iOS 9 poised to be 'game changer' as ad blocking already costs publishers $22B yearly

135

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 95
    mystigomystigo Posts: 183member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by brucemc View Post

     

    As I am not using Ad-blocking on desktop Safari yet, can anyone recommend the best extension(s)?

     

    Thanks


     

    https://adblockplus.org

     

    AdBlock Plus is excellent. Don't get AdBlock - (without the plus) it's a different product, and they allegedly sell access to advertisers to bypass the filters.

  • Reply 42 of 95
    misamisa Posts: 827member
    jltnol wrote: »
    "Mobile Safari represents 52% of the mobile browsing market (and 14% of total web browsing).

    Wow.. that's really amazing.

    And once users start blocking ads, that number will be ambiguous as the trackers used to get that information will no longer work and be of dubious value.

    Google Analytics, gone. Quantserve, gone.

    As for how much revenue is set to be lost... zero.

    People need to remember that the only people who benefit from ad blocking extensions are the advertisers, as they are no longer paying CPM on ads not delivered. CPC ads (eg adwords) are already completely useless and most sites still using it, only do so because it's their only option.

    Adblockers block css containers and common script names, they aren't smart, and any site that wants to "defeat" adblocking, can and will. But what we're going to see is more direct-sale type of advertisements that become part of the content, and less trashy "third party" clickbait ads.

    Another set of people who directly benefit from blocking ads are those creating adult content, as their content is stolen and redistributed to link shorteners, image sharing sites, and file lockers that are plastered with obnoxious third party ads that no legitimate site would ever use because they're so obnoxious. Less incentive to steal content entirely to profit from stolen content when the revenue source is nerfed.
  • Reply 43 of 95
    mystigo wrote: »
    https://adblockplus.org

    AdBlock Plus is excellent. Don't get AdBlock - (without the plus) it's a different product, and they allegedly sell access to advertisers to bypass the filters.

    That and Ghostery. And, obviously, click2flash.
  • Reply 44 of 95
    Please I think most people are missing the point. Check how AdBlock makes money, by having a whilelist of companies that pays them to allow their ads to show up. Apple's move is to take a cut of anyone making a single cent of an iOS device. They do the blocking natively so they can charge for the white list instead of AdBlocks and as mobile ads going to be the main source of advertisement they position themselves to take a big cut of Google's money.
  • Reply 45 of 95
    Regardless of how Hyped the estimates are, the Woe-is-me wording makes "$41.4B" sound like an earthquake. In a Global economy, where the US economy, whose national debt is measured in trillions, ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal), "41.4B" is a drop of water in your bathtub. It's less than 1% (maybe 0.1-0.2%).

    These ads only serve to Consume the bandwidth we pay for regardless of whether we want it or not. I, for one, want my content my way unless they are willing to subsidize my monthly mobile internet usage fees.

    Thank you Apple. This has been a LONG time coming!!


    (If you haven't guessed, I've been an engineer and worked on/with/designed computers since the 'dark ages' when 4K of memory was 'HUGE')
  • Reply 46 of 95
    palominepalomine Posts: 362member
    I like Weblock on my mobile devices, been using it a year.
  • Reply 47 of 95

    Please forgive possible dup:

     

    Regardless of how Hyped the estimates are, the Woe-is-me wording makes "$41.4B" sound like an earthquake.  In a Global economy, where the US economy, whose national debt is measured in trillions, ref:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal), "41.4B" is a drop of water in your bathtub.  It's less than 1% (maybe 0.1-0.2%).

    These ads only serve to Consume the bandwidth we pay for regardless of whether we want it or not.  I, for one, want my content my way unless they are willing to subsidize my monthly mobile internet usage fees.

    Thank you Apple.  This has been a LONG time coming!!  



    (If you haven't guessed, I've been an engineer and worked on/with/designed computers since the 'dark ages' when 4K of memory was 'HUGE')

  • Reply 48 of 95
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,926member
    cali wrote: »
    I know some ads can be annoying but how are people supposed to support themselves now??

    Everyone wants everything for free now. But don't DARE ask them for a teaspoon of sugar.
    There's a difference between static ads and intrusive ads. Don't annoy me with ads. Don't redirect me to the App Store. Don't make me watch a video.
  • Reply 49 of 95
    schlackschlack Posts: 717member
    i would be ok with a partial ad blocker...in deference to news sites that need revenue.

    it would only block ads that

    1) were over a certain data size
    2) consumed more than an inconsequential amount of CPU time
    3) had animations
    4) had highly contrasting colors
    5) were tracking me beyond a minimal amount
  • Reply 50 of 95
    mystigomystigo Posts: 183member
    Quote:



    Originally Posted by Misa View Post



    People need to remember that the only people who benefit from ad blocking extensions are the advertisers, as they are no longer paying CPM on ads not delivered.

     

    That's a very interesting theory. I think the logic might be a tad flawed though. Can't quite put my finger on it.

  • Reply 51 of 95
    dreyfus2dreyfus2 Posts: 1,072member
    Quote:



    Originally Posted by Mystigo View Post

     

    That's a very interesting theory. I think the logic might be a tad flawed though. Can't quite put my finger on it.


     

    Not sure it is that flawed. People annoyed enough by ads to proactively stop them are very unlikely to have previously been lucrative targets?! Only paying for targeted ads reaching people willing to look at them should be a better value...

  • Reply 52 of 95
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,755member
    cali wrote: »
    I know some ads can be annoying but how are people supposed to support themselves now??

    Work for it? Come up with better solutions that don't cause the 14K of text for the article you want to read to also be surround by literally megabytes of CRAP that keeps running in the background killing your data cap and battery life?

    Zero sympathy for the current state of the web. A strong dustup is long overdue.
  • Reply 53 of 95
    docno42docno42 Posts: 3,755member
    mystigo wrote: »
    https://adblockplus.org

    AdBlock Plus is excellent. Don't get AdBlock - (without the plus) it's a different product, and they allegedly sell access to advertisers to bypass the filters.

    I'm trying this on Firefox and really like it. I wish they would release a safari extension: https://www.eff.org/privacybadger
  • Reply 54 of 95
    qvakqvak Posts: 86member

    If advertisers didn't abuse the technology, people wouldn't care so much about the occasional ad.

     

    But now they've signed their own death warrant. Their practices have created fanatical anti-advertisement people who would like nothing more than a scorched earth solution to the advertising problem.

  • Reply 55 of 95
    qvakqvak Posts: 86member

    Th

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post





    I'm trying this on Firefox and really like it. I wish they would release a safari extension: https://www.eff.org/privacybadger

     

    There are similar products out there for Safari like Ghostery and De-Affiliator

  • Reply 56 of 95
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    cali wrote: »
    I know some ads can be annoying but how are people supposed to support themselves now??
    Frankly my dear I don't give a damn how they support themselves. For all I care they can walk the street doing tricks. Of course the problem with that is that the hookers would complain about the neighborhood going to hell because of the Madison Avenue types.

    The problem with ads are two fold. One is that they impact a machines performance. Second they use my bandwidth.

    There is a third issue for some users in that ads are a vector for malware, viruses and such.
    Everyone wants everything for free now.
    Not at all, the problem is I'm paying for things I don't want to an extent that has gotten out of hand. Ads have a significant impact on ones bandwidth usage and this costs people a lot of money.
    But don't DARE ask them for a teaspoon of sugar.

    I'm perfectly willing to support sites with reasonable ad policies but we now have sites that pop up pop ups on top of pop ups. Due to the rather hostile approach taken by many sites I will be running ad blockers on iOS as soon as it is stable. I will use it aggressively against sites that have a history of plastering excessive ads across my browser.

    In a nut shell I'd rather see many sites go under rather than to put up with the excessive number of ads that come via their sites.
  • Reply 57 of 95
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,087member
    docno42 wrote: »
    I'm trying this on Firefox and really like it. I wish they would release a safari extension: https://www.eff.org/privacybadger
    Works on Chrome too. I use it on my work machines. It's only been out a few days and I think they mentioned a Safari version would be available at some point. But it's not an ad blocker.
  • Reply 58 of 95
    dreyfus2dreyfus2 Posts: 1,072member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post



    Work for it? Come up with better solutions that don't cause the 14K of text for the article you want to read to also be surround by literally megabytes of CRAP that keeps running in the background killing your data cap and battery life?



    Zero sympathy for the current state of the web. A strong dustup is long overdue.

     

    Fully agree, but have no idea myself on how that could happen without force. Even sites as big as iMore can't possibly manage ads themselves and lock the true culprits like Google out. I have been involved in the programming of software for airport ad displays and have some idea on the requirements of the advertising agencies... the record keeping and documentation requirements are enormous and that does not even include the acquisition part. Starting that from scratch, and investment in acceptable audit-safe content management solutions is more than most small and medium sites will be able to manage.

     

    Of course, Apple's move here can be seen as trying to force just that. If the commercially dominant mobile platform shows people a way out, services like Google have to come up with solutions (e.g. certified delivery mechanisms that reduce tracking and excess data/scripts that will then be excluded from filters if criteria is met). I am quite sure that this will get interesting. The obvious risk is that it will temporarily cause grave damage to smaller sites...

  • Reply 59 of 95
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member

    The problem for me isn't so much that they're annoying, it's that all the tracking and javascript impact performance enormously, particularly on older hardware.
    This is a huge factor in my hate of ads. Further as machine performance goes up ads just become more complex and use up that performance. If people don't believe this I urge them to try an ad blocker because the performance impact can be dramatic even on a new computer.
    I didn't realize how much performance was impacted on my machines until I installed Ghostery. For me, it was a night and day difference.
    The other thing I don't like is bandwidth usage which is dramatic. This take money right out of my pocket. Often ads are several times the content in download costs.
    I also, as an experiment, turned off Javascript in settings for mobile Safari, and I saw another big performance boost. Sites that used to load like shit (hello, The Verge, Re/Code, iMore), loaded far better and I saw fewer tab refreshes and crashes.

    Eventually I turned JS back on because a lot of things depend on it (like forums), but I will be a day one adopter of Ad blocking when it comes in ios 9.

    Yep! I may premit ads on specific sites that aren't excessive and that i use a lot, but most sites will be completely blocked for advertising. I just find it to be rather horrific that I have to pay for ads that don't apply to me and most likely to no one in general. The sad reality is that the advertising industry is built upon a bunch of BS that says if you hook one out of ten thousand people you have had a successful campaign. That is all well and good if the ads don't cost me anything but the fact is they burn up a huge amount of bandwidth. Bandwidth I pay for on my iPad.
  • Reply 60 of 95

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by brucemc View Post

     

    As I am not using Ad-blocking on desktop Safari yet, can anyone recommend the best extension(s)?


     

    Someone recently recommended Ublock to me, so I'm currently using that. Have used AdBlock and AdBlock Plus in the past, also have used Ghostery as well as some "do not follow" (kill Google/Facebook crap) extensions, none worked perfectly. Ublock seems to do an okay job (still not sure I've configured it to run as well as I know it can), but one of the things they boast is less memory used, which is one of the criticisms I have had with some of the others.

     

    Really annoying these guys characterise my adblocking as costing them. Next thing you know they're going to be accusing people who use adblockers as thieves who steal revenue from them or some other nonsensical crap that turns people who don't want their ads into criminals. Fork them.

Sign In or Register to comment.