Even Saint Gorhill understands this, which is why uBlock Origin is not blocking the scripts in question either by default, you *. In truth, you can’t block each and every script on these pages, as basic functionality breaks. > I wont add much because people already gave good arguments but i’ll just leave this hereįact VI: Brave does not allow Facebook / Twitter / Google trackers, nor is there any kind of monetary agreement between Brave and these companies. Show me the default adblocker of Firefox that is somewhat similar to uBlock Origin or Brave’s adblocker, then. > Whatever Martin’s posts cover, we can reliably expect your never-ending agitation against Mozilla. > Brave is, after all, owned by an advertising company, and not being able to detect ads impacts their business modelįact IV: Mozilla receives 80%+ of its annual revenue from Google, the biggest ad company in the world.įact V: Mozilla does not implement a local ad delivery system that would hurt Google’s revenue. Brave’s ads are also opt-in and the browser doesn’t show its own ads by default.įact III: Websites do not lose any more revenue via Brave than they would via uBlock Origin or any other adblocker. > Brave added an adblocker for one reason – to be able to detect ads in order to be able to replace them.įact II: Brave does not replace ads on websites, Brave’s ads are system notifications. My point still stands, what you say does not disprove it at all.
> Enhanced Tracking Protection is a tracker blocker, not an ad blocker – the name should give you a clue, but yeah, let’s be disingenuousįirefox’s tracker blocking tracking blocking exists because they are too afraid to include an adblocker similar to uBlock Origin, Brave etc. Those API limitations are not applicable to native adblockers (like the one in Brave) as native adblockers are not extensions… For example, Brave does CNAME uncloaking: > I guess the developer of uBlock Origin knows more about the subject than you:įact I: This article just cites the extension API limitations of Chromium. Hill, who never accepted donations or compensation for his development work, is another core reason why the extension is as popular as it is right now. Many users hold uBlock Origin in high regard because of its memory and CPU effectiveness. Users may add more lists, for instance to deal with annoyances on the Internet. The extension blocks more advertisement but also trackers, miners, popups, malicious URLs and more by default. Hill calls uBlock Origin a "wide-spectrum content blocker" instead of an ad blocker. The Firefox version of uBlock Origin is considered the version that offers the best protection, as it supports protection against CNAME tracking, which the Chrome versions do not offer. To name a few improvements: blocking WebRTC from leaking IP addresses, removing elements permanently from webpages, blocking JavaScript by default, and addressing new tracking methods, such as CNAME tracking,
Hill improved the extension over the years, adding features and improvements to it on a regular basis. The extension was created after Hill left the uBlock project that he created. The uBlock Origin extension was first published on Mozilla's extensions store in April 2015 by its creator Raymond Hill, known as gorhill online. As far as the number of reviews is concerned: uBlock Origin received more than 13200 reviews, thousands more than Adblock Plus' 8500 reviews at the time of writing.
#Firefox mobile adblock plus#
The average rating is 4.8 out of 5 on the Mozilla add-ons store, while Adblock Plus has a rating of 4.5 out of 5. UBlock Origin beats Adblock Plus in other metrics as well. If the trend continues, the gap between the two ad blockers will widen in the coming months and years. Mozilla reports that uBlock Origin crossed the 5.5 million users mark while Adblock Plus is sitting at 5.47 million users at the time of writing. Now, uBlock Origin has surpassed Adblock Plus on the Firefox add-ons store, making it the number one Firefox extension in regards to user numbers.
0 kommentar(er)
