I admit that uBlock is faster than the rest of field. However only by fractions, at least on my machine. Adguard gives me filtering across all browsers including other applications, more comprehensible settings and moreover adds browsing security.
Also being discussed here https://www.wilderssecurity.com/threads/ublock-a-lean-and-fast-blocker.365273/page-57#post-2520147
and uBlock0 is more CPU Friendly... Anyways Adguard is very nice alternative to me, if ever i would need to install as an Windows Application. Care to elaborate more? What settings and security it provides?
Didn't notice. All settings, I mean UI, adding a filter or a blocking rule etc. but it is a question of personal liking. It adds a protection against malicious and phishing websites, more read at http://adguard.com/en/how-malware-blocked.html Agree. I forgot, it also has parental control.
I find it really fast if I block 3rd party scripts and iframes. It's much faster than without those being blocked.
All this can be done in ublock0 Logger too, along with creating exception rules, like disabling cosmetic filter (i mean one by one per site). And observing/controlling browser requests <aka behind-the-scene>.. Yes hmm..uBlock has some Malware filters to block the pages. However i rely on Medium Blocking mode, to be little proactive, and for Phising, i guess i hope for little common sense and Eset
ublock0 is hands down the best (ad)blocker ever. it's little to none impact on browsing speed, unlike competitors. gorhill deserves the best (ad)blocker of the decade award, leaving competitors far behind.
uBlock by gorhill is truly the innovator in the field which blew away the competition in the beginning. Only now are they catching up!
I'm quite satisfied with ABP and Ghostery but I do believe that the developers should be able to speed them up.
I didn't like it the last time I checked. But yes, it does seem to perform better when it comes to speed.
Adblocker Plus AND Ghostery? Aren't those two redundant? Before uBlock Origin I had been running ABP as well as Ghostery but never together. ABP with the correct filters beats Ghostery easily...
Indeed, it's so obvious that I remain stunned that not all users of adblockers haven't switched to uBlock Origin, which is better than whatever competitor and moreover far more than a simple adblocker. I respect everyone's choice but I'm surprised, that's all.
Results For Firefox For Adblock Plus - The article mentions that if you disable the ABP setting “Allow some non-intrusive advertising” the performance will increase a lot. - Firefox 41 will ship with changes that will improve the performance and greatly reduce memory overhead of ABP.
On the other hand, the article also mentions that ABP was tested with only EasyList, while uBlock's defaults were used, i.e. EasyList, EasyPrivacy, Peter Lowe's, two malware filter lists, and all uBlock's own filters. Side note: my own benchmarks have always been with "acceptable ads" disabled.
And that's also a disadvantage to ABP because blocking more means less load time. ABP should have performed better with more filters at least on Firefox which is my concern.
I like Ghostery's interface, but with ABP you can manually block certain objects. So I use them both.
That's what you can easily do in uBlock Origin, too: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/Element-picker
Like I said, the last time I checked I didn't like it. Performance wise it's better, but it's not for me.
I've read this FAQ about why we have uBlock and uBlock Origin, but I'm curious as to what, if any practical difference there is between them? https://www.ublock.org/faq/