Cuthroat razors and boxing gloves

[biglouis]

.... for the product banners? Not very positive images from a marketing point of view.

On top of which I sincerely doubt that a M8 is that robust or as weatherproofed as some of the competition - did they actually try assaulting one with a pair of boxing gloves?

The banners look very amateurish, imho

LouisB

[jaapv]

But it is better than a gallery of available ladies....

[bill]

Eh?

Am I missing something?

Regards,

Bill

[jaapv]

An ad that appeared from time to time...

[bill]

Aha.

I'm on Firefox

Regards,

Bill

[jaapv]

The ladies were easy on the eye, I must admit...

[biglouis]

Originally Posted by bill

Aha.

I'm on Firefox

Regards,

Bill

You mean, with Firefox, you don't get banner ads? I'll have to check that out.

LouisB

[rob_x2004]

Beyond seriously annoying. Now we have to dl another browser to view the place properly sans garbage.

[jaapv]

The ads pay for the site. Internet Explorer is not a very good browser anyway.

[NZDavid]

I get them on Safari. I like them, they're clever! Why not lighten up -- or suggest your own?

[rob_x2004]

I'k ok on IE, Explorer has a right click show picture. If I am playing on the mac then the dl period times out peoples valuable responses, and so hides their pictures, and all the sites radio buttons. The ads are serious garbage. You think everyone will spend the time waiting for a page to load? Maybe in this sites demographic but like someone pointed out, preaching to the converted..I mean come on. They are hardly imaginative and interesting. Previously the animated ads were in the header pages not every thread. Why not prioritize animations to load last or something so at least the page loads properly.

[biglouis]

Originally Posted by NZDavid

I get them on Safari. I like them, they're clever! Why not lighten up -- or suggest your own?

I don't think they're clever and I don't know about product misrepresentation laws in other countries but if I bought an M8 in the UK based on the representations in either of these banner ads and then decided it wasn't sharp enough or robust enough I'd have grounds for misrepresentation and a full refund of my money. So, regardless of whether I should lighten up Leica should take care about misleading potential buyers.

I'd be happy to suggest alternatives but for a fee. After all, Leica obviously paid someone for these bad ideas so it is only fair that I should be paid for better ones.

LouisB

[earleygallery]

I have to agree they are really really bad. Some 'bright spark' in an ad agency has no doubt earned themselves a very nice bonus for all their hard work in coming up with these ideas too.

[SJP]

I don't think they're clever and I don't know about product misrepresentation laws in other countries but if I bought an M8 in the UK based on the representations in either of these banner ads and then decided it wasn't sharp enough or robust enough I'd have grounds for misrepresentation and a full refund of my money. So, regardless of whether I should lighten up Leica should take care about misleading potential buyers.

POS the ads are clear and unambiguous "How sharp is your picture? Extremely sharp" I fail to see what misrepresentation has to do with this & please define 'extremely' while you are at it.

Solid brass, magnesium, aluminium etc. vs. injection moulded ABS - no chance.

Meanwhile I fail to see what you are getting so excited about - the M8 is a phenomenal camera by any standards.

[stevelap]

Originally Posted by biglouis

I don't think they're clever and I don't know about product misrepresentation laws in other countries but if I bought an M8 in the UK based on the representations in either of these banner ads and then decided it wasn't sharp enough or robust enough I'd have grounds for misrepresentation and a full refund of my money. So, regardless of whether I should lighten up Leica should take care about misleading potential buyers.

I'd be happy to suggest alternatives but for a fee. After all, Leica obviously paid someone for these bad ideas so it is only fair that I should be paid for better ones.

LouisB

Careful, you're in danger of being labelled a of a 'fun detector' I second the 'lighten up' comment, surely in all but the most serious of advertising a spot of humour is to be welcolmed?
Not that I think that they're likely to win any awards by the way.

[rob_x2004]

Am I blaming the wrong thing? I can ignore the inane adverts, but is it just coincidence that since their incorporation into this site, it has become my slowest to load site and the site with the most timed out operations. Yahoos front page loads quicker and how much crap is on that? There are days the site just....sucks. Yes I am on broadband, no I am not in a city. I use tabbed browsing.

[JBA]

A agree that the ads are rather amateurish. In fact, they are embarrassingly so.

The biggest annoyance I've had with them is that they blocked the Quick Links dropdown when I tried to access it from the main forum page. Clicking on a thread, where the ads don't display, solved the problem.

[stunsworth]

Rob, the new ads use Flash, so it's possibly the time to load the Flash elements that's causing the delay.

[HarryW]

I know that the ads help support the site however I find them to be a pain.
If you use Safari and do not want to see the ads then install AdBlock:
Safari AdBlock (Mac) - Download
I have been using this for a couple of months without problems.
Regards
Harry

[rob_x2004]

Thanks. Will try the ad block, and try and find out about turning off flash.