
Yahoo.com:1116x522 (1668)
PunkNews.org:835x370 (1205)
PitchForkMedia.com:2366x894 (3260)
Fark.com:1017x872 (1889)
This is all included on the entire page, not based on resolution, or above the fold ads, etc. - if I did that, I could easily show how we show less ads to the regular user than most sites out there. Go back to feeling stupid, because this argument is DEAD and has proven time and time again - apparently no one is allowed to make money these days or they violate your definition of "true rockin websites."
since Jason seems to have problems with 4th grade level mathematics, I have done a proper evaluation of the ad space used between 3 sites, AP.NET, fark, and punknews (sites jason chose in his horribly bad and lacking of math skills comparison). This compares actual viewable space of the site (ie. the giant grey bars on ap.net dont get counted as part of the site, cuz they arent part of the site) I've also included jpg's with nice red rectangles over the adspace so you at home can compare too. These comparisons analyze only the initial space viewable when the page loads, my browser window was at 1529x1134 size when done.
lets start with the images so you can have them open for perusing
we have:
Absolutepunk.net
http://img17.exs.cx/img17/7818/apdotnet.jpg
Fark:
http://img17.exs.cx/img17/6758/fark.jpg
Punknews.org
http://img17.exs.cx/img17/6472/punknews.jpg
Ok so now that we have hte images open, lets look at the numbers shall we:
ABSOLUTEPUNK.NET
142x239 - 33938 pixels
198x382 - 75636 pixels
476x67 - 31892 pixels
141466 pixels
viewable space: 772x992 - 765824 pixels
RESULT:
18.47% adspace
FARK.COM
137x692 - 94804
474x84 - 39816
134620 pixels
viewable space: 1506x992 - 1493952
9.01% adspace
PUNKNEWS.ORG
483x77 - 37191 pixels
124x118 - 14632 pixels
119 x 92 - 10948 pixels
62771 pixels
viewable space: 1508x998 - 1504984
4.17% adspace
now correct me if i'm wrong, but 18.47% is much larger than 4.17% used by punknews, and 2x as large as the 9.01% used by fark. Summation: Tate can't face the fact that his site is infact a sellout to advertisements (and can't figure out that you figure out the size of a rectangle with multiplication, not adding the length+width).