is Flyertalk unstable?
Jul 13, 2015 | 8:25 am
#16
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Argentina
Posts: 40,875
In Firefox the page loads okay but the whirly thing takes a while to stop.
I seem to be having all sorts of problems with Firefox lately. Regular ''Not Responding'' messages have been driving me mad. Time to uninstall it and move back to IE I think.
I seem to be having all sorts of problems with Firefox lately. Regular ''Not Responding'' messages have been driving me mad. Time to uninstall it and move back to IE I think.
Jul 13, 2015 | 8:25 am
#17
Suspended
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Atherton, CA
Programs: UA 1K, AA EXP; Owner, Green Bay Packers
Posts: 21,685
The intrusive slow loading ads need to be addressed by the IT folks; many users are reporting the same problems. I think almost all of us would be happy to see the ads if they weren't so distracting and disruptive to loading.
Last edited by IBobi; Jul 13, 2015 at 1:51 pm Reason: admin edit
Jul 13, 2015 | 8:27 am
#18
Suspended
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Atherton, CA
Programs: UA 1K, AA EXP; Owner, Green Bay Packers
Posts: 21,685
I'd suggest just loading the newest version of FF, maybe after fully deleting the old version. IE is still kludgy IME.
Jul 13, 2015 | 8:50 am
#19
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 10,709
Quite, and I'd happily pay that. There appears to be another suggestion though on the http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/techn...een-shots.html thread referred to in post #9 above; banning anyone who suggests using, or actually uses, ad blockers.
Jul 13, 2015 | 9:43 am
#20
Suspended
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Atherton, CA
Programs: UA 1K, AA EXP; Owner, Green Bay Packers
Posts: 21,685
I would tend to agree with respect to the annoying animated ads. FT bans animated GIFs on the boards, apparently because they are distracting.
The company obviously needs to be able to use ads to support FT, so I don't begrudge them regular static ads; it's the bandwidth intensive annoying animated ones which are really egregious.
The company obviously needs to be able to use ads to support FT, so I don't begrudge them regular static ads; it's the bandwidth intensive annoying animated ones which are really egregious.
Jul 13, 2015 | 9:54 am
#22
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2012
Programs: BA Gold, QF WP
Posts: 12,551
Again, I would recommend all those complaining to post in the below threads in the FT Technical Support Feedback section so that the complaints can be properly addressed.
I would suggest you post in the below threads:
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/techn...een-shots.html
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/techn...alk-today.html
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/techn...een-shots.html
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/techn...alk-today.html
Jul 13, 2015 | 10:04 am
#23
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Cumbria
Programs: BAEC GGL/CCR, Hilton Diamond, Starbucks Gold
Posts: 4,513
I find I cannot acces the page numbers at the top of the page as an ad is partially obscuring these, although can be seen behind the ad itself. Hence why you cannot click on these.
Worth setting posts per page to 40 in settings as this means less pages to worry about.
Worth setting posts per page to 40 in settings as this means less pages to worry about.
Jul 13, 2015 | 10:20 am
#24
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,790
Good idea, but I think that the only way to force this is if a mod puts those links in again and then locks the thread before anyone else posts.
Jul 13, 2015 | 10:30 am
#25
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Argentina
Posts: 40,875
Quite, and I'd happily pay that. There appears to be another suggestion though on the http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/techn...een-shots.html thread referred to in post #9 above; banning anyone who suggests using, or actually uses, ad blockers.
I wouldn't pay to browse this site Flyertalk would end up being HIDDY free.....that'd make quite a few people happy I imagine.
Last edited by IBobi; Jul 13, 2015 at 1:58 pm Reason: admin edit
Jul 13, 2015 | 10:35 am
#26
Suspended
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Atherton, CA
Programs: UA 1K, AA EXP; Owner, Green Bay Packers
Posts: 21,685
Last edited by IBobi; Jul 13, 2015 at 1:59 pm
Jul 13, 2015 | 10:50 am
#27
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,790
I guess a lot wouldn't, but I'd pay a tenner. I'm pretty sure that there would be a mass exodus though if ad blockers were banned and there was no paid ad-free option. I'd be first in the queue.
Last edited by IBobi; Jul 13, 2015 at 1:59 pm
Jul 13, 2015 | 11:08 am
#28
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Milton Keynes
Programs: BA Blue
Posts: 375
It's more to do with the type of ads now. More videos that have sound.
Others that can hide or decrease functionality on certain devices.
Most people wouldn't object to them if they weren't overly intrusive - and they have become so.
Others that can hide or decrease functionality on certain devices.
Most people wouldn't object to them if they weren't overly intrusive - and they have become so.
Jul 13, 2015 | 12:26 pm
#29
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 4,790
Talk about killing the goose that laid the golden eggs...
Last edited by SteveF; Jul 13, 2015 at 12:40 pm
Jul 13, 2015 | 1:02 pm
#30
Moderator: The British Airways Club, Iberia Club, Airport Lounges and Eco-conscious Travel
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London, UK
Posts: 22,601
This thread has been moved to the Technical Support and Feedback forum.
FYI, Internet Brands follows a protocol whereby if a member uses this site to publicly recommend the use of adblockers to others, the member may face a formal warning.
Prospero
Moderator: BA forum
FYI, Internet Brands follows a protocol whereby if a member uses this site to publicly recommend the use of adblockers to others, the member may face a formal warning.
Prospero
Moderator: BA forum