Why should I use Safari AdBlocker?

jon08

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Nov 14, 2008
1,673
28
I installed it today hoping it would eliminate ads and whatnot, and while it seems to integrate with Safari nicely and is unobtrusive, it doesn't really do a great job at blocking ads.

I can still see ads on various sites that I for example wouldn't see on Firefox using AdBlockPlus. I'm pretty disappointed. Do GlimmerBlocker, Safari AdBlock or SafariBlock do any better job??
 

GGJstudios

macrumors Westmere
May 16, 2008
44,360
701
I use SafariBlock and Safari AdBlock. Of the two, I think SafariBlock does a much better job.
 

GGJstudios

macrumors Westmere
May 16, 2008
44,360
701
It means you need to run Safari in 32-bit, which most people don't want to do. I think Apple has done such a good job with there 64-bit talk that people are afraid of 32-bit apps.
It works fine. It doesn't have to be 64-bit to work effectively. A great many apps that run on SL are still 32-bit.
 

fanchee

macrumors 6502a
Nov 23, 2009
540
20
I'm running it and Safari is still running in 64 bit mode, and I also notice SIMBL Agent which is also 64 bit.
 

GGJstudios

macrumors Westmere
May 16, 2008
44,360
701
I'm running it and Safari is still running in 64 bit mode, and I also notice SIMBL Agent which is also 64 bit.
It's quite common to run a mix of 64-bit and 32-bit applications simultaneously on SL:

To ensure simplicity and flexibility, Mac OS X still comes in one version that runs both 64-bit and 32-bit applications. So you don’t need to update everything on your system just to run a single 64-bit program.
http://www.apple.com/macosx/technology/
 

Keleko

macrumors 68000
Mar 26, 2008
1,919
2,623
I use Safari AdBlocker that allows me to urn Safari in 64 bit. I used to use ClickToFlash, but it got annoying on sites that have Flash as the main basis for how the site works. If that isn't a problem, then ClickToFlash gets rid of the most annoying ads. I wouldn't mind ads so much if they didn't pop out in front of the content or made noise.
 

Mumford

macrumors regular
Oct 8, 2006
181
2
Altadena, CA
It's quite common to run a mix of 64-bit and 32-bit applications simultaneously on SL:[/url]
Yes, it's possible for separate applications to have different bit-ness. But if a single application is loading shared libraries, they must have the same bit-ness as the parent application.
 

GGJstudios

macrumors Westmere
May 16, 2008
44,360
701
Yes, it's possible for separate applications to have different bit-ness. But if a single application is loading shared libraries, they must have the same bit-ness as the parent application.
And your point is? My point is that Safari AdBlock runs just fine in 32-bit mode on Snow Leopard.
 

chill.

macrumors 6502
Sep 1, 2008
385
0
just a heads up, by ad blocking you are denying revenue to the websites you visit. if the ads are unobtrusive then you should really consider not using an ad-blocker to support these sites
 

fishmoose

macrumors 68000
Jul 1, 2008
1,661
42
Sweden
just a heads up, by ad blocking you are denying revenue to the websites you visit. if the ads are unobtrusive then you should really consider not using an ad-blocker to support these sites
But they only get money if you click on the ads, right? I never click on an ad so I can just block them anyway.
 

Surely

Guest
Oct 27, 2007
15,043
8
Los Angeles, CA
I use Click2Flash, and it works great for flash-based ads, but doesn't help with the millions of non-flash ads.
Millions of non-flash ads? I rarely see an ad, and all I use is Click2Flash. Sure, I see a non-flash ad every once in a while, but it is so rare for me that I hardly notice.

But they only get money if you click on the ads, right? I never click on an ad so I can just block them anyway.
Exactly. I think the last time I clicked on a banner ad was in 2002.:p
 

chill.

macrumors 6502
Sep 1, 2008
385
0
But they only get money if you click on the ads, right? I never click on an ad so I can just block them anyway.
depends on the ad. there are some ads that are CPC (cost per click) but also CPV (cost per view) or (cost per visitor). macrumors uses ads too! i am willing to bet that they get parts of a penny from every time this HP/Sony banner is viewed
 

fishmoose

macrumors 68000
Jul 1, 2008
1,661
42
Sweden
depends on the ad. there are some ads that are CPC (cost per click) but also CPV (cost per view) or (cost per visitor). macrumors uses ads too! i am willing to bet that they get parts of a penny from every time this HP/Sony banner is viewed
Okay. But if I don't allow tracking cookies, CPV ads cannot work anyway since they can't track if I loaded the ad?
 

GGJstudios

macrumors Westmere
May 16, 2008
44,360
701
Millions of non-flash ads? I rarely see an ad, and all I use is Click2Flash. Sure, I see a non-flash ad every once in a while, but it is so rare for me that I hardly notice.
Click2Flash alone isn't as clean as using SafariBlock/Safari AdBlock. Here are just two examples. In all cases, Click2Flash is active:

Without SafariBlock:
Picture 1.jpg
With SafariBlock:
Picture 2.jpg
Without SafariBlock:
Picture 3.jpg
With SafariBlock:
Picture 4.jpg

I'll keep both, since it's much cleaner.
 

Surely

Guest
Oct 27, 2007
15,043
8
Los Angeles, CA
Click2Flash alone isn't as clean as using SafariBlock/Safari AdBlock. Here are just two examples.

Screenshots

I'll keep both, since it's much cleaner.
Nice screenshots.

However, SafariBlock doesn't work for me. I would need to run Safari in 32-bit mode.

Probably has something to do with the last update being from September 2008.

Are you still running Leopard?
 

GGJstudios

macrumors Westmere
May 16, 2008
44,360
701
Nice screenshots.
However, SafariBlock doesn't work for me. I would need to run Safari in 32-bit mode.
Probably has something to do with the last update being from September 2008.
Are you still running Leopard?
SafariBlock runs fine in 32-bit mode on Snow Leopard.