Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The iOS 9 Content Blocker thread
- Thread starter thatJohann
- WikiPost WikiPost
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
Technically speaking he sells you the app "as-is" , he is not supposed to provide you support in the coming years and future updates. The other thing is I believe that ad-block apps/add-ons are script based so they update automatically. There isn't much to do enhance the app itself. So purify should work just as good as it did when it was first released.
If you are not happy you can check alternative for free like Focus by Mozilla and BlockBear by TunnelBear the guys behind the famous VPN service.
That he sells you the app "as is" , he is not supposed to provide you support in the coming years and future updates.
Isn't that generally how most apps are, short of ones that provide some subscription model or something like that? As long as they are functional and still do what they did at the time of purchase, that is basically all that is technically expected. I mean we all hope that there would be more updates and so forth, but as far as actual expectations go, aside from any actually stipulated future updates and support, it's not something that is part of the purchase. Again, this is all technically speaking. And none of that is to say that it's right (or wrong) or good (or bad).
What if you paid for an app and an iOS update broke it after a fairly short period of time because the developer used non approved techniques? How long should that period of time be? What if you paid a lot more money for it and the same thing happened? How much money is too much money? Who should decide this? You?
I have been in the position of paying a considerable amount of money for apps and these things have happened. Possibly even worse is when a developer is still in business and moves to 'My app v2' just after you paid for v1. Your app breaks and you're left in the lurch because they no longer update v1. They should continue to update v1 to maintain compatibility for a set period of time.
Last edited:
Then you work on getting a refund. Clearly those some are somewhat different circumstances than what has been brought up here earlier.
Last edited:
All of those circumstances fall under the definition of 'sold as is', which is the category you and other posters are using as a defence of the developer. Mine are not imaginary scenarios, each has happened to me and sometimes on more than one occasion.
Between my problems and @tosbsas issues with pages on Purify there is a considerable amount of grey. Many people here think it's black and white and no Purify support of any kind should be forthcoming. I disagree with this assessment.
Last edited:
Most people don't realise that only 1 or 2 guys behind the apps. They always imagine its a big company like Adobe, and for $1 per purchase its not worth years of upgrades and support.
That being said, Apple could force app developers to supports apps to be fully working for at least 1 year from release. Seriously there are apps on the App Store that have been not updated for 6 years. Apple should take out any apps that have been not updated for more than 2 years off the store to ensure compatiblity.
But all they care about is saying "The App Store now has 400,000 apps!" of which are 100,000 are none working and 280,000 are simple apps made by individuals as test and demos.
[doublepost=1470154602][/doublepost]
Just do like I do, don't buy apps except from known developers that are known to support their apps for a long time.
That being said, Apple could force app developers to supports apps to be fully working for at least 1 year from release. Seriously there are apps on the App Store that have been not updated for 6 years. Apple should take out any apps that have been not updated for more than 2 years off the store to ensure compatiblity.
But all they care about is saying "The App Store now has 400,000 apps!" of which are 100,000 are none working and 280,000 are simple apps made by individuals as test and demos.
[doublepost=1470154602][/doublepost]
Just do like I do, don't buy apps except from known developers that are known to support their apps for a long time.
No one said anything about anything being imaginary. But the circumstances of an app being there and working as it had been at the time of purchase simply with no new updates are different than circumstances where the that isn't the case and the app isn't working as it did before.
The problem with these apps are the rules that require continuous maintenance. Websites change and when they do they ruleset may need an update. If you don't keep it up then the workings of the app will degrade over time. It'll stop doing what it did when you bought it and thus "sold as is" no longer applies. You need a proper company with a healthy business if you want to prevent that from happening. This is something you can see in the app store if you take a closer look at all the ratings for an app over time (the amount of stars is dropping).
Last edited:
You'd need a somewhat different type of content blocker for that, like Adguard Pro: https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...rs-mini-reviews.1918483/page-35#post-23639398
Not that much in terms of free. I think there's Weblock (https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/weblock-adblock-for-apps-websites/id558818638?mt=8) which is sometimes on sale or goes free, and there's AdBlock (https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/adblock/id691121579?mt=8) which also sometimes goes on sale or becomes free, or some similar ones.
Edit: Looks like AdBlock is actually free at the moment as part of a limited sale/promotion, so now might be the time to try it.
I just noticed AdBlock as well. I'll give that a try.
Thanks again!
Edit: The only thing it seems to be missing is a whitelist feature. And the option to blocks an ad from the share sheet like Adguard. Obviously neither are a deal-breaker for me. Just thought I should point that out.