Everybody that's undecided get purify now that's $0.99
Before the price jumps back up
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
Before the price jumps back up
On the contrary, this is actually very transparent. Can you verify the block and white lists of iOS content blockers at this time? No, because most are completely closed-sourced projects (especially Purify, which is developed and promoted by the lead developer of the open source extension uBlock). Big advertisers could be paying off any popular adblocker and we would probably have no reliable method of finding out.
Adblock Plus is offering a good deal: they deal with the advertisers, impose strict guidelines and make sure they behave well. As an incentive, they are paying each developer who implements their white list. Users can completely opt out of this. I think this is a good thing and I find it beyond hypocritical that people have no problem paying money for an adblocker, but find it wrong when said adblocker charges advertisers.
At least he's open about it. Who knows which of the other devs took the offer too but doesn't talk about it.
Anyway, I just deleted Crystal. Fortunately I got it for free on the first day.
That would indeed be nice. Perhaps someday.
This is good information. I'm hearing impaired, though, so my carrier removed the telephone portion from my plan.
I paid .99 cents. Small amount but still kinda scummy tbh. Just bought purify. Hope he doesn't take that route as well.
Purify developer said he won't. Time will tell.
- Liam Gladdy @lgladdy 27 minutes ago Bath, England
You are the worst and I hate you forever @_CrystalApp. Please promise you won’t do the same, @purify_app. http://www.theverge.com/2015/9/24/9393941/clear-ios-ad-blocker-offering-paid-whitelist…
Hide summary
0 retweets0 favorites
Purify App @purify_app 12 minutes ago
@lgladdy promise!
i want to whitelist ad networks like Deck that do not use trackers or animations.... they play fair (simple, small ads that help the websites pay the bills but don't piss us off).
From their privacy policy:
"We don’t track our readers in any way or allow any other behind-the-scenes shenanigans. We just serve useful, relevant ads in a simple, unobtrusive way to support independent publishers."
We need to support this kind of thing to take back the web.
From their privacy policy:
"We don’t track our readers in any way or allow any other behind-the-scenes shenanigans. We just serve useful, relevant ads in a simple, unobtrusive way to support independent publishers."
We need to support this kind of thing to take back the web.
Personally I find it beyond hypocritical if a dev takes my money for the service of blocking ads, and then turns around and denies me the service I paid for if some advertiser comes along and offers a bribe. Eyeo's business model is beyond shady. I hope that no iOS blocker becomes as dominant as they are on the desktop (which is what makes it possible for them to run this protection racket in the first place).
I basically want a blocker that sources data from popular telemarketing phone lookup services such as 800notes. I get at least 3-4 calls a week and they are all in there.
From Crystal developer, in regards to his new deal plans with the app.
Crystal App @_CrystalApp 55 minutes ago
@mctiernanja I’ll be allowing ads based on the criteria at http://acceptableads.org. Again, entirely optional.
Crystal App @_CrystalApp 55 minutes ago
@mctiernanja I’ll be allowing ads based on the criteria at http://acceptableads.org. Again, entirely optional.
You are misrepresenting this. Crystal still provides you that service, full stop. They will simply offer an acceptable ads option that lets customers who want to whitelist ads that are not intrusive or annoying. It gives advertisers an opportunity to exonerate themselves and pay their share for solving the problem they created. They can’t pay their way in, Eyeo has strict guidelines. Ads that don’t comply with the guidelines won’t get on the list. That’s it. They have staff that monitors the compliance with those deals, hence why they ask money for it. Again, it is hypocritical that people have no problem paying money for an adblocker that blocks all ads, but when that person accepts money for whitelisting acceptable ads (the white list is publicly available by the way), it is suddenly shady? Either no one pays anything for a blocker or it is OK to ask money from both sides.
Another post from Dean, in regards to what will be happening with the coming update.
Crystal App @_CrystalApp 1h1 hour ago
@gruesgripes It’ll be entirely optional when the feature is available. It’s there for people who want to support pubs with non-intrusive ads
Crystal App @_CrystalApp 1h1 hour ago
@gruesgripes It’ll be entirely optional when the feature is available. It’s there for people who want to support pubs with non-intrusive ads
It's not the service that was promised when I got it.
And who is Eyeo to decide what's "not intrusive or annoying"? For example, their definition of "acceptable" currently includes trackers that violate my privacy.
Excuse me? What kind of strange logic is that? How would you like it if you pay an exterminator to get rid of cockroaches in your home, and instead he leaves a few behind because some insecticide manufacturer paid him behind your back?
I WARNED YOU ALL. I AM SAYING FOR LONG THAT CRYSTAL IS SH*T. I TOLD YOU.
Ask a refund as soon as possible and buy PURIFY.
Ask a refund as soon as possible and buy PURIFY.
Dean has been open and honest about the plans for the app moving forward. People will still be able to block all ads. Nothing is being forced on anyone. Those that test the new feature can decide if they want to continue using it, or turn it off. Whitelisting is also going to be included in an update.
How is giving people a choice and being open about the deal struck nefarious?
You turn the feature off. Problem solved.
You turn the feature off. Problem solved. As I said before, iOS 9 content blockers are almost all closed-sourced projects. You don’t know whether they can be trusted. Trackers may still track you even though they are not visible. There is huge potential for abuse here. Crystal openly commits to using the publicly available whitelist of AdBlock Plus, for me that is a good thing.
Poor analogy. For one thing, the adblocker tells you this beforehand and gives you an option to turn it off. For another, you have a direct relationship with advertisers and websites who show ads, so you might actually want to whitelist some advertisers so that you can support your favourite websites. The exterminator would do this without your permission and you personally have no relationship with the insecticide manufacturer. The gist of the white list is this: you find it acceptable to see certain ads. If you don’t, you turn the feature off. Problem solved.
Well, that's a bit of a euphemism, isn't it? According to the WSJ the Adblock whitelist is turned on by default, so it's not like people opt in to "test" the new feature.
I appreciate that he's open about it. Doesn't change the fact that I will not use this app though.
Last edited:
Here: http://www.imore.com/how-to-get-refund-itunes-app-store
I ADVISE YOU ALL TO ASK A CRYSTAL REFUND AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
You only have 14 days to do it, after the purchase.
This whole thing has turned into a mess. Most consumers will be completely clueless which 'content' blocker does what. Apple should reconsider the whole system. I'm not against the concept of providing a mechanism to promote good behavior of advertisers but this is turning into an ugly mess.
So until this recent announcement (which is still not a given as being anything really nefarious) what was the issue with Crystal?
Indeed. Let’s all pay for the most expensive, closed-source and questionably advertised content blocker that is made by the lead developer of the open source adblocker uBlock. Let’s not ask any questions why Purify is not open source or free too. If people have a problem with Crystal’s announcement, then they should seriously ask themselves whether they should be supporting any adblocker that is not free and open source.