chrfr
macrumors G5
Apple has limited content blocking to 64-bit devices only, so no blocker will work on an iPhone 5.
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
Nevermind, I found it! It had to do with restrictions :S
Im not the only on with these problems though: http://www.imore.com/cant-enable-content-blockers-your-iphone-or-ipad-ios-9-heres-fix
Thanks for your tips man!
Rogifan
macrumors Penryn
Warbrain
macrumors 603
You know what grants you granular control of what you block? The Ghostery extensions. The database is just that - a database.
Using one should be enough , if is not you need to find a better one
Is like installing 2 antivirus programs on your pc both doing live scanning
Apple_Robert
Contributor
Using 2 content blockers has almost no affect on system resources and performance versus antivirus.
Ideally, one would be best. However, with everything being new, there is no harm in running two at once right now. It will take a little while for programs to mature.
Just found out about Marco pulling Peace. Now, I'm not going to judge him one way or another for it - I never bought the app - time will be the judge of whether he's hurt his reputation with this but it brings up a bigger picture.
I've been listening a few of the more popular Mac & Apple Podcasts this last few days and every time the subject of ad blockers has come up, almost without fail every podcaster has waxed lyrical about how things need to change and that they "accept responsibility" for ads on their sites but then go on that they need to make money. Not one seems to have admitted that the abuse of ads and tracking to ridiculous levels, where sometimes it's so hard to find the content among them all, is what has led us to this. They design their sites or pay someone to do it - so they are aware these intrusive ads are there so they should be taking their lumps now. Yes, these sites need to make money but if they hadn't abused our goodwill in the first place we wouldn't need the ad blockers. Some of these sites (and it's not just tech sites by any means) were taking 5-10 seconds to load fully on 100 Mb+ BB connections. That is just ridiculous.
Hopefully the dawn of the ad blockers will make for a more enjoyable web for everyone, not just the people monetising it.
I've been listening a few of the more popular Mac & Apple Podcasts this last few days and every time the subject of ad blockers has come up, almost without fail every podcaster has waxed lyrical about how things need to change and that they "accept responsibility" for ads on their sites but then go on that they need to make money. Not one seems to have admitted that the abuse of ads and tracking to ridiculous levels, where sometimes it's so hard to find the content among them all, is what has led us to this. They design their sites or pay someone to do it - so they are aware these intrusive ads are there so they should be taking their lumps now. Yes, these sites need to make money but if they hadn't abused our goodwill in the first place we wouldn't need the ad blockers. Some of these sites (and it's not just tech sites by any means) were taking 5-10 seconds to load fully on 100 Mb+ BB connections. That is just ridiculous.
Hopefully the dawn of the ad blockers will make for a more enjoyable web for everyone, not just the people monetising it.
Apple_Robert
Contributor
Your comment was about 2, not 5. Sometimes, running two content blockers can results in negative display results. But, as I said, running two has hardly any affect on system resources or performance.
Do some research, and you will find out for yourself, that what I said is true.
Ludatyk
macrumors 604
He written a piece on how much ads has gotten outta control... It was well written & discussed over throughout the circles. I respect his talent.. he's a great developer. But what he pulled... doesn't make any sense.
Of course, his reputation is going to take a hit... But I'm sure he's going to pull through. I went ahead and requested a refund... Going to go ahead and try Purify instead.
Enough about Marco, let's consume Crystal.
For what it's worth, I have enjoyed using Crystal but will more than likely download some of the others for comparison.
For what it's worth, I have enjoyed using Crystal but will more than likely download some of the others for comparison.
netnothing
macrumors 68040
You can't whitelist in Crystal correct?
I'm trying Blockr....that allows whitelisting and even granular controls over what gets block.
-Kevin
I'm trying Blockr....that allows whitelisting and even granular controls over what gets block.
-Kevin
Apple_Robert
Contributor
1Blocker has even more ability than Blockr.
As noted earlier, with 1Blocker, you can create rules on the fly (if you like). I have done it twice thus far.
I've installed 1Blocker and it makes some newspapers' webpages unusable. Links don't work and so on....
Warbrain
macrumors 603
That's what happens these blockers. A lot of sites use beacons and trackers for functionality.
Mefisto
macrumors 65816
Very happy with Crystal at the moment. Just the kind of "start it and forget about it" bare bones blocker that suits my needs.
I'm all for further customization when and if the developer gets around to it, but at the moment it does it's thing and does it well.
I'm all for further customization when and if the developer gets around to it, but at the moment it does it's thing and does it well.
Slightly miffed with Peace getting pulled. That said the original intention was to retain it rather than request a refund but my position has now changed.
I bought it on my iPhone as I yet to update my iPad to iOS 9. I've just updated the iPad but the app won't even transfer from my phone back to my Mac library (not under transfer purchases or backup) so I have no way to get it to my iPad where it would be of most value to me. So refund time.
I bought it on my iPhone as I yet to update my iPad to iOS 9. I've just updated the iPad but the app won't even transfer from my phone back to my Mac library (not under transfer purchases or backup) so I have no way to get it to my iPad where it would be of most value to me. So refund time.
Yeah, I read it before posting which was part of the reason I said I'm not going to judge him. Could be an interesting Accidental Tech Podcast next week at least.
I installed Crystal then tried Blockr. So far I'm preferring BLockr and will stick with that one for a while since it seems to be working.
Just download a blocker and use it. There is no need for meticulous comparisons at this point because they all seem to have some flaws and room for improvement. Let them compete and learn from each other and switch if necessary. No need to pay for apps you might not use.
Ludatyk
macrumors 604
I'd suggest you do a refund. Exactly what I did... Imma try out Purify, but Imma wait until I get the notice of my refund being granted.
Marco already said on Twitter he's giving the app to Ghostery, so more than likely they will release it under their own name.
I've requested a refund for the Peace content blocker app. Sad, this app showed promise.
Also, this is the first time I've ever requested a refund from Apple, and I've been with Apple products since 2012. The refund procedure was quick and painless. Thank tou, Apple.
I still have Purity, which I like.
Also, this is the first time I've ever requested a refund from Apple, and I've been with Apple products since 2012. The refund procedure was quick and painless. Thank tou, Apple.
I still have Purity, which I like.
I've been testing Blockr today and like it quite a bit. Good customization options including whitelisting, but without Purify's inflated price. Next I'll be testing 1Blocker (you can test it for free, but full functionality requires a $3 in-app purchase). Customization options will probably be too much for many people, but I like that you can see exactly what is being blocked ...