Why aren't all pop-ups caught by pop-up blockers

[wumply]

I gather that pop-up killers work by determining the size of the pop-up...but then why do some pop-ups slip though.

It is, I suppose, a bit more complex; perhaps other criteria are used and "nothing's perfect."

But can someone tell me more of how the blockers work and why they fail or refer me to a site that goes into this?

[Dehcbad25]

I am not completely sure, but I think they work in part by the action that the page takes when it creates the popup. So, if the pop up is internal (because you have spyware) then it won't be stopped, but if the pop up is creating from the web browser it will. Alternatively I know there can be blocked by IP address too.

[Conan]

It's just a simple fact that as time goes by, web sites figure out a way to elude the pop-up blockers.

[Fenalaar]

A lot of popups these days are generated by either veaknesses in java or various multimedia plugins, so they elude the popup blockers.

Before popup blockers became common, I usually did my surfing with netscape with active content turned off. Worked like a charm. It was much easier to turn off active content in Nutscape than in Exploder...

Johan-Kr

[wumply]

Came across this bit on the net recently.

Blocking software typically suppresses a new window. It detects a command known as "openwin" for opening a new window, which would be written into the HTML (Hypertext Markup Language) of a Web page. That command calls on a third-party server to deliver the pop-up or pop-under.

Deflating pop-up blockers
Some new pop-up techniques simply avoid that command, thus subverting blockers that rely on suppressing it. For example, some advertisers are sending pop-ups through a "user initiated command" triggered when people mouse over an object on the page, according to ad executives familiar with the technique.
...
Many ad-delivery companies are now using technology to detect whether or not a computer or visitor has installed a pop-up blocker. If one is detected, it will deliver a floating ad to the page instead. Burst Media, for example, is one company that is experimenting with the overlays.

[Jeric Hikari]

And don't forget the flash overlays that won't EVER go away and constaintly hover RIGHT where you want to look or click.

[wumply]

Yeah, they really bug me too and so do the ones that bombard you with an ad when you click 'cancel'. Trouble is it doesn't do any good to be irritated. Ads pay for the internet and so those who want you to see their ads but find them blocked, push the ad writers to find ways around the blockers. Comme ci, comme ca. What to do? Pay a fee per year to use the net? Not sure that would be workable or if the advertisers would go for it. Conan, in his comment of this post, stated the bottom line!

[tarun]

Some sites have started getting by FF. Any extension/way to stop this?

[Fenalaar]

There's one simple solution that will defeat all of this - Lynx.

Sadly, you won't be able so see much of todays content, either... :(

Johan-Kr

[MSNwar]

I like pop-ups. Some of my best bargains come from pop-ups as that is where discounts or freebies are usually offered. That is the legitimate side of pop-ups. Unfortunately, we can also receive adware, malware, etc. from pop-ups. Overall I discourage the use of pop-ups when I instruct webmaster classes because of the later.

symantec.com, makers of Norton Anti-Virus, published a study in conjuction with the U.S. Armed Forces this month. It is presently the advertised subject of discussion on the American Armed Forces Network that Rik and BigBooger will recognize. They took five PCs that the average consumer would purchase from retail outlets and connected them to the internet running only the software included in the purchase. Multiple scenerios and tests were conducted by visiting multiple sites of interest. It took an average of 4 minutes for each of the PCs to become infected with some form of adware, malware, virus, etc. In comparison, 5 years ago, same test, it took an average of 15 minutes. Last, most of the infections were delivered due to pop-ups. Basicly, when a visitor clicks "some" (note I said some) pop-ups the visitor is agreeing to the delivered content. How? Read the sites' Terms of Service.

The "Terms of Service" is usually found in the footer of web sites. Almost nobody ever reads them. You will find a statement that basicly says "you agree to the use of pop-ups when visiting the site." Unscrupulous web masters are employing the use of the TOS to simply avoid legal issues.

Is there an answer to completely blocking pop-ups? No. You see, I am a internet marketer and I know that pop-ups actually increase sales, newsletter opts, etc. Private research shows conversion rates increase when pop-ups are utilized in a reasonable fashion. As long as pop-ups continue to increase the bottom line then web masters and internet marketers will continue to find ways to thwart pop-up blockers.

CNET is a site that took the lead from a private group I am associated with and started using pop-ups for this very reason. We increased their backend sales with pop-up ads, slide-in ads, flash ads, etc. Now, you see other sites utilizing the same methods. Why? Because the banks don't complain :-)

Take Care,

MSNwar