41–50 of 53 posts
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.)
While the comparison doc mentions it, I don't see anyone here talking about Wipr 2. As the comparison doc states, if all you need is configuration-free ad blocking on macOS and iOS, Wipr 2 definitely gets my vote.
I'm not sure if I'm just completely unlucky and/or illiterate, but I coughed up for Wipr and it really has not panned out as effectively as I'd hoped. I recently also tossed in UBOLite and the difference is night-and-day: actually being able to browse without ads.
And don’t forget to activate Wipr Extras.
The readme proudly proclaims: “ The end of Safari ad-blocking B.S.” Except that it’s just another declarative blocker spread across 4+ extensions. This seems like the same old B.S to me. Better off sticking with Firefox.
The readme proudly proclaims: “ The end of Safari ad-blocking B.S.” Except that it’s just another declarative blocker spread across 4+ extensions. This seems like the same old B.S to me. Better off sticking with Firefox.
After using uBlock origin lite on Safari for a while I went back to blocklist-based blockers. They are just faster. They don't suddenly break, making me reload site or restart browser. And the only thing needed on top is just some JS script injection via a separate extension for some sites like YouTube
It's just another declarative adblocker, as that is all Safari (and now Chrome) allows. There's vanishingly little room for differentiation in this space.
[flagged]
You're ignoring the obvious fact that you can use other browsers. There's no need to use Safari. Also people choose Apple products for a variety of reasons that might trump their browsing preferences. It's still fair for them to want to improve their browsing experience. You're trying to call out "Apple fanboys" but all you're doing is showing the biases of your limiting beliefs.
It's just another declarative adblocker, as that is all Safari (and now Chrome) allows. There's vanishingly little room for differentiation in this space.
That info is outdated. Safari also allows JS scripts running on sites, i.e. extensions working like script injectors. The difference with content blockers is those extensions must be explicitly allowed to access sites being browsed first, for privacy reasons.
Just installed it to see if it might be better than AdGuard on memory usage, and now I’m getting constant “Pssst! You forgot to apply some settings” notifications as soon as I leave the app. Clicking it takes me back to the app, where it does an update of everything, and… That’s it. Leave the app again, and the notification reappears. Quite annoying! Edit: it appears it doesn’t remove ad content blocks like AdGuard,…
>Just installed it to see if it might be better than AdGuard on memory usage Why would it be? All adblockers are using the same content blocking API, so at best you'll be using less memory usage while it's updating, which happens so rarely that it's not worth worrying about.
> uBlock Origin Lite: Chromium-only Manifest V3 extension. Not available for Safari. How did I install it as a safari extension on iOS from the App Store?
This is also outdated. Gorhill did release uBlock Origin Lite for iOS Safari.
I lost track of all the methods (current and past) to block ads via browser extensions. Which of the two, if any, use "declarative blocking"; which inject JavaScript (and by extension require trust and site access permissions)?