Firefox helps iPhone users bypass ads on web sites while making money showing its own ads After several weeks of anticipation, Mozilla has started rolling out ad blocking to the iOS version of its popular browser, but you can still expect to see ads on Mozilla's own pages, including the new tab page. The org officially rolled out the new native ad blocking feature for iOS Firefox on Tuesday, moving it out of the …
I'm not much of an Apple user, but I was gifted an iPad, and the ad experience on IOS was truly shocking. I installed Blokada, which definitely helps reduce the ad noise, as does my Pi-Hole.
Side note: I'm pretty sure Apple fanbois have Stockholm Syndrome. It's the only explanation for their rabid loyalty.
So-called "ad-blocking" is nothing of the kind. Nothing is blocked.
Web pages are free to include external embeds, which are invitations to browsers to fetch content that might have nothing to do with the actual page. Equally web browsers are free to ignore such exhortations. That's what so-called "ad-blocking" actually is: instructing your browser to not bother collecting that cruft.
My browser, my computer. Don't bother fetching unsolicited crap unless I say so. Nothing is blocked.
-A.
The question is: of different undesirable/unwanted content blocking tools, which do indeed do "Don't even request/download any things that I haven't permitted" and which only do "Still request/download the URLs included in the page, but don't actually display the undesirable ones"? The resulting appearance may be the same, but only one of these actually prevents the spyware tracking…
So this is an argument about what "block" means? I don't understand why you care, especially as this does meet the dictionary definition (pulling in external content would happen by default, this software is preventing that, therefore it's blocking an operation in the sense of to prevent something from happening. If you thought you were instructing us, I think we're generally all aware how HTML works.
The reason that I care is the pejorative implication of the word "block" implying something unnatural, nefarious and untoward whereas it's actually just me configuring my computer the way I want it.
Quite a lot of Reg commentards profess the Noscript creed, yet I don't recall anyone describing it as a Javascript blocker. Browsers since time immemorial have offered the ability to load images or not; is this "image blocking"?
Of course I would expect this audience to have at least some idea of how HTML and HTTP work. I would also expect those tasked with fitting web pages with "ad-blocking" detection and berkist consequences to know this too. I wonder how they deal with text-only browsers and screen readers for the visually impaired.
-A.
Orion lets me install actual uBlock Origin. I like Firefox on my computer, but on my iPhone I'm using Orion.
I REALLY hate ads. If I see an ad, I'm annoyed every time. And that's before you even get to the ads that are actually trying to install malware, which is not a small number.
Me too. And apparently Amazon are now trying to piss me off because every time I visit the site I get an almost full-screen advert for Amazon Prime that I have to click away. I mean FFS! What brain dead moron (manager or designer) thought that was a good idea. I go to Amazon to find stuff and I shouldn't have to click past an advert to get to the search box.
Idiots.
Not exactly. Brave got complaints because they removed the ads that were originally there and replaced them insitu with their own. Firefox isn't doing that. They still have ads on some Firefox-related pages, but when you read a page you navigated to, Mozilla won't inject ads onto it. It's up to you how much you care, but that is a big difference.
