Difference to "AdBlock" (no plus) for Chrome?
Difference to "AdBlock" (no plus) for Chrome?
As far as I can see there is another similar Ad blocker extension for Chrome:
AdPlus (without postfix "plus")
What is the difference?
It seems to me that the advantage of AdBlock (only) is that ít blocks ads even BEFORE the actual download.
AdBlock Plus on the opposite downloads them all before hiding them.
Am I right?
Peter
AdPlus (without postfix "plus")
What is the difference?
It seems to me that the advantage of AdBlock (only) is that ít blocks ads even BEFORE the actual download.
AdBlock Plus on the opposite downloads them all before hiding them.
Am I right?
Peter
Re: Difference to "AdBlock" (no plus) for Chrome?
1. adblock (no plus) is very slow
2. adblock plus is blocking ads from downloading. There was an issue about the filters (filters in wrong format were hiding the ads), but now is solved.
waiting the official release, you can use the development build to have all the last improvements
en/development-builds#installation
2. adblock plus is blocking ads from downloading. There was an issue about the filters (filters in wrong format were hiding the ads), but now is solved.
waiting the official release, you can use the development build to have all the last improvements
en/development-builds#installation
Re: Difference to "AdBlock" (no plus) for Chrome?
As mapx notes correctly, the most important Adblock Plus issue has been resolved recently - so we are now on par with Adblock as far as blocking quality goes.
For me the most important difference right now is: Adblock Plus uses the same code to work with filters on Firefox and Chrome so there should be no surprises when using filter lists that have been created with Adblock Plus/Firefox in mind. Adblock uses the same filter lists but has occasional problems due to a different code base (most recently - because of the new $donottrack option).
Adblock Plus/Firefox still remains significantly more advanced than Adblock Plus/Chrome, particularly as user interface goes - I will continue to work on that. At the moment you need Firefox if you want to contribute to filter lists. The goal is to offer a fully customizable extension for Chrome as well so that people who want to tweak something themselves can easily do that. "Autopilot mode" on the other hand works pretty well already.
For me the most important difference right now is: Adblock Plus uses the same code to work with filters on Firefox and Chrome so there should be no surprises when using filter lists that have been created with Adblock Plus/Firefox in mind. Adblock uses the same filter lists but has occasional problems due to a different code base (most recently - because of the new $donottrack option).
Adblock Plus/Firefox still remains significantly more advanced than Adblock Plus/Chrome, particularly as user interface goes - I will continue to work on that. At the moment you need Firefox if you want to contribute to filter lists. The goal is to offer a fully customizable extension for Chrome as well so that people who want to tweak something themselves can easily do that. "Autopilot mode" on the other hand works pretty well already.
Re: Difference to "AdBlock" (no plus) for Chrome?
Does this mean that rules such as
Are now treated the same in Firefox and Chrome (I was under the impression that these sorts of rules were essentially hiding rules in ABP / Chrome)?
Code: Select all
||adblockplus.org^
________________________________
ABP Subscriptions
ABP Development Builds
Submit an issue report with Adblock Plus
ABP Subscriptions
ABP Development Builds
Submit an issue report with Adblock Plus
Re: Difference to "AdBlock" (no plus) for Chrome?
Yes, that's what it means. From the look of it, Adblock Plus 1.1 for Chrome (development-builds/adblock-plus-11-for- ... -available) will be released on Monday - and all the weird filters issues should be gone then.
Re: Difference to "AdBlock" (no plus) for Chrome?
Does this mean that in every case in which Adblock would block an ad rather than downloading and hiding, even though an up-front memory cost will be required, Adblock Plus now does this, or does ABP still sometimes sacrifice security for speed?Wladimir Palant wrote:As mapx notes correctly, the most important Adblock Plus issue has been resolved recently - so we are now on par with Adblock as far as blocking quality goes.
Re: Difference to "AdBlock" (no plus) for Chrome?
Adblock Plus now always blocks ads when somehow possible. We only hide the elements that loaded before the tab got the necessary data (usually a rare scenario) and on a few websites that are affected by WebKit bug 45586 - same as Adblock.
Re: Difference to "AdBlock" (no plus) for Chrome?
I tried it out and it still works faster and uses less memory than AdBlock; I mean AdBlock uses a little less memory in its own process but it also injects a lot of code into all tab processes, as GundlachWladimir Palant wrote:Adblock Plus now always blocks ads when somehow possible. We only hide the elements that loaded before the tab got the necessary data (usually a rare scenario) and on a few websites that are affected by WebKit bug 45586 - same as Adblock.
mentioned at one point, and I'm hoping that that workaround is no longer necessary to achieve maximum blockability.
I now recommend this extension rather than Gundlach's; now to achieve parity, you'll only need to register the abp: pseudo-protocol, as he did, but it's not a big deal because most people just install it and expect it to work out of the box.
There's a buzzin' in my brain I really can't explain; I think about it before they make me go to bed.
Re: Difference to "AdBlock" (no plus) for Chrome?
RU AdList (Р СѓСЃСЃРєРёР№, Українська). Lain_13. Последнее обновление: сегодня в 10:03:08
Re: Difference to "AdBlock" (no plus) for Chrome?
Зачем писать об ошибках в теме, которая никак с ними не связана? Тем более, что эта проблема как раз обсуждается в другой теме: forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=7174