8 ms·

You have to have a 64-bit iPhone for the "content filtering" functions. The iPhone 5 is the last 32-bit CPU-based iPhone.

by numair 11y ago

pduan 11y ago
Thanks! Although jailbroken ad blockers were working. Guess it's an Apple framework limitation.
- userbinator 11y ago
  Most definitely an artificial limitation. There's nothing about blocking ads that requires a 64-bit CPU.
  - hughes 11y ago
    What if there are (2^32)+1 ads on the screen!?
    - pinewurst 11y ago
      Just don't look at Yahoo sites then. :)
      - jbrooksuk 11y ago
        Or The Verge!
      - deleted 11y ago
        [deleted]
  - usef- 11y ago
    Apparently the block list is compiled/JITed to native code when loaded for better performance and battery life. They probably decided it wasn't worth the engineering effort to add a second code generation backend for 32bit phones (which are now three+ generations old and already facing RAM limitations).
dave_sullivan 11y ago
Yeah, I love how they make it sound like old iphones "weren't powerful enough to handle blocking ads!" when blocking ads actually significantly cuts down on the resource usage. What's frustrating is that on their new phones you can block ads in Safari proper, but apparently not from within an app like Flipboard. I guess they're saving that particular "feature".
- Bud 11y ago
  How would a framework that is explictly part of and designed for Safari possibly work in a third-party app with sandboxing? Seems pretty silly to accuse Apple of nefariously "saving" this. Similarly, Apple never "made it sound" like old iPhones "weren't powerful enough". You really shouldn't put things in quotation marks and attribute them to others when you just made them up.
  - dave_sullivan 11y ago
    They could have it edit the hosts file or some better global interface for blocking/not blocking certain hosts from any app (which would be most users' preference when using ad blockers?) I think it's ok to use scare quotes to convey sarcasm instead of a direct quote. There's admittedly some ambiguity there. 32bit vs 64bit is a super lame limitation to claim, and to most people "number of bits" would appear performance related. It's nice they finally enabled a way to block ads, but it's hardly a feature they deserve a pat on the back for. It's more like, I was seriously considering switching to Android if they didn't add it.
- yuanchuan 11y ago
  Correct me if I'm wrong. I watched the Safari Content Blocker video that is presented in WWDC 2015 and it mentioned that the list of content to be filtered is compiled to bit code instead of reading it as a JSON file, which makes it more efficient and less draining on CPU. Since it is compiled down to bit code, 32-bit will not be compatible to 64-bit and that's why only the newer iPhones and iPads are compatible. It is not that iPhone 5 is not powerful enough but simply the CPU architecture doesn't support.

You have to have a 64-bit iPhone for the "content filtering" functions. The iPhone 5 is the last 32-bit CPU-based iPhone.

by numair 11y ago

You have to have a 64-bit iPhone for the "content filtering" functions. The iPhone 5 is the last 32-bit CPU-based iPhone.

pduan 11y ago

Thanks! Although jailbroken ad blockers were working. Guess it's an Apple framework limitation.

userbinator 11y ago
Most definitely an artificial limitation. There's nothing about blocking ads that requires a 64-bit CPU.
- hughes 11y ago
  What if there are (2^32)+1 ads on the screen!?
  - pinewurst 11y ago
    Just don't look at Yahoo sites then. :)
    - jbrooksuk 11y ago
      Or The Verge!
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
- usef- 11y ago
  Apparently the block list is compiled/JITed to native code when loaded for better performance and battery life. They probably decided it wasn't worth the engineering effort to add a second code generation backend for 32bit phones (which are now three+ generations old and already facing RAM limitations).

dave_sullivan 11y ago

Yeah, I love how they make it sound like old iphones "weren't powerful enough to handle blocking ads!" when blocking ads actually significantly cuts down on the resource usage. What's frustrating is that on their new phones you can block ads in Safari proper, but apparently not from within an app like Flipboard. I guess they're saving that particular "feature".

Bud 11y ago
How would a framework that is explictly part of and designed for Safari possibly work in a third-party app with sandboxing? Seems pretty silly to accuse Apple of nefariously "saving" this. Similarly, Apple never "made it sound" like old iPhones "weren't powerful enough". You really shouldn't put things in quotation marks and attribute them to others when you just made them up.
- dave_sullivan 11y ago
  They could have it edit the hosts file or some better global interface for blocking/not blocking certain hosts from any app (which would be most users' preference when using ad blockers?) I think it's ok to use scare quotes to convey sarcasm instead of a direct quote. There's admittedly some ambiguity there. 32bit vs 64bit is a super lame limitation to claim, and to most people "number of bits" would appear performance related. It's nice they finally enabled a way to block ads, but it's hardly a feature they deserve a pat on the back for. It's more like, I was seriously considering switching to Android if they didn't add it.
yuanchuan 11y ago
Correct me if I'm wrong. I watched the Safari Content Blocker video that is presented in WWDC 2015 and it mentioned that the list of content to be filtered is compiled to bit code instead of reading it as a JSON file, which makes it more efficient and less draining on CPU. Since it is compiled down to bit code, 32-bit will not be compatible to 64-bit and that's why only the newer iPhones and iPads are compatible. It is not that iPhone 5 is not powerful enough but simply the CPU architecture doesn't support.