I think it's interesting that they are making this decision - one that clearly pushed users to stay on the mobile web which is beneficial for Google - based on a study that was pretty flawed. This article debunks their methodology pretty well: https://medium.com/@alexaustin/just-because-it-s-google-does...
Google Will Soon Start Punishing Mobile Sites that Use Annoying App Install Ads
151–160 of 311 posts
Re: Google Will Soon Start Punishing Mobile Sites that Use Annoying App Install Ads
#152I think it's interesting that they are making this decision - one that clearly pushed users to stay on the mobile web which is beneficial for Google - based on a study that was pretty flawed. This article debunks their methodology pretty well: https://medium.com/@alexaustin/just-because-it-s-google-does...
Hush, don't tell them--they might decide not to do it.
Re: Google Will Soon Start Punishing Mobile Sites that Use Annoying App Install Ads
#153Earlier quoted context omitted.
well , it's easy , because Discourse is extremely complicated to deploy for the average joe. phpBB is ... in php , ie cheap hosting , sftp deployment ... Server side Ruby was never easy to deploy.
This may have formerly been the case but at least since they switched to Docker based installs it's incredibly easy. I migrated an ancient vBulletin forum over to Discourse last week and had no problems with the basic (fairly short) instructions. https://github.com/discourse/discourse/blob/master/docs/INST...
> since they switched to Docker based installs it's incredibly easy
For you. A developer. The average deployer of a PHPBB forum clicks a button on their cheap host and sets the options in the admin page.
They don't even have the foggiest idea what Docker even is.
Re: Google Will Soon Start Punishing Mobile Sites that Use Annoying App Install Ads
#154I still do not understand the popularity of this approach. It seems to crazy increase bounce rates. You would think that negative user behavior would already make these undesirable without Google being explicit?
As someone working in tech, and does digital marketing consulting, there is actually a lot of value in these interstitials: 1) Usually the app is infinitely better than the mobile web experience. You can chalk it up to prioritization of engineering working on iOS / Android app development over a mobile web experience -- usually for good reason. 2) It's a solid retention strategy. You can harp on about bounce rates re…
I generally agree with these points. We ended up with an interstitial the same way I hope most everyone else did: we A/B tested it, and the results were clearly positive on engagement and purchase.
We could choose to drop the interstitial as a matter of principal or on the assumption that the difficult-to-quantify long-term benefit will pay off later, but we'd have to make that decision not in the absence of data, but actually in opposition to the data.
Or let Google make the decision for us...
Re: Google Will Soon Start Punishing Mobile Sites that Use Annoying App Install Ads
#155Does this apply to "please subscribe to our stupid newsletter" that obscures many sites now?
Per http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2015/09/mobile-fr... "After November 1, mobile web pages that show an app install interstitial that hides a significant amount of content on the transition from the search result page will no longer be considered mobile-friendly. This does not affect other types of interstitials." This implies the answer is No, since that's another type of interstitial (not an app instal…
Perhaps they're approximating by analyzing the page as a mobile user agent and a non-mobile user agent, then comparing.
Re: Google Will Soon Start Punishing Mobile Sites that Use Annoying App Install Ads
#156Re: Google Will Soon Start Punishing Mobile Sites that Use Annoying App Install Ads
#157tldr; Cool... but shouldn't google stop policing the internet and abusing, what some might call, monopoly powers for trivial gains.
======
I'd be willing to bet, this will one day be in an FTC/DOJ report about monopoly practices at Google...
Google seems to have forgotten they don't want to be looked at as a monopoly or abusing their power for the small things. While this is consumer friendly, at least at first glance, I still find it anti-competitive and generally worthless exertion of their near monopoly power.
It also effects them quite heavily (GMail being my prime example). If I had to guess, this is a decision by someone who is lacking the resources to fully grasp the decision and potential long term ramifications of their action. Maybe they do, but for a company of their size this seems petty.
The potential anti-trust lawsuit however will not be petty.
Re: Google Will Soon Start Punishing Mobile Sites that Use Annoying App Install Ads
#158I still do not understand the popularity of this approach. It seems to crazy increase bounce rates. You would think that negative user behavior would already make these undesirable without Google being explicit?
Works the same as nigerian prince stories - it filters out smart people and leaves you with suckers.
Re: Google Will Soon Start Punishing Mobile Sites that Use Annoying App Install Ads
#159tldr; Cool... but shouldn't google stop policing the internet and abusing, what some might call, monopoly powers for trivial gains. ====== I'd be willing to bet, this will one day be in an FTC/DOJ report about monopoly practices at Google... Google seems to have forgotten they don't want to be looked at as a monopoly or abusing their power for the small things. While this is consumer friendly, at least at first glanc…
This is like a television service provider pledging to give their customers (who want high quality tv shows) more high quality tv shows and less shitty shows.
Re: Google Will Soon Start Punishing Mobile Sites that Use Annoying App Install Ads
#160Earlier quoted context omitted.
I always enter something along the lines of @ . . My hope is that they'll waste money on trying to email it and then get a bounceback that the email failed to be delivered.
It wont cost them money if they have a double opt-in. But you will punish those without the double opt-in by pushing them up to the next tier in the payment plan sooner. The amount of money they waste one one dodgy email address is minuscule though. What is more funny is that they will see @ . when scrolling through their list, and you could even send them a 'message' this way. E.g. WhyTheHellYouMakeMeSignUpForThisRu…
You can sign up their personal facebook accounts, though – if the user is facebook.com/username123, you can register username123@facebook.com, facebook will throw the mails into the spam folder, and report them to spam lists, and the newsletter ends up getting blacklisted earlier.