back to article AdBlock Plus BLOCKED from Google Play

Google has zapped the Android app version of AdBlock Plus from its Play store. The ad giant has also kyboshed other ad-blocking applications from its online shop. Adblock Plus revealed the Chocolate Factory's snub in a blog post: In a rather surprising move, Google removed Adblock Plus and other ad blocking apps from the …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. El Presidente
    WTF?

    More adverts, everywhere.

    Or else we do evil.

    Use APK extract the AdBlock plus app or get AdBlock plus direct and sideload it.

    If Google continue down this forced adverts path it's AOSP for me and FU to Google.

    1. Fogcat

      Re: More adverts, everywhere.

      Ad revenues must be down

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: More adverts, everywhere.

        You know the only reason Android exists is so Google can harvest all your personal data and browsing habits while feeding you delicious adverts right?

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: More adverts, everywhere.

          It has another function: replacing the Streetview WiFi grabber (a fact Google actually admitted when pressured).

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: More adverts, everywhere.

            The funny thing is I had to turn Wifi off otherwise the crap Android phone's battery wouldn't even last the day.

            1. Dave 126 Silver badge

              Re: More adverts, everywhere.

              >The funny thing is I had to turn Wifi off otherwise the crap Android phone's battery wouldn't even last the day.

              Upgrade to ICS if you can, and you will find 'battery saver mode' that turns off Wifi and background data when the phone is in standby. It certainly solved the major gripe RegHardware had with the Sony Xperia P when they reviewed it with its original Android version.

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                @Dave 126 - Re: More adverts, everywhere.

                IF you can! Samsung and telcos would rather sell you another one instead of upgrading the one you have.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          The reality!

          You know the only reason iOS, Android and Windows exists is so Apple/Goole/Microsoft can harvest all your personal data and browsing habits while feeding you delicious adverts right?

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        @Fogcat - Re: More adverts, everywhere.

        No, ad revenues are not down but they don't grow as fast as they were used to.

    2. JDX Gold badge

      Re: More adverts, everywhere.

      @El Presidente

      Please, FFS grow up and stop using the word "evil" for anything you don't like. Maybe when you spend hundreds of billions of dollars building a platform you can decide to just give it away from the goodness of your heart, until then you'll have to continue being a whiney little bitch.

      Just install it the regular way and stop acting all offended they don't allow apps which block their revenue stream in their own app store.

      1. El Presidente
        Facepalm

        Re: More adverts, everywhere.

        "Just install it the regular way and stop acting all offended they don't allow apps which block their revenue stream in their own app store."

        No. Never.

        Since when did exercising a choice make anyone a whiney [sic] little bitch?

        @AC

        "You know the only reason Android exists is so Google can harvest all your personal data and browsing habits while feeding you delicious adverts right?"

        You know the only reason AblockPlus exists is so Google can harvest all your personal data and browsing habits while blocking the highly intrusive adverts right?

        Dunno which is worse, Apple Fanbois or Google Astroturfers.

        1. sabroni Silver badge

          Re: Since when did exercising a choice make anyone a whiney [sic] little bitch?

          When they decide to whine like a little bitch?

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: More adverts, everywhere.

        "From the goodness of your heart?"

        Sorry, I hadn't realised Google spent all that time and money building Android from the goodness of their heart. I don't recall them ever saying that, but the sure did spout on about how the platform was all about being open, ideologically free and different from all the others who just wanted your money.

        You don't consider Google in spirit now (and in fact later) are now backtracking on that ethos having pulled in hundreds of millions of suckers?

        And while we're about it, El Presesidente didn't start spouting this "evil" shit - no that was Google at their pretentious best..

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: More adverts, everywhere.

          Erm, they went to great lengths to point out the advantages of the open source model. Then go and totally undermine that by:

          1. not providing the source until after release.

          2. Starting to lock down the platform with moves like this.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            @AC 13:01GMT - Re: More adverts, everywhere.

            You're confusing open source software with free and open source software.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: More adverts, everywhere.

          "Sorry, I hadn't realised Google spent all that time and money building Android from the goodness of their heart"

          Me either, it looked for all the world like google appropriated a bunch of code from students and out of work IT pro's who should be getting paid, spent a bit of cash patching it up a bit to dress it up as their own work and then abused their dominance to destroy the mobile OS market...

          1. andy 45
            Thumb Up

            Re: More adverts, everywhere.

            "it looked for all the world like google appropriated a bunch of code from students and out of work IT pro's who should be getting paid, spent a bit of cash patching it up a bit to dress it up as their own work and then abused their dominance to destroy the mobile OS market..."

            haha!! well said that man.

        3. JDX Gold badge

          Re: More adverts, everywhere.

          >>sure did spout on about how the platform was all about being open

          Is their app store part of the Android platform though?

          >>When a company proudly proclaims that their mantra to be "Do No Evil", they openly invite comparisons of evil to their actions - especially this one.

          If you think a company trying to make money is "evil", then I suppose you're right. It's pretty clear their mantra was about not having closed standards, using their position of power to crush opposition, etc. Not having restrictions on what can be sold in their own appstore WHEN THEY ALLOW OTHER APPSTORES AND LET YOU INSTALL APPS DIRECTLY.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            @JDX - Re: More adverts, everywhere.

            Watch out with your blanket pardon for companies trying to make money. Organized crime is doing just like that, trying to make money. What could you possibly see evil in that ?

      3. BillG

        Re: More adverts, everywhere.

        @JDX - When a company proudly proclaims that their mantra to be "Do No Evil", they openly invite comparisons of evil to their actions - especially this one.

      4. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: More adverts, everywhere.

        Lack of choice is 'evil', it is ecosystem fascism where you are forced to do what the OS dictator says.

        Google have let power go to their heads, they'll screw up Android at this rate.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          @AC13:00GMT - Re: More adverts, everywhere.

          Sorry I'll have to bring you back to the real world but actually user lock-in is good for business. Consumer and end-user freedoms prevent companies for making cash. Try to grasp the concepts of "steady revenue stream" and "average revenue per user" and you will see that a free consumer is a bad consumer and has to be coerced by any technical and / or legal means available.

      5. Loyal Commenter Silver badge
        Stop

        Re: More adverts, everywhere.

        Am I a whiney bitch, or is it a cse of...

        Adverts:

        I don't want to see them.

        I don't want to click on them.

        I don't want them to pop up so I might accidentally click on them which might send me god-knows-where, potentially to a malicious site.

        I'm not going to buy whatever they're touting, so why force them on me if I make the choice that I don't want them?

        I understand that it is Google's business model to sell advertising space to third parties. Good on them, they've done well out of it, but I still think I should have the choice to not have information about me sold to others without my explicit consent.

        And by the way, many people consider most forms of advertising to be 'evil' due to the fact that they are designed to be deliverately manipulative (the whole point is to influence you to buy something you otherwise wouldn't). They use psychologically tricks to influence you against your will. The same tricks that if someone used them on people to influence them into, for instance, having sex with them, would be considered evil by a lot more people. The fact that advertising may be a necessary evil in order to fund the internet doesn;t subtract from its evilness, but merely highlights how we don't live in a black-and-white world, and such terms are relative.

        So, don't patronise us and tell us to grow up for lamenting the removal of the option to exercise choice.

        1. El Andy

          Re: More adverts, everywhere.

          @Loyal Commenter I understand that it is Google's business model to sell advertising space to third parties. Good on them, they've done well out of it, but I still think I should have the choice to not have information about me sold to others without my explicit consent.

          You have that choice. Don't use services with adverts. It's that easy.

          1. GBL Initialiser
            Megaphone

            Re: More adverts, everywhere.

            "You have that choice. Don't use services with adverts. It's that easy."

            ABP users often ignore this though and try to spin it in a way that they are entitled to access the content on their terms. One of the excuses that crop up time and time again is 'I pay for internet access, why should I have to watch adverts?', I don't feel I need to point out the gaping hole in this argument. Frankly I consider the use of ABP parasitic and attempts to justify its use arrogant.

            P.S. no, I don't make money from any services even remotely connected with advertising before someone tries to pull that one.

            1. Jordan Davenport

              Re: More adverts, everywhere.

              I have no problems with simple advertising, but I will never accept Flash ads (on the desktop); HTML5 ads that bounce around, play audio, play video, or otherwise distract me from what I'm trying to do and drain battery life; or ads that take up a significant portion of the display area and hinder my ability to do work. I'm fine with simple text ads like Google's or plain graphics.

              At least in Firefox, AdBlock Plus even displays non-intrusive ads by default. Furthermore depending on the lists you download or rules you create, you can block only tracking syndicates, again such as Google, and take an active part in protecting your own privacy. Call me arrogant if you like, but I like being able to determine what information I divulge about myself and to whom I divulge it.

              AdBlock Plus itself isn't any more parasitic than a computer or the Internet itself for enabling users to be able to do something. What the user often does with it is what you deem parasitic behavior, but that's not the tool's fault, especially since it does actually try to allow non-intrusive advertising by default. Furthermore, I try to only use services that only use advertising I deem acceptable.

              I'm edging away from Skype now because of the intrusive ads Microsoft is starting to push during calls. I'll stop using any service that starts shoving advertising down my throat in the most obnoxious way they can. Meanwhile I'll pick up other publications or opt to receive advertisements from certain companies just to look at the ads.

            2. cybersaur
              Thumb Down

              Re: More adverts, everywhere.

              GBL Initialiser, I supposed you've never muted the volume on your TV nor changed the channel when an ad appeared?

              1. GBL Initialiser

                Re: More adverts, everywhere.

                @cybersaur

                I don't watch TV. Back when I used to I didn't mute or channel hop, no. In fact advert break channel hopping bugs the hell out of me. The only time I didn't at least hear the TV adverts was if I was leaving the room to make a drink or some such.

                Your analogy is somewhat flawed anyway. I'm not sure of the exact details because, as I said, I don't have any business dealings with advertising but I know there is such as thing as "cost per impression". When an advert is requested and displayed on a website it records an "impression", blocking means no request is made to get the advert so it directly costs the site owner money.

              2. Fatman Silver badge

                Re: More adverts, everywhere.

                Or even more importantly, left the room to take a piss!!!!!

            3. JP19

              Re: More adverts, everywhere.

              "Frankly I consider the use of ABP parasitic and attempts to justify its use arrogant."

              While I consider attempting to force serving of ads to users who have clearly indicated a preference not to see them as attempting to defraud those paying for the ads.

              Do you think if ABP fetched the ads but didn't render or hid them it would be less parasitic? Maybe it could even click on them and hide the results too.

              1. DF118

                @GBL initialiser Re: More adverts, everywhere.

                I pay for the adverts as part of the price for the things I buy. If I want not to see ads that is my choice. It is not parasitic behaviour to block them any way I see fit, especially if I would never have clicked them anyway. Your logic is flawed.

                1. GBL Initialiser

                  Re: @GBL initialiser More adverts, everywhere.

                  @ DF11

                  Blocking adverts = You getting access to content you want whilst depriving the content provider of money

                  Dictionary definition of parasite = a person who receives support, advantage, or the like, from another or others without giving any useful or proper return, as one who lives on the hospitality of others.

                  I think you will find my logic, in this particular instance, is fairly grounded in reality.

                  1. DF118

                    Re: @GBL initialiser More adverts, everywhere.

                    It doesn't matter how po-faced your language is, your argument is still based on a subjective assumption and therefore flawed. If the model a content provider has chosen to use to fund its services and (hopefully) turn a profit is the 'paid for by advertising' one then they are effectively in competition with other sites to provide my eyes (and clicks) to their advertisers. The tired cliché is, I believe, that I am the product. In an ideal world for the advertisers my hardware, bandwidth, browsing habits and search history is used by one vendor to sell my custom to another. There is no obligation on me to provide any of those things to anyone and on the whole I choose not to. Should my actions in so blocking this behaviour cause the content provider to fail to be able to fund and/or profit from their activities then that is a failure of the ad-funded business model, not me being a parasite, no matter how you try to dress it up. There are exceptions, which is what whitelisting is for. The Reg gets this. Ars Technica (to name but one) doesn't. Hence their occasional whiny op-ed pieces saying so.

            4. John Deeb
              Pirate

              Re: More adverts, everywhere.

              "You have that choice. Don't use services with adverts. It's that easy."

              Ehhmm, ads are a feature around the whole WEB on each browser and device. And the nature of the web is the idea that is open: that I can load and display HTML and mail messages the way the client (me and my software) decides. That's the internet, that's how it's designed, that's the core philosophy like for example Google's "making money without doing evil".

              So when this has become all a "service" that I can choose *not* to use? What Google is doing is to *inhibit* what is normal daily usage to millions of people because it's now "their" operating system. But what it really is: flying completely in the face of their own philosophy

              http://www.google.com/about/company/philosophy/

              Points 1, 2,3 4, 5, and 6. And that's exactly the face of deepest evil: talk like this, act like that!

          2. seraphim

            Re: More adverts, everywhere.

            I also have another choice--use technological means to not watch the adverts. If I DVR a show and fast-forward them, or am watching live and go to make myself a cup of coffee when the ads come on, I'm not doing anything wrong. They put the ads out there, I choose not to watch them. It's exactly the same when using an ad blocker in your browser, and it amazes me how people somehow equate it to wrongdoing, or state if you don't watch the ads you ought not view the content either. We've done it for ages in many different mediums.

        2. Nigel 11
          Meh

          Re: More adverts, everywhere.

          So, don't patronise us and tell us to grow up for lamenting the removal of the option to exercise choice.

          But your freedom to choose to block adverts has not been removed. It's just that the Google store has stopped stocking that app, so you have to get it from somewhere else and learn an extra trick or two to install it. To me, it's a bit like your default supermarket deciding not to stock one of your favourite products. Annoying.

          If they'd made it impossible to block adverts without voiding your phone's warranty, THAT would be interfering with your freedom of choice. If they'd used cryptographic techniques so it was impossible to install anything they didn't want you to, and so they could retroactively take away something that they didn't want you to have , that would qualify as evil. Nobody could be that nasty, could they?... Oh.

        3. RW
          Pint

          Re: More adverts, everywhere.

          Loyal Commenter: "I'm not going to buy whatever they're touting, so why force them on me if I make the choice that I don't want them?"

          I think you just said "the Emperor has no clothes." Selling something on the internet? Forget about ads: they don't work, just as Loyal Commenter says. Instead of trying to lure visitors to your site selling crap, try setting up your site so that Google searches for the goods/services you offer return your pages. And make sure people can navigate to the item they might buy. Example: I buy a fair amount of body jewelry and have noted that some sites have very poor search facilities, while others have excellent ones. The distinction is simple: can a visitor to such a site tell within seconds if (say) you have circular barbells, made of stainless steel, internally threaded, with a 10mm thickness? Sometimes the answer is yes, it's easy to tell, but other times you can't be sure and keep wondering if you overlooked the item you are contemplating purchase of.

          Meanwhile a pox on search aggregators that do nothing but clutter up Google results.

      6. Chris007
        Facepalm

        Re: More adverts, everywhere. @JDX

        As opposed to me having to read your "whiney little bitch" reply to El Presidente then

      7. Fatman Silver badge

        Re: More adverts, everywhere.

        @JDX,

        I though that my getting 9 or 10 downvotes was bad, but, your 50+ downvotes on this post, may have set the record!!!

        1. GBL Initialiser

          Re: More adverts, everywhere.

          @Fatman

          Anyone who has been around here for any length of time knows to pay sod all attention to down votes anyway. More often than not they are the result of either saying something mean that could hurt the feelings of a famboy's chosen company or the amount of inconvenient truth in a comment.

    3. Shades

      Re: More adverts, everywhere.

      The term "sideload" amuses me when refers to Android as it actually allows you to install software from elsewhere (as long as you tick a box buried in the settings).

      I always thought sideloading was used in relation to the installation of software, via an undocumented method/hack, on devices which don't specifically allow the installation of software from places other than their own app store.

      Anyway, can't see the point of apps like AdBlock taking up CPU time and consuming precious elecktrickery when a perfectly good, and frequently updated, hosts file does exactly the same job with either none or very, very little extra overhead.

      1. David Hicks
        Thumb Down

        Re: More adverts, everywhere.

        @ Shades = "Anyway, can't see the point of apps like AdBlock taking up CPU time and consuming precious elecktrickery when a perfectly good, and frequently updated, hosts file does exactly the same job with either none or very, very little extra overhead."

        It doesn't do the same job though. With hosts you block an entire host, not just the resources you don't want your browser to grab.

        1. Michael Habel Silver badge
          Big Brother

          Re: More adverts, everywhere.

          That's why I use AdAway which does just that. Sadly it too appears to be gone from the Market.

          I'll have to be sure to backup that .apk, along with Adobe Flash for future use.

          Outta intrest isn't ABP a Firefox Plug-in? Or did the ever make an Android wide version.

          I'm not even sure I ever used it on the Android version of Firefox. I can somewhat recall that long ago that Dolphin Browser had a badly broken ABP Plug-in for their Browser. Although the promised to fix it. They never did. Makes ya wonder why? then quietly let it die.

          If AdAway only has One drawback to it, its that you need to reboot your phone after each update. (As to presumably load up the new Hosts.conf File to Memory I guess). I forget if the Phone also has to be rooted for it to work. My first guess would be yes it does. But, thats One of the many reasons WHY I rooted the thing to begin with,

          Google can watch someone else!

        2. Fatman Silver badge

          Re: More adverts, everywhere.

          This is the most important part:

          With hosts you block an entire host, not just the resources you don't want your browser to grab.

          When used in conjunction with Element Hiding, you can get extremely selective about what you do see, and what you don't see, even if they come from the same host.

          Using a hosts file to block 'slimybigcorp.com' blocks everything; while carefully tuning Ad Block Plus to block 'slimybigcorp.com/quivering_flash_animation.flv' targets just the mentioned file. And, of cource wild cards are allowed, so blocking something like 'slimybigcorp.com/scripts/*' does what you think it ought to.

        3. Katie Saucey

          Re: More adverts, everywhere.

          "..hosts you block an entire host, not just the resources you don't want your browser to grab." Like DoubleClick?

      2. AndrueC Silver badge
        Thumb Down

        Re: More adverts, everywhere.

        frequently updated, hosts file

        Maybe you don't consider your time valuable but I consider mine to be. I have better things to do than keep updating an obscure configuration file. Computers are supposed to relieve us of drudgery and mindless tasks, not create new boring tasks for us.

        1. Jordan Davenport

          @AndrueC

          AdAway does exactly that and does it automatically. It even allows for whitelists of websites to allow explicitly in your hosts file. It used to be on the Play Store, but it's open source and still available from Google Code for the meantime or from their recommended repository F-Droid, a repository of free software (FOSS) for Android.

          http://code.google.com/p/ad-away/ <- AdAway's homepage

          http://f-droid.org/ <- F-Droid's homepage

        2. FatGerman
          Windows

          Re: More adverts, everywhere.

          "Computers are supposed to relieve us of drudgery and mindless tasks, not create new boring tasks for us."

          Ha! 99% of the mindless drudgery in the world begins with sitting down in front of a computer.

      3. Gene Cash Silver badge

        Re: More adverts, everywhere.

        Which is what Ad Away does (install an ad-free hosts file) and Google has banned them as well.

    4. zanto
      Mushroom

      Re: More adverts, everywhere.

      Screw google, I'm going to install this anyway now.

    5. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: More adverts, everywhere.

      Glad I moved to Windows Phone. It just works, no reboots, no having to find a version of firmware that actually works, no spyware from Google and no Malware.

    6. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: More adverts, everywhere.

      I often wonder what people are going on about when they talk of adverts all over the place ... and then I realise I've been running adblock plus for the last few years.

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Stop

    Taken this long?

    Of course Android supports other stores and side loading, so not really a biggie.

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Trollface

    How very Apple of them!

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Very Apple of them would be to remove the 'Allow installation from unknown sources' option before removing it from the store to prevent any installation of any kind.

      :-P

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        @AC 12:53 - Don't worry!

        This will follow next, it won't be long.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        True give them 2 years tops before they quietly retire the external install option...

  4. Richard 120
    Thumb Up

    fixed it

    "interference with another service or product our revenue in an unauthorised manner"

    1. Ben Norris

      Re: fixed it

      more importantly developers revenue. Take away their income and you'll end up pushing them back towards only releasing on IOS.

      1. M Gale

        Re: fixed it

        "Take away their income and you'll end up pushing them back towards only releasing on IOS."

        You mean income from the adverts I will never click on, which will never send any cost-per-click money to Google or their Adwords partners? That income?

        Advert blocking is a quite blunt but necessary demonstration of the end-user's likelihood to ever purchase what is being advertised. Personally I think the developers of apps that are on my devices, have gotten more money from me via paid-for apps than they will ever get via advertising. Especially the ones with permission-creep that get uninstalled the moment they start asking for all that bullshit (yes Rovio, I'm looking at you).

        Now what was that about iOS, now with iAds?

  5. Anonymous Custard Silver badge

    Web page

    http://adblockplus.org/en/android

    As the link seems to be missing from the article (unless I missed it).

    That said when I tried recently to use it again, even the localhost proxy work-around didn't work. Adblock Plus did run, but whenever I tried to open an http webpage in either Chrome, Dolphin or Firefox all I got was the tab title but an empty page. Turning off AB+ immediately allowed the pages to display properly.

    Shame really as it was a useful app, albeit I guess one the Chocolate Factory felt their business model somewhat threatened by.

    1. delboy711

      Re: Web page

      Turn wireless off and on again.

      OK now?

    2. El Presidente
      FAIL

      Re: Web page

      @AC It works, you've wired it up wrong!

      1. Anonymous Custard Silver badge

        Re: Web page

        I must be, but I can't get it to work, with wifi on/off or a full reboot.

        Adblock installed, set to port 26571 and localhost.

        Was a bit mistaken earlier, it does work with Firefox, but if I try and access an http page via Chrome then I get an empty tab (but with its correct tab header). However if I try an https page then it works as well. Desktop or mobile versions of pages also don't help.

        It used to work after Google did their initial messing about, but then they pushed a Chrome update and it all went south. Which I guess maybe the difference here?

        Anyway, Adblock or Chrome....?

        Hmm, well hello again Firefox.

  6. Phil W

    Root apps probably safe

    I don't think Google will care about root apps. They're not actually harming their revenue.

    The reasoning for blocking AdBlock is obvious really isn't it.

  7. TeeCee Gold badge
    Devil

    Surprise, surprise.

    Well, actually the only surprise is why it's taken the world's largest ad pusher this long to axe ad-blocking apps from their official offerings.

    Its very presence on Google Play always seemed a bit like turkeys voting for christmas.

    1. AndrueC Silver badge
      Stop

      Re: Surprise, surprise.

      Yeah a bit like their secure searching on Chrome. Now I suppose it could because they value our privacy and want to protect us but it could also be because most ad blockers can't process secure connections.

      Luckily if you create a new search engine with this URL:

      http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=%s

      And stay signed out you can continue insecure searching :)

  8. adnim Silver badge
    Meh

    It's my device

    I will decide what is unauthorised.

    My hosts file is probably the most important file on my Tab 2

    1. JDX Gold badge

      Re: It's my device

      It's their store. They will decide what they want to host within it.

      You can still decide what's allowed on your device, you just have to do it yourself. You have absolutely zero moral grounds to tell them what they can or can't put in their store.

      1. Rampant Spaniel

        Re: It's my device

        That was my thought. They can remove it if they wish but they can't stop it being used so it seems rather petty and pointless to remove it. I don't tend to notice many ads on mobile sites so I hadn't bothered to install an ad blocker, methinks it's time to now just because.

        Thanks for bringing it to my attention google!

        1. Miffo

          Re: It's my device

          >They can remove it if they wish but they can't stop it being used so it seems rather petty and pointless to remove it.

          Here's a shit analogy to help explain why it isn't petty. If I gave people the use of a car in my business with the idea that they would make me money (somehow), then I found someone was actually taking money out of my bank account thanks to the the use of this car - would it be petty to stop them using my car? Sure they can use another car so perhaps I shouldn't bother. Would you like me to just post you a cheque and save the bother?

          I don't think it's petty to stop helping someone to take my money - it'd be mental not to.

      2. adnim Silver badge
        Facepalm

        @JDX Re: It's my device

        OK I'll bite...

        Thanks for pointing out the obvious.

        Did you actually read my post?

        I made no mention of their store, nor did I in any way... "tell them what they can or can't put in their store".

        So your comment in reference to mine is utterly pointless.

        1. sabroni Silver badge

          Re: @JDX It's my device

          Bite this. The article makes no mention of your device, or what you choose to install on it. The article is about AdBlock in the Google Play store, if your comment has no relevance to that then it's in the wrong thread.

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: It's my device

        Odd. When you are whining about the fruity company, your tune is very different. Hypocrite or fanboy? Same thing really.

        Anon because WTF not.

    2. VaalDonkie

      Re: It's my device

      While you might own the physical device, you don't have much of a say in what happens on the software level. It's unfortunately the way the terms and conditions are worded. It's just like Amazon being able to yank ebooks off of the Kindle even if you paid for them.

      1. adnim Silver badge
        Mushroom

        Re: It's my device

        "you don't have much of a say in what happens on the software level"

        My device is rooted. I know Linux, I can code, I can hack.

        Damn right I have a say in how it works at the software level.

        If I didn't I wouldn't own one or use one.

        Terms and conditions are for the Sheeple.

        1. sabroni Silver badge
          Thumb Up

          Re: Terms and conditions are for the Sheeple.

          Yeah, I suppose if you buy something and it breaks a week later you just suck it up and bin it, all that terms and conditions bs is just for the sheeple who believe in crap like "law" and "society". Bunch of Corporate Pricks.

          1. Loyal Commenter Silver badge
            Facepalm

            Re: Terms and conditions are for the Sheeple.

            Yeah, I suppose if you buy something and it breaks a week later you just suck it up and bin it, all that terms and conditions bs is just for the sheeple who believe in crap like "law" and "society". Bunch of Corporate Pricks.

            *Shakes head*

            In the UK at least, you are protected by law, in the form of consumer rights, whether or not there are appropriate 'terms and conditions'. If electronic goods fail within a certain time (IIRC 12 months) due to a mnanufacturing defect, the manufacturer has to, by law, replace the faulty goods. No T&Cs required. What the T&Cs are actually for is to limit the responsibility of the company in question, not to strengthen the rights of the consumer. In fact, it is precisely because of things like T&Cs that we have legal concepts like 'unfair contract terms', and legally enshrined rights such as the one I describe above.

            Because, at the end of the day, 'law' and 'society' are social constructs that are in place to, on the whole, protect the people. Without them, we'd have much worse corporate feudalism than even the most fevered fanboy's imagination could come up with, and we'd all be indentured to the likes of Google and Apple.

            1. AndrueC Silver badge
              Stop

              Re: Terms and conditions are for the Sheeple.

              If electronic goods fail within a certain time (IIRC 12 months) due to a mnanufacturing defect, the manufacturer has to, by law

              Actually no, it's not that simple. If the fault occurs within the first six months the retailer has to prove that it isn't a manufacturing defect. After that the consumer has to prove that it is. Secondly the retailer doesn't have to replace the item. That's just one of their options. They are quite at liberty to pay for a repair instead. They are also allowed to take wear and tear and usage into consideration when deciding what if anything the consumer is owed.

              SOGA is good but it's not an automatic 'I win' for consumers. As noted above - it's between consumers and retailers not manufacturers.

              But overall I agree with you. Everyone needs to have some respect for the law. If we pick and choose which bits we like it won't work at all.

          2. Alan Brown Silver badge

            Re: Terms and conditions are for the Sheeple.

            "Terms and conditions" are usually a way for companies to try and prevent you obtaining your legal rights, or fool you into signing them away.

            Try reading them sometime. I've never seen a set which try to give you MORE than your legal rights.

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Google bowing to pressure from 'paying customers' (advertisers)..

    Seems the control monopoly has just failed, and with it goes the ability to do the right thing.

    1. Don Jefe
      Thumb Down

      Re:

      The right thing? You're really going to claim the 'moral' high road on this?

      If you want to get into philosophy then it is actually AdBlock users who are on the low side of the moral argument by accessing and using services for free but breaking the implied contract by refusing the advertisements that fund them.

      That being said I use the hell out of AdBlock, it just drives me nuts when people pontificate on the moral implications of free software. There are far more things that deserve moral examination than free software.

      1. El Presidente
        Holmes

        Re: Re: Implied Cotract

        Wrong context, fella.

        There is no contract, implied or otherwise, when someone serves up adverts without a page viewers' knowledge, consent or prior agreement. It's take it or leave it as with all the other content on the page.

        If 'contracts' as you define them were enforceable I'd have terms and conditions on my PC so that whenever my browser recreated a web page on my machine the page's author would owe me 10p.

        I wish.

  10. Randy Hudson

    "The open source outfit". I wonder what that is referring to

  11. auburnman

    Dammit

    With any luck they will rebrand AdBlock as a firewall/NetNanny style extension (that just so happens to blacklist ad sites by default). I hope they don't go after the PC version as well.

    1. davtom

      Re: Dammit

      Just install it from their website. This really is NOT a big deal.

      1. sabroni Silver badge

        Re: This really is NOT a big deal.

        Not for the technically minded no. But for the majority of Android users it means they won't ever see this thing called AdBlock, meaning they'll probably not even think that blocking ads is a possibility. More importantly it shows Google making a choice and indicating a direction, making it clearer that ad revenue is where they are focusing.

      2. auburnman
        Thumb Down

        Re: Dammit

        It is a big deal, because it means the slumbering giant has finally woken up and noticed AdBlock. Ergo there is a good chance that there will be further moves to make it more and more of a faff to find and install in the pipeline.

  12. Frogmelon
    Facepalm

    Gaaple?

    Gooooseberry?

  13. Frogmelon

    It's technically not a big deal, but it's another chip away at the public ethical face of an organisation that swore to do no "evil".

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      @Frogmelon - The heck with no evil!

      They're making loads of money.

  14. Badvok

    Typo Correction

    "In a rather s̶u̶r̶p̶r̶i̶s̶i̶n̶g̶ unsurprising move"

  15. DrXym Silver badge

    Get it from the site and an apk instead

    On the one hand it's the user's device to do as they see fit. On the other it's Google's store to do with as they see fit, including removing bypass tools.

    Anyway I expect these apps will appear on an apk and are not hard to install that way. I expect Google know that even if this is the case, just removing the app from the store will stop 95% of potential users from ever finding it.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Get it from the site and an apk instead

      Until of course they remove that little tick box that allows you to install applications from elsewhere. Then it's down to rooting and installing different firmware altogether. If you haven't already...

      1. DrXym Silver badge

        Re: Get it from the site and an apk instead

        There is no indication they intend to do that, and if they did there would be uproar. Even my Nexus 4 makes it extremely easy to install apks - I used it just this week to buy a Humble bundle of games, none of which originated from the Play store.

  16. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    A reminder never to turn on auto update anywhere on anything...

    1. Loyal Commenter Silver badge
      FAIL

      If you want your computer to be part of a botnet by the following morning, go for it. After all, security updates are for pussies, right?

      1. Silverburn
        Stop

        Additionally:

        No updates + sideloading from "untrusted" sources = tears.

        1. Badvok
          Pirate

          Now that they've blocked the only 'safe' (relatively) source for getting this app it will not be long before botnet versions are floating around all over the place just waiting for the unwary.

          1. Michael Habel Silver badge
            FAIL

            >Implying that Android Market / Play Store & Apples' App Store are the harbingers of safety, and would never infect meeelions of users with duff Software before the Mob politely taps them on the Shoulder and YELLS WTF!? at them. cause ya only read about this happening on average 4x a year.

            Thankfully its on Apples side most of the time, but not always!

            As others have said GET THE BLODDY THING FROM A TRUSTED SOURCE!!

            (i.e. Not from 4Shared.com but from abp.com (or where ever!)

            On the note of "other" App Stores / Markets. Did Amazon ever manage to kick their Marketplace up a notch. I recalled looking into it once before. It must have made Microsofts Store seem like the Apple App Store by comparison. Perhaps they might start hosting ABP for those that want it. No they're not Google. But they seem like a nice Corporation.... AT FIRST!!

  17. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Side question

    ...but does Amazon allow it? I know they don't appear to be there now, but do they specifically stop it i.e. could they publish there to get to the (smaller) masses?

  18. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Ad-men block ad-blocking app? hardly surprising.

    Now that Google have decent market-share in mobile this is one of a number of new moves you will be seeing.

    Next will be an increasing lock-down on the source for Android and the modding community.

  19. Crisp Silver badge
    FAIL

    Adverts are not a service or a product.

    They are an annoyance and an intrusion.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Adverts are not a service or a product.

      Yeah but selling adverts is not! Get it ?

  20. Hayden Clark
    Happy

    AdBlock-in-firefox still works

    Firefox add-ons don't seem to be Android apps (.apks). Firefox on Android still uses .xpi files.

    So, just move to Firefox!

    1. El Presidente
      Trollface

      Re: AdBlock-in-firefox still works

      Thumbs up. Firefox for the win!

      Only weirdos use chrome anyway.

  21. This post has been deleted by its author

  22. Drefsab

    Adaway gone to

    Adaway is missing as well, good job I already have it installed, backing up the apk now :)

  23. zedee

    Ad away now gone too

    Just went to check it out on the strength of the above above - and it's had the same fate.

    Only available on F-droid or a Google Project site.....

  24. zanto
    Thumb Down

    google won't care

    Users who can sideload ABP would be the minority who wouldn't matter anyway.

    "Do no evil", my arse.

    1. Al Jones

      Re: google won't care

      Users who frontload ABP are in a minority too - it's not exactly the first thing that the Man on the Clapham Omnibus installs when he gets a new Android phone.

  25. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    this reminds me

    to root my no-name tablet, I've been meaning to do this, and it crawls up in the todo list every time I go online (hardly ever), when I see the ad-crap and ad-supported crap trying and succeeding to make their presence known., but I don't go online often enough, and it slips down the list...

    OK, I will spend 20 min of my time to root and first thing I'm gonna install is adblock plus. Yeah, I'm a thankless freetard, but also old-fashioned, if I see "free", I expect it to be free, and not attached to strings from here to Mars.

  26. John Robson Silver badge
    FAIL

    free advertising

    i might need to go and download...

  27. Paul 135

    we need a viable alternative to Google Play and its other evils such as DRM

    Google is using Google Play to try and lock down Android in more ways than one. I am mist concerned about the levels of DRM in Google Play apps these days, meaning that to use the app you must have Google Play (and have paid Google a nice little sum both for the app itself and then for the licence to use Google Play when you bought your phone).

    We desperately need an app store that offers paid apps, but guarantees that they will be DRM-free. Developers could be attracted to such a store if it took a much smaller cut than the ridiculous 30% that Google and Apple demand.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      @Paul 135 - Re: we need a viable alternative to Google Play and its other evils such as DRM

      Now you're waking up ? Too late, my friend, you should have listen to the Old bearded man.

  28. This post has been deleted by its author

    1. Greg J Preece

      Re: What's the difference...?

      One isn't regulated by Google Play and thus continues to work?

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: What's the difference...?

      The app can block ads in Ad-supported apps. The Firefox add-on only blocks ads in Firefox.

      1. This post has been deleted by its author

  29. The_Regulator

    Google can't maximize advertising profits

    If you continually block them so screw you adblock plus dev....there goes the best app available......enjoy your targeted ads users....

  30. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Fandroids or... Freetards?

    Oh the advertising company Google is evil they aren't letting me block adverts on their operating system they provided for free in the applications that I downloaded for free which were ad subsidized because I'm too cheap to buy the 0.99p version

    1. This post has been deleted by its author

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Fandroids or... Freetards?

        With software that you refuse to pay for. You haven't got any moral high ground here.

      2. Craigness
        FAIL

        Re: Fandroids or... Freetards?

        "they shouldn't restrict users' rights over their own devices"

        They don't stop you using your device in the way you want. They've prevented some app developers from selling apps which violate the polices of the store. You can sideload, they can use a different delivery system.

        "On my phone, using my bandwidth"

        You agreed to download an ad-supported app from their website using their bandwidth. If you don't want the ad-supported version then pay for the ad-free version. If there is no ad-free version then get the ads or don't download the app. Why is that so hard to understand?

        1. M Gale

          Re: Fandroids or... Freetards?

          What about the developers of Early Bird, that turned the paid version into a "free" adware version, and "updated" all of the paying users to get hit with adverts?

          Or maybe Rovio, who are the masters of permissions creep?

          Sorry, but if somebody is blocking adverts then that is an indication that they are never going to buy what is advertised. Suck it up, and make a paid version. Do not assume that people will not do exactly what they wish with what is on their devices.

    2. RyokuMas Silver badge
      Mushroom

      Re: Fandroids or... Freetards?

      Damn right! Having written a number of mobile games, I was forced to swallow my pride and turn to advertising - paid with free trial proved to have less than a 1% coversion rate, and don't get me started on in-app purchasing...

      Even back in the 8-bit days, people were happy taking a punt on a £1.99 or £2.99 game, and yes, quite a few of them turned out the be shit. But for weeks of work, it would be nice as a developer to get a bit of a return for my efforts.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        @RyokuMas - Re: Fandroids or... Freetards?

        So, if it was clearly unprofitable, why didn't you just quit developing games ? I find it a little bit strange that you're looking for a way to force people to pay for things they are not interesting in paying for. Is this what they call a business model ?

        1. RyokuMas Silver badge
          Megaphone

          Re: @RyokuMas - Fandroids or... Freetards?

          @AC 17:44 " I find it a little bit strange that you're looking for a way to force people to pay for things they are not interesting in paying for.

          ... and I find it strange that you seem to think that you are entitled to the rewards of someone else's work for free with no caveats. I never said I had to make a return - I write games because I enjoy writing them. However, like I said, it would be nice to get something back, and without the backing of a large marketing budget, advertising is the best way to ensure that happens.

          Short version - it may be your phone and your bandwidth, but neither of those give any payment to the developer. It's the developers who decide how they want to make a return (if any) on their apps - if you want to encourage them away from monitizing via adverts then start paying. Otherwise put up and shut up.

  31. Greg J Preece

    Still available!

    As a Firefox plugin. :-)

  32. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    google doing the right thing

    Its not really evil or unethical for google to want to stop adblockers. Ads don't just make them money but pay the developers of the apps too. Without that income most of those apps would be pay only or not available on android at all.

    The only unethical action here are the users who think that it is fair to take the apps for free and then block their part of the deal.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      @AC 15:42GMT - Re: google doing the right thing

      The same exact reasoning applies to organized crime who has to pay the thugs coming to mug you. If you don't pay, how exactly are they going to be paid ?

      So companies are spending money do develop those adverts and to have them shoved at me. I don't even watch them and I never purchased anything on the Internet or in a store because as a result of an advert so how exactly are those developers going to be paid ? What if I just scrap those adverts just before they reach my eyes, does it make any difference ?

  33. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    perhaps the reporting has the wrong end of the stick

    This story is odd, because the most effective Android ad blocker, Ad Away, is still there. I suspect that the point might be less a concern regarding ads (being arsed to block them apparently making you some sort of outlier), more an issue of throwing up a proxy that changes content transparently.. That would be a useful way for malware to behave.. hrm..

    Anyway, the nice thing about Android is that unlike iOS, it not being approved for main store doesn't stop you installing it- though you obviously have to make actual informed decisions there :)

    1. Michael Habel Silver badge

      Re: perhaps the reporting has the wrong end of the stick

      Actually your are wrong I can confirm as others here have already attested to above that AdAway is in fact gone, (i.e. removed) from the Play Store. Other then that I agree with everything else, you said. AdAway is the BEST! but, unlike ABP. Which up to this point my knowledge would have lead me to believe was a Firefox & Chrome Plug-in ONLY. AdAway strips Adds off everything including Ad-Warez such as but, not limited to Angry Birds.

      If you ever asked yourself is it worth it to root your Device for this?

      The Answer is simple. The Answer is YES!

  34. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Psycologists would have a field day with the confirmation bias in this thread. Funny how tunes change when Google are doing something unsavoury.

  35. Miek
    Linux

    On Android, I have gone back to Firefox simply because Google has no intention of allowing extensions for Chrome on Android. Just installed Firefox and have my Adblock and Autocomplete=on extensions working. I am a happy penguin today.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      You're misleading us

      Android is just a parasite infecting and growing on penguin eggs. It is not the penguin as you would seem to imply.

      1. Miek
        Linux

        Re: You're misleading us

        Grow a pair AC

  36. bag o' spanners
    Meh

    As a rational adult with a functioning brain, I filter adverts in all formats at all times. Took me a while to blank the planet sized things on billboards, but I managed it. On an average bus or tube journey in London, I reckon the adbods are screaming in your face at least a hundred times an hour. On a bike, it's easier to resist the lure of the gigantic font and simplistic appeals to my baser instincts, because I'm mobile, and they're peripheral. Adverts may be a necessary evil in some people's eyes, but they're still evil, with one or two notable exceptions. Their relevance to my physical existence and my ability to afford the shiny is microscopic. Even film trailers fall into the "99% of everything is shite" paradigm. My default mode isn't credulous wonder, followed by instant desire.

    I'd rather read a sensible balanced review than believe a blaring ad campaign. Hype is just a gobshite annoyance, and just as aggressive as pushy chuggers. For non-television watchers like me, relentless repetitive advertising seems curiously desperate. Overpriced garbage and dodgy sevices wheedling for attention. And as Ebay kindly pointed out, even the targetted version doesn't pay its way.

    Maybe Google's getting its panic pants on, and manning the ramparts to defend its market share.

    "adblock on stun"

  37. Craigness
    Facepalm

    ITV doesn't get this much abuse for showing adverts! The Google haters are ignorant of the following points:

    1) Google has not banned you from installing this app.

    That is all. It's understandable that they've removed it from the Play Store because when whiney El Presidente is FORCED [sic] to install an ad-supported app it's agreed that the developer gets paid by displaying adverts. How does it make any sense for the same store which provides er...FORCES...you with that app also to provide an easy way to circumvent that agreement? Even so, if you want to use it then go ahead. Just remember that nobody but you is doing anything evil.

  38. Herby Silver badge
    Joke

    In other news...

    Your TV will self destruct and refuse to play pictures if you get up while a commercial is running and get a bite to eat (or dispose of bodily waste). You MUST sit there and enjoy the ads.

  39. Rentaguru
    Coat

    Ah much better

    El reg is so much better without the ads. I know that I'm taking food from the mouths of starving baby journalists but the ads have got too intrusive of late and adaway works .... after ridding myself of the proxy in the 3g apn. It's the internet like it used to be until google ads spoilt it for everyone!

    Mines the one with the journos pay packets overflowing the pockets!

  40. Ed_UK
    Meh

    Zen and Adverts

    If an ad is shown and nobody buys anything, does it still make money?

  41. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    @GBL Initialiser

    You seem to forget these ads use up costly mobile data - so I am in effect forced to pay for ads I don't want.

    Money is tight enough - I don't need a bunch of ad hacks wasting mine trying to sell me stuff i don't want.

This topic is closed for new posts.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019