Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

ASUS To Include AdBlock Plus On All Phones and Tablets In 2016 (betanews.com)

Posted by samzenpus on from the no-more-ads dept.

JoeyRox writes: Starting in 2016 Asus will ship all phones and tablets with AdBlock Plus integrated into their mobile browser. The ad-blocking software will not only be pre-installed but enabled by default as well. The move to include ad-blocking software on mobile devices is significant because unlike desktop users the percentage of mobile users presently employing ad-blocking software is very low at approximately 2%.

5 of 189 comments (clear)

  1. Just serving the customer by jones_supa · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The sorts of politically incorrect software that Asian electronics companies can ship is sometimes funny. I'm sure there are a few smaller vendors that even ship a Torrent app with the explanation being up front "the customer wants to download pirated movies". I love it.

    Baking in an adblocker will certainly raise eyebrows in Google and other big advertising syndicates.

  2. Interesting: what next? by Maow · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is an interesting move.

    Will others follow suit and a crisis in online advertising ensue?

    Or will ABP leverage this to extract gobs of cash from the ad industry to allow a lot of ads through, rendering it relatively useless?

    I shall remain behind my DNS-based ad blocking here at home and watch with interest.

    On a side note, some YouTube ads are sneaking through on a mobile device. Anyone know what domain(s) they're being served from? It's a fairly recent phenomenon; something's changed on their end it seems.

    1. Re:Interesting: what next? by CastrTroy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I very much agree with this. Web sites need to support themselves. I don't think the web would work quite as well if you had to pay a fee to every website you went to, even if it was a very small amount. As long as the ads don't move or make sounds, and don't try to cover up the content, then I don't really have a problem with them. I think that advertisers are shooting themselves in the foot. If there weren't so many terrible ads on the web, we wouldn't even be having this discussion right now.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
  3. End of the advertising-era for the web? by RogueyWon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's starting to feel a bit like the end of an era for the advertising-based business model for the web. Almost everybody I know now uses an adblocker on their desktop/laptop PC. My employer recently switched on adblocking-by-default on our office PCs, due to concerns over the number of malware-spreading adverts. Meanwhile, adverts while mobile browsing have become so disruptive (it's virtually impossible now to browse certain websites on an iPhone) that I'm strongly considering adblocking on my phone as well.

    The web-advertising industry is on the verge of suicide. Few people had a problem with the static banner ads and most tolerated the animated .gifs, but the video-ads were a further intrusion and, for many people (self included), the auto-playing video-ads were the tipping point. The increasing prevalence of ads as a means of pushing malware and the failure of the advertising networks to screen them out seems to have been the tipping point for a lot of Government and corporate networks as well.

    So the question is, what comes next and what does it mean? The strangulation of advertising income is going to fundamentally change the way a lot of sites operate. The pace at which newspapers and magazines are paywalling formerly free content is accelerating. In other cases, the content is free but subscription plans are available for an enhanced service, or even required if users want to leave comments or participate in forums. Are we moving towards a world in which only sites with a product to sell and small-scale operations will be free to browse?

    If so, there might be upsides as well as downsides. One product of the advertising model has been the clickbait-culture. That's not just about "10 shocking things you won't believe" and "this one neat trick" headlines, it's also about deliberately provocative content. Stories which get people riled up are great business, if your business model is based on page-views and ad-views. Give people an interesting article that they enjoy reading and they will view the page once then move on. Give them something that makes them angry and they will leave an angry comment, then refresh the page 30 times over the course of the day to argue with other people leaving angry comments. Just look at the stories on Slashdot which get the highest number of comments...

    Slashdot is a long way from the worst offender (even though, in the DICE-era, it undoubtedly is an offender). The advertising web model has turned the angry fringe voices, whether the ultra-conservative demagogues of the right, or the "ban everything I don't like" Angry Campus Narcissists of the left into a profitable business model and in doing so has arguably coarsened public debate and poisoned the wider political sphere.

    So maybe the death of the advertising model and the move to a subscription-based web might be a good thing.

  4. Re:Wrong adblocker! by thegarbz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Wrong attitude. The use of an ad blocker which defines "acceptable" ads sends a clear message on what we can tolerate, and quite frankly I'm quite happy to tolerate ads that are not obtrusive, animated, or include any multimedia other than text or even a very small static picture.

    What I don't want is a world where I have to make a micro payment to every bloody page I visit.