yashsingh1/xdaforums huggingface dataset:
[Android Software Development] javip:
the adblockers simply make it "one click" easy to block the ads. there are numerous ways to get around the ads if you truly want too.

on a side note: how much of do the developers really lose? I'm not saying I'm one side or another but yes developers like getting paid and consumers don't like seeing ads.

my point being that most adblockers need access to your hosts file (phone must be rooted). xda is very big across the net but still a sort of 'niche' area where only a certain percentage of those us that like doing things to our phones meet. the vast majority of the market is totally unaware of what even rooting is.

as a very unscientific test, i asks all the people i know that use their phones for social networking and playing games (angry birds) questions pertaining to rooted phones and such. only about 2% of them even had a minor clue as to what i was talking about.

so to close this rant: adblocks might be bad/good in various ways but the majority of those ads are getting clicked and the developers are seeing something from that (of course i mean, if the ads really are paying)

i guess this has nothing to do with the OP question. simple answer. Ad Blockers aren't breaking any rules.
[Android Software Development] Meltus:
Most of the time developers make very little from Ads, but in some rare cases (Angry Birds being a brilliant example) the company turns over about 1 million dollars a month, purely from ads.

The point of ad-supported apps, the way i see it anyway, is that you offer a free version that's ad supported and a 'paid' one that isn't (i know this isn't always the case, but that's the fault of the developer). Blocking the ads in the free one will undoubtably stop the users from buying the paid one, meaning the developer will lose out.

And whilst it's true that a very small percentage of all android users actually have rooted their phone and can use Ad Blockers, does that justify using one?
[Android Software Development] Asphyx:
The OP has a point that the patches do take away revenue but the ad blockers are very different than other pirated methods since they do not change the programs themselves merely make additions to the phone's hosts file.

Ad Blockers of ANY kind (even on desktops) do the same thing. By blocking ads on Websites you are in essence STEALING money from the person who runs that site too!

but every major browser and Security suite has one!

And I would personally urge developers that if they want to use the AD subsidized business model they should at least offer a way to remove the ads via a one time donation. (Some do!)

I personally will not use or run any apps that use Ads simply because I know that 99% of all malware comes from scripts of hijacked servers these ads eminate from.

And it really sucks for those with limited data plans who will quickly run out of bandwidth quota from all the ads.

I really understand the OP (and other developers) point and I support their right to be compensated.

But please pick a better way to get compensated. A Lite version may entail slightly more work but it will ensure you will get something for it as opposed to hoping you get something for it because someone hacked the hosts file and stopped your revenue stream dead in it's tracks.
[Android Software Development] javip:
not at all, i'm simply stating both sides. it's going always going to be a pro/con dilemma. same with the mpaa/riaa except adblocking does not constitute piracy where you are literally stealing and not paying as opposed to modifynig your operating system to behave as you wish.

frankly speaking i do the same. I use ABP for firefox and i have a modifed hosts file as well that keeps these ads from ever appearing on my machine.

so atleast for justification on that part, consider the performance hits from multiple flash/banners/whatever popping up everytime you want to just browse the net.
[Android Software Development] hav0c:
You can download ad free from the market for a while. Apparently Google does not have a problem with it. Why should XDA ban something that you can download from the market?

The other thing is that you can not stop people from editing their host file (because this is the only thing the application is doing)

So banning it from these forums doesn't make any sense at all IMO.
[Android Software Development] jug6ernaut:
What ppl don't under stand is that if these programs didn't have ads they would cost money. Ppl do not write these programs for free, ads are they get paid. If u remove the ads u will see more programs being paid and less ad supported.

This stuff imo should not be allowed. But this will up end up costing everyone bc a few ppl are greedy. Whether it helps the performance of the game or w/e its besides the point. That was the developers decision. I am surprised its not against the terms of use.

My 2 cents lol
[Android Software Development] javip:
i don't understand why it would be against the terms of use? free vs paid vs ad supported all have valid points and you will never completely make everyone happy, whether it be the developer or the end user.

consider all the websites you visit on any given day and your antivirus software that you have installed that blocks a certain number of popups/ads that generate revenue for these websites.

how is this any different from having an ad blocker on your phone? it's still very much the same thing and i'm sure those that don't like the mentality of ad blocking on their phone use some sort of ad blocker on their pc.
[Android Software Development] unreal2k:
Blocking ads is not a good thing for developers if that's how they get their money but it also takes away from the end-user experience. Ads usually get in the way (see Angry Birds) or they take away some of people's bandwidth if they don't have unlimited data. So no matter how you look at it somebody "pays" for it either way.

I'm not arguing for or against if this development should be on xda, just a different angle that i was thinking about for a long time.
[Android Software Development] javip:
the same, i'm not arguing for either side. just a debate towards both ends.

it's almost a rock/paper/scissors argument. each on trumps another.

developer distributes free app with ads. consumer likes app but dislikes ads. developer needs to keep consumer happy to get any downloads but still needs to get their revenue stream flowing, ie. ads stay in.

rinse, repeat.
[Android Software Development] noobdeagle:
hmmm interesting thread personally i think it is wrong to edit a program to remove the ads in it that should be a no no, because your altering someone elses work, and essentially losing them revenue which would cause free apps to become just paid and non ad supported (possibly)

adblocking via hosts files however i think is perfectly fine as your not altering someone elses work. adfree i also have no problem with as essentially its just a downloader for hosts files i guess for people who don't know how to push a hosts file themselves. personally i just push the sames hosts file from my desktop seems to work quite well infact its the one reason i rooted and s-off'd my Desire HD :D

as for adfree being in the market yeah it is surprising because google makes alot of revenue from ads so its surprising they allow apps to block these revenue sources i guess however its just goes to show how hands off google is with user apps compared to say ....apple :P

and lets face it the average user wouldnt be pushing files and gaining root access ect to do it (none of my friends have) i think its a select few who will actually go to the trouble to actually remove the ads probably not enough to impact revenue from ads however if someone is redistributing a apk with ads removed then its probably going to do more harm.

one things for sure my DHD is staying ad free (its not so much ads in apps but ads in webpages that bother me)
[Android Software Development] Dyonas:
If you're talking purely in-app ads then I'd rather pay than have an ad supported version, as long as the cost is fair for what it offers. For websites I try to block all ads on my phone because I don't have the best connection and I doubt I'm the only one suffering in that way. The last thing I want is for an ad to load while the content fails with a timeout error. Flash ads are far more intrusive but at least you have the option to only show flash content you choose.
[Android Software Development] DamianGto:
Funny tread.

I see it this way.

The program i do takes time to do, but it also fun to do.

It also give me a change to learn new things. So it do give me some experience and knowledge.

That's a big payments for me.

Next steep is to decide how i would spread the program.

I do have tre choice.

1: give it away for free and get the knowledge that people use it and is happy with it.

2: try to earn some money with ads but still make it free with the knowledge that some use adblocker so they still use it for free, but i still get some money from them that don't use adblocker. It still give me some money.

3: try to earn money and sell it with the knowledge that fewer will use it.

but in the end it will give me alot more money then ads.

so the problem is not adblocker.

all developer know some people use adblocker and its not a good way to earn money unless you have a killer app that is downloaded much and uses alot.

so the bottom line is that if a developer want to earn money he sell the program. maby do a lite version with ads. just to get more user to use the program and they maby buy the full version.

it will give me more money in the end.

**DamianGTO Steam kernel. 350MB Ram. 500HZ. Ext2 on all partitions. js3 base**
[Android Software Development] 2k4ever:
yea, the thread is funny

i would never have belied that in a place like this you can find so many arguments that seem to come straight from mpaa/riaa

imo having an (rooted) android phone has a lot to do with the freedom to set it up and use it in the way you want to - and if you don't want ads, than you have the possibility to block them

and luckily there are developers that offer an easy and convenient way to do so

distinguishing between ads in apps and on web pages seems very sanctimonious (no one really said that its ok to block ads on web pages, but thats the basic understanding i get from this thread)

btw: i bet that most of the people arguing against adblockers run an adblocker on their pc...

and finally: you are targeting the wrong "bad" app!

most of the people who will run an adblocker will also have DroidWall or an other firewall installed - and as most apps don't really need an internet connection, you can just block the ads by not allowing the specific app to connect to the net

therefore, firewalls are worse than adblockers, as the latter ones have at least the benefit to provide adfree web surfing (once again, from the thread i get the impression that that isn't perceived as "bad")

this post has become longer than intended, sorry

but someone has to defend the adblock developers ;)
[Android Software Development] jug6ernaut:
greed...its an amazing thing...

Tell me..thos who believe in blockers... What makes you think that you can get something for nothing? Do you think these programs just pop into existence?

lets say you walk into a store a grab a drink in walk out. U get arrested and u tell the cop "i can't pay it just ruins the experience, plus it was just so ready to take it." Do you think this argument would work? Go ahead in try it let me know.

Why would I say such a think u say? Bc that's the exact same argument I've read through this thread. Out does not matter if its ready or if there are other methods to do the same thing what matters is the results.

What it comes down to is removing the ads is stealing from the developers. They release the programs to consumers with the agreement that you pay no money up front but rather through viewing of ads.

Some ppl may cry n whine over that last statement but that's not a matter of opinion, that is a fact. If the developer didn't want to put ads in the they wouldn't have. If they did n u download there so u are agreeing to pay through the viewing of ads.

But if you want developers to stop making ads SUPPORTED programs by all means continue. They will slowly disappear to only payed apps. Developers time is not free.

Nothing is free you always pay someway or another.

On a final note. What is the difference between blocking ads and crackling a adfree version of the same application?

I don't think another analogy is needed...

Jug6ernaut
[Android Software Development] DamianGto:
i think adblocker is up to all people if they.want to use it or not.

you don't agree to view any ads. most of the time you don't even know its an ad in the program you just downloaded.

also the best you can do to support the program and the developer is to buy the full/donation version. you dont get much from ads either.

stop saying adblocker is to steal. its not.

if you think so you should look at the company you work for. they often have firewall and proxy. guess what? they filter out ads to. lol..

**DamianGTO Steam kernel. 350MB Ram. 500HZ. Ext2 on all partitions. js3 base**
[Android Software Development] Asphyx:
But you could get the same affect by simply placing a nag screen that didn't take data/code/scripts from a source the developer does not control and have it run on my device.

If I can make the analogy:

I trust you (chainfire) to come into my house because I have known of you and your reputation as a developer and trust your products to be safe.

But if I install your work and it is ad subsidized it is like lending you the key to my house and you walking away and leaving the door to my house open. Anything can come in and your App isn't bothering to look and see if it is bad.

This is my reasoning for uninstalling or buying the ad free version.

That is my biggest problem with Ad supported apps. Could be just as easily done with a nag screen or even a feature reduction as many do. Trial periods also will have the same result you seek in spurring payment.

it would have the same exact affect on actual SALES and not force data turds onto 100s of users.

And I think your being a bit cynical about users. Not all want everything for free.

Either via donation or purchase and (to my friends) purchase reccomendations I am always willing to support a good developer monetarily for the code I run on my devices.

I want to support the Developers in any way I can.

But knowing how well Ad servers are at checking the code they pass I won't let any ads onto my device if I can possibly help it.

It's not about Money it's all about the security!
[Android Software Development] nonini:
All these add blockers are going to do is make developers clamp down even further, already Angry Birds Seasons doesn't launch a new level if you dont have an Internet connection. I can see this same type of check being performed everytime you try to use a program.

People don't want to see Ads and don't want to pay, nice little world some people live in.
[Android Software Development] ParanoidDK:
I dont mind ads in the apps, what i do mind when i am on my phone is ads on the websites i go to while on the phone.

What i dislike about them there is they will make the site longer to load on the 1 mbit connection i have... i dont have a cap on that connection so let the data flow, as long it dont need to take 1-2 mins to load a website.

I dont run any ad blocker on any of my computers because i do know ads are there to help the sites to run but i do run one on my phone.

I also dont mind buying a ads free version of a app or a game if there is one. If there aint a ads free version then it is hard to buy one.

So i can ether block the ads to get faster browsing, and try to buy so many of the games and apps i use if they have a full / ads free version,

Or i can remove the ad blocker in my host file, get slow browsing, keep the ads versions and in the end get a nokia insted of a android phone next time i change phone because nokia dont have a good marked place yet, and in that way the devs will loose the revenue from the ads anyway.

So to recap.

If there is a paid adfree version of a game/app i use (And i use all i have installed) then i buy that, the few i have where that is not the case (Read angry birds because they earn more on ads then on sold games) i am sorry but i am not going to having site when i browse load slowere then now so i will rather just remove the game insted when the feeling i get here is i am as bad as a pirate from the mods on the site that did reply here.
[Android Software Development] Niccolò Paganini:
I would never have belived that in a place like this you could find people defending proprietary software, let alone ads on apps.

Putting ads on apps is stealing from the users: developers are stealing bandwidth, processor cycles, memory, battery life and the electrical energy needed to charge the phone. This is a criminal activity and must be stopped.

In addition, ads require more time to be spent on the part of the user to perform the intended tasks, as well as causing them to lose attention and concentration.

On the other hand, ads are often used as a way to steal even more money from users, such as when they are linking to a WAP page which uses WAP billing.

So who are engaging in this criminal activity known by the name "ads on apps"? I want the names.
[Android Software Development] the_scotsman:
7 year old thread mine....:eek:

Ads don't steal from the user. Ads help pay for the content that you, the end user, get for free. No one is forcing you to install the apps that contain ads if you feel so strongly about them.

And it's certainly not "criminal activity".
[Android Software Development] robneymcplum:
What utter horse ****.
[Android Software/Hacking General [Developers Only]] kunnusingh:
wrong post, please delete this thread..
[HD2 General] vishbad:
hi htc hd2 users...i love my hd2..first the stock rom was installed in it..i felt some few bugs in stock rom n i tried energy rom after seeing good reviews for it..once i installed energy rom..i found having hanging issues or freezing issues..well i didnt know whats the reason for it...so again i formatted or uninstalled energy rom n installed the ols stock rom itself...now again i found another one rom named as cleanEX RV Ultra 1.01 ..its great n its compatible with my hd2 version...n i am running on it only..today i saw a tmobile updated official rom of 3.14 n i am plannin to install it..but i am scared what ll happen if frequently changing the rom...whether it ll affect my hd2 or cause any damage etc etc

thanks for the reply..

phone-T-mobile htc hd2

Os version-21913

Rom version- cleanEX RV Ultra 1.01

Radio version-2.08.50.08_2
[HD2 General] m4sta2k:
nothing will happen

Just remember to run task29 before you flash your new rom
[HD2 General] kurt-willems:
I have my device now for about 15 mounts, and in the meal wile I have install more than 70 Rom's on it without any problems.

The most important is not how much Rom versions you will install but eater if you would do it correctly. :cool:
[HD2 General] jigners:
Why don't you put HSPL3 2.08HSPL and MAGLDR1.13 on it so you can have Android on NAND, Windows Phone 7, hah? . . . now we're talking:):)
[HD2 General] tictac0566:
Like kurt-willems, my HD2 is like 15 months old, I´m a flashaholic since other devices in the past. I think I flashed roughly 50 custom ROMs (plus some stock ROM flashes before task29 was possible with stand-alone apps).

It is being said that the memory chip technology which stores the OS ROM can be at least re-written 1000 times. I don´t think I will still use the HD2 in 20 years.

Maybe, I´ll keep it as a souvenir as one of the greatest smartphones in the early 2000´s. And at least 1 ROM of each OS on an SD... just for fun, hehe...
[HD2 General] erwinpiero:
I couldn't really remembered how many ROM flashing i've had done since my Dopod 838 Pro, TyTN II, Touch Pro, Touch Pro2, Snap and now HD2, nothings bad happened. So the point is, it's safe as long as You do by the rule Sir. Go a head, You can do more than just that, Cheers :D
[HD2 General] silverwind:
Bro, your avatar is the same with the signature of Bro Tictac (above your post :p )

I have been flashing my HD2 for 13 months and I tried almost all wwe roms available in XDA and HTC Pedia. But I think it still below 1000 times.

And when it reaches 1000 times and something happen with my HD2, I will not regret it because HD2 is the best phone ever made by HTC :D

Cheers....

PS. Win, sudah berhasil dual boot nya? ;)
[HD2 General] vishbad:
what are the requirement for installin Nand Android Rom on tmobile hd2??

hi friends actually i have hd2 for the past 6 months..but still i didnt know how to install android in this t mobile hd2...i am a die hard fan of android...but wanted to make sure what r the requirements for installin the android rom..i mean the radio version required,the windows version,hspl etc etc..

thanks for the reply

phone-T-mobile htc hd2

Os version-21913

Rom version- cleanEX RV Ultra 1.01

Radio version-2.08.50.08_2
[HD2 General] fred_up:
Since you are running a custom ROM, then you alread have HSPL running. I would go into BootLoader Mode to confirm that the SPL is 2.08.HSPL

Your RADIO is fine (although there are a few updated verions 2.12.50 and the 2.15.50 are the more popular).

Once all that is done then you are able to go into the Android NAND ROM Flashing.
[HD2 General] Dpat09:
Since you know what your talking about, I have a question I also have the Radio 2.08.50.08_2 I currently have android on it, but I wanted to try wp7, evrywhere I go it says I have to have 2.14.50 and up or a 576mb ram radio, can install wp7 and if so would any rom work using a youtube tut? but replacing it with the rom i choose?Please reply i've sent so many private messages and asked and asked no one has replied. so please help me. Thanks
[HD2 General] uli71:
You have to change RADIO by your own.

See this thread: http://xdaforums.com/showthread.php?t=611787
[Windows Phone 7 General] slyoldfox:
I let my usb sync cable at work, so I thought I'd use the usb cable I use for on my car charger (expansys / htc-hd7-car-charger-with-usb-micusb-cable-cc-c200-1a-5v-204687/).

While I notice that the phone is charging, it's not starting up Zune, neither am I able to make it work with Chevron7.

While it was already unlocked on the other PC, do you reckon that the error is more due to the fact that I already unlocked it on another PC? Or more that the USB cable for the car charger is somehow not compliant (and can only be used to charge?).

Any insights on this matter? I'll try my other cable on monday at work anyway...
[Windows Phone 7 General] The Gate Keeper:
others have reported issues with not using the correct cable, so try using a different one (i.e. the one provided with the phone?).
[Windows Phone 7 General] brummiesteven:
I don't!

Well it would be a good feature for others don't get me wrong but it wouldn't benefit me. I switched completely from Google to Microsoft services shortly after getting the phone using Windows Live Domains (to use a custom domain instead of @Hotmail).

I would imagine the majority of people's MSN contacts are people they actually know, have phone numbers for and/or have on fb so the link feature works well in this case.
[Windows Phone 7 General] chumaj001:
NO, the official HTC car charger cable DOES NOT work as data cable. I guess its even written on the box. I believe that its because they dont want your phone to sync with cigarette lighters :)
[Windows Phone 7 General] slyoldfox:
Indeed that cable does not work.

A normal data cable solved the issue. Too bad I had to spend money twice .. thought I'd be clever and buy the car charger coz it came with a micro-usb cable :)