3 ms·

ABP also introduced an Acceptable Ads option a few years ago that triggered the creation of a fork called AdBlock Edge without that option. Adblock Edge was rec

ABP also introduced an Acceptable Ads option a few years ago that triggered the creation of a fork called AdBlock Edge without that option. Adblock Edge was recently discontinued in favor of uBlock Origin [1], which has a much smaller memory footprint and is faster. [1]: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock

dvh 11y ago
uBlock origin is bigger (js wise) than both AdBlock and AdBlock plus and uBlock, comparison: https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/msT3z9naIEkfKFjrj2G3G67moSuKz-l4zAFPmKfaNggvKDuJxb3DnA1I1x_YUexeYMGJjl84_74=s640-h400-e365-rw https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/msT3z9naIEkfKFjrj2G3G67moS...
- lorenzhs 11y ago
  Javascript size is a weird metric, and the plot is useless without context. The plot does not even state for which browser the metric was collected (or is it the repository size? That would be completely useless, as uBlock's and uBlock origin's repositories include versions for different browsers.) Because when I add the sum of all .js files in uBlock's repository, I get 1.08MB. Heck, the whole src and platform directories combined are 2.8MB, and that includes both the Chrome and the Firefox version! Can you point to a source for that plot?
  - dvh 11y ago
    > The plot does not even state for which browser the metric was collected It's there in the title of the plot. Did you even looked at the plot? > Can you point to a source for that plot? I did the plot few days ago, I simply installed all those extensions and calculated JS size on disk.
- gorhill 11y ago
  Because uBlock Origin ships with the default filter lists, so that it can work immediately out of the box without having to remotely fetch these filter lists at launch time (updated versions of these lists will be automatically fetched some time after launch). It's not uncommon that the remote servers hosting the lists fail to respond, which would cause the extension to "malfunction" if this happened after first install -- these lists are key for the proper functioning of the extension (at least in its default out-of-the-box settings). I want the extension to work properly immediately after 1st install. The size of uBlock Origin as downloaded from AMO or Chrome store is ~1.5 MB (because it's compressed). The compressed package would be ~650 kB without the 3rd-party lists (the content of these lists are not javascript code).
- rudolf0 11y ago
  Regardless, uBlock results in more performant web browsing.
  - kazinator 11y ago
    I switched Firefox from Adblock Plus to uBlock Origin on several different machines, the oldest being a 2007 vintage Core 2 Duo laptop Win 7, which lets 3 gigabytes of the machine's 4 be used. I couldn't tell any subjective difference in any of the installations. If I have to formally measure the response time difference in response in an interactive app, it's below the don't care threshold.
- dvh 11y ago
  Why my comment has -4 points? I simply stated the truth, everybody can measure size of JS of these extensions. I did not count default filter list to size of JS, I only counted actual JS code and uBlock origin has simple more JS code than both Adblock and Adblock plus. If I lied I would understand the downvotes but I didn't lie. I was also surprised that uBlock origin is bigger than adblock, especially when it's name sounds like something much much simpler and smaller but the fact is that size wise they are practically the same.
  - gorhill 11y ago
    Possibly because in reality the resources consumed while at rest (disk storage) are magnitude less important than the resources consumed while running (memory/CPU cycles).

dvh 11y ago

uBlock origin is bigger (js wise) than both AdBlock and AdBlock plus and uBlock, comparison: https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/msT3z9naIEkfKFjrj2G3G67moSuKz-l4zAFPmKfaNggvKDuJxb3DnA1I1x_YUexeYMGJjl84_74=s640-h400-e365-rw https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/msT3z9naIEkfKFjrj2G3G67moS...

lorenzhs 11y ago
Javascript size is a weird metric, and the plot is useless without context. The plot does not even state for which browser the metric was collected (or is it the repository size? That would be completely useless, as uBlock's and uBlock origin's repositories include versions for different browsers.) Because when I add the sum of all .js files in uBlock's repository, I get 1.08MB. Heck, the whole src and platform directories combined are 2.8MB, and that includes both the Chrome and the Firefox version! Can you point to a source for that plot?
- dvh 11y ago
  > The plot does not even state for which browser the metric was collected It's there in the title of the plot. Did you even looked at the plot? > Can you point to a source for that plot? I did the plot few days ago, I simply installed all those extensions and calculated JS size on disk.
gorhill 11y ago
Because uBlock Origin ships with the default filter lists, so that it can work immediately out of the box without having to remotely fetch these filter lists at launch time (updated versions of these lists will be automatically fetched some time after launch). It's not uncommon that the remote servers hosting the lists fail to respond, which would cause the extension to "malfunction" if this happened after first install -- these lists are key for the proper functioning of the extension (at least in its default out-of-the-box settings). I want the extension to work properly immediately after 1st install. The size of uBlock Origin as downloaded from AMO or Chrome store is ~1.5 MB (because it's compressed). The compressed package would be ~650 kB without the 3rd-party lists (the content of these lists are not javascript code).
rudolf0 11y ago
Regardless, uBlock results in more performant web browsing.
- kazinator 11y ago
  I switched Firefox from Adblock Plus to uBlock Origin on several different machines, the oldest being a 2007 vintage Core 2 Duo laptop Win 7, which lets 3 gigabytes of the machine's 4 be used. I couldn't tell any subjective difference in any of the installations. If I have to formally measure the response time difference in response in an interactive app, it's below the don't care threshold.
dvh 11y ago
Why my comment has -4 points? I simply stated the truth, everybody can measure size of JS of these extensions. I did not count default filter list to size of JS, I only counted actual JS code and uBlock origin has simple more JS code than both Adblock and Adblock plus. If I lied I would understand the downvotes but I didn't lie. I was also surprised that uBlock origin is bigger than adblock, especially when it's name sounds like something much much simpler and smaller but the fact is that size wise they are practically the same.
- gorhill 11y ago
  Possibly because in reality the resources consumed while at rest (disk storage) are magnitude less important than the resources consumed while running (memory/CPU cycles).