|
> What I'm wondering is why you would want to do this at all. From your
> description, your marketing people are creating newsletters
> with embedded
> advertising. If they are embedding a call for a banner
> (called a creative in
> adspeak) then normally that call would grab the
> creative/clickthrough link
> from the ad server not the web servers. For tracking the
> results of the
> advertising, this is a superior solution. Any decent ad
> server will have an
> interface that the marketing dept. can access without
> touching the servers at
> all.
>
> -=dwh=-
Don-
We're currently using an adserver, but looking to get rid of it as our
email distribution engine will do a better job of tracking the ads than
the adserver could do... The other issue we were hoping to address by
dropping the adserver was speed: we only serve static ads into our
newsletters, so there is no need for ad rotation or any of the other
features one might want when ad serving to a webpage. We also serve a
lot of "ads" which aren't image banners... They are combinations of text
placements and images, so there really is a need for us to give our ad
folk a single consist interface for inputting and scheduling ads instead
of the mish-mosh of excel spreadsheets, emails and IM's which happen
now. And also they need to be integrated into our content system because
of the content like nature of the text ads (i.e. these ads need to go
through the copy-edit process just like any other piece of content that
we write).
I've heard of Coda, but I didn't realize that you could have separate
partitions on separate servers acting as mirrors. My impression from the
info on the website was that you still needed to implement dedicated
storage servers, but that Coda would allow these storage servers to
behave as one large redundant drive(s). I will have to investigate this
further. I would like to implement a strategy similar to your own, but
right now I don't have the hardware or the cash to do so, so I am trying
to use what I have...
Thanks for help!
Zack
|
