I wonder how the ad networks/agencies will respond to this if it becomes the norm across future competing browsers?
Flash ads (including video) can be horrid on CPUs, but they also often have higher CPMs than static, "cheaper" ads. Firefox seems to be blocking flash entirely. They’re also doing it in a way that the ad networks can’t tell, unlike Chrome. In other words, if I disable Flash in Chrome, the ads normally fall back to (cheaper) non-flash ads. On Firefox, I’m getting blank gray boxes.
For sites that depend on advertising to survive, hopefully the ad networks will update their inventory with alternative non-intrusive ads a.s.a.p. so this type of (admittedly much needed) evolution doesn't suck too many content providers down.
Flash ads (including video) can be horrid on CPUs, but they also often have higher CPMs than static, "cheaper" ads. Firefox seems to be blocking flash entirely. They’re also doing it in a way that the ad networks can’t tell, unlike Chrome. In other words, if I disable Flash in Chrome, the ads normally fall back to (cheaper) non-flash ads. On Firefox, I’m getting blank gray boxes.
For sites that depend on advertising to survive, hopefully the ad networks will update their inventory with alternative non-intrusive ads a.s.a.p. so this type of (admittedly much needed) evolution doesn't suck too many content providers down.