[How To] Block Ads in MobilSafari

[Eurisko]

I agree with everything BigBoss and Saurik have said.

I live on the revenue generated by the ads on packages I host in Cydia. I pay for the server, the bandwidth, the mortgage on my home and the food on my table with the money these ads bring in.

If you block the ads, I make nothing. Hard to pay the bills with nothing.

As BigBoss said, I apologize if the ads in Cydia are annoying. But the ads are the life-blood of a repository now. Without them, we cannot provide you with the apps you want. It's as simple as that.

-ste

(Ste Packaging)

No offence to you personally, but your financial concerns aren't mine. If you're spamming me, I have every right to stop you. Bigboss has no authority and quite a bit of arrogance to tell someone not to block his ads.

[Nykwil]

No offence to you personally, but your financial concerns aren't mine. If you're spamming me, I have every right to stop you. Bigboss has no authority and quite a bit of arrogance to tell someone not to block his ads.

This is not very mod like behavior.

In fact this is the kind of behavior that will alienate developers from a site like this.

I've yet to see any of the ads in any of the apps to be considered "spam like"

[ksiphone]

or make a pay option that generates a s/n specific unlock code that gets rid of the ads for good. this would provide end users frustrated by ads the ability to pick and choose which programs will have ads and which won't at the same time still providing revenue for developers. i'm sure you guys have forecasted how much you will make on average based on download numbers and estimated end user usage.

on a side note, do programs like cycorder or categories send statistical access info back to the developers or merely access and display ads? Do you guys have access to real data showing how much these programs are used or how often these programs are accessing the ad sites for content? This seems like useful information to build your "monetization model".

i'm still using 2.0.2, but i hear lag time is fixed with 2.1. it is pretty frustrating waiting so long at times for things to open. knowing that the program is accessing the web looking for ads while what i was trying to record is now gone, gets pretty frustrating.

the bottom line is, if its a great program, then people will be happy to compensate you guys for your time and effort. i happily paid the $8 for swirlymms and i don't use it nearly as much as others. please consider a dual method to generate revenue. if folks are willing to pay to remove ads, maybe its time to give them that option. if the ads don't bother others, they should have the option to keep them.

[persichini]

or make a pay option that generates a s/n specific unlock code that gets rid of the ads for good. this would provide end users frustrated by ads the ability to pick and choose which programs will have ads and which won't at the same time still providing revenue for developers. i'm sure you guys have forecasted how much you will make on average based on download numbers and estimated end user usage.

on a side note, do programs like cycorder or categories send statistical access info back to the developers or merely access and display ads? Do you guys have access to real data showing how much these programs are used or how often these programs are accessing the ad sites for content? This seems like useful information to build your "monetization model".

i'm still using 2.0.2, but i hear lag time is fixed with 2.1. it is pretty frustrating waiting so long at times for things to open. knowing that the program is accessing the web looking for ads while what i was trying to record is now gone, gets pretty frustrating.

the bottom line is, if its a great program, then people will be happy to compensate you guys for your time and effort. i happily paid the $8 for swirlymms and i don't use it nearly as much as others. please consider a dual method to generate revenue. if folks are willing to pay to remove ads, maybe its time to give them that option. if the ads don't bother others, they should have the option to keep them.

Very Well Said

[one1]

conveniently it is made to block every ad except on this site

Dunno why though, backbeatmedia is indeed on the hosts list, but it isn't blocking any of the ads here.

[Eurisko]

This is not very mod like behavior.

In fact this is the kind of behavior that will alienate developers from a site like this.

I've yet to see any of the ads in any of the apps to be considered "spam like"

This has nothing to do with the moderation of this site, and I actually support the Ads running on this site because MMi wouldn't be here without them. However, that being said, no one has the right to tell others how they should conduct the use of their own devices. Bigboss cannot demand that only his site be removed from this hosts file. You're all for telling Apple to stick it when it comes them trying to prevent you from modding your phone, but when it comes to a Dev making those same types of demands, you'll back them up? Seems rather two faced don't you think?

[sterickson]

We are talking about two kinds of ads, actually.

First, there are the ads that display within an app, which developers like BigBoss and Saurik have in theirs. The revenue from those ads go straight to the developers.

Second, there are the ads that display in Cydia, which are put their by the folks who host the packages for the developers. That's the kind of ads that I and MMi and BigBoss (wearing his hoster hat) put there to generate revenue for us, to pay for the servers and bandwidth that allow you to actually download and install the packages. In my case, it also pays my other bills. Without these ads, we cannot afford to provide the packages to you, which will leave you with nothing to download.

It's as simple as that, really.

-ste

[Teh H4RrY]

Saurik and Big Boss, Are there anymore ad sources inside the new Hosts file, which show up in any of your apps? apart from the aforementioned "127.0.0.1 mm.admob.com" that of which i have removed.

[sterickson]

Saurik and Big Boss, Are there anymore ad sources inside the new Hosts file, which show up in any of your apps? apart from the aforementioned "127.0.0.1 mm.admob.com" that of which i have removed.

You might also remove anything that blocks Google AdSense ads.

-ste

[Teh H4RrY]

You might also remove anything that blocks Google AdSense ads.

-ste

And what might that be? What addresses?

[sterickson]

And what might that be? What addresses?

To start with, these, for sure:

127.0.0.1 pagead.googlesyndication.com
127.0.0.1 pagead2.googlesyndication.com

Please note that they appear more than once in the file, so search for and get rid of all of them. In fact, there is a lot of repetition in that file, from what I can see.

-ste

[ajustcircle]

Well, this whole thing has caused a lot more controversy than I had thought might ever happen.

To be honest I didn't inspect the file to see if it would effect BigBoss and Saurik's ads – I'm more than happy to remove those from the hosted file if it would make you two feel more comfortable.

Truthfully, I have no problem viewing ads in your applications, what I don't like is when I need to get a small bit of information via Safari, having to wait the extra time for ads to load. It doesn't seem like what's in my best interest.

I don't run adblocking software for my home browsing (other than Safari's pop-up blocker), but in my mobile life, where AT&T isn't providing the same kind of experience I have at home speedwise, I'm going to block the ads.

To say we all ought to not block ads on our phones because it is like stealing is just ignorant – the issue is speed, and this helps, its not about evading giving you money. The two things are not comparable, stealing is an intentional disregard for the merchant because of the price of the item, adblocking, especially when some of you don't accept money in any other form, is most certainly not.

BigBoss and Saurik, it truly was not my intent to disable the ads from showing in your apps. Consequently, If you'd like me to remove the entry for your apps ads, let me know if it is just the entry already mentioned and if you change your content/provider and the entry needs changing please forward that along as well.


And to this cat,

i just love how everyone who has a job to do somehow adds in their political flare like we actually care who you are going to vote for... My name is paris hilton, I have the IQ of 3. I'm hot, and I love obama, because he is for change (yet I have no clue what change he is for, I just know he isn't bush).

thats basically a sum-up of the entire election process for anyone who is in the media.

It was a joke. Get over it. If I really wanted to throw my "political flare" into my work it most certainly wouldn't be in a joking way. I am not of the belief that our country's condition is anything to joke about. My understanding of politics, and especially in this election, is vast – more so than the average citizen. I assure the support I exerted for Obama is well calculated and only has to do with Bush insomuch as I am by no means a republican and thus my beliefs are not held up by him.

To clarify, I'm not worshiping at the feet of Steve Jobs either – just so ya know.

[sterickson]

Again, please note that it's not just the ads inside developer's apps that need to be seen, but the ads displayed in cydia as you browse packages you can install.

If those ads are blocked, we can't afford to host the packages for you. If you'd like to see the repositories go away and go back to hunting down packages from the developers and manually installing them (assuming the dev knows how to make the .deb, even), then go ahead and block the ads.

All you'll do is destroy the idea of Cydia and repositories and shoot yourself in the foot.

-ste

[ajustcircle]

Again, please note that it's not just the ads inside developer's apps that need to be seen, but the ads displayed in cydia as you browse packages you can install.

If those ads are blocked, we can't afford to host the packages for you. If you'd like to see the repositories go away and go back to hunting down packages from the developers and manually installing them (assuming the dev knows how to make the .deb, even), then go ahead and block the ads.

All you'll do is destroy the idea of Cydia and repositories and shoot yourself in the foot.

-ste

Okay, I'm not opposed to removing the ads for you too ste, but what you requested earlier was that people remove Google ads the hosts file. Like the majority of the web, I often view sites that are from Google. I'm not opposed to removing something other than BB and Saurik's, but what I'm not okay with doing is compromising a large portion of what this, in this particular facet, is designed to do. If it were something that didn't have such a massive hit to the rest of my browsing habits it'd be fine, but not like this.

[sterickson]

Well, I run Google AdSense ads on the packages I host in Cydia, as do other repository maintainers. If those ads are to be seen then you need to remove the entries I specified (at the very least) from the hosts file.

If you aren't willing to do that, then you are saying that not seeing ads is more important than having packages to install on your iPhones and iPod Touches, because without those ads, there will not be any packages.

Once there are no packages, you won't have to worry about seeing ads in Cydia, or the apps in it, anymore.

-ste

[one1]

If STE would put previews with their packaging like many others I'd be a lot more excited about the whole deal. Several people take the time to put previews with any image packages such as themes and more, but when I go to an STE package I end up with a big "donate to me" ad and nothing else to view to give me an idea what I am looking to download.

Let's make it good for everybody, give a little get a little if you will. When STE gets up to the level of other packagers that are going through the trouble to put previews with their packages and get up to the level they are at, I'll be first on the block to remove the ad blocking. I do not download STE packages because I never know what I am getting.

[461am]

If STE would put previews with their packaging like many others I'd be a lot more excited about the whole deal. Several people take the time to put previews with any image packages such as themes and more, but when I go to an STE package I end up with a big "donate to me" ad and nothing else to view to give me an idea what I am looking to download.

Untrue. A vast majority, if not all of his packages, now feature a changelog, screenshots, and more info section. Where this is not available, there is almost invariably a link that leads to the developers site.

[one1]

Untrue backatcha, I am literally looking through Cydia as we speak. Same old "donate" screen it always was. Who wants to follow a link off the installer? Others are putting everything right there.

[461am]

Untrue re-backatcha. Gone till the letter M, and i've only encountered 4 packages that lead you to the donate page (and the developers page).

Others are not putting it right there, they lead you to links too, albeit links that look better on the iphone.

[freei]

First off, let me say that I'm all in support of paying the developers. I understand the need to pay the rent, and would not want to make that any more difficult for anyone. But I have to call FUD on a on couple points here.

... we have to pay the bills related to that (which aren't cheap at all, I spend a couple thousand dollars a month on bandwidth just for Cydia's main repository, and I do a fraction of the transfers the community sources do) as well as make a living for ourselves
...
What that means in turn is that running software like adblock or messing with your dns resolution to bypass ad servers is pretty much stealing a product from someone. It is no different from walking into a store and taking something from them

ok, that doesn't even survive a casual brush with logic.
Psuedo-IP FUD, pure and simple. I mean really, go read that again and think about it for a moment.
Needing to pay the bills is understandable in it's own right, there's no need to try and bolster it with such absurdities.

you are violating the monetization model. Just because its easy to do and just because someone doesn't notice doesn't make it right.

Nor does it necessarily follow that it's wrong either, only that perhaps that particular model is flawed (or at least unenforcible).

If you don't like the ads that someone has you should simply not go to their website. This in the same way that if you don't like the cost of someone's product you don't buy it.

I'll agree with both of those statements, as individual statements. But now you're talking about mixing those concepts into something different.
I don't mind having an ad on the server that's hosting the download of a product. You'll see it when you download (whether through a browser or cydia or whatever) and it helps cover the cost of performing that very download. And if there's a cost for the thing being downloaded, so be it. But to continue showing ads at every use of the product, particularly when there is no additional cost incurred by it's use (other than the bandwidth of serving that very same ad) is a bit harder to justify. With no way to turn them off, it brushes just short of becoming spam.
(I'm guessing that you're not going so far as to suggest that people blocking spam are stealing, or should stop using email if they don't want to read it.)

At least provide a way to turn them off, and you may find some people are more willing to purchase/donate. Others may prefer the ads if that matches their financial situation, and that's fine too.

That all said, the fact that people are now promoting mobile ad blocking solutions on the iPhone is forcing BigBoss and I to rethink our current monetization strategies

GOOD! That's excellent. From the quality of your work, you're obviously quite intelligent, so I'm sure you'll come up with something that's both more effective and less annoying. I look forward to it.

(and also work out some technological solutions to figure out how to maintain our in-application advertisements even though people have started blocking them).

Isn't that a bit hypocritical for applications you have to jailbreak in order to run in the first place? There will always be a way to circumvent it, as evidenced by the very fact that we're having this discussion to begin with. And while some folks will decline to do so just out of respect for the wishes of the developer, most of those folks won't be able to run this software (at least until apple approves of jailbreaking). So you have a user base with both the morals and the means to block the ads, and if they're annoying enough you'll have provided the motivation as well. (Other apps may even provide this motivation if their ads are annoying enough, as it's probably easier to block all-or-nothing than to pick and choose.) If you really think there's a sustainable solution based on forcing users to watch ads and not giving them an option out, it's probably time to step back and take another look in that mirror.

People will always find a way to avoid annoyances (ads in this case) so the trick is to find a way to get income from them doing so, rather than depending on preventing it for your income.

As for me, I'm going to make a donation to saurik's paypal as a thanks for all his great work, and then I'm going to go block all ads from my phone.