Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Alternatives to iOS and iOS Devices' started by ugahairydawgs, Mar 13, 2013.
Is Chrome next?
Ads supported apps are never free. Blocking apps from ads supported apps is no different from pirating software.
How is it? I never signed an agreement saying I'd look at add when using the app.
So I'm assuming you don't run ad blocking software on your browser.
Better go make dat Titanium Backup or whatever you got before you forget ~
Already done. :thumbup:
This is some serious smack going on. Good thing there are alternative Android app stores.
Android also has the ability to sideload applications without the need of mods.
Much more convenient than installing another app store , IMO.
I pay for my Android apps that have ad free versions. Tweestcaster is one, 1Weather is another. I don't mind paying for my apps as long as I can be ad free. My Firefox browser on my computer, Nexus 4 phone and Nexus 7 tablet all have ad blockers installed as well.
I see no problem with them going through with this.
What about subway surfers. No way to pay for it or pay to remove them ads. And it's in the play store. Usually you can find a paid version.
I can understand why Google have done this.
I personally can not play/utilise ANY ad supported apps be they on Android or iOS. As soon as I boot an app, if I'm presented with an advert - i dump it. They annoy me profusely.
I prefer a paid alternative without Ads. However I didn't know there were apps that could actually block adverts in other apps on android, i may have tried it myself if I had.
But if for all the right reasons Google has decided to do away with them to help developers and such fair enough.. BUT!!! At the same time what really is annoying is 'paid' apps that later become free and add advertisements, and then when you update your app you paid for - your left with crappy adverts and no way to revert back to your older version without jumping through hoops.
Google should likewise stamp out and remove app's that do this and make it patently clear to developers that if they were a paid app, then if they wish to make the app free or ad supported then they should release it as a separate release and not as an update - because that is not fair on the consumers who purchased the application in the first instance.
Same for paid games that later update and add micro-transactions to the game which otherwise would have been previously without charge. That's just evil and money grabbing of developers too.
So yes by all means protect your advertising revenue and developers Google. That's good.
But at same time protect your consumers from getting burned by greedy practices some developers decide to utilise....
You don't have to look at them, but you do not have the right to remove them. The dev of the app provided the app to you free of charge, because it is monetized through ad views/clicks. It is not your right to remove that, and thus create what equates to a paid version of that app. If you don't want ads displayed, then buy the app. What makes you think you are entitled to the work of others, free of charge?
Where does it say I don't have the right to remove them? These add are usually location based and are a huge battery drain. I usually change channels during commercials too.
I don't care about ads but the great thing about android is that you can still install these apps without the play store because android supports sideloading apps without root.
Really? You're trying to draw a correlation between watching television and getting a free app? You've got to be kidding me. You really think you have the right to circumvent apps so that you can have a free version of a paid app? Are you really that cheap? Oh and by they way, there is a generalized provision in the terms that does explicitly state you may not circumvent security components that protect any product. In this case, that would be rooting to circumvent ads... By the way, you never answered my question. What makes you think you are entitled to the work of others, free of charge?
I do the same except not all apps have paid ad-free versions.
Well for one they've put it in the store listed 'Free'. I'm not cheap, I buy apps if they offer a paid version. Some apps don't offer a paid version and just bombard me with intrusive ads. All it took was a free adblocker from the app store, which also worked in Chrome for ads in web pages.
So...basically you feel you're entitled to other people's work for free. You seem to feel devs should provide you with software without any sort of monetization at all. If you're that particular about ads, then maybe you should either buy the paid version, or get another app. You most certainly do not have the right to steal from the developer. People like you are the very reason many devs don't believe in the free model, because of people like you who seem to think they are entitled to the works of others. Disgusting.
I don't block ads as I like to support content providers and ddeveloper, unless they shove some full screen crap in my face, then I simply refuse to use other app/site/whatever.
I do actively seek out paid variants to avoid ads though.
As for the side loading of ant apps from the likes of AdBlockPlus, its only a tick in a box awa for anyone who wants to install the app.
Barely an issue to those that really want it.
Did you read what I said before you launched into your huge "holier than thou" rant? Perhaps you should go back and read my post that you quoted, and then read what you replied with, and then see if those 2 correlate. I look forward to your response.
You sir, get it! Now if only certain other people who feel devs should provide him with their work for free, could follow your lead...
I saw exactly what you posted. You seem to feel you are entitled to the works of others, and they are not entitled to monetization of said work, if you so feel they aren't (though you use their work). You could take a lesson from ChazUK.
I really don't think you did, I told you I opt for paid apps, however not all apps offer an ad-free paid version. You then went on and said "Why don't you get the paid apps".
If there is no paid version, I don't use it. Honestly, i hate ads. I do the same thing on my iPhone, pay for the app to get rid of ads.
..and you obviously did not read the entire statement. The one sentence you are harping on said "If you're that particular about ads, then maybe you should either buy the paid version, or get another app." In other words, if there isn't a paid app available, and you don't want ads, don't use the app. You have no right to deny the dev monetization of their work....but apparently you seem to think you have to right to their work, but they do not have the right to profit from their work.
This is a dick move by Google, protecting their own interests at the expense of their users. Still, Android being Android, it's easy enough to sideload ad blockers anyway. AdBlock Plus for Android is already adapting to this and AdAway has simply instructed its users to use an alternate open market called F-Droid which lets you directly download the APK.