Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google Web Designer

google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 462 posts

Re: Google Web Designer

#201

Post by malandrew »

mattdennewitz wrote: post #165
abalone wrote: post #118

Ok, the war is on. Does anyone know of a good HTML5 ad blocker? Flash was awesome . It made it really easy to block animated ads. My browsing experience had been wonderful ever since I installed a Flash blocker a few years ago. Also did wonders for my battery life. Please, please help my browsing experience remain wonderful. Thanks.

such entitlement! do you have any idea how publishers make money on the web?

Not at all. It's only entitlement if the publisher also provides me a way to pay them for the content (at the same rate that the advertiser is paying) and I still choose not to pay for the content.

I want to be the customer, not the product being sold.

Re: Google Web Designer

#202

Post by devilcius »

Samuel_Michon wrote: post #134
Shamanmuni wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it's called "Google Web Designer", so many of us web developers probably thought we were the target audience. I first thought it was a Dreamweaver competitor with better support for JS libraries and HTML5, which would be great. Instead we have "Google Ad Designer" targeted at designers and marketers. OK, I was still interested at least to play with it for a while and see if I could recommend it to my designer fri…

> see if I could recommend it to my designer friends, but no Linux support You know professional designers who only work with Linux? I don’t.

Pleased to meet you.

Re: Google Web Designer

#203

Post by clebio »

smokinjoe wrote: post #181
clebio wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By providing valuable, interesting content, maybe? http://theoatmeal.com/comics/facebook_likes

Those are Facebook likes while the conversation is about ads on websites. And in the end, he says that interesting content will get you "Likes," where in the current conversation of blocking ads does the visitor contribute after perusing the valuable and interesting content?

Yes, I realize that, but the idea holds. Subscription-based services work if the content is worthwhile. It is an alternative model to ads, sure. One that is proven.

Re: Google Web Designer

#204

Post by WhiteNoiz3 »

zodiac23 wrote: post #133
WhiteNoiz3 wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Despite the poorly chosen name, this is a WYSIWYG tool for animation, not a site design tool. If all you care about is markup, use a text editor and make your animations by hand. Compared with Adobe Edge Animate (which is very similar), the markup is actually very clean (aside from the big script block, which is for ad functionality and also animation / drawing routines). You can see the animations defined as real ke…

From File > New if you select a blank HTML file, you get an empty HTML file with no Ad specific JavaScript.

Thanks, I thought I tried that. That does reduce the extra code quite a bit.

Re: Google Web Designer

#205

Post by Gormo »

mattdennewitz wrote: post #165
abalone wrote: post #118

Ok, the war is on. Does anyone know of a good HTML5 ad blocker? Flash was awesome . It made it really easy to block animated ads. My browsing experience had been wonderful ever since I installed a Flash blocker a few years ago. Also did wonders for my battery life. Please, please help my browsing experience remain wonderful. Thanks.

such entitlement! do you have any idea how publishers make money on the web?

Entitlement? He is entitled to not download and view content that he doesn't want to.

No one is obligated to alter their own behavior in order to sustain someone else's business model. How publishers make money is their problem to solve, and if they're publishing content on the open web that's viewable with web browsers, then it's up to them to decide how to deal with the fact that some web browsers aren't going to download the ads.

They have plenty of alternative options: they can block all of the content unless ads are downloaded; they can put all of the content behind a paywall, etc. But most websites don't employ these methods, and do leave their content accessible to people who block ads.

Re: Google Web Designer

#206

Post by camus »

tareqak wrote: post #14

Makes sense to me. Easier to make websites --> More websites --> More ads --> More money for Google.

That's why google wanted flash on Android at first place , ads+drm. Google always like flash unlike Apple and even ship with it's own Flash plugin.

But Adobe decided Flash was too expensive to maitain on mobile and fired 700 employees and outsourced the rest of the Flash team to india. The remaining employees are now working on Bracket (...). And Sencha is more profitable than Flash division at Adobe.What's left of Macromedia? nothing, They should have stuck with Livemotion and Golive ... lol

The result is that the last version of Flash (CC) has less features than the previous ones ( some drawing tools gone...)

Re: Google Web Designer

#207

Post by manish_gill »

jh3 wrote: post #195
manish_gill wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry, but what's so wrong with not wanting to have advertisements on your browser? People make their money via ads? Sure, why not. Do I always have to see those ads, and just sigh and "suck it up", even though it's potentially ruining my browsing experience? I don't think so.

> I'm sorry, but what's so wrong with not wanting to have advertisements on your browser? Would you pay a monthly fee to all the websites that provide you content in exchange for an ad free experience?

All the websites? Nope. A selected few who I think provide me a great value as a customer? Why not.

Re: Google Web Designer

#208

Post by yk »

abalone wrote: post #172
lukeschlather wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firefox+NoScript does a pretty good job. Typically, the domains that host the JavaScript to run the ads have no JavaScript I actually want executed. If there's an exceptional case I open it in a Chromium private browsing window.

NoScript blocks all javascript except for a whitelist you have to construct. That's way too disruptive as a general solution. We need something easy and automatic.

I am quite happy with Ghostery+NoScript. If you have a general solution, then you would just end up with an arms race. See [0] for details.

[0] http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2010/12/its-made...

Re: Google Web Designer

#209

Post by tdoggette »

icambron wrote: post #102
alphakappa wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The amount of code it generates for a page containing just a rectangle is not a good way to judge the tool. They may have some finite overhead because of the expectation that most users will be using the tool to create more complex pages. If the tool is good for the average ad-page that's created, while maintaining cross-browser compatibility, and bad for extremely simple pages, then who is to judge?

I agree. The big(gish) script they injected is just fixed overhead, as is the CSS for positioning the canvas. It's just stuff we're used to having in separate files. The actual non-boilerplate part is this: {\"type\":1,\"xoff\":0,\"yoff\":-1.4210854715202004e-14,\"strokeWidth\":1,\"strokeColor\":[0,0,0,1],\"fillColor\":[1,0,0,1],\"tlRadius\":0,\"trRadius\":0,\"blRadius\":0,\"brRadius\":0,\"width\":201,\"height\":104.…

Please edit; stretches the page on 1366 width.

Re: Google Web Designer

#210

Post by znowi »

simonsarris wrote: post #22

The most important feature of this (to Google(?)) is the built-in ad editor. It's the last point on the feature list page, but it's very telling that it's the first thing on the "Create New" screen. https://support.google.com/webdesigner/answer/3261498?hl=en&...

Might as well be called "Google Ad Designer" :)

There seem to be a hidden agenda in everything Google does these days.

Post reply on HN