Google forces users to view Ads

Users are forced to view ads as Google consistently removes adblockers from its store.

Obviously Google knows better than users and its not upto users to choose what they want anymore. Google will decide for you!!!

It is normal. They are an ad company. They developt everything for colecting analytic to show matched ads to users.
But user should get options to block them or not. :-TU

Well google decided that you should not have the option.

Melih, please check this one too

Like you said, google is an advertising company and they want users to see the ads. No choice for the users.

They have forbidden adblockers in their store now for several years.
This is not new.

forcing users and not giving them option is bad, whether new or old.

Yes, they blocked AdblockPlus first then Adguard then this Samsung one. Many people do not aware there is an option to block ads.
Someone should wake them up about there is option to block them. Samsung is a big company, they can integrate this adblocker to their phones by default. They own the 1/3 of the market.

Anyway, I am against “tracking ads”… I love ads who promised to do not track me.
Please read: Understanding EFF’s Do Not Track Policy: A Universal Opt-Out From Tracking | Electronic Frontier Foundation
We need the ads for content providers bills. They have to promise to do not track users.

mmmm… does this thread being a retaliation against google statement about Comodo? that would be childish to do so…

btw, i’m using Chrome with Adguard , no blocking of Adguard here and it still in the google store.

Hi Umbra Polaris,
The two subjects are not related and not as a result of one another.

Seems comodo's forum mods locked threads about the topic and Melhi , out of the blue, posted a thread about Google removing adblockers extensions from their store
As far as topics being locked, that was due to multiple topics being created on the same subject matter.

Thank you.


Do you have an alternative way of funding content that doesn’t involve advertising then? As I recall you are a supporter of “ethical advertising” yet here you are apparently supporting the blocking of all adverts. I’m sorry to say this, but I detect a little bit of double-standards here.

I am all for “empowering user”. Giving choice to users not forcing them with no choice. The issue is being responsible and empowering users.
Our offerings gave all 3 choices

1)Full ads
2)Sanitized ads
3)Full ad blocking

Empowering users is the key, not to force them! Google is forcing users and giving them no choice.

I too believe in choice, but choices have consequences. This is just part of a much wider debate about how web content is paid for and what Comodo’s excellent product range doesn’t offer is the ‘Holy Grail’ 4th option of an alternative funding system to advertising.

I’m already reading elsewhere about the methods advertisers are using to defeat ad-blockers. Ad-blocking has become an arms race that will simply consume more and more resources, both in the clients, the servers, and the Internet itself, that could be better used to deliver content.

I use an ad-blocker in the full knowledge that by doing so I’m getting something for nothing. My problem with adverts is not that they’re there but that the way they are presented is shambolic, often immensely intrusive, and mostly annoying. I do wonder whether anyone ever clicks on any of the horrible adverts we see? From a security point of view I would never click on an advert on a web page even if the product interested me (I’d do a search for the product separately).

Enforcing adverts as Google wants is not the right solution, but neither is insisting that those of us who want to be advert free should be able to effectively avoid paying for our content. Perhaps a third way is an ad-blocker that modifies the way adverts are displayed, so that adverts are less intrusive, more consistently displayed, and known to be safe to click on? If we always knew where the adverts would appear on a web page, if they occupied the same space, if they were consistent, and if we could be sure they were safe to click on, users might be more likely to accept them.

On television you know where the adverts are, they come in a bunch, it’s generally easy to separate them from the content, so that one can view the adverts if one is interested, but go and make a cup of coffee if not. That is what I think we need on the web and not this terrible mish-mash where the content is buried under a wall of useless adverts.

So here’s your challenge Melih, build me an ad-blocker (or a browser) that doesn’t block the ads, but instead creates some order out of the current chaos and standardizes adverts so that I know where they’ll be on a page, how big they’ll be, how much space they’ll take up, and that they are safe to click on.

Not ‘sanitized ads’ but ‘standardized ads’ - just like on the TV. Can you do that?

Challange accepted…

wait and see…


The problem with that approach is the web developers set up how the ads will be displayed.

No ad blocker is going to change this. All you can do is block it.

It’s where the one browser of power to rule them all strategy really shows. With Opera having given up it’s Presto engine it’s only Mozilla’s and Google’s engines that are driving the web browsers on the Windows platform. Kinda worrying…