Why we introduced Ad blocker to Vivaldi browser
-
@Agych said in Why we introduced Ad blocker to Vivaldi browser:
The presence of this API is vital, at any times.
And bringing it back once it is removed, is ofcourse also vital.Vivaldi Devs pls take this into consideration.
It depends on how it is done. It may be possible and feasible, but it may also become a burden to maintain.
Ideally they would at least attempt to maintain it for few versions, until the built-in content blocker gets powerful enough.Not speaking for everyone, but at least as for me (and i'm quite sure for many others too),
if this API gets removed and is not restored by Vivaldi, I will have to forever stick with the last Vivaldi version where this API is present.Do not even think about that, doing that would place you in much greater danger than a lack of specific content blocker would.
-
@madiso said:
It depends on how it is done. It may be possible and feasible, but it may also become a burden to maintain.
Ideally they would at least attempt to maintain it for few versions, until the built-in content blocker gets powerful enough.I guess it is too early to speak about it now, need to see how easy the task of bringing it back will be.
The ideal case is that it is modular and easy to "copy-paste" back with minor changes. That would be just ideal i guess.@madiso said:
Do not even think about that, doing that would place you in much greater danger than a lack of specific content blocker would.
Disagree. And strongly disagree in the case of a proper and strong security/privacy extensions configuration and setup.
And ofcourse I Do think about that - in the worst case (the API not brought back after its removal by Google) it will be the only way to go. -
@macadoum said in Why we introduced Ad blocker to Vivaldi browser:
sell mugs if your content is good and you want to survive.
Well, that's what they do, isn't it? All of the mugs keep visiting those sites, and they sell their data to the advertisers.
I hate those YouTube channels that nag users to subscribe or buy a T-shirt. If their content is any good, they will get subscribers or at least lots of views, and generate revenue without begging for it.
-
Thank you for listening to the community, this blocker definitely improved Vivaldi experience for many users.
-
Thank you from me too for implementing an ad blocker that's defaulting to "do not block". There are different reasons why to use an ad blocker, for me too:
I was very happy that you implemented the blocker on Android. When I switched from Yandex to Vivaldi I was a bit unhappy since the traffic increased significantly. I regularly hit my data limit of 2gb/month, and more than half of it was "caused" by Vivaldi.When surfing on my tablet, I do not block by default but on some pages the performance is so bad that it is almost impossible to use them (especially hitting an ad when trying to scroll gets on my nerves or when you have to scroll the first 5 seconds after opening an article since the ads load time after time and are regularly moving your view).
On desktop, I have a big screen and a mouse wheel, so ads do not affect usability that much and the blocker is usually turned off.
Most ad blocker plugins block ads by default, and I have to put each page to a whitelist. However, I constantly forget to put web pages on it and for example blogs that I find by googling for a good tutorial etc. did not profit from me, even so a lot of them have very low ads and I would have had no problem when they view it.
As conclusion: I never found a reliable blocker with a default whitelist, so thank you for implementing it this way, I think it makes it way easier to find a compromise between usability and revenue generation.Did you think about implementing something like Flattr or alternative ways how web pages could get some money to live?
-
I just hope that when addon blockers will stop working in Chromium, Vivaldi will keep them working, as to be quite honest, I much more prefer to use an extension than a built in browser function, and I don't want to be forced to use a more basic solution, since Vivaldi's adblocker doesn't have the ability to remove manually chosen elements on the sites, among other things available in uBlock Origin and it's forks.
-
@supra107 Until then, you could export the filters you have created using uBlock's element picker to a text file and import it as a new blocker list.
-
Regardless of providing a built-in ad blocking solution, it would be interesting to see you guys and other developers collaborate on keeping the Web Request API alive beyond Manifest v3. Perhaps a joint effort between all Chromium-based browsers other than Google Chrome, i.e, Vivaldi, Opera, Brave and perhaps even Edge, would make things easier in the long run.
Moreover, relying on Chrome Web Store for extension distribution on virtually all Chromium-based browsers is bad, but fragmention such as the one promoted by having browser specific stores such as Opera add-ons (https://addons.opera.com/en/) or Edge add-ons (https://microsoftedge.microsoft.com/addons/) is also undesirable. Perhaps it could be possible to create an open store for WebExtensions that is not governed by a single entity.
-
Super big thanks for the ad and Tracking blocker
-
Hey, I have been paying for a ad blocker for awhile now. Thank you for this option! This is great! Works just as good if not better. Thanks again.
-
@lrc1128 said in Why we introduced Ad blocker to Vivaldi browser:
Hey, I have been paying for a ad blocker for awhile now. Thank you for this option! This is great! Works just as good if not better. Thanks again.
?? You are the first person who has used a paid adblocker, worst than the build in Vivaldi. The best adblocker extensions I know are all free and Open Source (uBlock Origin, nano Adblocker, Blokada (Android. app)..)
-
Do not even think about that, doing that would place you in much greater danger than a lack of specific content blocker would.
This is the common narrative "update or bad things will happen". Stop saying this. It is only 1/2 thrue if not less.
-
@jrucki said in Why we introduced Ad blocker to Vivaldi browser:
Do not even think about that, doing that would place you in much greater danger than a lack of specific content blocker would.
This is the common narrative "update or bad things will happen". Stop saying this. It is only 1/2 thrue if not less.
At a minimum, you must update according to those of Chromium to avoid "Browser outdated" messages, to correct reported bugs and incompatibilities, close security holes (daily there are more than 80,000 new viruses and exploits reported on the network) ....It is certainly not a catastrophe of not updating frequently, but highly necessary and recommended. Not to do so, apart from increasing the security risk, may worsen performance and with this the user experience.
Same with all soft and OS. -
@jrucki said:
This is the common narrative "update or bad things will happen". Stop saying this. It is only 1/2 thrue if not less.
Agree.
Plus it is definitely less, when you have a normal security setup in the browser (for the browser) and in the OS (for the rest, and generally). And in the own head ofc.@catweazle said:
Same with all soft and OS.
LOL, sorry dude but I disagree, you should say that to those who are using software that is no longer developed or the SW that has become shit/degraded in the newer versions, as well as to all the happy users of the beautiful and the best Windows version (Windows 7) who are detesting the ugly and the insecure/non-private/buggy Windows 10.
-
@Agych said in Why we introduced Ad blocker to Vivaldi browser:
@jrucki said:
This is the common narrative "update or bad things will happen". Stop saying this. It is only 1/2 thrue if not less.
Agree.
Plus it is definitely less, when you have a normal security setup in the browser (for the browser) and in the OS (for the rest, and generally). And in the own head ofc.@catweazle said:
Same with all soft and OS.
LOL, sorry dude but I disagree, you should say that to those who are using software that is no longer developed or the SW that has become shit/degraded in the newer versions, as well as to all the happy users of the beautiful and the best Windows version (Windows 7) who are detesting the ugly and the insecure/non-private/buggy Windows 10.
Wrong, Windows 7 is very good, true, Windows 10 by default has many functions that detract from privacy, it is also true. But, although it is not so easy to remove all these functions, it can and I have done it, now having Windows 10 with a much better and safer OS than 7, to start with the sandbox system that has to prevent malware from Affect the system, added with a Defender at the height of the best AV.
-
@catweazle said:
it can and I have done it
It can be done indeed, but not completely, only partly, since all this bunch of useless crap is in the heart of the OS.
I'm not even speaking about the ugly primitive flat UI which is also very hardly customizable in comparison to Windows 7 (where I actually don't need it that much, as the Aero and the 3D-style of everything looks beautiful already out of the box).
Oh, the forced uncontrollable windows updates - no comments, just facepalm.
All in one - "well" done M$.@catweazle said:
now having Windows 10 with a much better and safer OS than 7
Completely disagree.
It can be your opinion, but my opinion is strongly the opposite.
W7 is better in all aspects. Minor stuff W10 has better than W7 (task manager, copy-paste-move-delete dialog, etc) doesn't count here, given all the flows and deteriorations W10 has in comparison to W7.
And a lot of ppl think the same, as I've seen on the internet.@catweazle said:
added with a Defender at the height of the best AV.
Are you serious?
This is one of the worst AVs!
Both generally as well as privacy-wise (Windows 10!).
I would understand if you said that about Kaspersky or Bitdefender, but W10 Defender? O_o
That's an unexpected surprise to hear this i gotta say..
Btw AV is just one major security component, another one equally (if not more) important for privacy and security is a decent Firewall (like Outpost FW for example).
But this part requires skills/knowledge/experience to properly set it up use it and continuously update its config, therefore the vast majority just skips this part and sticks with the stock crappy Windows firewall in auto-mode, which is very bad and mostly useless. -
@Agych https://www.av-test.org/en/antivirus/home-windows/windows-10/february-2020/microsoft-defender-4.18-200515/
Windows 10 updates are fully configurable, when and what
-
@catweazle said:
@Agych https://www.av-test.org/en/antivirus/home-windows/windows-10/february-2020/microsoft-defender-4.18-200515/
Ok it might have been improved to some extend.
But:-
We should be (at least partly) skeptical about all these AV tests.
-
Even if we go with this site, check this:
https://www.av-test.org/en/antivirus/home-windows/
I counted 5 AVs scoring at 6 in all three aspects. And 13 with Protection score at 6.
MS Defender is in neither of those, so still not "at the height of the best AV", right? -
(Plus again, the Privacy flows, and given that Privacy is a "subset" of Security, it brings MS Defender even lower!).
-
-
@Catweazle said in Why we introduced Ad blocker to Vivaldi browser:
Wrong, Windows 7 is very good, true, Windows 10 by default has many functions that detract from privacy, it is also true. But, although it is not so easy to remove all these functions, it can and I have done it.
The thing is with W10 you can't be ever sure that you 've done enough so having to live with that thought alone makes it not worth using it. In other words I don't want my OS to oppress me if you get what I mean.
-
Results vary from month to month, both in the Defender and in others. The new Defender from Windows 10 was always in the group of the best. Adding the Sandbox system that adds even more security. MS has undoubtedly learned from the past as the main target of viruses.