I originally posted as a question about why some pages have original and story view disabled. The reasoning we arrived at is that it must be due to the snapshot that is supposedly taken of the site which would interfere with ads being shown to every user or something like that.
Either 1. remove the snapshot altogether for story view, possibly original view as well and remove the opt-out function in the process.
Or 2. give users the option to opt-out of the snapshot which in turn disables the the publisher opt-out.
I can assure you, I’d rather have my article take a second longer to load in every case rather than have to view in feed view, click a link and wait for it load in a different tab which than has to be closed for some of my feeds.
I’ll probably be using Newsblur as my new reader in any case but this is a real annoyance to me, it does take away from the user-experience, more so than slightly longer loading times does.
Just FYI this has been discussed in much further detail in the original topic here:
Quick summary (my opinion):
The original view is a cache (copy) of the original site, which allows Newsblur to do certain things like mark read while scrolling. Advertisers/publishers don’t like this for all sorts of reasons, and Newsblur likely legally has to give them an opt out.
Us users don’t like the views being disabled as its a huge annoyance, and frames in place of caching would do most of the job while removing the “problem” of caching.
How Newsblur works now:
- Cache original view but frame story view.
- If publisher objects, disable both views.
Obviously, many of us users find this non-ideal. I can think of two alternatives.
Ideally, if Newsblur wants to keep caching, then it could:
- Cache any views it wants.
- If publisher objects, stop caching and instead frame all views.
Or the other alternative:
- Stop caching, frame both views.
- Publishers have no ground for objection.
Yea, I know, that question is mine
As I said in the idea up there I originally posted a question, the question was kind of answer so I figured it would be better to post an idea for a change.
Haha, yeah was FYI for other people Didn’t notice this one was an idea though, I see what you did.
Have people missed the story view or something?!
How could there not be more people wanting to be able to use it on every site?
OK, so I had a twitter conversation with Samuel about this:
The take away is that this is by design, likely as a courtesy to publishers, and wont be changing.
As the developer that is Samuel’s call to make and I respect it. So the reality is that those of us who dislike this behavior need to get an extension developed! I tried peaking at the JS but its obfuscated. I know I can look at the source on github but its likely beyond my limited skill, we need to get someone with more know how involved!