Not just in a browser -- the ones included with apps too. I accepted
the necessity of these until one popped up and SCREAMED at me. That's
absolutely unacceptable. I can't remember what I was doing at the time
(last week, maybe) or I would complain directly to the author.

I can't imagine how anybody wanting to sell something would think that
scaring the shit out of potential customers would be a good idea.

--
Cheers, Bev
"I love deadlines... especially the whooshing sound
they make as they go by." -Douglas Adams

In article <s8jr0i$c4f$1@dont-email.me>, The Real Bev
<bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:

> Not just in a browser -- the ones included with apps too.

use content filtering on your local network.

it will get most ads, but not all of them, since the content blocking
filters are always one step behind the ad companies, who find new ways
to circumvent the blocking.

> I accepted
> the necessity of these until one popped up and SCREAMED at me. That's
> absolutely unacceptable. I can't remember what I was doing at the time
> (last week, maybe) or I would complain directly to the author.

what you were doing was using an app which had a loud ad.

stop using that app and the problem goes away, at least until you
encounter a new app that has the same or similar loud ad.

> I can't imagine how anybody wanting to sell something would think that
> scaring the shit out of potential customers would be a good idea.

you scare easily.

In comp.mobile.android, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Not just in a browser -- the ones included with apps too.

My solution to in-app ads is to never install ad-supported apps.
Browser ones are harder to stop.

> use content filtering on your local network.

An outside the device filter won't work on a new network (eg, cellular
data).

> it will get most ads, but not all of them, since the content blocking
> filters are always one step behind the ad companies, who find new ways
> to circumvent the blocking.

I believe ad blocking is effectively the Halting Problem, which provably
cannot be (100%) solved.

>> I accepted
>> the necessity of these until one popped up and SCREAMED at me.

In many cases the provider of a resource (app, webpage) has no direct
control over the ads that appear with it. They instead have enlisted
services to provide ads and give them payments. In such a situation the
best the author can do is notify the partner ad agency. The agency may
have not even directly provided it, but resold the spot. It can be
very difficult after the fact to know where a particular ad came from,
you need some IDs associated with the ad at the time of display.

>> I can't imagine how anybody wanting to sell something would think that
>> scaring the shit out of potential customers would be a good idea.

There are so many advertising tactics out there that I find baffling,
but somehow manage to be successful enough to sustain the business.

> you scare easily.

Jump to conclusions much there, nospam?

Elijah
------
advertising: micropayments done in the most shitty way

In article <eli$2105251901@qaz.wtf>, Eli the Bearded
<*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:

> >> Not just in a browser -- the ones included with apps too.
>
> My solution to in-app ads is to never install ad-supported apps.
> Browser ones are harder to stop.

that is not a guarantee either. sometimes there aren't alternatives to
ad-supported apps and sometimes paid apps have ads, although nowhere
near as many.

> > use content filtering on your local network.
>
> An outside the device filter won't work on a new network (eg, cellular
> data).

it does if the device is configured to do so.

there are cloud solutions for exactly this scenario.

> > it will get most ads, but not all of them, since the content blocking
> > filters are always one step behind the ad companies, who find new ways
> > to circumvent the blocking.
>
> I believe ad blocking is effectively the Halting Problem, which provably
> cannot be (100%) solved.
>
> >> I accepted
> >> the necessity of these until one popped up and SCREAMED at me.
>
> In many cases the provider of a resource (app, webpage) has no direct
> control over the ads that appear with it. They instead have enlisted
> services to provide ads and give them payments. In such a situation the
> best the author can do is notify the partner ad agency. The agency may
> have not even directly provided it, but resold the spot. It can be
> very difficult after the fact to know where a particular ad came from,
> you need some IDs associated with the ad at the time of display.
>
> >> I can't imagine how anybody wanting to sell something would think that
> >> scaring the shit out of potential customers would be a good idea.
>
> There are so many advertising tactics out there that I find baffling,
> but somehow manage to be successful enough to sustain the business.
>
> > you scare easily.
>
> Jump to conclusions much there, nospam?

not at all.

she stated she was scared by an ad on a phone.

think about that. being scared by an *ad*. on a phone.

the ad might be annoying (many of them are), but it's hardly scary. it
cannot inflict harm.

it's also the result of a user action, something she explicitly did to
cause the ad to start. ads don't randomly start playing while the phone
is not being used. ad companies want the user's attention.

mute the volume or quit the app. problem solved.

uninstall the app and future problems avoided.

In comp.mobile.android, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:
>> My solution to in-app ads is to never install ad-supported apps.
> that is not a guarantee either. sometimes there aren't alternatives to
> ad-supported apps and sometimes paid apps have ads, although nowhere
> near as many.

If it has ads, I don't install it (or if mistakenly installed, it
gets uninstalled). That solves in-app ads. No app is so indispensible
that I've needed to break that rule yet.

What apps do _you_ find lack non-ad-supported alternatives?

Non-monetary pleas for me to do something, eg Firefox asking me to look
at Pocket, I write off as "not ads". YMMV.

Elijah
------
ads in webpages are not "in-app ads"

>> Not just in a browser -- the ones included with apps too.

AdClear is a VPN firewall and system-wide ad-blocker that does a great
job of blocking ads over your phone.You can also block apps that don't
need Internet access except for serving ads.
https://www.seven.com

nospam wrote on 25.05.2021 18:38
> sometimes there aren't alternatives to ad-supported apps

I must have a few hundred apps and, offhand to my knowledge, none have ads.

In my humblest of opinions, if someone is seeing ads, something is wrong.
*What functionality do we need that doesn't come with an adfree app anyway?*

> uninstall the app and future problems avoided.

When I test apps, they get a one-strike-you're-out condition, one of which
is whether they display ads or not.

Luckily, when I search for apps in Google Play (via the Aurora Store), I
explicitly set the filter to not include apps with ads so I never see them.

In my humble opinion, if someone is constantly seeing ads, it's proof that
something is very wrong. I don't know what is wrong - but something is.

*What functionality do we need that doesn't come with an adfree app anyway?*

Eli the Bearded wrote on 26.05.2021 01:58

> What apps do _you_ find lack non-ad-supported alternatives?

This is a basic question I'd love to know the answer to also.

What app functionality do a lot of people need that doesn't have an
alternative which doesn't have any ads?

While I have hundreds of apps on my phone, I admit I don't do some things
like game playing that a lot of people do so let's not name specific brands
but overall functionality as I'm sure there are certain games that you can
only get with ads if you must have _that_ game.

What do you need to do on a phone that doesn't have ad free apps to do it?

kelown wrote on 26.05.2021 03:04

> AdClear is a VPN firewall and system-wide ad-blocker that does a great
> job of blocking ads over your phone.You can also block apps that don't
> need Internet access except for serving ads.
> https://www.seven.com

+1 on AdClear.

For the OP I would also vouch for AdClear although as I recall there was
some controversy between Google & AdClear that I don't remember the details
of (did they get kicked off of Google Play?).

I used AdClear for years but I didn't really need it.

My last two phones each had hundreds of apps & I am not using AdClear & yet
I haven't seen an ad in ages (I can't remember when I last saw an ad).

I'd first ask what functionality we need that has ads before installing
AdClear but AdClear also seems to do the trick (as might a good hosts file
if rooted).

I'd also let people know that the GP search is easy for ad free apps.

On 2021-05-25 7:12 p.m., paul wrote:
> nospam wrote on 25.05.2021 18:38
>> sometimes there aren't alternatives to ad-supported apps
>
> I must have a few hundred apps and, offhand to my knowledge, none have ads.
>
So in reality, you haven't the slightest clue but for perhaps a handful.

> In my humblest of opinions, if someone is seeing ads, something is wrong.
> *What functionality do we need that doesn't come with an adfree app anyway?*
>
>> uninstall the app and future problems avoided.
>
> When I test apps, they get a one-strike-you're-out condition, one of which
> is whether they display ads or not.
>
> Luckily, when I search for apps in Google Play (via the Aurora Store), I
> explicitly set the filter to not include apps with ads so I never see them.
>
> In my humble opinion, if someone is constantly seeing ads, it's proof that
> something is very wrong. I don't know what is wrong - but something is.
>
> *What functionality do we need that doesn't come with an adfree app anyway?*
>

On 05/25/2021 04:58 PM, Eli the Bearded wrote:
> In comp.mobile.android, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>> Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:
>>> My solution to in-app ads is to never install ad-supported apps.
>> that is not a guarantee either. sometimes there aren't alternatives to
>> ad-supported apps and sometimes paid apps have ads, although nowhere
>> near as many.
>
> If it has ads, I don't install it (or if mistakenly installed, it
> gets uninstalled). That solves in-app ads. No app is so indispensible
> that I've needed to break that rule yet.
>
> What apps do _you_ find lack non-ad-supported alternatives?

The one that immediately comes to mind is 'Classic Words' which is a
proper Scrabble game with 5 or more levels of difficulty. That was the
only 'real' one I could find. The ads only arrive when I have a wifi
connection. I don't think that was the source of the screaming ad.

I tried a number of 'gallery' apps, and the one I liked best has ads.
Same with the other apps that have ads. As long as they're just bands
across the top or bottom of the screen I can tolerate/ignore them.
Anybody who wastes money trying to sell me something makes me smile.

Remember there was a short video that asked you to do something that
required concentration and after 15 seconds or so a screaming horror
popped up? It was sort of like that, but different.

> Non-monetary pleas for me to do something, eg Firefox asking me to look
> at Pocket, I write off as "not ads". YMMV.

Just a nuisance.

--
Cheers, Bev
"...so she told me it was either her or the ham radio, over."

The Real Bev wrote on 26.05.2021 06:17
> The one that immediately comes to mind is 'Classic Words' which is a
> proper Scrabble game with 5 or more levels of difficulty.

I don't play games on a phone but if you need _that_ specific game, then I
guess you're stuck with the ads (or with blocking them via AdClear).
https://adclear.com

> I tried a number of 'gallery' apps, and the one I liked best has ads.

That's interesting as a picture gallery app doesn't have a lot of things to
do, does it (that the others don't do)?

Searching F-Droid via Aurora Droid for free open source gallery apps nets

Simple Gallery Pro (minimum SDK 21)
https://f-droid.org/en/packages/com.simplemobiletools.gallery.pro/

LeafPic Revived (minimum SDK 21)
https://f-droid.org/en/packages/com.alienpants.leafpicrevived/

PhotoChiotte (minimum SDK 21)
https://f-droid.org/en/packages/la.daube.photochiotte/

Camera Roll (minimum SDK 19) (deprecated)
https://f-droid.org/en/packages/us.koller.cameraroll/

A Photo Manager (minimum SDK 14)
https://f-droid.org/en/packages/de.k3b.android.androFotoFinder/

Using Aurora to search Google Play there are too many to list them all.'
These are Google free, GSF free, free, and ad free gallery apps.

Gallery Ad Free (target SDK 30)
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.Gallery.App

Simple Gallery (target SDK 29)
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.simplemobiletools.gallery

Gallery Ad Free (target SDK 29)
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.adfreegallery

Gallery Lite (target SDK 29)
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.sybu.simplegallery

Gallery Ad free (target SDK 29)
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=adfree.gallery

Gallery Ad free (target SDK 29)
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.Gallery.Pro

EZ Gallery (target SDK 29)
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.jag.essentialgallery

Gallery Ad Free (target SDK 29)
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.adfree.Gallery

Gallery (target SDK 28)
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=pw.claco.gallery

Gallery ICS (target SDK 19)
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.moblynx.galleryicsold

I stopped there as I had installed each of those to test out at a later date
(as I am wont to do) but note each of these gallery apps is Google free, GSF
free, ad free, and of course free.

I didn't even bother to finish the list and there are certainly tons more if
you're willing to have the gallery app depend on Google Services Framework.

However one of those should be acceptable for your needs, shouldn't it?
What special thing do you need a photo/screenshot gallery app to do anyway?

I can't imagine any app that I use that I can't find a replacement for that
doesn't have any ads where all it takes, AFAIK, are decent search tools.

> Same with the other apps that have ads. As long as they're just bands
> across the top or bottom of the screen I can tolerate/ignore them.

While I've seen what you talk about I can't think of an app that I have that
has any ads, even those innocuous ones. Certainly never full screen ads.

> Anybody who wastes money trying to sell me something makes me smile.

:-)

They invented stupid people because others needed to make money off them.

The Real Bev wrote:

> Not just in a browser -- the ones included with apps too.

AFAIK, only possible on a rooted device, where it can filter DNS
requests, if you only use it on wifi at home, maybe you could use a
piHole, but I doubt that covers many people's usage.

In article <eli$2105251958@qaz.wtf>, Eli the Bearded
<*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:

> >> My solution to in-app ads is to never install ad-supported apps.
> > that is not a guarantee either. sometimes there aren't alternatives to
> > ad-supported apps and sometimes paid apps have ads, although nowhere
> > near as many.
>
> If it has ads, I don't install it (or if mistakenly installed, it
> gets uninstalled). That solves in-app ads. No app is so indispensible
> that I've needed to break that rule yet.
>
> What apps do _you_ find lack non-ad-supported alternatives?

there are plenty of apps that either do not have an ad-free alternative
or have a paid tier to remove ads that is not cost-effective if it's
only used on occasion.

since my ad blocking is very effective, i don't care if an app is ad
supported or not. if it does what i need, then i use the app. the ads
are blocked, so just about every app is ad-free.

worst case, i see a blank box where the ad would go, which means the
developers are not very good and can't be bothered to check for errors.

On Wed, 26 May 2021 08:27:02 +0100, Andy Burns
<usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:

>The Real Bev wrote:
>
>> Not just in a browser -- the ones included with apps too.
>
> AFAIK, only possible on a rooted device, where it can filter DNS
> requests, if you only use it on wifi at home, maybe you could use a
> piHole, but I doubt that covers many people's usage.

I run piHole on my local network. My router is set up so it
advertises the piHole as the DNS server in the routers' DHCP
setup. That is enough to avoid many ads and some tracking.

When I'm away from home, connected with wifi or mobile data, I
route all traffic from my phone and tablet through my
piVPN/openVPN server at home, so it uses the same DNS, i.e.
piHole.

For me, that works fine. Of course the bandwidth of piVPN
running on a Raspberry Pi 3 is somewhat limited, but I don't
watch videos on the road anyway.
Perfect for mail / chat / weather / browsing etc..
--
Regards,
Kees Nuyt

nospam wrote on 26.05.2021 14:12
> there are plenty of apps that either do not have an ad-free alternative
> or have a paid tier to remove ads that is not cost-effective if it's
> only used on occasion.

So far nobody but The Real Bev even remotely tried to back up that up.

It's OK if your belief system is based on no facts but if I ask for a fact
then don't just mindlessly reply that your belief system is devoid of facts.

*Name one*.

>
> since my ad blocking is very effective, i don't care if an app is ad
> supported or not. if it does what i need, then i use the app. the ads
> are blocked, so just about every app is ad-free.

As I have asked everyone here who claims they must use apps with ads,
just name functionality you feel you need that you can't find without apps.

>
> worst case, i see a blank box where the ad would go, which means the
> developers are not very good and can't be bothered to check for errors.

I see those in web pages given my PC hosts file blocks most inpage ads.

*What functionality do you need you claim you can't find adfree apps for?*

Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
> The Real Bev wrote:
>
> > Not just in a browser -- the ones included with apps too.
>
> AFAIK, only possible on a rooted device, where it can filter DNS
> requests, if you only use it on wifi at home, maybe you could use a
> piHole, but I doubt that covers many people's usage.

There are apps that provide a VPN service, which blackhole traffic to
certain ad server IPs. The rest of the traffic they pass through to your
regular internet connection (ie there aren't a real VPN with their own
servers etc).

One I can think of is:
https://github.com/M66B/NetGuard
which has an adblock hosts file option if you install the .apk, but not via
the Play Store (funny that, can't imagine why Google doesn't like adblocking)

Theo

On 05/26/2021 07:27 AM, Theo wrote:
> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>> The Real Bev wrote:
>>
>> > Not just in a browser -- the ones included with apps too.
>>
>> AFAIK, only possible on a rooted device, where it can filter DNS
>> requests, if you only use it on wifi at home, maybe you could use a
>> piHole, but I doubt that covers many people's usage.
>
> There are apps that provide a VPN service, which blackhole traffic to
> certain ad server IPs. The rest of the traffic they pass through to your
> regular internet connection (ie there aren't a real VPN with their own
> servers etc).
>
> One I can think of is:
> https://github.com/M66B/NetGuard

That seems like the most useful suggestion thus far. Thanks!

> which has an adblock hosts file option if you install the .apk, but not via
> the Play Store (funny that, can't imagine why Google doesn't like adblocking)

Hard to believe. What can they possibly be thinking?

--
Cheers, Bev
"I love deadlines... especially the whooshing sound
they make as they go by." -Douglas Adams

The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 05/25/2021 04:58 PM, Eli the Bearded wrote:
> > In comp.mobile.android, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> >> Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:
> >>> My solution to in-app ads is to never install ad-supported apps.
> >> that is not a guarantee either. sometimes there aren't alternatives to
> >> ad-supported apps and sometimes paid apps have ads, although nowhere
> >> near as many.
> >
> > If it has ads, I don't install it (or if mistakenly installed, it
> > gets uninstalled). That solves in-app ads. No app is so indispensible
> > that I've needed to break that rule yet.
> >
> > What apps do _you_ find lack non-ad-supported alternatives?
>
> The one that immediately comes to mind is 'Classic Words' which is a
> proper Scrabble game with 5 or more levels of difficulty. That was the
> only 'real' one I could find. The ads only arrive when I have a wifi
> connection. I don't think that was the source of the screaming ad.

$DRIFT ON

My previous Huawei (Y560-L02) phone with Android 5.1.1 had the nice
functionality that you could allow/disallow Internet access - Mobile
or/and Wi-Fi - on a per-app basis.

Such a feature would solve your problem with the ads in the 'Classic
Words' game.

However, my current Samsung Galaxy A51 phone with Android 10/11 does
not seem to have that functionality or anything similar.

Was this Huawei feature the odd-on-out?

$DRIFT OFF

[...]

On 5/26/2021 7:27 AM, Theo wrote:

> There are apps that provide a VPN service, which blackhole traffic to
> certain ad server IPs. The rest of the traffic they pass through to your
> regular internet connection (ie there aren't a real VPN with their own
> servers etc).
>
> One I can think of is:
> https://github.com/M66B/NetGuard
> which has an adblock hosts file option if you install the .apk, but not via
> the Play Store (funny that, can't imagine why Google doesn't like adblocking)

If you use Google in any way (bet you do) then the ads are one way that
you pay for her services. That said:

I see no ads in my Gmail service. I of course pay with my data in the
cloud. But of course it has to squeeze in between my health provider
data, my credit card data, my various (4) government's data, my ISP
data, my online purchase data, my phone provider data, my utility
provider data, etc, etc, etc. Those who have no data in the cloud raise
your hand. I thought so...

The apps in the Google Play Store are plainly marked if they contain ads
or not so one can choose all ad free downloads if wanted. My experience
is that many ad free apps are duds. YMMV. In most cases I just prefer to
pay the few bucks to remove the ads or buy the app if pay only. I don't
mind paying for a developer's hard work. YMMV.

And there are umpteen ad blockers available in the Chrome Web Store
though I don't use one. For my browser news reading I just use a
JavaScript on-off switch, reader view button, and cookie killer switch.
They kill most of the annoying ads for me. YMMV.

Frank Slootweg wrote on 26.05.2021 10:52

> My previous Huawei (Y560-L02) phone with Android 5.1.1 had the nice
> functionality that you could allow/disallow Internet access - Mobile
> or/and Wi-Fi - on a per-app basis.
> However, my current Samsung Galaxy A51 phone with Android 10/11 does
> not seem to have that functionality or anything similar.

I have an A-series on Android 11 which (I think) would be similar to yours.
Let's see if we can find a setting to set the Wi-Fi access per app.

First place I look is in permissions under Settings > Apps > Your apps
Taking "Chrome" as my example (which I have "disabled") there's only
Camera, Contacts, Location, Microphone, & Storage (all disabled)
But there's also a section for "Mobile data" which I looked into.
Allow background data usage = on/off
Allow data usage while Data server is on = on/off

It's not clear to me what a "Data server" is and a search for "Android data
server" didn't bring up anything that clued me in as to what it really is.

One conclusion we can potentially make is the OP can restrict mobile data on
a per-app basis, but that doesn't tell us anything about Wi-Fi access.

So I move on to the Android 11 Settings > Connections > Wi-Fi section where
under "Data usage" there's a section for "Wi-Fi data usage" which, for
Chrome (which is disabled) there are those _same_ two options again!
Allow background data usage = on/off
Allow data usage while Data server is on = on/off

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm......... does that mean the switch applies to both Wi-Fi and
to mobile data? If so, that means we can turn on or off "data" (which I have
to assume is both Wi-Fi & Cellular Data at this point) on a per app basis.

Notice it says "background" data in one option and "Data server" in the
other so we need to dig deeper into what "foreground" data means and what
that "Data server" is (because I don't know what a "Data server" is yet).

BTW, there's also a "Data saver" option in Settings > Connections > Data
usage which says "Data saver helps cut down your data usage by preventing
apps from using data in the background". Turn on now = yes/no

And of course there's a "Mobile data = on/off" option, which when you turn
it on allows another Android 11 option for "Mobile data only apps = on/off"
which, when I turn it on, I get the description of "Select apps that you
want to always use mobile data, even when you're connected to Wi-Fi. This is
useful if a certain app is blocked on a work or school Wi-Fi network."

There is a long list of apps with only a yes/no toggle after that option.

As a test, I set Aloha Lite to "on" in that mobile-data-only setting.
With Wi-Fi & MobileData on, it connected to the net.
With Wi-Fi off & MobileData on, it connected to the net.
With Wi-Fi on & MobileData off, it connected to the net. Huh? WTF?
With Wi-Fi off & MobileData off, it didn't connect to the net.

Drat. It shouldn't have worked with MobileData off & Wi-Fi on, but it did.
Let me know if you find something different or have added input so that
everyone benefits from each and every effort we apply to help others.

In comp.mobile.android, nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> wrote:
>> What apps do _you_ find lack non-ad-supported alternatives?
> there are plenty of apps that either do not have an ad-free alternative
> or have a paid tier to remove ads that is not cost-effective if it's
> only used on occasion.

Last I checked, that's not a direct answer to my question. And I don't
care what _you_ consider "cost-effective". I'm asking for what apps have
no non-ad-supported alternatives.

(To address The Real Bev's example, games are very difficult to define
"alternatives" for. My idea of an acceptable alternative might not be
hers.)

Elijah
------
has few app "needs" really

Theo wrote on 26.05.2021 16:27
> https://github.com/M66B/NetGuard
> which has an adblock hosts file option if you install the .apk, but not via
> the Play Store (funny that, can't imagine why Google doesn't like adblocking)

Thanks for the pointer to NetGuard which is new to me.

In the past I used AdClear which, I think worked (but I don't generally
download apps with ads so I'm probably not a good test of these as ad
blockers).

I think AdClear has the same issue with Google Play for some strange reason.
https://github.com/SEVENNetworks/AdClear/releases

Looking at NetGuard you have to dig a little bit to find the latest APK.
https://github.com/M66B/NetGuard/releases

Where this appears to be the current stable version of NetGuard.
https://github.com/M66B/NetGuard/releases/download/2.295/NetGuard-v2.295-release.apk

When I opened it up it asks for some permissions and then says "You can
allow or deny Wi-Fi or mobile internet access by tapping on the icons next
to an app" which may be a good way to allow/deny Internet to any given app.

Inside of NetGuard is a list of your apps where I scrolled down to "Chrome"
and to the right I tapped the "Wi-Fi" and "MobileData" icons.

There were other NetGuard settings for each app such as the "Conditions"
Allow Wi-Fi when screen is on (yes/no)
Allow mobile whyen screen is on (yes/no)
Block when roaming (mine was grayed out)
Allow in lockdown mode (yes/no)

Interestingly for the OP there was an option to log access attempts.
Enable logging of blocked addresses only (yes/no)
Enable filtering to log allowed addresses too (yes/no)
Enable access notifications for newly logged addresses (yes/no)
Notify Internet access attempts (yes/no)

Obviously that two-minute test just scratched the surface but I would say
from my experience testing programs that this NetGuard is a keeper.

Thank you Theo!

AJL wrote on 26.05.2021 18:20

> The apps in the Google Play Store are plainly marked if they contain ads
> or not so one can choose all ad free downloads if wanted.

This isn't for AJL - my advice is for people who want good search results.
So please take the advice below not "aimed" at AJL but aimed at most users.

Trust me that AJL is wrong - but what matters to you is what's right.

*My opinion is you should _NEVER SEE_ any apps with ads in a good search.*
Period.

(You can always loosen the filter later - but that filter should exist.)

*The _only_ apps you should see in a decent 1st search are "ad free" apps.*
Period.

Only if there are no decent free apps should you need to loosen the filter.
Which almost never happens (in my experience).

The whole point of an app search is for it to be powerful in the 1st place!

Why should your eyes have to do a visual search to pick the needle out of
the haystack as AJL suggests? I think the _filter_ should do that for you.

Google Play doesn't provide any decent filters.
Period.

If you use Google Play searches, then you're wasting your time.
You're trying to _visually_ find a good app in a haystack of bad apps.

If you use the Aurora Store (which searches Google Play) you get a host of
filtering options, one of which is to not see any apps that have ads.
Period.
https://f-droid.org/en/packages/com.aurora.store/

> My experience is that many ad free apps are duds. YMMV.

My experience is the dumber the search the dumber the results.
Likewise, the smarter the search the smarter the results.

I have _only_ free apps with ads - and I pick the best apps on the planet.
Anyone who claims what AJL claimed, I think, is just saying they don't know
how to search properly. And that's OK.

But AJL's conclusion is wrong.
I only post this, not for AJL (as he won't change his mind anyway).

I post this for _others_ so they don't come to the same conclusion he did.
He thinks he finds bad apps because good apps don't exist.

The reason people find bad apps is their search isn't a good one (IMHO).
The proof is my apps are the best on the planet - and none of them have ads.

Test me.
I'm never afraid of facts.

> In most cases I just prefer to
> pay the few bucks to remove the ads or buy the app if pay only. I don't
> mind paying for a developer's hard work. YMMV.

YMMV. I prefer to find the best apps on the planet.
They're always free (as far as I know).

I'm never afraid of facts.
When I say something - it's backed up by facts.

Name an app that you have to pay for that I can't do better, for free?

>
> And there are umpteen ad blockers available in the Chrome Web Store
> though I don't use one.

Chrome web store?
If people use Chrome, then that's a problem in and of itself.

> For my browser news reading I just use a
> JavaScript on-off switch, reader view button, and cookie killer switch.
> They kill most of the annoying ads for me. YMMV.

I think it's folly to try to add myriad extensions to make a web browser do
what any one person wants it to do.

My philosophical approach is to pick a web browser that _inherently_ does
what you want it to do, e.g., Tor, Aloha Lite, UngoogledChrome, Opera, Epic,
Brave, DuckDuckGo, etc.

As AJL said, YMMV.

My suggestion is to use a good search & find the best apps instead of using
a bad search and then trying to patch up all the problems of the bad apps.

paul <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> Frank Slootweg wrote on 26.05.2021 10:52
>
> > My previous Huawei (Y560-L02) phone with Android 5.1.1 had the nice
> > functionality that you could allow/disallow Internet access - Mobile
> > or/and Wi-Fi - on a per-app basis.
> > However, my current Samsung Galaxy A51 phone with Android 10/11 does
> > not seem to have that functionality or anything similar.
>
> I have an A-series on Android 11 which (I think) would be similar to yours.
> Let's see if we can find a setting to set the Wi-Fi access per app.
[...]

Never mind. The NetGuard app [1], which was mentioned elsewhere in
this thread, seems to do exactly what my Huawei 5.1.1 phone did. Even
the UI looks similar. I would not have thought of calling this
functionality a 'firewall', but I guess it sort of is.

I gather that the NetGuard app can solve The Real Bev's problem with
the ads in the 'Classic Words' game.

[1]
'NetGuard'
<https://github.com/M66B/NetGuard>
This page points to www.netguard.me, which in turn points to the Google
Play page:
'NetGuard - no-root firewall'
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=eu.faircode.netguard>