July 23, 2001

9:46 AM

x10.com 4th Most Popular Siteon the Internet according to Jupiter Media Metrix. Why? Because of those stupid pop-unders, which they are counting every pop as a visit to the x10 site. (nytimes:reg req) (no reg alt link)
posted by benjh (20 comments total)

So should these ads be counted as visits to the web site, even though 73% of people are closing the ads after 20 seconds. (My guess... 26% of people are closing the ads after 2 seconds).

I would say no, they are just an ad. Rediculous to rank them like any other site.
posted by benjh at 9:48 AM on July 23, 2001

What I find interesting is this assesment of how many people stayed at the site and possibly the amount of sales they rung up.
posted by owillis at 9:55 AM on July 23, 2001

I go for the chicks.
posted by dong_resin at 10:11 AM on July 23, 2001

I think this article opened an X10 popunder on my screen. It was either the article, or MeFi itself, which seems unlikely.

Does that count as clever cross-marketing, hypocrisy, or just plain irony?
posted by matt8313 at 10:18 AM on July 23, 2001

The article notes that the Times itself sells space to X10, matt, and we noted that fact weeks ago.

It drives me crazy; it's spreading like wildfire. Every other week they sign up a new site, it seems. After the Gray Lady got in bed with them, nobody else felt bad. Plus, the pop-under technique is starting to be used by more legitimate advertisers, not always careful in how they implement it. I bounced through three pages on one site recently and got three separate pop-under windows with the same ad!

My solution is to download the M$ enhancement that lets you add a domain to the "restricted sites" list (which by default won't run javascript) from the menu. Sometimes you have to confirm search queries and the like, but that's a small price to pay.
posted by dhartung at 10:58 AM on July 23, 2001

What's sad is that with their supposed "success" (sales of over $4 million), we will be besieged by a flurry of pop-unders just we now receive spam and junk mail. Ugh.
posted by timothompson at 11:03 AM on July 23, 2001

/me hugs his host file and his hax0red cookie.
posted by jcterminal at 11:07 AM on July 23, 2001

How many of those minutes of looking at the site = a browser window under the one being viewed?
posted by ParisParamus at 11:17 AM on July 23, 2001

There are a ton of shareware pop-up killers out there that all suck and are quite dubious. Pop-Up Stopper for Windows however, rules and is free. You can even have it play a wave file every time it kills a popup for extra fun. Just remember to hold down shift whenever you actually want to open a new window and everything is golden. I haven't seen an X-10 ad since I started running it.
posted by frenetic at 12:08 PM on July 23, 2001

I really don't understand why everyone gets their panties in such a bind over this. Any site that you're looking at that has these ads is giving you something for free (i.e. their content). Is having to click on a little black x such a big price to pay for all the hours of fun, entertainment and learning that you might get from these sights? Yes, they're an annoyance, but a very minor one.

Personally, I'd rather see a pop-under ad than a pop-up ad. At least it doesn't interrupt the browsing experience.
posted by skwm at 12:26 PM on July 23, 2001

Has anyone ever ever SEEN an x10 in action? I've tried to search for pages using x1o cams and came up with nothing. I say, either EVERYBODY is ignoring these ads or .... It's a covert project funded by the NSA to slowly adjust us to the idea of cameras pointing at us from everypossible angle. That way the gov. payroll Draconian Aliens at the NSA offices can better study our mating habits. Yeahhh......
posted by metasak at 12:58 PM on July 23, 2001

Has anyone ever ever SEEN an x10 in action?

from NewsFactor: Product Review: X10 Wireless Camera System
posted by andrewraff at 1:14 PM on July 23, 2001

Pop-under ads, Mr. Schalit said, are "more attractive both to publishers and to consumers than classical pop-ups because they do not interrupt the flow of your Internet session," Mr. Schalit said.

Of course they still interrupt my flow; the X-10 ad take focus when you close their parent window. If I've got another page sitting in the background, the X-10 ad pops-over that page and takes focus. It's a somewhat deceitful advertising practice in that some newbies, due to experience, may think that the X-10 ad is a pop-over for the other page, not knowing about pop-unders.
posted by nathan_teske at 3:46 PM on July 23, 2001

I'm still waiting for the "shocking" article about how 20% of these wireless webcams are in girls' showers and bathrooms. The ad with the girl just spells it out, "It can go anywhere!" At least thats the impression I get.

I think if they teamed up the with the Girls Gone Wild people they'd be number one.
posted by skallas at 4:09 PM on July 23, 2001

Um...I just wanted to apologize to everyone. It's not true that everyone is clicking through on x10-sponsored sites...(sniff)...it's only me. Yes, I am guilty. I do nothing but click through the pop-unders every single time I encounter one. Sometimes I wind up visiting the x10 site thousands of times in one day! So don't feel bad - it's nothing you did. It is my fault. I never intended to encourage x10, or have x10 become so popular in the rankings. I just wanted to see the x10 wireless wonder. OK, and the chicks.

I will try to cut back. Forgive?
posted by davidmsc at 4:10 PM on July 23, 2001

Personally, I'd rather see a pop-under ad than a pop-up ad. At least it doesn't interrupt the browsing experience.

I had that attitude when it was banners. I was also fine with pop-ups and pop-unders now and then if the site was particularly good. But lately it's become an epidemic. Without my little pop-up blocker I can't surf the web without my desktop becoming stupidly cluttered with garbage. I didn't buy an x10 camera the first ten thousand times I had to stare at the ad, I'm not going to buy one any time soon. In fact I might actually try to destroy them if I'm ever confronted with any in the real world.
posted by frenetic at 4:55 PM on July 23, 2001

I have Windows XP on my laptop (because frankly, its the only thing I can get to go into hibernation properly, but thats beside the point). Anyways... as you may/may not know, Windows XP GROUPS your icons together. So if you have 2 Internet Explorer windows open, it shows one icon on taskbar with a little number 2 next to it. When you click it, it pulls up a selection menu from there.

Well, it also has the side effect that I don't notice pop-unders at all. Usually, I would see them pop-up and then under, but nope, they just pop under. But then the taskbar doesn't change, just adds a number, hardly noticeable.

Imagine my surprise when I went to switch to something else and then back to IE, and I had 18 windows open, 14 of which were x10.com.

It's obnoxious. I was done, so right click, close all on the taskbar. But how long was I at those windows? Possble a couple hours.
posted by benjh at 6:55 PM on July 23, 2001

skallas, here's a link to an ad by the company that directly addresses the voyeuristic tendencies their other ads featuring fresh-faced, young women have always merely suggested.

metasak -- googling X-10, I came across this article that I think is pretty freaky. It's a trend I didn't know anything about. Not even a hint. That's a different species of geek than the ones I associate with, I guess.

And, um, sorry for all the ad links. I got started and couldn't stop.
posted by JParker at 1:36 AM on July 24, 2001

So I'm curious. Are you folks hating the fact this ad pops up so much, or because its a pop-up at all - or both?
posted by owillis at 7:02 AM on July 24, 2001

casting my hanging chad for "because it's a pop-up" (pop-under). Annoyance factors:
-- interstitial ads 10
-- popups 10
-- flashing, noise-making ads 10
-- pop-unders 9.5
Pop-unders would be a "10" on the annoy-o-meter if not for the fact that Alt-F4 is now a full-fledged reflex response.
posted by JParker at 2:02 AM on July 25, 2001