Discussion in 'other software & services' started by gorhill, Jun 23, 2014.
Just curious... What is the behavior you want to compare?
Not sure about the "slower" part. If you use HTTPSB in block-all mode, it's more than likely faster, as the CPU-intensive ABP-filtering engine is less in demand as a lot of things are blocked by matrix filtering before it reaches ABP-filtering.
I wanna see if some ads/banners I still get with adguard are going to be blocked by ublock. I am not talking about well-known websites, but mainly local websites unknown to the great audience.
For example, in a local discussion forum I visit sometimes, some banners which were not blocked by adguard have disappeared with ublock.
I'm trying it. I'm liking it.
I just didn't have the time to learn HTTPSB, so I was using either ABP or Adguard. They are ok but µBlock offers more bite (lists) if I need/want it.
No issues so far!
After running it for a week I must say I really like it. It's really fast and removes adds very well
I have one question: when showing blocked requests since install it shows them using abbreviation (k). Would it be possible to show exact number of blocked requests (without abbreviation)?
Did you disable "acceptable ads" in Adguard? In any case, it's all about the filter lists, for which I deserve zero credits.
Ok, I don't mind. I understand it would removes the need to mentally convert to a more natural figure.
Great, thank you!
can u add support to anti adblock ?
@gorhill yes, acceptable ads on Adguard are disabled.
ublock has more lists available, especially when looking at local country/language lists. This is room for improvement for Adguard.
I added the first list, it's hosted on github and is CC. You should be able to see there is an update, force a manual update, and then the list should be available. For the second link, it looks it's a script for Tampermonkey, uBlock doesn't do user scripts.
My observation is that HTTP SB in AdBlocker only mode is faster than µBlock. Can anybody confirm?
Nice, using it right now. I would prefer the ability to choose your own lists, but it has everything I need right now. How do you whitelist domains (using Your filters?)
The green button in the popup is to disable for the current site. It will be remembered. The "Your filters" tab is for your custom filters, if you want any.
Very doubtful. I made further optimisations to the pattern-based filtering engine in uBlock, which I haven't ported to HTTPSB. Also, HTTPSB has more overhead for net requests, as the matrix is still evaluated, and even if it wasn't, there are other global settings which need to be handled (hyperlink auditing, referrer, user-agent, and whatever I may forget).
Thing is, unless the difference in performance is large enough (and even then), there is no other way than benchmarking to know for sure. Without hard data, it's just too subjective. Even when there is a definite feel of faster, I advise to only rely on benchmarks. But here, given that I know well the inners of both extensions, I very much doubt HTTPSB is faster in ad-block mode. The only extra overhead in uBlock vs HTTPSB is the hiding of blocked images/frames, but the way it is implemented, I can't see it causing any noticeable delay.
Thanks gorhill. Upon further examination I can now conclude this was a false observation on my part.
I know, but what if you want to select which domains are being blocked? Can't you whitelist them in the "Your filters" tab?
I am wondering if is it sensible to add Privacy related stuff ( like hyperlink auditing, referrer, user-agent, local storage deletion) to uBlock and make it disabled by default. So, that there won't be any additional overhead to the addon if any. And users who want can enable it manually in the settings. This way, there would be more less reasons to not depend on HTTPSB when uBlock is used.
What do you think?
Am currently using uBlock and like it very much. Thanks a lot for the effort. Wishing some one will be ready to port it to firefox
ho u do that? can you provide step by step ...
Open extensions (menu - Tools - Extensions). Enable developer mode and click on Update extensions now.
Go to the About tab in uBlock's dashboard. The mutable assets used by the extension are listed there. Most of the time they are up to date, but if they are not it will be shown to you, and in such case there will be a button to update manually at the bottom.
I value privacy, and there is no reasons users who do not want to deal with a rather technical extension like HTTPSB should be deprived of useful privacy-related features -- as long as the likelihood of site breakage is very low, the point of the extension being to just install and forget about it.
Loving the extension! But is there any way to possibly add whitelist buttons next to the blocked requests in the logging statistics page? For example, next to a blocked filter have a whitelist button to whitelist the filter globally and maybe a checkmark box for whitelist only that website. Then it would make whitelisting so much easier
This is a really great blocker, but it does have its issues. For one thing, blocking pop-ups that some sites bring up in new tabs in Chrome. With ABP, this is never an issue. I've read the line about Chrome having its own pop-up blocker on the uBlock wiki, but said pop-up blocker absolutely sucks. I'm also having some issues with Netflix not wanting to load properly after signing in, even with uBlock disabled. That actually may be a problem with one of the many lists uBlock uses though, and I'm not certain how to work that out. There are still a few sites that refuse to load at all with uBlock enabled, but run just fine on ABP. Again that may be a list issue, so I'm not really trying to knock uBlock here. The pop-up blocking though, yeah, that needs looking into.
I was having some troubles with foxnews in that, with ublock enabled the comments section was missing, but when i turned it off (pressed the green button) they reappeared. Is there a white list for elements that you'd like to accept on a page or a particular "ad" you'd let through ublock?
Separate names with a comma.