ooooooooooh we're back on topic :) >>>Thanks for your replies, im going to investigate more about it, just another doubt, an expandable banner has to be in a layer?
Yes, because the unexpanded banner space is a fixed size to fit within the page content, the only way to allow the expanded banner to have the new size is to lay it on a layer on top of the existing. This also means you need 2 seperate SWFs for the expanded/unexpanded - there are way to make the two communicate (your banner publisher will have documents and special FScommands for this). I don't know of any books that deal with the technical side of expandable banners (as all publishers handle it differently and are always changing their methods). The only way to get good is really experience and trial and error. - Mick On 11/12/05, JesterXL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I agree to disagree. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Pete Hotchkiss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "'Flashcoders mailing list'" <[email protected]> > Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2005 7:19 AM > Subject: RE: [Flashcoders] Expandable banners > > > I think this tread ahs gone WAY OT now - lets just agree to disagree on > this one. It's realy not all that important :) > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of JesterXL > Sent: 10 November 2005 00:36 > To: Flashcoders mailing list > Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] Expandable banners > > > I don't need to accept them at all; it's called FlashBlock. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 7:22 PM > Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] Expandable banners > > > I agree - but we dont live in a perfect world and not all websites can > be google. And if they were it would be a pretty grey/vnial/boring > world. > > I do understand you might feel that flash based ads are intrusive - but > you > need > to accpet them as just an important part of the online landscape as > google keywords. Wether you coose to belive me or not they do work. > > > on 10/11/05 12:05 AM, Flashcoders mailing list > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Jakob Nielsen said it best; "Google's done well because they made ads > > that aren't annoying." Google ads can remain on a webpage and allow > > me to read without giving me a seizure, nor to do they appear over the > > > top of my webpage that I'm reading with no discernable close button. > > > > Google has not become the billion dollar company they are because of > > ads; they became that because of good search capabilities, ads that > > are relevant & not distracting, and allowing others to share in the > > revenue they generate. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Daniel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "Flashcoders mailing list" <[email protected]> > > Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 6:41 PM > > Subject: Re: [Flashcoders] Expandable banners > > > > something to consider is that google works off adds. If it weren't > > for thier adds you would have to pay for it. Same with Yahoo. I > > could keep going but I won't. I agree with pete here. I don't like > > adds being everywhere, but I do see the purpose and so I accept it. > > Its easy enough to ignor. Sometimes you'll get lucky and find > > something interesting. But if you don't, just ignor it. Flash > > banners, java script banners, basic jpeg/gif banners really arn't that > > > much different. The flash ones are just more fun to play with. ;) > > Personaly I'd hate it if they got rid of banner advertising. They > > would probably go back to pop ups everywhere wich is even more > > anoying. Oh, and some of us arn't rich and can't afford to pay for > > every site we go to. > > > > Daniel > > > > ryanm wrote: > > > >>> But when the quality of programming on TVnose dives, > >>> > >> You mean it gets worse than America's Next Top Model and The > >> Biggest Loser? 8-O > >> > >> Right now I pay $12.99 a month for high quality programming > >> without commercials, it's called HBO. > >> > >>> it costs you $60 to go to the movies, > >>> > >> At $9 a ticket we're not far from that now. > >> > >>> a daily news papaer is $10 a day, > >>> > >> Like I'd pay to read that crap... > >> > >>> and finaly you have to pay $99 per month just to use your favour > >>> websites (that used to be free) > >>> > >> The good ones don't need ads. If you content is worth consuming, > >> people will pay to consume it. > >> > >> ryanm > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Flashcoders mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders > >> > >> > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > Flashcoders mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Flashcoders mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Flashcoders mailing list > [email protected] > http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders > > _______________________________________________ > Flashcoders mailing list > [email protected] > http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders > > > _______________________________________________ > Flashcoders mailing list > [email protected] > http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders > _______________________________________________ > Flashcoders mailing list > [email protected] > http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders > _______________________________________________ Flashcoders mailing list [email protected] http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
