Forums
New posts
Search forums
News
Security News
Technology News
Giveaways
Giveaways, Promotions and Contests
Discounts & Deals
Reviews
Users Reviews
Video Reviews
Support
Windows Malware Removal Help & Support
Inactive Support Threads
Mac Malware Removal Help & Support
Mobile Malware Removal Help & Support
Blog
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Reply to thread
Menu
Install the app
Install
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
Software
Browsers
Web Extensions
Cannot block popup in uBo
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ForgottenSeer 92963" data-source="post: 976319"><p>Some initial explanation.</p><p></p><p>Ghostery did a study on Adblocker efficiency after Google published Mv3. In those studies uBO processed the rules the fastest of them all (considering the amount of rules uBO has enabled in default mode). uBO's first launch in which the filters were read and re-ordered for effective access took way longer than any other adblock extension. Gorhill responded by compressing the blocklists and caching the optimized and re-ordered filter set (only re-creating it for updates).</p><p></p><p>Because I only use 5000+ rules and update my list a few times per year, uBlock initialized blazing fast (small list with few updates means it could use the cache). When I hit Shift Esc uBO only has used a second (probably less) while other extensions used up to 3 seconds CPU time to initialize. That said the new AGv4 uses only 1/3 of initializing CPU time and 2/3 of processing time (when opening a fixed sequence of websites). Still old uBO is a fraction faster than AGv4 when doing this comparative performance test. Because most is done in parallel after browser start when systems idles waiting for your response, the speed difference in practice is not noticeable anymore (now less than 0.2 seconds).</p><p></p><p>When people use default uBO (with way to much useless malware blocklists) and compare it with AGv4 optimized, my guess is that AGv4 default optimized will have a slight performance advantage over uBO default. In terms of blocking experience (as [USER=78686]@SeriousHoax[/USER] has posted a few times), the AG (optimized) blocklists work better on AGv4 than uBO with default blocklists, the new and improved modifiers of the new rules engine will improve this (clean web experience) advantage even more.</p><p></p><p>As posted in the AGv4 thread (<a href="https://malwaretips.com/threads/adguard-browser-extension-v4-0.111171/page-3#post-976164" target="_blank">link</a>) the main advantage of AGv4 for me is that it is ManifestV3 ready. But you know me. I have a history of switching between uBO and AG, but at the moment I prefer AGv4 over uBO.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ForgottenSeer 92963, post: 976319"] Some initial explanation. Ghostery did a study on Adblocker efficiency after Google published Mv3. In those studies uBO processed the rules the fastest of them all (considering the amount of rules uBO has enabled in default mode). uBO's first launch in which the filters were read and re-ordered for effective access took way longer than any other adblock extension. Gorhill responded by compressing the blocklists and caching the optimized and re-ordered filter set (only re-creating it for updates). Because I only use 5000+ rules and update my list a few times per year, uBlock initialized blazing fast (small list with few updates means it could use the cache). When I hit Shift Esc uBO only has used a second (probably less) while other extensions used up to 3 seconds CPU time to initialize. That said the new AGv4 uses only 1/3 of initializing CPU time and 2/3 of processing time (when opening a fixed sequence of websites). Still old uBO is a fraction faster than AGv4 when doing this comparative performance test. Because most is done in parallel after browser start when systems idles waiting for your response, the speed difference in practice is not noticeable anymore (now less than 0.2 seconds). When people use default uBO (with way to much useless malware blocklists) and compare it with AGv4 optimized, my guess is that AGv4 default optimized will have a slight performance advantage over uBO default. In terms of blocking experience (as [USER=78686]@SeriousHoax[/USER] has posted a few times), the AG (optimized) blocklists work better on AGv4 than uBO with default blocklists, the new and improved modifiers of the new rules engine will improve this (clean web experience) advantage even more. As posted in the AGv4 thread ([URL='https://malwaretips.com/threads/adguard-browser-extension-v4-0.111171/page-3#post-976164']link[/URL]) the main advantage of AGv4 for me is that it is ManifestV3 ready. But you know me. I have a history of switching between uBO and AG, but at the moment I prefer AGv4 over uBO. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Top
