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

124

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 95
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    sog35 wrote: »
    The hell with that.

    If you have a good product you don't need to depend on ads.

    It is the web sites without "product" that need the income from ads. This very site is a good example and frankly a good example of not going overboard with ads.

    I will be using ad blocking the moment it is ready but I won't be blocking sites that I frequent if the ads remain reasonable. In the end places like Appleinsider need income to stay on the air so to speak.
  • Reply 62 of 95
    sergiozsergioz Posts: 338member
    cornchip wrote: »
    So you make an app and do iAds right? Isn't that what Apple is getting at (besides going for Google's throat)?

    That's exactly why, iAds will become more profitable!
  • Reply 63 of 95
    Quote:



    Originally Posted by cali View Post

     

    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.


    It's not the cost, it's the impact.

     

    I'd gladly display ads, as long as a 20Kbytes article doesn't grow to 7MB when all the ads are downloaded.

    An inline text 10K ad with a link would work just fine... that 2MB Flash ad... blocked.

  • Reply 64 of 95
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,767member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post

     

    I installed Adblock on my all my Idevices and just on my phone in one month it blocked 1000's of ads and saved about 500MB of data from being transfer to my phone and I am not the largest user of data and apps in my family. These ads cost you more than time and display real estate, it cuts in to your data plans.

     

    On my home computers I have been blocking ads for a long time, I even got Google analytics completely blocked at my firewall. Most all of google's ad websites and IP address are treated as a virus in my house. You would be surprised at the information flowing back and forth from your computers to google based IP addresses.

     

    Recently I been running into website which know your blocking ads and google data mining services and they will not display information on their website unless you allow the ads. Websites are fighting back on the blocking.

     

    For those who are old enough to remember ads today have gotten so bad it like the old banner ad days with the ads flashing on your browers screen and would not go away until you clicked on it. it the pop-up window with no close button so you could not make the window go away. Believe it or not Google change this all by making things simpler and none intrusive. But they are not the problem which they help fixed.


     

    I did blocking ads on sites were they need the money to give you their service is pointless, they'll find a way to not give you the service eventually. I think having a standard way of displaying ads and national rules on how they collect data (especially those that are cross referenced across sites) and what they do with it, would stop the war. If this was clear, I'd be ready to give up some of my info to ad makers so web sites could survive if they weren'T so greedy in wanting so much data.

  • Reply 65 of 95
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,087member
    foggyhill wrote: »
    I did blocking ads on sites were they need the money to give you their service is pointless, they'll find a way to not give you the service eventually. I think having a standard way of displaying ads and national rules on how they collect data (especially those that are cross referenced across sites) and what they do with it, would stop the war. If this was clear, I'd be ready to give up some of my info to ad makers so web sites could survive if they weren'T so greedy in wanting so much data.
    The standard ad providers aren't the ones to be overly concerned with anyway IMO. It's the data aggregators and other companies with persistent trackers following you from website to website. Rather than serve up relatively benign personalized ads their business is selling data to other companies for whatever use they wish. Worse you don't even see the evidence of them at work unlike an advertiser, and zero control over what they do with what they have.

    As an example right now these companies are watching what you do here at AI. They're not here to serve up ads, which don't scare me and shouldn't scare you either IMO. (but they can be irritating! I block 'em in most cases.)

    The beacons this list of companies are connecting with you have no purpose but to track what you do, where you go, and what you look at.

    Aggregate Knowledge / Beacons

    Audience Science / Beacons

    BidTheatre / Beacons

    BlueKai / Beacons

    Dotomi / Beacons

    eXelate / Beacons

    i-Behavior / Beacons

    Korrelate / Beacons

    Krux Digital / Beacons

    LiveRamp / Beacons, E-mail Analytics, Segment Data

    myThings / Beacons

    Neustar AdAdvisor / Beacons, Lead Management

    OwnerIQ / Beacons, Behavior Tracking, Lead Management

    RadiumOne / Beacons, Behavior Tracking

    Rocket Fuel / Beacons

    Veruta / Beacons

    Videology / Beacons, Video Player

    Yieldr / Beacons, Analytics, Behavior Tracking
  • Reply 66 of 95
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by cali View Post

     

    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.




    That's not my problem. No one (advertisers) should have the right to invade my space or track me without my explicit permission.

  • Reply 67 of 95
    My time and attention are my most valuable and rare resources. I can't afford to be constantly interrupted by attention grabbing ads.
  • Reply 68 of 95
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,767member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by TomMikele View Post

     



    That's not my problem. No one (advertisers) should have the right to invade my space or track me without my explicit permission.


     

    Well, then you don't get the service or pay for it outright, just like in the old days. BTW, using a web site's service is kinda explicit permission; no one forces you to do it.

     

    It is not the ads themselves that are the issue, but the data collection that goes with it. If you go to a tech web site and they market you a mac and everyone sees the same add, that's OK and most people don't really mind those kind of ads, but if you go to that web site and they market you anti-depressants because somehow they got you browsing such a subject on Google... Well, that's not ok at all.

  • Reply 69 of 95
    sflocal wrote: »

    Ads have evolved from being "annoying" to downright in-your-face.  I hate it to the nTH degree.  I lost track of the number of websites I attempted to visit, only to shut the window down because the ads were so over-the-top cluttering everything.


    The current model is broken.  Kudos to Apple for giving the finger to advertisers.  They should know better.  Now, an opportunity exists to create a whole new model that is less invasive and irritating.


    What will happen of course is when Apple once-again sets the course, the rest of the community will receive the benefits as well with little or no thanks to Apple for paving the way.

    Ads are not the problem. Websites like this one that feature 10 ads on one page like a glorified billboard are. People make a living on creating ads that her featured on websites. So you're saying it is perfectly ok for people to start losing their jobs and not be able to support their families
  • Reply 70 of 95
    bdkennedy1bdkennedy1 Posts: 1,459member

    Then web developers stop developing for Safari because they don't make any money when someone uses it.

  • Reply 71 of 95
    m3mm3m Posts: 7member
    Years ago, I discovered ad blockers while researching what was taking forever to load as I browsed the web. I had to work around the failure of publishers to ensure their web pages worked well. I no longer suffer at my computer, but my mobile browsing is still bogged down by slow loads and even browser crashes. Reader view in iOS Safari offers some relief but not enough. I bet Apple is opening ad blocking to iOS because they are aware of the problem and give a damn about their customers' user experience. I don't miss the conga lines of chipmunks when looking at web pages on my iMac and I won't miss the laggy rolling ads that obscure 1/4 of the screen on my iPod.
  • Reply 72 of 95
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    brucemc wrote: »
    As I am not using Ad-blocking on desktop Safari yet, can anyone recommend the best extension(s)?

    Thanks

    I've been using UBlock. It has been good so far but I've only have used it for only six months so far.
  • Reply 73 of 95
    moreckmoreck Posts: 187member
    sog35 wrote: »
    Thank goodness.

    I hate ads.  The scourge of the internet.

    You do realize that ads are the only thing keeping most websites free, right?

    Take away ads and the majority of websites would be forced to either charge for access or close down.

    Then geniuses like you will moan and whine about how these sites are daring to ask for money.
  • Reply 74 of 95
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    Ads are not the problem.
    Sure they are. It a nut shell that has what has inspired this reaction to them.
    Websites like this one that feature 10 ads on one page like a glorified billboard are.
    It isn't so much the number but rather the damage they do to your system and the bandwidth they use.
    People make a living on creating ads that her featured on websites. So you're saying it is perfectly ok for people to start losing their jobs and not be able to support their families

    Yes exactly! Some jobs simply aren't socially acceptable. Earlier I likened the ad industry to the prostitution industry and frankly the ad industry does more damage to society than the prostitution industry.
  • Reply 75 of 95
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    moreck wrote: »
    You do realize that ads are the only thing keeping most websites free, right?
    It is hardly free on mobile. In fact they average user big time.
    Take away ads and the majority of websites would be forced to either charge for access or close down.
    Yep, so what is your point. By the way they could consider reasonable ad strategies that don't burden the user.
    Then geniuses like you will moan and whine about how these sites are daring to ask for money.

    Some will, but that isn't my problem.
  • Reply 76 of 95
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Future Man View Post

     



    Find another type of job!   All this 'free' poip-up crap did not exist years agi, it was the evil Google that really prompted this bombardment of unwanted ads.


    Well, to be fair, I once created a free Anglefire page years before Google came to being and that really had unwanted ads everywhere. There were banner ads on top, the bottom and the side, with pop-up ads on every hyperlink click to boot.

     

    The scary thing that Google did was actively track your web usage and change those unwanted ads to ads of things you just bought on Amazon or a site you just browsed.

  • Reply 77 of 95
    Fantastic news! How did I miss this?
  • Reply 78 of 95
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sflocal View Post

     

    Ads have evolved from being "annoying" to downright in-your-face.  I hate it to the nTH degree.  I lost track of the number of websites I attempted to visit, only to shut the window down because the ads were so over-the-top cluttering everything.



    The current model is broken.  Kudos to Apple for giving the finger to advertisers.  They should know better.  Now, an opportunity exists to create a whole new model that is less invasive and irritating.



    What will happen of course is when Apple once-again sets the course, the rest of the community will receive the benefits as well with little or no thanks to Apple for paving the way.


    Ad Block Plus and Ghostery extensions have been available on Android for a good few years. 

     

    Apple is finally catching up with the competition. It's both welcome and about time. The final build of iOS 9 can't get here soon enough so we can finally have ad blocking like they do on Android.

     

    I like Apple a lot, but lets be honest with ourselves. They are not "paving" anything. As far as ad blocking goes, they are cruising down the already paved road that has been well traveled for a long time by Android.

  • Reply 79 of 95
    The advertising industry has killed the golden goose. By forcing full screen interstitials, videos, redirections to app stores and other disruptive forms of advertising and tracking they have driven even the casual user to ad-blockers. They had something good, they ruined it.
  • Reply 80 of 95

    The one thing I wonder about: I appears as though most of the posters here in the least just ignore ads, if they are not blocking them. However, there must a be a relevant group of people out there that intentionally click on ads, otherwise the whole business would have fallen apart long time ago. Therefore, I ask myself how big the impact of allowing ad-blocking on system level actually will be. Many of the posters here I suppose will be happily use it, but what about the few billions out there?

     

    Regarding the support of "free" content providers through ads, here is my take: In all honesty I have a hard time to come up with a long list of sites where I would be glad to pay for because the quality of the content makes me feel it is worth it. Most of it is "interesting", but my life would surely go on without the feeling of loss without them. There is a "race to the bottom" in web content as well. Just try to google the origin of some news (not specifically Apple or IT related). Often, I have a hard time to find the author, just because once published on the web it is shamelessly copied without giving the source. Next, the quality of the information in terms of "truth" and "completeness" is increasingly replaced by "quantity", click-baits and opinions. A comedian once said "You CAN have an opinion. You don't HAVE TO". What I mean is that there is very little gold in an increasing sea of worthless, no-value-adding stuff on the web. I often have the feeling that you can find "proof" for anything on the web, just you have to search long enough. Oh, and search increasingly is already advertising and manipulation you by "pre-filtering" what might be "interesting" for you. Same with social networks. Suggestions, articles and stuff are not random. They are selected based on what you leave as traces on the web to best match and confirm your views, interests etc. 

     

    I wonder if I am part of a dying race if I hear about Bush and Clinton "fighting" each other through Twitter and think "What a Kindergarten"?

     

    It seems yes, because paywalls for good.quality content did not fly as hoped, obviously. Either because people do not value the work, or because the quality is simply not there. Instead, people enjoy "entertainment" in forms of sensationalist "news", exposure of embarrassing "facts of interest" and uncritical blabla. Like TV, in the end.

     

    Actually, I do not know how much I would pay for AI. Probably more, if I would be spared some controversies about a certain European Island and its system ;-)

Sign In or Register to comment.