iOS 9 Safari content blockers debut to demand, denouncement & a high-profile delisting

11617182022

Comments

  • Reply 381 of 421

    By far, the most annoying ads are the ones that auto-open the App Store and display some game they want you buy, as if I'm going to reward that behavior by doing what they want. This still sometimes happens on AppleInsider. And no, don't tell me it was fixed in iOS8, because it still happens. While I'm aware AI has nothing to do with producing these ads, them serving it up is nonetheless part of my mobile web surfing experience, and if Neil wants to pat himself on the back and be "proud" of the mobile site, then he should also take responsibility for any bad experiences the site's ad business foists onto visitors.



    I'm not philosophically against web advertising. Nor I am not against AI getting paid (my previous existential challenge about why it should make revenue from posting others' content notwithstanding; the same challenge applies to other content aggregators like slashdot, reddit, etc). I just think the online advertising standard has sunk so low that it rewards the basest behaviors and tricks, rather than formulating better ads, such as those found in print magazines--or movie trailers. Instead of creating an ad you would want to look at, websites force you to look, using interstitial ads that can't be dismissed for 10 seconds. Or using animation ("punch the monkey to win a free iPad") or sexual images to distract you. Or Vibrant Media's infamous double-underlined text pop-up ads designed to catch computer users who are just moving the mouse across a web page. All of these tricks are annoying and anti-user. It serves NO ONE except the ad networks that take their cut, and the websites that proudly use this revenue model.



    The ad blocker situation is built upon years of frustration and treating web viewers opportunistically instead of with respect.

  • Reply 382 of 421
    crowleycrowley Posts: 5,991member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

     

     

    So Apple is now doing a GLOBAL REFUND of Marco's App.

    http://www.marco.org/2015/09/21/peace-refund

    This is EXACTLY what Marco should have done and taken the 30% hit.  Instead Apple does it.  

     

    If Marco was truly sorry he would have done this himself instead of waiting for Apple to do it.  Pathetic.  I'll never download an App from him again.


    Did you even read your link?

    Quote:


     As far as I know, this effectively never happens. When I decided to pull the app, I asked some Apple friends if this was even possible, and we all thought the same thing: iTunes billing works the way it works, period, and no special cases can be made.


    So, as I and many others have said, what you were demanding Marco do was not an avenue open to him.  There is no channel at Apple to request a global refund.  Even if Marco was truly sorry (he is), he cannot change Apple's policy on App Store refunds, any more than he can refund customers directly.  He does not have the data, he does not have the channels, he cannot do that.   

     

    Apple have now set a precedent and may open up a global refund ability, or may consider this a one off for a developer they want to keep on-side because he delivers quality independent apps to their ecosystem.  I doubt they'll change anything, as global refunds are going to pretty exceptional.

     

    But the long and short of it now is, no damage done.  Your continuing crusade now just seems vindictive.

  • Reply 383 of 421
    crowleycrowley Posts: 5,991member

    Will Apple be removing the app from people's phones as well?  That could annoy a whole new wave of people.

  • Reply 384 of 421
    crowley wrote: »
    Did you even read your link?
    So, as I and many others have said, what you were demanding Marco do was not an avenue open to him.  There is no channel at Apple to request a global refund.  Even if Marco was truly sorry (he is), he cannot change Apple's policy on App Store refunds, any more than he can refund customers directly.  He does not have the data, he does not have the channels, he cannot do that.   

    Apple have now set a precedent and may open up a global refund ability, or may consider this a one off for a developer they want to keep on-side because he delivers quality independent apps to their ecosystem.  I doubt they'll change anything, as global refunds are going to pretty exceptional.

    But the long and short of it now is, no damage done.  Your continuing crusade now just seems vindictive.

    I can't say I grasp Marco's reasoning here since the app would have taken at least a few(?) weeks to build, but I respect him for it. This isn't just about him giving up a revenue stream, but working to give it back. That's rare. Even if 'we' decides his reasons are dumb, or think he was myopic for not coming to this conclusion sooner, he made a hard choice that few ever make. Perhaps we need more people like Macro in this world willing to evaluate their thoughts and then act upon those thoughts, and less people like [@]sog35[/@] that make up their mind before any facts are in and then hold to their baseless views no matter what evidence is presented. There is a term for it, cognitive dissonance, and studies show that when faced with evidence that makes one uncomfortable certain people aren't just prone to keep their incorrect viewpoint, but make them stronger advocates of their misconceptions and superstitions. IOW, giving certain people facts will only reenforce their fallacies.

    crowley wrote: »
    Will Apple be removing the app from people's phones as well?  That could annoy a whole new wave of people.

    I doubt it. Besides pissing people off, it would also be an extra cost for Apple, as well as be a show of a Big Brother nature that wouldn't go over well as it would just like a petulant child taking their toys away from others for not getting their way (i.e.: getting paid). My guess is Apple did this for Marco because it's simply a lot of mindshare around an already controversial feature. I don't expect to see something like that for a very, very long time.
  • Reply 385 of 421
    crowley wrote: »
    Will Apple be removing the app from people's phones as well?  That could annoy a whole new wave of people.

    This.
    I'm not sure all want a refund if that would imply losing the app. I didn't read the fine print, but I'm sure you buy the right for indefinite use of the app as long as it complies to working with iOS (and no right for a number of upgrades or duration of service, or compatibility with future iOS hardware and software).
    But then, if the app would actually disappear I can envision some people suing apple for the psychological harm done.... ;)
  • Reply 386 of 421
    crowleycrowley Posts: 5,991member
    Never ceases to amaze me how fanboys will rant and rage against the implication of a slight that doesn't even affect them. Marco should have posted about wanting to do something that he wasn't able to do? And the fact that he didn't means he absolutely definitely didn't even try? That is bullshit. You have no idea.

    There is no reputational damage. The number of people who care or who even know about this is minuscule. Of those, as many will be happy with the response and resolution as are annoyed with the entire thing.
  • Reply 387 of 421
    sog35 wrote: »
    Bullshit.

    Marco never PUBLICLY said he wanted to do a GLOBAL refund..............until Apple did it for him.

    If Marco was TRULY sorry he would have said on his original post that he wants to do a global refund but he's checking with Apple if its possible.  No.  Instead he just gave a link to a instructions on how to get a refund.  Thanks a lot.

    Because of this disaster Apple was proactive that ate the 30% commission and did a global refund.  Then this clown Marco says, Oh yeah I was checking behind the scenes if a global refund was possible.  Bullshit.  He only said that AFTER Apple announced it publicily.

    The damage isn't done.  Marco has tainted the App store with his unprofessionalism.  Who wants to pay cash at an App store when the dev will stop support after 2 days?  This has damaged the App store and people's trust.  Hopefully people will focus their disappointment at Marco.
    Your first word in your reply succinctly describes your entire post.
    Marco is tainting the Apple store!!!!
    Take a reality check. Get out of your basement (as you Americans seem to be fond of saying) and take a walk in the real world.
  • Reply 388 of 421
    sog35 wrote: »
    crowley wrote: »
     
    Did you even read your link?
    So, as I and many others have said, what you were demanding Marco do was not an avenue open to him.  There is no channel at Apple to request a global refund.  Even if Marco was truly sorry (he is), he cannot change Apple's policy on App Store refunds, any more than he can refund customers directly.  He does not have the data, he does not have the channels, he cannot do that.   

    Apple have now set a precedent and may open up a global refund ability, or may consider this a one off for a developer they want to keep on-side because he delivers quality independent apps to their ecosystem.  I doubt they'll change anything, as global refunds are going to pretty exceptional.

    But the long and short of it now is, no damage done.  Your continuing crusade now just seems vindictive.

    Bullshit.

    Marco never PUBLICLY said he wanted to do a GLOBAL refund..............until Apple did it for him.

    If Marco was TRULY sorry he would have said on his original post that he wants to do a global refund but he's checking with Apple if its possible.  No.  Instead he just gave a link to a instructions on how to get a refund.  Thanks a lot.

    Because of this disaster Apple was proactive that ate the 30% commission and did a global refund.  Then this clown Marco says, Oh yeah I was checking behind the scenes if a global refund was possible.  Bullshit.  He only said that AFTER Apple announced it publicily.

    The damage isn't done.  Marco has tainted the App store with his unprofessionalism.  Who wants to pay cash at an App store when the dev will stop support after 2 days?  This has damaged the App store and people's trust.  Hopefully people will focus their disappointment at Marco.

    Nothing says "I'm sorry" like money. He gave back a lot of it, and gave up the potential to make much more. It doesn't get more sorry than that.
  • Reply 389 of 421
    sog35 wrote: »
    Your first word in your reply succinctly describes your entire post.

    Marco is tainting the Apple store!!!!

    Take a reality check. Get out of your basement (as you Americans seem to be fond of saying) and take a walk in the real world.

    Yes he is tainting the Apple store.

    Marco's App wasn't some unknown App.  It was the #1 App.  And then a day latter he pulls the plug.  How does that build confidence in a store?  When your best selling App pulls support in one day. 

    One single solitary app isn't going to undermine the unwavering confidence there is for the App Store.
  • Reply 390 of 421
    philboogie wrote: »
    So, in short, no on at this site pays attention to details. Ironic.

    Well we can't say that, because we don't know how much true control they have over the look, feel, and Huddler implementations.

    I'm often tasked with trying to make previous software/web design purchases work for companies, even if I had nothing to do with the decision. It's often times very frustrating and noodling around in undocumented code often breaks more things than you're trying to fix.
    That could work as a caption!

    If you meant my signature... thanks for the suggestion. Changed... :D

    It works far better than my previous quote from Realistic... because I've failed that test far too many times of late to be comfortable giving folks the bullets to shoot me with.
  • Reply 391 of 421
    dasanman69 wrote: »
    One single solitary app isn't going to undermine the unwavering confidence there is for the App Store.

    According to some apparently there will be a complete meltdown no one will ever buy from it again. The sky's will rain fire, the seas boil with brimstone and
    The end of the world. All because someone pull an app offor the App store.
  • Reply 392 of 421
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,709member
    I’m not a publisher, an advertiser, a journalist, or a website owner or manager.  I’m just an average internet user.  When I first learned about ad blocking in iOS 9 I was excited but after the excitement wore off I had a reality check moment. I thought about the consequences of blocking ads and what it could do to free online content and websites that do not deserve to be blocked if ad blocking goes mainstream and adapted by everyone.  We all hate intrusive, tracking ads but it’s a small price to pay in exchange for keeping the internet free and open with content we enjoy reading and watching when we visit our favorite websites everyday.  I do not have nor do I plan to install any ad blocking apps on my iPhone, iMac, or MacBook Pro.  Ad blocking will hurt everyone in the long run and it will have a bad domino effect.  You know the old saying, "For Every Action There's a Reaction." By blocking ads we will contribute to the slow demise of websites and the internet by jumping on the mob mentality bandwagon. We all deserve a safe and annoyance-free browsing experience but this is not the way to do it, with brute force using a blunt instrument. I agree with Marco Arment and his decision. Lets keep our favorite websites such as this one open for business.

    Most users are fine with advertising like banners, sponsored links (as long as it's labelled as such), and other benign methods. Everyone can agree auto-redirects, pop up ads, hover ads are damn detrimental to the user. Don't annoy me with ads.

    Imagine you get a magazine and every article section is wrapped in an ad that you have to cut away to see it. Also imagine if on any random page, a balloon inflates and pops out with another ad. That'll be annoying. Why do we have to go through this on the Internet?
  • Reply 393 of 421
    jungmark wrote: »
    Most users are fine with advertising like banners, sponsored links (as long as it's labelled as such), and other benign methods. Everyone can agree auto-redirects, pop up ads, hover ads are damn detrimental to the user. Don't annoy me with ads.

    Imagine you get a magazine and every article section is wrapped in an ad that you have to cut away to see it. Also imagine if on any random page, a balloon inflates and pops out with another ad. That'll be annoying. Why do we have to go through this on the Internet?

    There is ample demand for ad blockers thanks to those intrusive and virulent ads. It'll now be up to the survivors to retool and integrate advertising in a more benign form.
  • Reply 394 of 421
    crowleycrowley Posts: 5,991member
    sog35 wrote: »
    Nope.  Marco only wanted to give money back to those who took the time to go through a time consuming process.  Most people won't even bother doing that for $3.

    If he was really sorry he would have expressed his intention of giving a GLOBAL REFUND from the start.  IN his original 'apology' he should have said he wants to give a global refund but is still figuring out how to do it.  Instead he tells consumers they are on their own and need to do it themself.  

    Then Apple announces a global refund.  Then Marco said, Oh yeah.  I wanted to do a global refund from the start.  BULLSHIT.  

    If Marco requested a global refund with Apple he would have to pay Apple their 30% commission.  But since Apple is doing the refund he gets to keep the 30%. 

    Apple is losing out on the 30% commission.  Marco loses nothing but the time it took to make the App.
    This is a whole heap of nonsense that you've guessed at and/or made up.
  • Reply 395 of 421
    sog35 wrote: »
    dasanman69 wrote: »
    Nothing says "I'm sorry" like money. He gave back a lot of it, and gave up the potential to make much more. It doesn't get more sorry than that.

    Nope.  Marco only wanted to give money back to those who took the time to go through a time consuming process.  Most people won't even bother doing that for $3.

    If he was really sorry he would have expressed his intention of giving a GLOBAL REFUND from the start.  IN his original 'apology' he should have said he wants to give a global refund but is still figuring out how to do it.  Instead he tells consumers they are on their own and need to do it themself.  

    Then Apple announces a global refund.  Then Marco said, Oh yeah.  I wanted to do a global refund from the start.  BULLSHIT.  

    If Marco requested a global refund with Apple he would have to pay Apple their 30% commission.  But since Apple is doing the refund he gets to keep the 30%. 

    Apple is losing out on the 30% commission.  Marco loses nothing but the time it took to make the App.

    Actions speak louder than words. He got Apple to do something they've never done before. It was smart to check first before publicly promising anything.
  • Reply 396 of 421
    Whoever this Marco is, he looks somewhat idiotic. How can one claim second thoughts about an app after its release, when one spent weeks or more developing and testing it for the express purpose he now claims to regret?

    It's one thing to stop development on something because of lack or resources, or perhaps an app is being used in ways not intended and has unforeseen negative consequences. But Peace was conceived and designed to deliver the exact consequences he later claims were regrettable? I'm fairly certain he would have shared his ideas with people around him, so no one had this epiphany while in the conceptual stage? At the very least, this sounds stupid.
  • Reply 397 of 421
    sog35 wrote: »
    dasanman69 wrote: »
    Actions speak louder than words. He got Apple to do something they've never done before. It was smart to check first before publicly promising anything.

    he did not have to promise anything.  He could just have said:

    "I'm trying to work with Apple to get a global refund.  In the meantime you may request a refund directly through Apple if you choose to."

    That's it. And Apple did not do the Global refund because Marco told them too.  Apple did it because they are a high quality company that cares about customer satisfaction.  Stop giving Marco credit, he never contacted Apple.

    He said this:
    http://www.marco.org/2015/09/21/peace-refund

     "When I decided to pull the app, I asked some Apple friends if this was even possible, and we all thought the same thing: iTunes billing works the way it works, period, and no special cases can be made."

    "Today, Apple made the decision for me, in a way that I didn’t even think was possible, and I’m actually happy"



    So no Marco did not contact Apple about a global refund.  He just said he was THINKING about it and talked to a few Apple friends. 

    Did Apple release a statement? No, so you're guessing. You don't think that the higher ups at Apple aren't aware of what was happening just like we are?
  • Reply 398 of 421
    Marvin wrote: »
    You could say the same about TV ads. If you see an ad for pizza, Coca-Cola, travel etc on TV you don't pick up the phone or go online and order. Advertising is more about psychological conditioning (leaving an impression). If right now you were in the mood for buying a drone, what is the name that immediately pops into your head? What about a camera to record your sport activity? You're not clicking an ad to buy one, you have an association between a brand and a product. Obtrusive ads like popups do that so that they guarantee you see them. They're like flashers in the park, it doesn't matter if you don't want it, you've seen what's on offer and that image is in your head.
    These are used in the AI podcasts where they have to pretend to like a sponsor's product. They are a bit awkward to fit into text and audio. It's a lot easier with movies. Some people film their podcasts and use Youtube as the outlet with sponsor t-shirts and background products. News companies have been doing advertorials quite effectively:

    http://www.adweek.com/news/technology/pretty-much-everyone-doing-native-ads-now-150290

    When you look at an article like the following, you'd never know if Lennar paid for the article:

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/lennar-tops-expectations-as-housing-market-continues-to-improve-1442831939

    or if a tourism agency or hotels paid for this one where they link to travel deals:

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/touring-funen-denmarks-legitimate-fairy-tale-island-1442514019

    The success of this kind of thing depends on the audience demographics. Tech blogs are more likely to push technology because the advertisers will get a return on the ads. This is harder for sites catering to special interests like Apple products because Apple buyers mostly buy from Apple so what can an advertiser really sell you? Cases and accessories for Apple products mostly. The ideal advertiser here would be Apple.

    More general tech sites like Engadget and the Verge cover all technology and the advertisers they attract must influence the direction of the editorial because they won't want to annoy advertisers selling certain products by giving them bad reviews. If an advertiser is paying you a huge amount to advertise Moto 360 watches and straps for example, you're not going to completely trash the product or you'll just lose the ad revenue.
    Implementing this needs to convince people to have a balance and they'll want to protect privacy. You don't want a middle-man tracing your browsing history through the transactions. You'd be better off buying tokens like a bitcoin-style system and then have a balance of tokens, which then get sent to the content provider and converted back to cash immediately. As you say though, it has to be cheap and the problem is finding a good price that maintains a high volume of readers while sustaining the operation.

    If you priced articles at 1 cent then someone reading 20 articles per day would be paying $6/month. If that's for every site they visit, it can be off-putting and so you get a lower audience. A readership of 1000 people paying $6/month could probably sustain a small site. Readership volume seems to follow either popular personalities or a consistently high volume of interesting content. Some sites surprise me with their popularity like Gruber (mostly a content aggregator) and Leo Laporte. The following site says Laporte makes $6m per year in ad revenue from podcasts, which are downloaded 5 million times per month:

    http://www.marketplace.org/topics/business/podcastings-audience-and-its-profits-are-growing

    They are entertaining enough for an odd article or podcast but to consistently maintain an audience of tens of thousands over years surprises me. Laporte says he got his audience from mainstream media (TV and radio) first and just held onto it. Howard Stern maintains millions of listeners for his radio station.

    Maybe the route to go is to get more commenters from twitter with a lot of followers to post articles. Like this guy has 17.5k followers:

    https://twitter.com/heyreos

    He founded a different blog site Techwil but if you had a social media personality with a lot of followers who was just tweeting about Apple topics or related products, they could be convinced to earn money on an ad-supported blog. Here's one with ~35k followers who has a Thailand Apple blog:

    https://twitter.com/macthainews

    It's going to be a combination of hitting the right content being put out with the audience. Focusing on just Apple news is limiting because there are times when Apple goes for 6 months and puts out no new products. Gruber's site can maintain a lot of content by aggregating multiple sources and commenting on them but that posting style doesn't leave much room for a forum discussion.

    Funny you mention this, because:
    1. I come here to read educated well-written comments like this one;
    2. I mentioned a couple of days ago in my rant that I felt these forums were/are the most valuable asset at AI that is not being properly monetized;
    3. monetization today is exactly what you're alluding to above: it's almost ALL ***social networking and building a fan base***;
    4. I wrote a post a couple of days ago where I researched what Huddler brings to the table as a web solutions provider... for exactly what we're talking about here (forum i.e. social network monetization), which is not fully being implemented here for some reason, while working rather slick on other sites(?)

    I was going to write up a suggestion list over the weekend from my point of view... and actually send it to you in a PM ;) On second thought, I'll just add a couple of observations here that "may help" in defining your goals and getting there asap. To be truthful, I just plain don't have the time necessary to go in depth a much as I would really like to.

    First and foremost, as i stated now a couple of times, it is these forums... your very own personal and controllable social network... that are going to waste. Partly due to the format and the way threads and posts are handled.

    Why no up... AND down voting?

    See ArsTechnica as an example and who manage this quite well, even though once in a while the collective mind-thought of the nerds over common sense can and does take place i.e. censorship of unpopular ideas... again... it works and quite well.

    If no down-voting is allowed, why do up-votes need to be buried as they are now behind a click to see the "messages" that people leave?
    Think of it this way: if you're allowing Tweet (or less) length comments, why do you not show them? The number of superfluous posts simply saying, "Agree!" would be reduced dramatically. While this strategy certainly doesn't help CPM ads... those are and will be blocked enmass anyway so you're not losing anything. However, you do have the opportunity to GAIN from speed, efficiency and RELEVANCE of original posts and ideas, while at the same time allowing your readership to "interact" and be counted in even small ways and for however much the want to add to the discussion.

    Once again aimed at voting, and here is something where you Marvin PERSONALLY could benefit: why are GOOD (sometimes great!) and informative posts like yours, buried and not "pinned" or gravitated (based on "up-votes") towards the top of a topic thread?
    I've noticed for a long time that certain topics just plain die out, even though they contain valuable information for your readers... again... like the one I'm replying to now (Q: can you follow this on your logs?). Not only your own posts, but those from a number of un-named specialists in these threads take the time to go into detail over a wide variety of subjects. Many times if not almost always, those detailed comments, experiences and even solutions to problems get lost. Making use of the volunteer efforts of your "valuable readers" could be a gold mine if organized and promoted properly. Note: The Guardian, ArsTechnica, and the hated Adobe have "Editors Picks" as well as "Correct Answer" pins, that at least *I* find very expedient and helpful.

    How does AppleInsider differentiate itself from the pack?
    You guys need to answer that question yourselves. I think it's in your educated readership and that it can be the big differentiation going forward. I don't believe AI is a very good news aggregator at all, and the hands-off approach to aggregation and monetization is not going to pay your bills in the future.

    Aiming to outdo Apple's very own support forums, as well as every other Apple website with user forums, and to truly +INFORM+ your readership could IMHO be a goal that people would allow ads to support. Better utilizing social networking and a review of these forums and it's software to facilitate and support that goal could be a start.

    Tip: if you guys "really" want to take this bull by the horns, you might consider teaming up with some Apple fans, seeing what developers are out there, and working on a better solution to flat-thread forums. Even the ones I mentioned could use some work, and with a bit of thought each could be improved upon. A project that even I have thought about getting involved in here with my tech friends. If there's anything I *hate* at the moment about the Internet, it's finding relevant information pertaining to solutions... that when searched, lead only to multi-hundred post threads with no answer. There's a lot to do still to make the Internet truly efficient, useful, and "just a few keyboard taps away from knowledge".

    Notes:

    • why does AI not use valuable info from their readers to update their posts more often? You did for the Microsoft Office post, but the one about verifying Xcode is still wrong, even if it is the automatic code quotation available within Huddler... you DO have a responsibility then to spell it right or post it in a fashion that there's no mistake (-- is being interpreted as a 'long dash").

    • in the "Slide-to-Unlock Problem" post that a number of your readers experienced, the post itself is woefully written. It doesn't even detail what DFU Mode is or how to find more information about in. This where a YouTube video walk-through would be helpful, or again... you could pull posts to the thread that would help your readers.

    ***Have you taken a look at some of the top YouTube earnings? How about what someone like *Kim K.* (example only to show where the marketing and ad money is going these days!) gets paid to stand next to a sign on Instagram... as in no pro photographer need apply selfie?

    Edited to add: my apologies for the ramble. Obviously, writing isn't my job... and truth, I have a meeting to get to... ;)
  • Reply 399 of 421
    crowleycrowley Posts: 5,991member
    sog35 wrote: »
    I'm not guessing.

    FACT: Marco said on his original blog post that people should go to Apple directly for a refund. He mentioned NOTHING about a global refund, or him trying to contract Apple about a global refund.

    FACT: Apple announces global refund.

    FACT: After Apple's announcement Marco says he was trying to get a global refund worked out with Apple.  

    FACT:  Apple is losing the 30% commission from all purchases of the Peace App

    Those are all facts.
    And you've made up a narrative around those facts about Marco's intentions, undeclared action and inaction, and Apple's benevolence.

    You don't know that Marco didn't consider a global refund.
    You don't know that Marco didn't investigate the possibility to a reasonable extent, or even to utmost possible extent.
    You don't know what triggered Apple to issue the global refund.
    You know a few facts, but nothing pertinent to making any reasoned judgement.

    And now you're casting aspersions again about bribes. Another thing that you know precisely nothing about.
  • Reply 400 of 421

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc View Post

     
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post



    So, in short, no on at this site pays attention to details. Ironic.



    Well we can't say that, because we don't know how much true control they have over the look, feel, and Huddler implementations.

     

    I'm often tasked with trying to make previous software/web design purchases work for companies, even if I had nothing to do with the decision. It's often times very frustrating and noodling around in undocumented code often breaks more things than you're trying to fix.

     



    That's a good point. Or it seems like it. What I don't understand is why this site doesn't, well, I scrolled down before hitting the Reply button and you already touched on many topics that are spinning in my head for a long time. People read post #432; he makes many valid arguments there!

     

     

     





    Quote:

    That could work as a caption!




    If you meant my signature... thanks for the suggestion. Changed... 1biggrin.gif



    It works far better than my previous quote from Realistic... because I've failed that test far too many times of late to be comfortable giving folks the bullets to shoot me with.


     


     lol. Yeah, great sig now!

Sign In or Register to comment.