Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

WBlock: A New Ad-Blocker for Safari

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 53 posts

Re: WBlock: A New Ad-Blocker for Safari

#11

Post by zamadatix »

acephal wrote: post #9
nozzlegear wrote: post #8

I'm interested in trying this, but not really interested in signing up for the whole Testflight rigamarole. I've had uBlock Origin Lite installed ever since it was released, but I prefer Safari's Content Blocker approach which uBlock doesn't use. (uBlock uses manifest v3, and it sometimes it leaves those small "empty image" boxes where an ad would be; I'm not sure if those two things are related.)

Is there any reason to prefer uBoL over Pi-Hole/Adguard Home?

Those are DNS only adblockers.

Re: WBlock: A New Ad-Blocker for Safari

#12

Post by egypturnash »

acephal wrote: post #9
nozzlegear wrote: post #8

I'm interested in trying this, but not really interested in signing up for the whole Testflight rigamarole. I've had uBlock Origin Lite installed ever since it was released, but I prefer Safari's Content Blocker approach which uBlock doesn't use. (uBlock uses manifest v3, and it sometimes it leaves those small "empty image" boxes where an ad would be; I'm not sure if those two things are related.)

Is there any reason to prefer uBoL over Pi-Hole/Adguard Home?

It works when you are outside your home network, without the additional rigamarole of setting up a VPN for all your devices to pass their internet through your home server.

Re: WBlock: A New Ad-Blocker for Safari

#13

Post by figmert »

acephal wrote: post #9
nozzlegear wrote: post #8

I'm interested in trying this, but not really interested in signing up for the whole Testflight rigamarole. I've had uBlock Origin Lite installed ever since it was released, but I prefer Safari's Content Blocker approach which uBlock doesn't use. (uBlock uses manifest v3, and it sometimes it leaves those small "empty image" boxes where an ad would be; I'm not sure if those two things are related.)

Is there any reason to prefer uBoL over Pi-Hole/Adguard Home?

Pihole/adguard are great, and while their function overlaps with uBo, they are still different. You should use both.

UBo (and uBoL) have additional rules that can clean up pages. E.g. removing containers of ads.

It does much more too.

Re: WBlock: A New Ad-Blocker for Safari

#15

Post by mywittyname »

elashri wrote: post #7
blakesterz wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They do have a compare page here: https://github.com/0xCUB3/wBlock/blob/main/Adblock_Compariso...

I wonder why would they include GitHub stars as comparison point. Not only it is useless, it will mostly be wrong unless dynamically generated and updated.

It does indicate interest in the product from developers, which is helpful to know for smaller OSS projects because it means that people might be able to assist with development and it reduces the likelihood of the project being abandoned when the OG dev moves on.

Re: WBlock: A New Ad-Blocker for Safari

#16

Post by rocketvole »

nozzlegear wrote: post #8

I'm interested in trying this, but not really interested in signing up for the whole Testflight rigamarole. I've had uBlock Origin Lite installed ever since it was released, but I prefer Safari's Content Blocker approach which uBlock doesn't use. (uBlock uses manifest v3, and it sometimes it leaves those small "empty image" boxes where an ad would be; I'm not sure if those two things are related.)

Why would you need testflight? This app is on the app store

Re: WBlock: A New Ad-Blocker for Safari

#17

Post by ivanjermakov »

acephal wrote: post #9
nozzlegear wrote: post #8

I'm interested in trying this, but not really interested in signing up for the whole Testflight rigamarole. I've had uBlock Origin Lite installed ever since it was released, but I prefer Safari's Content Blocker approach which uBlock doesn't use. (uBlock uses manifest v3, and it sometimes it leaves those small "empty image" boxes where an ad would be; I'm not sure if those two things are related.)

Is there any reason to prefer uBoL over Pi-Hole/Adguard Home?

Absolutely. Pi hole does network blocking via DNS, uBoL does blocking via DOM queries.

Re: WBlock: A New Ad-Blocker for Safari

#18

Post by ivanjermakov »

HelloUsername wrote: post #3
InfiniteVortex wrote: post #2

wBlock is a new ad-blocker for Safari. It supports (in general) everything Wipr, AdGuard for Safari/iOS, uBlock Origin Lite can do except for maybe multi-device sync

And what does it do differently ?

Supports iOS 17.

Re: WBlock: A New Ad-Blocker for Safari

#19

Post by agoodusername63 »

rocketvole wrote: post #16
nozzlegear wrote: post #8

I'm interested in trying this, but not really interested in signing up for the whole Testflight rigamarole. I've had uBlock Origin Lite installed ever since it was released, but I prefer Safari's Content Blocker approach which uBlock doesn't use. (uBlock uses manifest v3, and it sometimes it leaves those small "empty image" boxes where an ad would be; I'm not sure if those two things are related.)

Why would you need testflight? This app is on the app store

Is it? I searched wBlock in the ios app store and found nothing.
Post reply on HN