What ad network is it that serves up ads that actually open up the iOS App Store, without having tapped on anything? That's super annoying.
Also how is iOS so bad it just opens the Store without asking?
Google Will Soon Start Punishing Mobile Sites that Use Annoying App Install Ads
211–220 of 311 posts
Re: Google Will Soon Start Punishing Mobile Sites that Use Annoying App Install Ads
#212Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly. And, even worse, when trying to play the video on youtube on mobile, I often get "this video is not available in embed mode, please click here to go to youtube, and it reloads the same page -.-
Are mobile devs not eating their own cooking anymore? I can't do anything on a smartphone anymore, outside of some very well worn ruts, that doesn't involve encountering some annoyance like this somewhere between twice an hour to every other minute.
Are you using native apps or mobile web?
Re: Google Will Soon Start Punishing Mobile Sites that Use Annoying App Install Ads
#213You know, at some point (and we are around that point) Google does cross a line where they are abusing their near monopoly on search. This is a pro consumer move, but it's another instance of Google saying do things our way or we punish you.
My gut tells me that unless thing change the open web is not going to do well as mobile dominates: This in itself is going to eat away Google's core business while Facebook dominates on mobile. And the funny thing is that the sites that beg you to install an app are doing so because they see where things are going with the open web.
PS Another thing that may also hurt Google's core business may be once Apple starts blocking their ads. Google ads will become the next Flash.
Re: Google Will Soon Start Punishing Mobile Sites that Use Annoying App Install Ads
#214What ad network is it that serves up ads that actually open up the iOS App Store, without having tapped on anything? That's super annoying.
That happens in Android sometimes, too, but my evidence-free sense is that it's usually rogue ad network participants because the app is usually some mundane game.
That and I wonder if the ads themselves don't contain Apple affiliate links and are just cookie stuffing.
Re: Google Will Soon Start Punishing Mobile Sites that Use Annoying App Install Ads
#215Re: Google Will Soon Start Punishing Mobile Sites that Use Annoying App Install Ads
#216I wonder if this is more search defense than it is user experience work. One of the things web driven access gives you is access to the search traffic through that web site, once you go to the App all that traffic goes with it. Its clear that an app for everything is getting pushed hard by content providers.
Re: Google Will Soon Start Punishing Mobile Sites that Use Annoying App Install Ads
#217Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem in the Microsoft case was use of near-monopoly in one market (operating systems) to gain unfair advantage in another market (browsers), though even that seems a bit outdated already since the idea of shipping an OS without a browser built-in seems ludicrous today. In any case, that concept of using monopoly power in one market to bolster power in another doesn't really apply here with Google. I share a lo…
This applies directly to Google. Remember them pushing Chrome on you? having ads directly on Google.com? To this day forcing you to use Chrome for Hangouts? And so on? Do you seriously think Chrome would have caught on if it weren’t for this push of advertisements? This is direct abuse of near-monopoly in one market (search engines) to gain unfair advantage in another market (browsers).
Chrome originally caught in for the same reason Firefox: when it came out it was the best browser by far. People forget how bad IE used to be and later how bad Firefox got.
Re: Google Will Soon Start Punishing Mobile Sites that Use Annoying App Install Ads
#218Earlier quoted context omitted.
This applies directly to Google. Remember them pushing Chrome on you? having ads directly on Google.com? To this day forcing you to use Chrome for Hangouts? And so on? Do you seriously think Chrome would have caught on if it weren’t for this push of advertisements? This is direct abuse of near-monopoly in one market (search engines) to gain unfair advantage in another market (browsers).
Chrome originally caught in for the same reason Firefox: when it came out it was the best browser by far. People forget how bad IE used to be and later how bad Firefox got.
Are you so sure about that? Because no one knew about it until Google started this massive ad campaign, where for weeks literally every single ad on the web was "INSTALL CHROME NOW".
Re: Google Will Soon Start Punishing Mobile Sites that Use Annoying App Install Ads
#219Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are mobile devs not eating their own cooking anymore? I can't do anything on a smartphone anymore, outside of some very well worn ruts, that doesn't involve encountering some annoyance like this somewhere between twice an hour to every other minute.
Are you using native apps or mobile web?
Surely it's obvious what he's referring to.
Even if you try living your whole smartphone life inside native apps (which would be sad), you inevitably get sent out to the web via links. Opening in your phone's browser or through the native web view.
The native "web view" is often an inadequate browsing experience, and will have the same annoyances as the full browser anyway, only worse because it's a cut-down version of a browser, tethered to the native app that doesn't want you straying too far.
To the point about dev's eating their own cooking. It's a fair question, but one I think increasingly is about project managers and non-developer stakeholders calling the shots on things because "everyone's an expert" in the web dev kitchen.
Re: Google Will Soon Start Punishing Mobile Sites that Use Annoying App Install Ads
#220Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure what makes this abuse. Curating the content you serve isn't just okay ; it's one of the key value propositions of a search engine. The problem is when a content provider, for whatever reason, intentionally curates in a way that provides less value to the consumer.
One potential problem here is that this only applies to page blocking interstitials that promote an app. Page blocking interstitials that push signing up for a newsletter, for example, will not be penalized. It could be hard to argue that an interstitial pushing an app (especially an app specifically for the site the user is visiting that gives them enhanced features compared to the mobile web version of the site) is…
Yeah, I dunno. I could buy the argument that a modal on launch isn't always evil (maybe it's a signin prompt), so we don't want to just block that kind of UI outright; we instead want some heuristics to tell us whether the modal is helpful or not, and prompts to download apps are almost always unhelpful.
Still, I feel like newsletter prompts are also easy to detect, so that argument doesn't hold a ton of water unless there's also a separate plan to address those—or maybe they're testing the waters with this one. I think I need more information to have a real opinion :/