7 ms·

The thing I find most interesting about journalistic coverage of Chrome is that they haven't brought up the elephant in the room: Chrome will not and will never

The thing I find most interesting about journalistic coverage of Chrome is that they haven't brought up the elephant in the room: Chrome will not and will never have an (official) ad blocker. Sure, Google also wants to have a stable client side for their javascript-based software, but the reality is that those programs don't make them the kind of money that search advertisement does. With Microsoft controlling the browser, they could conceivably release an ad blocker in IE8 and turn it on by default. Google would be in serious trouble very fast. I'm not trying to say that this will happen, just that Google's being smart and mitigating risk. Until they start making serious money from their office applications, however, creating their own browser seems to me to be a defensive move, not an offensive one.

snprbob86 18y ago
Microsoft is trying to build a large ad business also. Why would they release an ad blocker? I doubt we will ever see an ad blocker from any commercial entity. Unless, of course, ad blocking is the only motivator behind the entire business. Somehow, I don't really expect that either. Consumers of ad blocking software probably wouldn't be the kind of people who pay for things like that :-)
- incomethax 18y ago
  The fact that they are trying to build an ad business can be countered with the fact that they have not yet built an ad business _successfully_. As such they don't really lose anything by taking away Google's core business in the form of an ad blocker. Microsoft has always been very worried about Google, and Balmer has compared Microsoft and Google as rivals in the software industry. If Microsoft can leverage their control over browsers in IE8 with an ad blocker, then they can potentially take a large chunk out of Google's bottom line, and make Google a much weaker 'rival'.
  - snprbob86 18y ago
    And what about the tens of thousands of ASP.net developers who depend on ad revenue to pay the bills for Visual Studio and Windows Servers? Say what you will about Microsoft, but they depend on armies of developers who depend on ads. As such, do not expect them to produce an ad blocker. It would be nothing short of a developer relations disaster.
- volida 18y ago
  is it even legal to create an ad blocker or use one? assuming it's altering the content of the site it's directly violating the copyright of the site.
  - pmorici 18y ago
    Of course it is legal. Is it illegal to throw away the advertisements from your newspaper before you read it?
    - axod 18y ago
      But is it legal for a 3rd party to scan in your newspaper, remove the ads, then print it out and sell it to you? That is a more accurate analogy. It's stealing and depriving the publisher of their income. In any event, getting past adblockers is really really simple. It always will be, and if you think an adblocker can block anywhere near all adverts, you should go read up on how things work.
      - Jem 18y ago
        Educate me - which adblocker is it that you know of that removes the adverts from websites and then sells the resulting ad-free site to the user? To suggest that blocking an advert is stealing assumes that the author of the web page would make money off that advert in the first place. Furthermore, that logic suggests that anyone who chooses to ignore advertising rather than just blocking it is also guilty because they're depriving the publisher of a potential income too. Total rubbish.
        axod 18y ago
        Blocking an advert when viewing an ad supported website is stealing. You are stealing bandwidth, processing power, storage, electricity, etc Society is about give and take. Adblocking is about take.
        Jem 18y ago
attack 18y ago
Never? It's open source. I'll give it a month.
- irrelative 18y ago
  Ok, putting it in my calendar :)
mccutchen 18y ago
> Chrome will not and will never have an (official) ad blocker. Pardon my ignorance, but what web browsers actually have "official" ad blockers? > With Microsoft controlling the browser, they could conceivably release an ad blocker in IE8 and turn it on by default. Robert X. Cringely? Is that you? (http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2008/pulpit_20080905_005415.html http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2008/pulpit_20080905_0054...)
deleted 18y ago
[deleted]
axod 18y ago
Most people don't care. Most people see adverts as a good way to keep the internet free. It's only a very small proportion of people who like to block adverts and leech pages. "With Microsoft controlling the browser, they could conceivably release an ad blocker in IE8 and turn it on by default. Google would be in serious trouble very fast." Any ad blocker is at best maybe 50% effective. Most ads get through. You just don't realize they are ads. It might take google... an hour at most to get past the ad blocker if ms did such a thing.
- Jem 18y ago
  > It's only a very small proportion of people who like to block adverts and leech pages. If you want to talk about leeching, why not address the issue of massive flash and image based adverts that suck-up the bandwidth of those on limited/capped connections? Is that not leeching?
  - axod 18y ago
    Yes it is, but to tar every website with the same brush is not very nice IMHO. You are assuming that all websites are going to waste your bandwidth, show you irritating adverts, and piss you off. I think it'd be a nicer world if you assumed websites were going to be nice and useful. If a website does have bandwidth wasting ads, just don't use that website.
    - Jem 18y ago
      And you are tarring every person who blocks adverts under the same brush - as a leecher. You are assuming that those who block adverts by default don't contribute to websites in ways that more than makes up for the blocking of adverts - they're "stealing", don't forget. I've been using the Internet for approximately 8 years. I have never seen a 'nice and useful' advertisement (and yes, I'm including the time before I started using ad-block plugins).
      - axod 18y ago
        You've never seen a useful advert? What websites do you visit??? Not one of the advert results on google/ms/yahoo has been what you were looking for?

snprbob86 18y ago

Microsoft is trying to build a large ad business also. Why would they release an ad blocker? I doubt we will ever see an ad blocker from any commercial entity. Unless, of course, ad blocking is the only motivator behind the entire business. Somehow, I don't really expect that either. Consumers of ad blocking software probably wouldn't be the kind of people who pay for things like that :-)

incomethax 18y ago
The fact that they are trying to build an ad business can be countered with the fact that they have not yet built an ad business _successfully_. As such they don't really lose anything by taking away Google's core business in the form of an ad blocker. Microsoft has always been very worried about Google, and Balmer has compared Microsoft and Google as rivals in the software industry. If Microsoft can leverage their control over browsers in IE8 with an ad blocker, then they can potentially take a large chunk out of Google's bottom line, and make Google a much weaker 'rival'.
- snprbob86 18y ago
  And what about the tens of thousands of ASP.net developers who depend on ad revenue to pay the bills for Visual Studio and Windows Servers? Say what you will about Microsoft, but they depend on armies of developers who depend on ads. As such, do not expect them to produce an ad blocker. It would be nothing short of a developer relations disaster.
volida 18y ago
is it even legal to create an ad blocker or use one? assuming it's altering the content of the site it's directly violating the copyright of the site.
- pmorici 18y ago
  Of course it is legal. Is it illegal to throw away the advertisements from your newspaper before you read it?
  - axod 18y ago
    But is it legal for a 3rd party to scan in your newspaper, remove the ads, then print it out and sell it to you? That is a more accurate analogy. It's stealing and depriving the publisher of their income. In any event, getting past adblockers is really really simple. It always will be, and if you think an adblocker can block anywhere near all adverts, you should go read up on how things work.
    - Jem 18y ago
      Educate me - which adblocker is it that you know of that removes the adverts from websites and then sells the resulting ad-free site to the user? To suggest that blocking an advert is stealing assumes that the author of the web page would make money off that advert in the first place. Furthermore, that logic suggests that anyone who chooses to ignore advertising rather than just blocking it is also guilty because they're depriving the publisher of a potential income too. Total rubbish.
      - axod 18y ago
        Blocking an advert when viewing an ad supported website is stealing. You are stealing bandwidth, processing power, storage, electricity, etc Society is about give and take. Adblocking is about take.
        Jem 18y ago

attack 18y ago

Never? It's open source. I'll give it a month.

irrelative 18y ago
Ok, putting it in my calendar :)

mccutchen 18y ago

> Chrome will not and will never have an (official) ad blocker. Pardon my ignorance, but what web browsers actually have "official" ad blockers? > With Microsoft controlling the browser, they could conceivably release an ad blocker in IE8 and turn it on by default. Robert X. Cringely? Is that you? (http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2008/pulpit_20080905_005415.html http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2008/pulpit_20080905_0054...)

deleted 18y ago

[deleted]

axod 18y ago

Most people don't care. Most people see adverts as a good way to keep the internet free. It's only a very small proportion of people who like to block adverts and leech pages. "With Microsoft controlling the browser, they could conceivably release an ad blocker in IE8 and turn it on by default. Google would be in serious trouble very fast." Any ad blocker is at best maybe 50% effective. Most ads get through. You just don't realize they are ads. It might take google... an hour at most to get past the ad blocker if ms did such a thing.

Jem 18y ago
> It's only a very small proportion of people who like to block adverts and leech pages. If you want to talk about leeching, why not address the issue of massive flash and image based adverts that suck-up the bandwidth of those on limited/capped connections? Is that not leeching?
- axod 18y ago
  Yes it is, but to tar every website with the same brush is not very nice IMHO. You are assuming that all websites are going to waste your bandwidth, show you irritating adverts, and piss you off. I think it'd be a nicer world if you assumed websites were going to be nice and useful. If a website does have bandwidth wasting ads, just don't use that website.
  - Jem 18y ago
    And you are tarring every person who blocks adverts under the same brush - as a leecher. You are assuming that those who block adverts by default don't contribute to websites in ways that more than makes up for the blocking of adverts - they're "stealing", don't forget. I've been using the Internet for approximately 8 years. I have never seen a 'nice and useful' advertisement (and yes, I'm including the time before I started using ad-block plugins).
    - axod 18y ago
      You've never seen a useful advert? What websites do you visit??? Not one of the advert results on google/ms/yahoo has been what you were looking for?