Ad blockers or not – your choice matters
-
If and only if Vivaldi create a store of extension, this extensions only would be a mods for the browser.
The others common features should be take it of extensions in Chrome Store. If Vivaldi make your own store with extensions maybe could be outdated versions of Chrome Store extensions, how happend in Opera Store.The Vivaldi extensions maybe should be a feature unique of the browser, extensions that will modify the browser.html, and will inject a custom JS in the UI.
The support of mods natively would do the most interesting things in the forum.
Is only me opinion.
-
I don't think anybody wants to say, or hear this, but I suspect it's time for the major chromium-based browser vendors (Vivaldi, Opera, Brave, others) and extension makers to start discussing forking the chromium base and working separately from Google. No, the decision does not have to be made yet, but the infrastructure will take time to sort out and discussions should be started well in advance of the actual decision.
-
@driverop: And Microsoft must be the new one someone else, since over the last 4 or 5 years, they've demonstrated under Nadella that they're as close to an entirely different company as you can get.
-
Thought I read that Adblock Plus wouldn't be affected, since it uses a different system. Not that I use AB+.
-
Thanks for the response to this, and for [at least partially] committing to keeping the webRequest API or developing something different.
-
Thank you, Vivaldi, for caring about our choice!
-
Content blocker are an essential part of my web experience, I really can't imagine not using them.
When I first heard about this I was disappointed, also because the supposed "enterprise" version of chrome my keep the feature, who knows.
Hopefully Vivaldi will reintroduce the feature or someone will maintain it publicly. I can see Microsoft investing in this since they just moved Edge to Chromium. -
I'm glad to hear you guys are going to do something about this.
Can't say I'm a fan of creating an extension store though because it will still be reliant on developers submitting to yet another repository.
Ad blocking has become an essential feature and that's why I would like to see it baked into the browser. Most likely having to use the old API method because of the limitations of the one Google wants to transition to (unless or until they reduce the limitations).
I would like to see something that would allow us to load multiple lists in our settings panel (either by pointing to outside sources or loading local files like is now possible in the snapshot with
css
). Then having the loaded lists displayed in a panel tab that would allow us to select and deselect as well as add whitelist exceptions.Here's a quick mockup
-
I wouldn't know what I would do without having content blockers. The most important part about the internet and browsing in general is letting users have the choice for what content they view and spend resources showing on their browser. I'm glad that Vivaldi is on the right side this time!
-
Vivaldi could have an own store but just for some kind of extension that there is no on Chrome Store like Opera do.
And about an adblock built-in, if Vivaldi is worried about block some kind of content that could be useful for users (even for own business like advert from partners) I think the company could reach a mid term with the users, but adblock is, particularly, an important feature for a browser, even for myself to browser without have problems with sites that fill themselves of them and it makes the sites impossible to browse. -
@LonM several are not promise based if I saw that right - it always depends on which APIs you use. That's why I wrote "don't require special functions"
btw.:
Seems that Chromium supports / will prefer promise based APIs in Manifest V3 too:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1nPu6Wy4LWR66EFLeYInl3NzzhHzc-qnk4w4PX-0XMw8/edit#heading=h.kgd5124ymvn0
which will make the switch between browser (Mozilla based) and chrome (well, Chromium based) easier. When complete there might be only one API left. -
Hey there. I'm so happy to see this topic being picked up on a visible spot like this blog. The decision not only shows that you're interested in your users' desires, but also that you're open to customizing Blink. That's news to me, which I greet happily. Zhe corporate politics behind Chromium decisions have long been the major reason why I never used Chrome, or Chromium for that matter, but if I needed any extra reasons to use Vivaldi, this blog post is adding one more.
Here's the thing though. If Google should prevail with their decision, that the broad public won't have access to the current powerful ad-blocking capability through one of its to-be-deprecated APIs, then this will open up a new market. It would be a real shame if every browser developer decided on his or her own implementation and not work together.
With Opera, Brave and gasp Microsoft we have three alternative browsers that are sitting in the same boat, but there are other small forks too (Cent Browser anyone?). Could this group of companies find common ground to keep development on Blink engine customizations unified, so extension developers aren't confronted with an even more fractured ecosystem?
If this doesn't happen, then as time goes on. we will see that only a subset of extensions are going to work on each of those browsers. To some degree that's already the case today: Opera has a Sidebar Action API, but Vivaldi could theoretically support it too, since it already has its own panel.
Once the API capabilities differ from Chrome, this is also going to mess up access to extensions on non-Chrome/Chromium browsers. An alternative extensions store is a must, but like before I question if it wouldn't be smarter to partner up with other Blink fork developers. Granted, Microsoft is unlikely to be interested in that, but if a somewhat unified platform could be achieved, that would be one more unique selling point to draw users away from Chrome.
-
@cqoicebordel: Maybe, having a common store with Brave and Opera might be welcome for that particular case though...
-
This was heartwarming to hear... Thanks.
-
I like the of Vivaldi resisting the Google changes but I can also see when backporting the fix can become a maintenance nightmare. I hope you succeed for the better browsing experience of all of us.
-
Thank you for all your feedback and ideas. This goes to show this is important and something you care about. We're listening and take all your feedback on board.
-
Another thing has occurred to me, that I'd completely forgotten because I've been blocking rubbish on the web for so long... I've not seen it mentioned here yet, but maybe I skimmed too quickly, but...
ACCESSIBILITY!!!
I've noticed that ads, scripts and the flashy bells and whistles on web sites these days are really making the web inaccessible to many.
-
They make it much more difficult for screen-readers and other accessibility tools to do their job. I used to have a neighbour who recently passed away at a hundred and something. She was an avid computer-geek but registered blind. Her computer was a fantastic lifeline to the outside world over her final decade or two.
-
They make it very difficult for people with autism (over-stimulation) and ADHD (distracting). Again, I am aware of a few examples of direct experience/observation with this issue.
I know we've pretty much done the whole "why adblockers should be allowed to exist" thing to death, but I think these are additional important, unselfish reasons as to why there needs to be adblocking capability in all browsers, even if you don't use it yourself.
-
-
@jamesbeardmore said in Ad blockers or not – your choice matters:
I've noticed that ads, scripts and the flashy bells and whistles on web sites these days are really making the web inaccessible to many.
I think this is what goes under the name "asshole design":
https://2018.bloomca.me/en -
One word about ad blocking and sponsors:
Some of the default links that come in speed dial and the bookmarks are basically sponsor links, so please don't block the referral sites that count how often such a bookmark is clicked, anonymized and non-tracking, but use them if you buy something or book a trip. You don't pay more for the goods, but if you do so Vivaldi gets a (tiny) amount of money.
I don't know if Vivaldi is already profitable, but if not:
The extra money comes from the pocket of Jon & Co and not because they are rich, but because they have other, own companies which cross finance it - i.e. no external funding.I think the browser is worth the effort to make an exception for those sponsor links.
-
@QuHno said in Ad blockers or not – your choice matters:
please don't block the referral sites
To make it clearer - allow referrals on https://vivaldi.com/bk/ - this is what some of the default bookmarks use for their referrer.
Some bookmarks don't though. I'd be curious to know how they track their usage. For example, how does "easyjet" know if I came from the vivaldi default bookmark vs the one I created myself?