On 2/10/2023 4:20 AM, The Real Bev wrote:
>> Change "people" to "apps" and that's what you just said.
>
> There are a lot more people than there are ad-blocker apps (maybe 20,
> most with few users and low ratings). It's unrealistic to wish that the
> reverse were true.

Like any person or company that preys on the masses, you have to know how
to find the one priest who isn't a pedophile. Saying all priests are
pedophiles simply says that you didn't look very hard for the good ones.

However I will grant you that if you look for almost anything that most
people want, you'll find the same situation. Take cartoonify apps, or video
size reducers, or image snapshot editors or in the olden days, dvd burners.

Any app that a lot of non technical people want to find a technical
solution for will have the scammers inundating the search results with
their scams. It has always been that way. And it will always be that way.

The search results for best smartphone ad blocker will be no different.
https://www.google.com/search?q=best+smartphone+ad+blocker

You have to know how to make good choices out of your search results.
--
best regards,

Neil

The Real Bev wrote:

>> Netguard (Android) and AdGuard Pro (iOS) will be the best you can do
>> without rooting or jailbreaking. Netguard needs to be side-loaded, the
>> version on the Google Play Store lacks some features.
>
> Somebody (you?) pointed at the github version...

Hi TheRealBev,

Have I ever steered you wrong? Have I ever given you bad data?
Never right?

I wouldn't recommend NetGuard for you because it's like recommending that
someone buy aa chainsaw when it's too powerful for what they can handle.

It's _easy_ to use NetGuard; but it does a _lot_ of powerful things,
which you won't like if you don't sloooooooooooowly implement them.

As such, I don't recommend NetGuard for you; but I use it myself, just as I
cut down trees all the time with a chainsaw while on iOS they only have
butterknives for the same task.

If after that warning you still want to try out NetGuard, then read on
as it is sideloaded (which is nothing more than downloading a file).

BTW, I'm not sure why Steve makes *SUCH A SCARY HUMONGOUS DEAL* about
something as trivially easy as sideloading, where it's no different than
downloading a file and then tapping on that file you just downloaded.

I wish he's stop doing that because the Apple idiots get into a frenzy
every time *STEVE MAKES A HUGE DEAL ABOUT DOWNLOADING A FILE!!!!!!*.

However...

To the point if this thread, sideloading is the biggest difference there is
between the two platforms. It's _why_ iOS is crippled. Why Android is not.

Because of the lack of sideloading...
*iOS is crippled*

Anyway, while Google doesn't allow the "good" NetGuard any more than Google
allows the "good" Ungoogled Chromium or the "good" NewPipe YouTube client,
or the "good" Aurora Google Play Store client (ad infinitum), you can
easily download them all and they work just fine without anything else.

HINT: Forever replace the word "sideloading" with "downloading & tapping".

>> Your Pixel is old enough, and out of warranty, so rooting would not be
>> an issue.
>
> Not a warranty worry, I just want to avoid bricking it. I have no
> confidence in my ability to follow instructions that I HOPE will work.

Having rooted some phones and having a handful of old Androids lying around
(they never die - you just get new ones for free all the time), I will
agree with The Real Bev that rooting isn't for the sqeamish.

In _many_ cases though, rooting is no different than sideloading (yes, that
word again), in that you download a file and then you execute that file.

Voila! You're rooted.

NOTE: We have an entire Android thread on that topic, from only a short
while ago, so you'll find it in the archives if your heart so desires.

> The old battery lasted 5 years, so maybe the one I just replaced it with
> will too.

Another huge difference between Android and iOS is that Apple sleazily
cheaped out by putting substandard batteries in all iPhones. By stark
contrast, the average & flagship Android batteries can start your car.

That means the inevitable loss of capacity on Androids will keep them alive
far longer than the inevitable loss of capacity on iPhones. It's chemistry.

> Recent problem: Buying a nice LED shoplight which can supposedly be
> controlled (brightness) by my phone, except the instructions are
> ambiguous and don't seem to work no matter what order the steps occur.
> Why should something this simple be so difficult?

I have to agree with you that you can find anything that is poorly
designed; but by the same token, it makes the better designed devices all
the more precious. Like an Android smartphone over the poorly designed
iPhones which don't even have the standard ports such as sd & 3.5mm.

> I will look at Netguard, though.

Steve claims the adguard app is "the same" functionality as NetGuard but I
doubt it because the claims by both are completely different (e.g., AdGuard
for iOS works only on Safari according to their own web page - even as the
links Steve provided "intimate" otherwise).

Nonetheless, since you're on Android, you only likely care about Android.
This is the Google Play NetGuard which doesn't do the ad blocking feature:
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=eu.faircode.netguard>
This is the developer's web page:
<https://netguard.me/>
This is the Github page <https://github.com/M66B/NetGuard>
<https://github.com/M66B/NetGuard/releases/tag/2.303>

This is the latest release:
<https://github.com/M66B/NetGuard/releases/download/2.303/NetGuard-v2.303-release.apk>

Ooooooooooh... an APK file! Tell Steve to make a *HUGE DEAL THAT YOU NEED*
*TO SIDELOAD THAT APK FILE* as if it's a big deal to download & tap a file.

Note: Almost everything nospam said is a lie about the iOS ad blockers.
It's no longer shocking how little the iOS users know about iOS.
--
Posted out of the goodness of my heart to disseminate useful information
which, in this case, is to provide The Real Bev with honest good advice.

On 2/10/2023 1:43 AM, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> The Real Bev wrote:
>
>>> Netguard (Android) and AdGuard Pro (iOS) will be the best you can do
>>> without rooting or jailbreaking. Netguard needs to be side-loaded, the
>>> version on the Google Play Store lacks some features.
>>
>> Somebody (you?) pointed at the github version...
>
> Hi TheRealBev,
>
> Have I ever steered you wrong? Have I ever given you bad data?
> Never right?
>
> I wouldn't recommend NetGuard for you because it's like recommending that
> someone buy aa chainsaw when it's too powerful for what they can handle.
>
> It's _easy_ to use NetGuard; but it does a _lot_ of powerful things,
> which you won't like if you don't sloooooooooooowly implement them.
>
> As such, I don't recommend NetGuard for you; but I use it myself, just as I
> cut down trees all the time with a chainsaw while on iOS they only have
> butterknives for the same task.
>
> If after that warning you still want to try out NetGuard, then read on
> as it is sideloaded (which is nothing more than downloading a file).
>
> BTW, I'm not sure why Steve makes *SUCH A SCARY HUMONGOUS DEAL* about
> something as trivially easy as sideloading, where it's no different than
> downloading a file and then tapping on that file you just downloaded.
>
> I wish he's stop doing that because the Apple idiots get into a frenzy
> every time *STEVE MAKES A HUGE DEAL ABOUT DOWNLOADING A FILE!!!!!!*.
>
> However...
>
> To the point if this thread, sideloading is the biggest difference there is
> between the two platforms. It's _why_ iOS is crippled. Why Android is not.
>
> Because of the lack of sideloading...
> *iOS is crippled*
>
> Anyway, while Google doesn't allow the "good" NetGuard any more than Google
> allows the "good" Ungoogled Chromium or the "good" NewPipe YouTube client,
> or the "good" Aurora Google Play Store client (ad infinitum), you can
> easily download them all and they work just fine without anything else.
>
> HINT: Forever replace the word "sideloading" with "downloading & tapping".
>
>>> Your Pixel is old enough, and out of warranty, so rooting would not be
>>> an issue.
>>
>> Not a warranty worry, I just want to avoid bricking it. I have no
>> confidence in my ability to follow instructions that I HOPE will work.
>
> Having rooted some phones and having a handful of old Androids lying around
> (they never die - you just get new ones for free all the time), I will
> agree with The Real Bev that rooting isn't for the sqeamish.
>
> In _many_ cases though, rooting is no different than sideloading (yes, that
> word again), in that you download a file and then you execute that file.
>
> Voila! You're rooted.
>
> NOTE: We have an entire Android thread on that topic, from only a short
> while ago, so you'll find it in the archives if your heart so desires.
>
>> The old battery lasted 5 years, so maybe the one I just replaced it with
>> will too.
>
> Another huge difference between Android and iOS is that Apple sleazily
> cheaped out by putting substandard batteries in all iPhones. By stark
> contrast, the average & flagship Android batteries can start your car.
>
> That means the inevitable loss of capacity on Androids will keep them alive
> far longer than the inevitable loss of capacity on iPhones. It's chemistry.
>
>> Recent problem: Buying a nice LED shoplight which can supposedly be
>> controlled (brightness) by my phone, except the instructions are
>> ambiguous and don't seem to work no matter what order the steps occur.
>> Why should something this simple be so difficult?
>
> I have to agree with you that you can find anything that is poorly
> designed; but by the same token, it makes the better designed devices all
> the more precious. Like an Android smartphone over the poorly designed
> iPhones which don't even have the standard ports such as sd & 3.5mm.
>
>> I will look at Netguard, though.
>
> Steve claims the adguard app is "the same" functionality as NetGuard but I
> doubt it because the claims by both are completely different (e.g., AdGuard
> for iOS works only on Safari according to their own web page - even as the
> links Steve provided "intimate" otherwise).
>
> Nonetheless, since you're on Android, you only likely care about Android.
> This is the Google Play NetGuard which doesn't do the ad blocking feature:
> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=eu.faircode.netguard>
> This is the developer's web page:
> <https://netguard.me/>
> This is the Github page <https://github.com/M66B/NetGuard>
> <https://github.com/M66B/NetGuard/releases/tag/2.303>
>
> This is the latest release:
> <https://github.com/M66B/NetGuard/releases/download/2.303/NetGuard-v2.303-release.apk>
>
> Ooooooooooh... an APK file! Tell Steve to make a *HUGE DEAL THAT YOU NEED*
> *TO SIDELOAD THAT APK FILE* as if it's a big deal to download & tap a file.
>
> Note: Almost everything nospam said is a lie about the iOS ad blockers.
> It's no longer shocking how little the iOS users know about iOS.

That free github netguard says it works with every app on Android to block
access over either wifi or over cellular data. Plus it does ad blocking.

Does the iOS AdGuard do that access blocking of apps to wifi or cellular?

That $9.99 Pro AdBlock says it works only "for Safari" and it doesn't say
anything about being able to block access of apps to wifi or cellular data.
https://apps.apple.com/us/app/adguard-pro-adblock-privacy/id1126386264
"AdGuard is an ultra-efficient ad blocker for Safari."

The two apps don't even seem close if you look at what they say they do.
--
best regards,

Neil

In article <ts4q73$vqko$1@dont-email.me>, Neil <neil@myplaceofwork.com>
wrote:

>
> That free github netguard says it works with every app on Android to block
> access over either wifi or over cellular data. Plus it does ad blocking.
>
> Does the iOS AdGuard do that access blocking of apps to wifi or cellular?
>
> That $9.99 Pro AdBlock says it works only "for Safari" and it doesn't say
> anything about being able to block access of apps to wifi or cellular data.
> https://apps.apple.com/us/app/adguard-pro-adblock-privacy/id1126386264
> "AdGuard is an ultra-efficient ad blocker for Safari."
>
> The two apps don't even seem close if you look at what they say they do.

of course they're not the same. they work in different ways with
similar but not exactly the same results. sometimes one will be better
than the other. some people might choose to use both.

On 2023-02-09 23:46, The Real Bev wrote:
> On 2/9/23 4:38 AM, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>> Am 09.02.23 um 11:27 schrieb Carlos E.R.:
>>> I use an addblocker on my computers, but not yet on my phone/tablet.
>>
>> On my Pixel I use FF as standard browser. There can be easily adblockers
>> added. What I do not want to do is to install another browser.
>>
>> NoScript and uBlock Origin among a lot of other addons are available.
>
> Likewise, but FF is slower than what I assume is Chrome :-(  Mostly I
> just want a quick answer/factoid so I just talk (I'm really lousy at
> thumb typing) into the google fill-in box and hope for the best.  What's
> annoying is the popups in other apps that obscure the screen until you
> find the tiny X to get rid of it.

Popups in other apps?

I only get those if they are internal to the app, and then I uninstall
the app unless I absolutely need it, or it is the only advert. The
weather app, I think does that. Or "eltiempo.es", I don't remember. Or I
may buy the app if otherwise it is good and they promise to remove adds
on purchase.

Can adds be blocked in Chrome?

I prefer FF, but the google search applet, and the news thing, use Chrome.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

On 2/10/2023 5:43 PM, nospam wrote:
>> That free github netguard says it works with every app on Android to block
>> access over either wifi or over cellular data. Plus it does ad blocking.
>>
>> Does the iOS AdGuard do that access blocking of apps to wifi or cellular?
>>
>> That $9.99 Pro AdBlock says it works only "for Safari" and it doesn't say
>> anything about being able to block access of apps to wifi or cellular data.
>> https://apps.apple.com/us/app/adguard-pro-adblock-privacy/id1126386264
>> "AdGuard is an ultra-efficient ad blocker for Safari."
>>
>> The two apps don't even seem close if you look at what they say they do.
>
> of course they're not the same. they work in different ways with
> similar but not exactly the same results. sometimes one will be better
> than the other. some people might choose to use both.

Saying they're similar is like saying a horse is similar to a jet airplane.
They're not even close to the same when you look at what they say they do.

https://apps.apple.com/us/app/adguard-pro-adblock-privacy/id1126386264
https://www.netguard.me/

How can anyone say they are close when the iOS one says it only works in
Safari & it doesn't block individual app access to cellular data or wifi?
--
best regards,

Neil

On 2/9/2023 7:07 PM, The Real Bev wrote:

<snip>

> Somebody (you?) pointed at the github version...

I modified my write-up on hosts files to include how to do essentially
the same thing on unrooted and non-jailbroken Android and iOS/iPadOS
devices.

See "Host Files, and Alternatives, for Adware and Spyware Blocking"
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CtVsYszTivu_MOEHpj1JYYCHXQqgX8z6yfrZ9CxGwMw>.

I also added it to the document "Android and iOS features that Users of
the Other Operating System Wish they Had"
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JznrWfGJDA8CYVfjSnPTwfVy8-gAC0kPyaApuJTcUNE/>
on page 104.

On 2/10/2023 9:54 PM, sms wrote:
> I modified my write-up on hosts files to include how to do essentially
> the same thing on unrooted and non-jailbroken Android and iOS/iPadOS
> devices.
>
> See "Host Files, and Alternatives, for Adware and Spyware Blocking"
> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CtVsYszTivu_MOEHpj1JYYCHXQqgX8z6yfrZ9CxGwMw>.
>
> I also added it to the document "Android and iOS features that Users of
> the Other Operating System Wish they Had"
> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JznrWfGJDA8CYVfjSnPTwfVy8-gAC0kPyaApuJTcUNE/>
> on page 104.

I just explained to the other guy that if you read these two descriptions
https://apps.apple.com/us/app/adguard-pro-adblock-privacy/id1126386264
https://www.netguard.me/

How can anyone say they are close when the iOS app says it only works in
Safari & it doesn't block individual app access to cellular data or wifi?

I read your article saying that you can possibly trick the iOS app to do
more than only work in Safari but it was confusing whether that worked only
for iPhone browsers or if it worked on all apps like the Android app does.

Even if you manage system wide ad blocking for the entire iPhone, the iOS
app still doesn't have blocking control by app for wifi and/or cellular.

You need to make it clear these apps don't do anywhere near the same thing.
--
best regards,

Neil

On 10 Feb 2023, sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> posted some news
<news:ts5r53$13b47$1@dont-email.me>:

> On 2/9/2023 7:07 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Somebody (you?) pointed at the github version...
>
> I modified my write-up on hosts files to include how to do essentially
> the same thing on unrooted and non-jailbroken Android and iOS/iPadOS
> devices.
>
> See "Host Files, and Alternatives, for Adware and Spyware Blocking"
> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CtVsYszTivu_MOEHpj1JYYCHXQqgX8z6yfrZ9CxGwMw>.
>
> I also added it to the document "Android and iOS features that Users of
> the Other Operating System Wish they Had"
> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JznrWfGJDA8CYVfjSnPTwfVy8-gAC0kPyaApuJTcUNE/>
> on page 104.

The most important difference is shown in the link of the original post.
https://blog.esper.io/what-is-project-mainline/

Google has been updating Androids so seamlessly nobody even notices it.
Updates for Android are no longer done like they were in the early days.

Every Android phone down to Android 4.4 received this update for example.
https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answer/6048248

Why aren't Android completely seamless mainline updates, which have been
occurring for years, not even once mentioned in that difference document?

Mainline is the biggest difference between the two platforms.
iOS doesn't update seamlessly like mainline does for Android.

In article <ts5pu0$136ep$1@dont-email.me>, Neil
<neil@myplaceofwork.com> wrote:

> Saying they're similar is like saying a horse is similar to a jet airplane.

no it's not.

> They're not even close to the same when you look at what they say they do.

they both block ads. that makes them similar. they do so in different
ways, and which one is better depends on various factors.

one advantage of a content blocker is that it can differentiate content
versus ads when both are served from the *same* *host*, which a hosts
file cannot possibly do.

In article <ts5r53$13b47$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

>
> See "Host Files, and Alternatives, for Adware and Spyware Blocking"

see 'more disinformation'.

> I also added it to the document "Android and iOS features that Users of
> the Other Operating System Wish they Had"

the only people who wish they had the ability to use a hosts file are
living in the past and very ignorant about more effective modern
methods (or they're trolls).

On 10-02-2023 11:24 sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> On 2/9/2023 7:07 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Somebody (you?) pointed at the github version...
>
> I modified my write-up on hosts files to include how to do essentially
> the same thing on unrooted and non-jailbroken Android and iOS/iPadOS
> devices.
>
> See "Host Files, and Alternatives, for Adware and Spyware Blocking"
> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CtVsYszTivu_MOEHpj1JYYCHXQqgX8z6yfrZ9CxGwMw>.
>
> I also added it to the document "Android and iOS features that Users of
> the Other Operating System Wish they Had"
> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JznrWfGJDA8CYVfjSnPTwfVy8-gAC0kPyaApuJTcUNE/>
> on page 104.

I think the biggest difference between the two ecosystems is that you can
safely download any Android app from anywhere to get anything you want to.

You can't do that with the iPhone.

And you don't need to get into the complexities of rooting or jailbreaking.
Any typical user can download an app with their web browser & click on it.

Downloading an app is not any different than downloading any file and
clicking on it. Android will ask you what you want to do with that file.

If it's an app installer, then Google Play Store antivirus will always run
an automatic scan on it so it's no less safe than installing any other app.

Even if you decline that initial automatic installation scan, the Android
antivirus program runs twice a day by default scanning all installed apps.

You don't even have to worry about updating your installed apps on Android.
There are plenty of Android updaters which autoupdate any app you want.

All this app installing & checking capability doesn't exist on the iPhone.
Is any of that explained in your document that supposedly explains that?

On 2/10/2023 10:28 PM, nospam wrote:
>> Saying they're similar is like saying a horse is similar to a jet airplane.
>
> no it's not.

Then how does the iOS app block individual app access to wifi or cellular?

>> They're not even close to the same when you look at what they say they do.
>
> they both block ads. that makes them similar. they do so in different
> ways, and which one is better depends on various factors.

Why does the iOS app product description say it only works inside Safari?
> one advantage of a content blocker is that it can differentiate content
> versus ads when both are served from the *same* *host*, which a hosts
> file cannot possibly do.

If you claiming they're similar then you should answer those two questions.

--
best regards,

Neil

In article <ts5ul4$13ofb$1@dont-email.me>, Neil
<neil@myplaceofwork.com> wrote:

> >> Saying they're similar is like saying a horse is similar to a jet airplane.
> >
> > no it's not.
>
> Then how does the iOS app block individual app access to wifi or cellular?

same way as android.

once you figure out how android does it (and it's *very* obvious you do
not), you'll have your answer. simple. you might also learn that it has
more limitations on android than it does on ios.

> >> They're not even close to the same when you look at what they say they do.
> >
> > they both block ads. that makes them similar. they do so in different
> > ways, and which one is better depends on various factors.
>
> Why does the iOS app product description say it only works inside Safari?

because that's how that particular product was designed.

other products have different design goals and work in different ways.

no method is perfect. those who actually understand how things work can
choose which products (plural) work best for their needs and configure
them appropriately. those who do not understand are left flailing in
the dark, often using wildly outdated and ineffective methods.

> > one advantage of a content blocker is that it can differentiate content
> > versus ads when both are served from the *same* *host*, which a hosts
> > file cannot possibly do.
>
> If you claiming they're similar then you should answer those two questions.

diversion noted.

On 2/10/2023 6:05 PM, nospam wrote:
>> Then how does the iOS app block individual app access to wifi or cellular?
>
> same way as android.

You bullshit too much or you don't understand what those two apps do.

The $9.99 iOS app says it does almost nothing except block ads in Safari.
The free Android app says it blocks wifi & cellular & system wide ads.

>> Why does the iOS app product description say it only works inside Safari?
>
> because that's how that particular product was designed.

Which means the iOS app doesn't do anything near what the Android app does.

>> If you claiming they're similar then you should answer those two questions.
>
> diversion noted.

Those 2 questions show your claim the apps do similar things is bullshit.

--
best regards,

Neil

In article <ts64lp$14g0c$1@dont-email.me>, Neil
<neil@myplaceofwork.com> wrote:

>
> The $9.99 iOS app says it does almost nothing except block ads in Safari.
> The free Android app says it blocks wifi & cellular & system wide ads.

and?

if the goal is blocking 'wifi & cellular & system wide ads', then
choose something other than adguard. duh.

you have previously claimed that those two are completely different, so
why do you continue to compare them as if they were the same?

claiming that something doesn't do what it was not designed to do is
not only bullshit, but it's incredibly sleazy.

this may come to you as a surprise, but there are many more ad blocking
tools than just those two examples, which work in different ways, with
different features and limitations.

On 2/10/2023 11:07 AM, Neil wrote:
> On 2/10/2023 6:05 PM, nospam wrote:
>>> Then how does the iOS app block individual app access to wifi or
>>> cellular?
>>
>> same way as android.
>
> You bullshit too much or you don't understand what those two apps do.
>
> The $9.99 iOS app says it does almost nothing except block ads in Safari.
> The free Android app says it blocks wifi & cellular & system wide ads.

Not quite. While it does block ads only in Safari, it also offers DNS
filtering. See
<https://adguard.com/kb/adguard-for-ios/solving-problems/system-wide-filtering/>.
I added this to the two documents.

If you jailbreak an iPhone you can block Wi-Fi data from being used, on
a per-app basis, using the Network Disabler Tweak, see
<https://piunikaweb.com/2019/12/07/disable-network-apps-ios-13-jailbreak-tweak/>.
I also added this to the two documents. There is no way to accomplish
this without jailbreaking. This will not block ads on addresses that are
not redirected. Of course once you Jailbreak, you can just edit your
hosts file.

The issue here appears to be a lack of understanding the differences
between ad blocking and DNS redirection (and what the purpose of a hosts
file is) They are not equivalent. Try explaining this to a non-technical
person and their eyes will glaze over!

On 2023-02-10 17:58, nospam wrote:
> In article <ts5r53$13b47$1@dont-email.me>, sms
> <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> See "Host Files, and Alternatives, for Adware and Spyware Blocking"
>
> see 'more disinformation'.
>
>> I also added it to the document "Android and iOS features that Users of
>> the Other Operating System Wish they Had"
>
> the only people who wish they had the ability to use a hosts file are
> living in the past and very ignorant about more effective modern
> methods (or they're trolls).

Blocking hosts uses less memory and CPU (and less data transmitted). It
can also be done at the router.

It is just a method that can be used. It has pros and cons. To each its
own. No need to flame.

And no, I don't use it.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

On 2/10/2023 1:58 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:

<snip>

> Blocking hosts uses less memory and CPU (and less data transmitted). It
> can also be done at the router.
>
> It is just a method that can be used. It has pros and cons. To each its
> own. No need to flame.

Whether you use a hosts file on the actual device, or use NetGuard or
AdGuard to block domains via a VPN (adding all the domains that would be
in your hosts file to Netguard or Adguard), the end result is the same.

The latter actually has cons, but the only con of a hosts file on the
machine is that on Android and iOS you have to root or jailbreak to edit
the hosts file. On Windows, MacOS, or Linux you can edit the hosts file
directly.

Once Apple allows non-WebKit browsers in iOS then the need for the ad
blocking capability of AdGuard for Safari will disappear, but the DNS
redirection capability will still be useful

Not everyone understands the advantages of hosts files but nospam can
read
<https://www.zdnet.com/home-and-office/networking/how-to-use-a-hosts-file-to-improve-your-internet-experience/>
to learn how hosts files work and why they are useful.

In article <ts6e7l$15g7r$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> If you jailbreak an iPhone you can block Wi-Fi data from being used,

there is no need to jailbreak to 'block wifi data from being used',
which would be a foolish thing to do.

>
> The issue here appears to be a lack of understanding the differences
> between ad blocking and DNS redirection (and what the purpose of a hosts
> file is) They are not equivalent.

indeed, and it's you and a certain other troll who think they are
somehow equivalent, mostly by comparing hosts file with content
blockers (which block more than ads, another thing they get wrong).

many people use *both*, another concept lost on them.

> Try explaining this to a non-technical
> person and their eyes will glaze over!

their eyes glaze over because they know when someone is pretending to
know things they do not and feeding them a load of crap.

In article <s8ribjxum.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

> > the only people who wish they had the ability to use a hosts file are
> > living in the past and very ignorant about more effective modern
> > methods (or they're trolls).
>
> Blocking hosts uses less memory and CPU (and less data transmitted). It
> can also be done at the router.

the difference in cpu usage and memory is negligible, particularly
compared to the network query itself.

putting a hosts file on a router is non-trivial or impossible for
consumer routers, although some do have a content blocking feature
(often called parental control), with varying levels of effectiveness.
configurability and privacy.

a much better choice would be to use a pihole or equivalent, which is
continually updated and far more effective at blocking a wide variety
of stuff (not just ads), and can also be tweaked in ways not possible
for a hosts file.

> It is just a method that can be used. It has pros and cons.

everything does.

the trolls deliberately ignore that because it doesn't fit their
narrative.

> To each its
> own. No need to flame.

there is when trolls deliberately and continually lie about pretty much
everything. they revel in disinformation.

In article <ts6gvp$15olq$3@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> Once Apple allows non-WebKit browsers in iOS then the need for the ad
> blocking capability of AdGuard for Safari will disappear,

absolutely false.

comments like that is clear proof how little you know about ios, webkit
and ad blocking in general.

> but the DNS
> redirection capability will still be useful

that's not going away.

> Not everyone understands the advantages of hosts files but nospam can
> read

there you go again, resorting to ad hominem attacks.

instead of digging yourself a deeper hole, you should read about the
*disadvantages* of a hosts file and why they are obsolete as well as
more advanced methods, before commenting further.

On 2/10/23 5:31 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2023-02-09 23:46, The Real Bev wrote:
>> On 2/9/23 4:38 AM, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>>> Am 09.02.23 um 11:27 schrieb Carlos E.R.:
>>>> I use an addblocker on my computers, but not yet on my phone/tablet.
>>>
>>> On my Pixel I use FF as standard browser. There can be easily adblockers
>>> added. What I do not want to do is to install another browser.
>>>
>>> NoScript and uBlock Origin among a lot of other addons are available.
>>
>> Likewise, but FF is slower than what I assume is Chrome :-(  Mostly I
>> just want a quick answer/factoid so I just talk (I'm really lousy at
>> thumb typing) into the google fill-in box and hope for the best.  What's
>> annoying is the popups in other apps that obscure the screen until you
>> find the tiny X to get rid of it.
>
> Popups in other apps?

Yes. Apparently there are adblocking apps that get rid of those too.
NetGuard (the github version) seems to be one of them, but I haven't
looked at it yet.

> I only get those if they are internal to the app, and then I uninstall
> the app unless I absolutely need it, or it is the only advert. The
> weather app, I think does that. Or "eltiempo.es", I don't remember. Or I
> may buy the app if otherwise it is good and they promise to remove adds
> on purchase.
>
> Can adds be blocked in Chrome?

I have adblockplus for Chrome/linux, but I don't think there's an
android version. Hard to see why google would allow one for the desktop
version.

> I prefer FF, but the google search applet, and the news thing, use Chrome.

--
Cheers, Bev
"Let them all go to hell, except Cave 76"
-- Mel Brooks

Am 11.02.23 um 07:12 schrieb The Real Bev:
> I have adblockplus for Chrome/linux, but I don't think there's an
> android version. Hard to see why google would allow one for the desktop
> version.

Use Firefox and ad the much more transparent uBlock Origin to it and you
will get a completely new surf-feeling. Together with NoScript - wich is
nothing for beginners - it is an unmatched team.

--
Gutta cavat lapidem (Ovid)

Am 11.02.23 um 07:35 schrieb Joerg Lorenz:
> Am 11.02.23 um 07:12 schrieb The Real Bev:
>> I have adblockplus for Chrome/linux, but I don't think there's an
>> android version. Hard to see why google would allow one for the desktop
>> version.
>
> Use Firefox and ad the much more transparent uBlock Origin to it and you
> will get a completely new surf-feeling. Together with NoScript - wich is
> nothing for beginners - it is an unmatched team.

Works also on Firefox on Android.

--
Gutta cavat lapidem (Ovid)