Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Adblock Fast Returns To Google Play a Week After Being Pulled

Posted by timothy on from the permission-ping-pong dept.

An anonymous reader writes: A week ago, Google suddenly removed Adblock Fast from its Android app store. Today, the ad blocker has been reinstated, enabling Samsung users to download it once again from Google Play. Late last month, the browser preinstalled on Samsung's Android phones gained support for content-blocking plugins, and the first plugin to support the functionality was a free and open-source solution called Adblock Fast. Rocketship Apps, the maker of Adblock Fast, uploaded the Android plugin on January 29, but Google rejected an app update on February 1. The app hit Google Play's top spot for free, new productivity apps on February 2, and was pulled by Google on the same day.

29 of 53 comments (clear)

  1. You need an adblocker by The-Ixian · · Score: 2

    Just to load the androidheadlines.com page... even on a full computer it takes forever to load.

    Anyway, Google is free to ban, pull, push, whatever any app they want... it's their store...

    --
    My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
    1. Re:You need an adblocker by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 2

      Google IS currently free to do what they want. But should they be?

      I'd like to see alternate app stores become available, giving users a real choice. Yes, I know Amazon and Samsung have their own stores, but they are available only to users of their own branded devices. Of course, you can side-load apps, but then you open the door to all kinds of security issues. What I want is alternative stores that are completely integrated. THAT would give us some true competition, and maybe some better rates for developers.

    2. Re:You need an adblocker by beakerMeep · · Score: 1

      Anyone can download the Amazon app store. Also try F-Droid. There are a lot of alternative stores, just not sure which are all that good.

      --
      meep
    3. Re:You need an adblocker by Karlt1 · · Score: 1

      " if Google did not act, we faced a Draconian future, a future where one man, one company, one device, one carrier would be our only choice. So if you believe in openness, if you believe in choice, if you believe in innovation from everyone, then welcome to Android. Now let's get started"

      Andy Rubin......

    4. Re:You need an adblocker by macs4all · · Score: 1

      Google IS currently free to do what they want. But should they be?

      I'd like to see alternate app stores become available, giving users a real choice. Yes, I know Amazon and Samsung have their own stores, but they are available only to users of their own branded devices. Of course, you can side-load apps, but then you open the door to all kinds of security issues. What I want is alternative stores that are completely integrated. THAT would give us some true competition, and maybe some better rates for developers.

      So you want the security of a Walled Garden and the ability to load Apps from every back-alley website, too?

      Sorry, doesn't work that way in REAL life.

    5. Re:You need an adblocker by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 1

      Do you buy products from every back-alley Web site that offers merchandise for sale? No, probably not. You learn which ones can be trusted. Are there shady sites that try to scam you? Of course. Should we have only one Store where you buy things, to make sure you stay safe? Hardly.

    6. Re:You need an adblocker by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 1

      The Amazon App Store is only available on Amazon-branded devices.

      From TechCrunch: "Google doesn’t allow competing app stores in the Play Store"

      http://techcrunch.com/2015/08/...

    7. Re:You need an adblocker by macs4all · · Score: 1

      Do you buy products from every back-alley Web site that offers merchandise for sale? No, probably not. You learn which ones can be trusted. Are there shady sites that try to scam you? Of course. Should we have only one Store where you buy things, to make sure you stay safe? Hardly.

      Mobile devices are an exception to the rule, and for very good reason.

  2. Google might not be free to do whatever by infernalC · · Score: 1

    Who knows what is in their contracts with Samsung? Not I, said the little red hen.

    Samsung might have something in the contract akin to "By virtue of thy revenue that thou dost receive from the users of Our own devices, thou, O Google, shalt let Us distribute whatever We shall want in thy Play Store. Buhahahaha."

    Contracts between behemoths are generally closely held secrets.

  3. How to measure ad traffic? by jc42 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It's widely believed that ads have taken over (from porn ;-) as the main traffic on the Web. This is rather significant if even close to true, it's likely one of the main reasons that our handy little portable gadgets (that many of us hardly ever actually use as phones) run so slowly and eat up so much bandwidth.

    But a problem with even discussing this is that, as far as I've found, there's no reliable app available to actually measure our bandwidth use, classify it, and tell us what's eating it up. I do know that my android gadget is often running warm, eating batter and bandwidth, when it's just sitting "idle" in my pocket.

    Yeah, I know; part of that is the tracking software. ;-) But whatever; I can't really say with any authority what's causing its activity. The one thing I can actually see is apps that stay running in the background, and the gadget's power usage app does report that "innocent" apps like mail/message readers and web browsers are using battery when "nothing is happening". Investigating does often show that some of their windows contain video ads that are running. The power-usage app does let me kill apps, but that's not very useful in measuring the source of the power/bandwidth usage.

    So is there a good way to actually measure the traffic, classify it, etc., so we can actually determine what's really eating up the battery and bandwidth? Are there good google keywords to learn about it? There are a few good unix/linux tools for examining network traffic, but I haven't found them for android, ios, etc. Anyone know what they might be, and how we might verify that they're not just trojans?

    (And yes, I'm also aware that the marketers are going to read this and be major sources of replies that try to reassure us without answering anything. Maybe we can moderate them down? ;-)

    --
    Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    1. Re:How to measure ad traffic? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      How do you categorize the porn ads?

    2. Re:How to measure ad traffic? by jc42 · · Score: 1

      How do you categorize the porn ads?

      Well, to my knowledge, I don't actually have any porn on my android gadget. (My Macbook has a much larger screen. ;-) But I'd expect that those who do, would find it interesting and useful to know how much of their porn apps' traffic and battery usage is from the ads. The marketers do have a way on inserting their stuff into all sorts of places where it isn't welcome. They're probably even worse than the porn vendors that way.

      In any case, the question is general: How do we reliably find out what stuff in our gadget is using the battery and/or bandwidth? To be useful, the software supplying such information should work for whatever apps we have installed, especially those that came with our gadget. The suppliers of the gadgets don't seem very interested in helping us. In particular, Google and Apple are the two major suppliers of "smart phone" software, and neither seems very trustworthy when it comes to learning just what their gadgets are actually doing.

      Somehow, with all the attention that the spread of portable Internet-enabled gadgetry, the Internet community seems to have been taken by surprise by the way that the corporate world views it not as a source of information, but rather as a new method for distributing marketing to their mark(et)s.

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    3. Re:How to measure ad traffic? by shawn2772 · · Score: 1

      It's widely believed that ads have taken over (from porn ;-) as the main traffic on the Web.

      I think it's pretty well-established that the majority of traffic on the Internet is from streaming video. Netflix and YouTube together comprise a huge majority of traffic. Maybe you're considering that traffic to be "Internet", not "Web", even though it's reached/triggered largely through web sites? That seems like a difficult distinction to draw in a non-arbitrary way. I suppose you could say the web is anything retrieved by an HTTP request, and video uses different protocols once the player has been retrieved. If so, you could be right about ads comprising more traffic than porn, but if so it's only because porn online has moved to primarily video format while many ads are still served as static images, via HTTP GET requests.

      Anyway, this claim seems dubious, and certainly not "widely believed".

  4. you just could keepup by buffet_caterer · · Score: 1

    At this rate, you just simply could keep up with this stuff

    --
    Well lived, well enjoyed
  5. Now that our advertisers have reviewed it... by Sparowl · · Score: 2
    You can have your ad-blocker back! Our Advertisers have had time to review it, find work arounds, and will be adjusting their revenue streams accordingly.

    Additional ads may now be implanted into your program.

    We appreciate your addition to our revenue!

  6. I'm sure Samsung+Google had interesting phone call by JoeyRox · · Score: 1

    To discuss Google pulling the app from the store. Looks l like Samsung prevailed in the discussion.

  7. Re:APP blockers?!?!?! by Zaowulf · · Score: 1

    Yo dawg I heard you like apps

  8. Re:I'm sure Samsung+Google had interesting phone c by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

    From the summary:

    Late last month, the browser preinstalled on Samsung's Android phones gained support for content-blocking plugins, and the first plugin to support the functionality was a free and open-source solution called Adblock Fast.

    --

    "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

  9. Re:Stop with the crappy proxies by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 3, Informative

    I use Firefox on Android with adblock plus, searchonymous, and google redirects fixer installed. Clunky browser overall but it's better than dealing with the usual shit that most websites (slashdot included) have. I used the Ghostery addon before, but after seeing how much better privacy badger is (or rather, how it doesn't break websites like most privacy addons do) I just use that on desktop and hope they might make it available for Android. For now, I mostly just rely on the setting to make third party cookies be session only.

  10. End of the Personal Computer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    We are witnessing the transition into a new era, made possible by the saturated of "walled garden" platforms and corporate curated software markets.

    If nothing is done, in 5 years time the vast majority of users will be unable to even install ab-blockers, let alone use them. In 10 years time, ad blockers may be de-facto banned across the vast majority of the web anyway, with sites refusing access to browsers detected to have ad blocking software installed. This is already happening across some sites even now.

    Ad block was always a thorn in the side of advertisers and major websites alike. But in the era of the true PC, the desktop and laptop personal computer, there was little companies could do to stop users from ridding themselves of irritating, offensive, and malicious advertisements and pop-ups. But now, in the era of the locked-down "tablet", the all but carrier owned "smartphone" and above all the domination of private App stores over software distribution on such platforms, users have neither the ability or authority to install the software they want on their own devices.

    This is the true legacy of mass tablet and smartphone adoption. The end of the "Personal Computer" as a mass consumer experience. We now sit at the dawn of the "Licenced Computing" era, where digital devices become less like personally programmable machines, and more like fixed function electronics devices. In such an age, corporate and in reality, cartel control over user devices is not only enabled, it is to be expected. We can expect to see a permanent end to ad-blocking devices on iOs and android systems within I think 3 years. Windows 10 will be curating browser add ons not long after that. And when the majority of the web cannot even install ad-blockers, the minority still using them will find themselves evicted from what is left of the World Wide Web.

    Gentle-nerds. It has been a privilege.

    1. Re: End of the Personal Computer by Ralgha · · Score: 1

      I sideload AdAway and see no ads anywhere on my phone. If they do away with that option then I'll push it through and, and if that fails then I'll flash it.

    2. Re:End of the Personal Computer by vux984 · · Score: 1

      Tablets are already on a downward trend.

      Only because of the rise of large screen smart phones.

      . People want computers with power, or they don't want computers much at all.

      True to a point, but the bulk of the web isn't aimed for them, its aimed for...

      The latter wants an appliance anyway and your argument is moot for them.

      The bulk of the web is aimed at them, if the bulk of the web can get them locked down enough, it doesn't need to lock down the open PC, it can just block them out unless they run an approved ad-friendly app to connect. Because the web can ignore the PC if its the minority... and like or not, the people who need computers and not just appliances are in the minority.

      There will be resources for PC users, by PC users, for resources for Open/Free/OSS/whatever advocates by Open/Free/OSS/whatever advocates but the mainsteam web... for better or for worse will be made for people with locked down tablets, and they'll care if you can connect with a "PC" then about as much as they care if you can connect from Linux today.

      At least, that's one plausible future.

  11. More information about Google's decision by JoeyRox · · Score: 2

    http://techcrunch.com/2016/02/...

  12. what? by beakerMeep · · Score: 1

    Amazon's app store can be downloaded on any Android device (I just installed it on my Nexus 5X). And of course other stores aren't on Google Play That would be like Walmat allowing a Bestbuy to setup inside its walls -- but you most certainly can _use_ other stores.

    --
    meep
    1. Re:what? by Tony+Isaac · · Score: 1

      You had to side-load it, right? That's the point, you can't install another App Store without side-loading, which is riskier than third-party app stores.

      And of course other stores aren't on Google Play That would be like Walmat allowing a Bestbuy to setup inside its walls

      The problem with you analogy is that Walmart (Google Play in your analogy) is the only store where you can "legally" shop. Every other store is considered "under the table" and "use at your own risk"--kind of like buying from the guy on the street corner in front of Walmart.

      A better analogy for what I would like Google Play to be, is a shopping mall. Lots of stores under one roof.

    2. Re:what? by beakerMeep · · Score: 1

      I agree more choice is good but I dont think it's fair to hold Google responsible for not providing their competition to you. And saying other stores are not available is just incorrect. I'm actually straining to think of some example where a store gives access to other stores (other than your ideal mall analogy). Apple has the same type of warning even on the desktop now. As long as the option is there I think it's fine. If they ever took that away though, it'd be time for pitchforks and torches.

      --
      meep
    3. Re:what? by shawn2772 · · Score: 1

      The problem with you analogy is that Walmart (Google Play in your analogy) is the only store where you can "legally" shop. Every other store is considered "under the table" and "use at your own risk"--kind of like buying from the guy on the street corner in front of Walmart.

      A better analogy for what I would like Google Play to be, is a shopping mall. Lots of stores under one roof.

      That would make it impossible for Google to provide a safe space where users can download without having to be concerned about malware, unless Google were also vetting/managing the contents of all of those other stores... in which case, what's the point, since they'd all just be subsets of Google Play?

      In addition, as others have pointed out, there's a competitive element here. Google Play doesn't exist just because Google wants to provide a safe app store for Android (though Google does want that), it's also a profit center. Advertising may not always be the most effective way to make money online, and being an online software retailer is a good business. So making alternative stores available that don't give Google a cut of their sales would be bad business. Philosophically, Google is committed to keeping Android an open platform and open ecosystem, which means that it's important that alternative stores exist. Business-wise, the existence of alternatives is bad.

      The tension is resolved by allowing the platform to support alternative stores, but not actively facilitating their use. I think it's a reasonable compromise between the ideal of openness and the pragmatism of business and creating a safe place for users who aren't good at distinguishing malware from good apps. It's similar to the approach of locking bootloaders by default to ensure that users are only running official system images, but selling unlockable devices that allow users who want to to take control and do what they like.

      (Full disclosure: I work for Google, on Android security, though not on malware detection and have no connection with Play store policies or management. My discussion of Google's business interests here is not based on any inside discussions, just on commonsense thinking about the goals and options.)

  13. Re:Stop with the crappy proxies by thegarbz · · Score: 1

    I tried to like Firefox but it fails on one simple test: It doesn't zoom pages to the right width automatically. On a phone I want to click a link and be done with it, not have to resize every individual page to make it readable. In this regard even Samsung's shitty browser has it beat.

  14. Re:Stop with the crappy proxies by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

    It fails on more than that. Sometimes, for no apparent reason at all, the whole screen will go blank and you can't do anything until you force stop the app. Also text editing not only has a shitload of bugs, but the selection of text within an editor is also horribly designed.

    But again, because the web itself is overall so fucking broken by design without browser addons, you don't have to deal with the usual shit that websites send your way.