GlimmerBlocker trouble
in [Mac Applications]
|
Prev: A Query?
Next: UGG Bailey Button Women Boots 5803-Black
From: Jolly Roger on 11 Dec 2009 02:44 In article <jollyroger-66F8BF.01131011122009(a)news.individual.net>, Jolly Roger <jollyroger(a)pobox.com> wrote: > In article <2009121021594616807-malcolm(a)invalid>, > Malcolm <malcolm(a)invalid> wrote: > > > On 2009-12-10 21:05:10 -0500, Jolly Roger <jollyroger(a)pobox.com> said: > > > > > In article <2977fzmljrwi$.1geemcc6e85mb$.dlg(a)40tude.net>, > > > Richard Wakeford <rwakefordfortynine(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > >> On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 10:47:22 -0600, in comp.sys.mac.apps you wrote: > > >> > > >>> Why bother with GlimmerBlocker when AdBlock for Safari is far superior > > >>> and does such a fantastic job? > > >> > > >> You can have 64 bit Safari with GlimmerBlock > > > > > > I'm curious. What advantages does running Safari in 64-bit mode give you? > > > > Increased security. > > <http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/01/16/road_to_mac_os_x_snow_leopard > > _6 > > 4_bit_security.html&page=2> > > That's a good summary. Thanks. BTW, I found out tonight that Safari AdBlocker (also based on AdBlock Plus) is 64-bit: <http://www.sweetpproductions.com/safariadblocker/> An I've read reports that GlimmerBlock doesn't block nearly as many ads. That would make sense to me, as I'e tried several different ad blockers in the past, and AdBlock seems to block more than any other I've ever used. -- Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me. E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts. JR
From: Stainless Steel Rat on 12 Dec 2009 22:31 In article <jollyroger-DFEF03.10472110122009(a)news.individual.net>, Jolly Roger <jollyroger(a)pobox.com> wrote: > Why bother with GlimmerBlocker when AdBlock for Safari is far superior > and does such a fantastic job?: Additionally -- and this is stuff I've been experimenting with in the past week or so -- because GlimmerBlocker is a proxy it can do some useful transformations on incoming HTML documents before they get to the browser. The first is a ham-handed way to deal with obnoxious, obfuscated JavaScript that loads advertising overlays. It is accomplished with this transform option: gb.zapScriptElements(); As the name implies, it zaps all script elements in the HTML before the browser ever sees it. Why is this useful? Because I can zap script elements on a per-host or per-domain basis. Yes, there probably is an add-on for that, but now that's two add-ons (or plug-ins) when one GlimmerBlocker does both. The second is a fixup for one web site that I visit that doesn't set an appropriate charset in the meta-data. This one uses: gb.insertAtHeadStart('<META....>'); to add the appropriate charset meta-data tag. Again, on a per-host or per-domain basis. I get a lot more utility and flexibility in GlimmerBlocker than I did with AdBlock and SafariStand (and in the case of SafariStand the META injection never worked).
From: Calum on 15 Dec 2009 15:52 On 11/12/09 07:44, Jolly Roger wrote: > An I've read reports that GlimmerBlock doesn't block nearly as many ads. Maybe true out of the box (I've no idea), but beyond that, GB will block as many as you're prepared to spend the time configuring it to block.
From: Jolly Roger on 15 Dec 2009 16:58 In article <hg8sud$1udt$1(a)adenine.netfront.net>, Calum <com.gmail(a)nospam.scottishwildcat> wrote: > On 11/12/09 07:44, Jolly Roger wrote: > > > An I've read reports that GlimmerBlock doesn't block nearly as many ads. > > Maybe true out of the box (I've no idea), but beyond that, GB will block > as many as you're prepared to spend the time configuring it to block. That is true of either one, and was not my point. -- Send responses to the relevant news group rather than email to me. E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my very hungry SPAM filter. Due to Google's refusal to prevent spammers from posting messages through their servers, I often ignore posts from Google Groups. Use a real news client if you want me to see your posts. JR
From: Stainless Steel Rat on 15 Dec 2009 17:14
In article <hg8sud$1udt$1(a)adenine.netfront.net>, Calum <com.gmail(a)nospam.scottishwildcat> wrote: > Maybe true out of the box (I've no idea), but beyond that, GB will block > as many as you're prepared to spend the time configuring it to block. Or other ad lists that you want to subscribe to: http://glimmerblocker.org/wiki/Filters |