dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
645
share rss forum feed

tcope
Premium
join:2003-05-07
Sandy, UT
kudos:2

[Apps] Must Have Apps for Android! [Updated: 02/06/12]

said by Da Geek Kid:

a new app I found not mentioned here that is a MUST for rooted phones is Adfree. »play.google.com/store/apps/detai···n.adfree

Questions... have the ads in apps really not allowed the app to be used as intended? Did you pay for the app with ads or was it given to you for free? If you like the app, is it such a bad thing for the developer (who spent countless hours making the app) to get paid for their work? Do you work for free?

In most cases the developer also makes an ad free version. Usually for the princely sum of $.99.


nekkidtruth
YISMM
Premium
join:2002-05-20
London, ON
kudos:2
Reviews:
·WIND Mobile
·Rogers Hi-Speed

said by tcope:

Questions... have the ads in apps really not allowed the app to be used as intended? Did you pay for the app with ads or was it given to you for free? If you like the app, is it such a bad thing for the developer (who spent countless hours making the app) to get paid for their work? Do you work for free?

In most cases the developer also makes an ad free version. Usually for the princely sum of $.99.

Although I don't disagree that developers should be allowed to make money, this way of making money is piss poor on a mobile network.

In a time when most wireless carriers nickle and dime you for every byte sent and received, it's not very good business practice to use ads in this way. I control how much data is used, not the other way around.

Once carriers start offering decent data plans (and some already are), this would be much less of an issue.
--
Weeeeeee

tcope
Premium
join:2003-05-07
Sandy, UT
kudos:2

said by nekkidtruth:

In a time when most wireless carriers nickle and dime you for every byte sent and received, it's not very good business practice to use ads in this way. I control how much data is used, not the other way around.

Once carriers start offering decent data plans (and some already are), this would be much less of an issue.

I'm not really sure you thunk that statement through. So it's the developers fault that _you_ downloaded and _you_ used the app when the app contained ads? Sorry but your statement does not have any merit to it. It's like buying a car and blaming the manufacture because you need to fill it with gas in order to get anywhere. The two things and nothing to do with each other at all. Not one thing.

OZO
Premium
join:2003-01-17
kudos:2

2 recommendations

If you don't want to offer your app for free, don't offer it for free. Isn't that simple? Obviously, others have a different POV on that. Offering your app for free doesn't give you any right to make life of its user miserable... If you disagree with that, please remove your app form offering to public. BTW, I do some development and offer my programs for free without that trash (ads). And I can assure you, that I thought through it and I don't have any regrets about that choice.
--
Keep it simple, it'll become complex by itself...



Juggernaut
Irreverent or irrelevant?
Premium
join:2006-09-05
Kelowna, BC
kudos:2

1 recommendation

Good job, OZO!



nekkidtruth
YISMM
Premium
join:2002-05-20
London, ON
kudos:2
Reviews:
·WIND Mobile
·Rogers Hi-Speed
reply to tcope

said by tcope:

said by nekkidtruth:

In a time when most wireless carriers nickle and dime you for every byte sent and received, it's not very good business practice to use ads in this way. I control how much data is used, not the other way around.

Once carriers start offering decent data plans (and some already are), this would be much less of an issue.

I'm not really sure you thunk that statement through. So it's the developers fault that _you_ downloaded and _you_ used the app when the app contained ads? Sorry but your statement does not have any merit to it. It's like buying a car and blaming the manufacture because you need to fill it with gas in order to get anywhere. The two things and nothing to do with each other at all. Not one thing.

I assure you, I've thought it through. Your car analogy doesn't really work. If you want to use a car analogy the following would work better:

It would be like me faulting the manufacturer of the vehicle for poking a hole in the gas tank and asking me to pay to fix it.

Developers can make money all sorts of different ways. Trial periods, limited functionality, donations. Ads are a poor way of doing it. I chose to download a functioning app to do what I need to do. However, I do not download an app to dip into my data usage as it sees fit. It's called control.
--
Weeeeeee

tcope
Premium
join:2003-05-07
Sandy, UT
kudos:2
reply to OZO

If you were buying the app, you'd be (more) correct. But you are not buying it... it's not yours. You are licensed to use it. But this is not the point in question anyway.

You release your apps free and without ads.... great! Still not the point.

I'll be more clear... if a developer spends a lot of their time making an app and, rather then charge people, feel it's more appropriate to make their revenue from ads... this is their right. By bypassing the ads you _are_ screwing over the developer so that they cannot earn something for their hard work. Most apps will have a free version with ads and a pay version. If you feel the app is worth is, pay for it to avoid the ads. But by using the free app and blocking the ads you are simply going to drive that developer out of the biz. Let's also be real... the ads are not killing use of any apps. Right now I'm using the free version of an alarm app. It has ads. When am I going to view them? When I'm sleeping? The only time I even know they are there is when I reach over and hit the snooze button... 3 or 4 times in the morning. If I did not like the ads, I'd pay the developer the dollar or two and avoid them.

But if you cannot afford to pay a developer a dollar for a good app and would rather drive them out of the biz, then feel free to use apps for free and bypass the ads.


tcope
Premium
join:2003-05-07
Sandy, UT
kudos:2
reply to nekkidtruth

said by nekkidtruth:

It would be like me faulting the manufacturer of the vehicle for poking a hole in the gas tank and asking me to pay to fix it.

Developers can make money all sorts of different ways. Trial periods, limited functionality, donations. Ads are a poor way of doing it. I chose to download a functioning app to do what I need to do. However, I do not download an app to dip into my data usage as it sees fit. It's called control.

Not the same. The app is not defective and it's doing what exactly it is supposed to do. Don't like it... don't buy the app/car.

I don't always agree with ads either. If I don't... for whatever reason... I don't use the app.

As mentioned above, you are not buying the app. You are buying a license to use it. If you don't like the app (the entire app)... don't use it. Again, because you don't like the revenue stream the developer is using does not make it right to screw the developer over from being paid a fair price for the person's hard work. Call me old fashion but that is pretty universal.


Selenia
I love Debian
Premium
join:2006-09-22
Fort Smith, AR
kudos:2
reply to tcope

Happy medium is Hola. It's a web accelerator and cache. If the same few ads are contantly fetched, Hola will cache it and mitigate most of the data usage. I block ads because of abusive systems like Airpush, but make it a point to buy an app if I really like it. Besides, most paid versions add useful features.



nekkidtruth
YISMM
Premium
join:2002-05-20
London, ON
kudos:2
Reviews:
·WIND Mobile
·Rogers Hi-Speed
reply to tcope

said by tcope:

Not the same. The app is not defective and it's doing what exactly it is supposed to do. Don't like it... don't buy the app/car.

I don't always agree with ads either. If I don't... for whatever reason... I don't use the app.

As mentioned above, you are not buying the app. You are buying a license to use it. If you don't like the app (the entire app)... don't use it. Again, because you don't like the revenue stream the developer is using does not make it right to screw the developer over from being paid a fair price for the person's hard work. Call me old fashion but that is pretty universal.

Clearly we disagree. I vote with my wallet. If the app is useful, I buy it. While I'm testing it, I do not allow ads. Plain and simple. The developer gets my money from the purchase, not through forcing me to incur charges through my wireless carrier.

If the developer chooses to use such an invasive way to receive revenue, then he will have to deal with the consequences. As I pointed out, there are plenty of legit ways to produce revenue that do not require the developer to force intrusive ads nor to force me to pay extra fees on top of that to the carrier for data used.
--
Weeeeeee

tcope
Premium
join:2003-05-07
Sandy, UT
kudos:2

No one is "forcing" you to use the ad app and as you said, you pay for the app if you like it (I'm guessing if you don't like it, you don't use it). Nothing wrong with that. I'm just pointing out that blocking ads on free apps hurts the developer and runs the good one away from Android.



nekkidtruth
YISMM
Premium
join:2002-05-20
London, ON
kudos:2
Reviews:
·WIND Mobile
·Rogers Hi-Speed

1 recommendation

said by tcope:

No one is "forcing" you to use the ad app and as you said, you pay for the app if you like it (I'm guessing if you don't like it, you don't use it). Nothing wrong with that. I'm just pointing out that blocking ads on free apps hurts the developer and runs the good one away from Android.

You're right, no one is forcing me. Just as no one is forcing me to view ads. Truly good developers know full well ads are not appreciated and don't base their entire revenue stream on them. I don't feel the least bit guilty. There are apps that do not offer ad-free options, nor the ability to buy a "pro" version. I do not stop using those apps simply because they have ads, I remove them. I also make it a point to let the developer know that I don't appreciate the ads and there are other avenues they could be pursuing in terms of revenue.
--
Weeeeeee


Juggernaut
Irreverent or irrelevant?
Premium
join:2006-09-05
Kelowna, BC
kudos:2

1 recommendation

reply to tcope

Bull shit. Like I want, or need to see travel ads when I open ringdroid?

These are rotating, crap ads that devs see nothing or little for. I never click them in any case.
--
"I fear the day that technology will surpass our human interaction. The world will have a generation of idiots." ~ Albert Einstein


tcope
Premium
join:2003-05-07
Sandy, UT
kudos:2

said by Juggernaut:

Bull shit. Like I want, or need to see travel ads when I open ringdroid?

These are rotating, crap ads that devs see nothing or little for. I never click them in any case.

Users don't need to click on the ads for the developer to get paid. They can (most do) get paid just to push the ad.

Let me rephrase your statement above... "Like I need to pay the developer for his/her hard work put into ringdroid". Both statements are the same. That is what you really are stating. You are bypassing the developers revenue stream and basically not paying the developer for his/her hard work. You can sugar coat that all you want... that is _exactly_ what a person is doing if they block the ads. You can hate ads, think they don't have a place in the app, think the developer made a mistake in using them, etc... the results of blocking the ads is still the same.

If you take a quick look you will see that ads in apps generate around $1.6 billion for app developers each year. They don't put them in apps for no reason (obviously). Thinking this is probably just one way to justify keeping revenue from the developer.

How about this... like the app and want to block the ads... contact and send the developer $.99 instead. My only point is that _blocking ads in apps takes money away from the developer_.


gjrhine

join:2001-12-12
Pawleys Island, SC
reply to OZO

said by OZO:

Offering your app for free doesn't give you any right to make life of its user miserable

There is where you go wrong. Minor annoyance maybe, but "miserable" is hyperbole.
--
Gary in South Carolina --For a list of all the ways technology has failed to improve the quality of life, please press three.


Sandman
Premium
join:2002-07-10
Strafford, MO
reply to tcope

said by tcope:

said by Da Geek Kid:

a new app I found not mentioned here that is a MUST for rooted phones is Adfree. »play.google.com/store/apps/detai···n.adfree

Questions... have the ads in apps really not allowed the app to be used as intended? Did you pay for the app with ads or was it given to you for free? If you like the app, is it such a bad thing for the developer (who spent countless hours making the app) to get paid for their work? Do you work for free?

In most cases the developer also makes an ad free version. Usually for the princely sum of $.99.

So, I don't disagree that developers should make money. I have played at least one game though, Stupid Zombies, where there is no ad-free version, and the ads actually blocked the bottom part of the screen. Which made some levels nearly impossible to complete.

I've also seen people argue that you shouldn't use an ad blocker on your desktop web browser, and to them I say that I didn't start using ad blockers until some sites started using audio ads that you could not shut up.
--
Rule #62: Don't take yourself so damn seriously!


nekkidtruth
YISMM
Premium
join:2002-05-20
London, ON
kudos:2
Reviews:
·WIND Mobile
·Rogers Hi-Speed
reply to tcope

said by tcope:

Let me rephrase your statement above... "Like I need to pay the developer for his/her hard work put into ringdroid". Both statements are the same. That is what you really are stating.

Actually no, they are not the same thing. Perhaps that's how you wish to interpret it, but that is not at all what he said.

said by tcope:

You are bypassing the developers revenue stream and basically not paying the developer for his/her hard work. You can sugar coat that all you want... that is _exactly_ what a person is doing if they block the ads. You can hate ads, think they don't have a place in the app, think the developer made a mistake in using them, etc... the results of blocking the ads is still the same.

So it's perfectly ok for a developer to require the data stream that I pay for, to try to sell me something I don't want? That's an interesting way to look at it. If a developer would like to be compensate for their work, they need only ask. However, forcing me to incur a fee for my data usage does not and will not ever sit well.

said by tcope:

If you take a quick look you will see that ads in apps generate around $1.6 billion for app developers each year. They don't put them in apps for no reason (obviously). Thinking this is probably just one way to justify keeping revenue from the developer.

If they're missing out on that revenue, they can feel free to contact my wireless carrier and request they be compensated through the money I just spent paying for said ad to use my connection.

said by tcope:

How about this... like the app and want to block the ads... contact and send the developer $.99 instead. My only point is that _blocking ads in apps takes money away from the developer_.

This is not at all unreasonable. However, this would only be necessary for developers who do not already provide a way to pay for a pro version or ad-less version of the app. I suspect you were most likely expecting a "NO WAY!" response. Sorry to disappoint.
--
Weeeeeee

tcope
Premium
join:2003-05-07
Sandy, UT
kudos:2

said by nekkidtruth:

So it's perfectly ok for a developer to require the data stream that I pay for, to try to sell me something I don't want? That's an interesting way to look at it. If a developer would like to be compensate for their work, they need only ask. However, forcing me to incur a fee for my data usage does not and will not ever sit well.

Yes, yes and YES!!!!!!!

The ads are part of the app!!!! You act like the developer forced you to use the app... as this is the only reason why you could even think the developer was somehow responsible for how _you_ used your data connection.

I've mentioned this a few times already... you don't own the app. The developer is giving you a license to use it. If you don't like the way it works..... YOU DON'T NEED TO USE IT. It's _THAT_ simple.

But again... none of that has anything to do with my point. By blocking ads you are now allowing the developer to be compensated for his/her hard work. If enough people do this, it will drive the good developers away from Android.
Expand your moderator at work


nekkidtruth
YISMM
Premium
join:2002-05-20
London, ON
kudos:2
Reviews:
·WIND Mobile
·Rogers Hi-Speed

1 recommendation

reply to tcope

Re: [Apps] Must Have Apps for Android! [Updated: 02/06/12]

said by tcope:

Yes, yes and YES!!!!!!!

The ads are part of the app!!!! You act like the developer forced you to use the app... as this is the only reason why you could even think the developer was somehow responsible for how _you_ used your data connection.

I've mentioned this a few times already... you don't own the app. The developer is giving you a license to use it. If you don't like the way it works..... YOU DON'T NEED TO USE IT. It's _THAT_ simple.

But again... none of that has anything to do with my point. By blocking ads you are now allowing the developer to be compensated for his/her hard work. If enough people do this, it will drive the good developers away from Android.

We'll have to agree to disagree. I do not see it this way, nor will I ever. As a developer myself, I would never put any of my potential customers or potential paying customers in a position to WANT to block ads, let alone need to.
--
Weeeeeee
Expand your moderator at work