Hi,
I'm a new poster here, so I thought I'd begin with a question for the Tek Syndicate guys.
I see Logan talk about Adblock and other such programs, but why use those when you can just use a HOSTS file?
Is there a performance difference with a HOSTS file VS an Adblock program?
and what are your thoughts on a HOSTS file?
Thanks,
-Ash
update, update, update, update, update, update, unless you run a program that auto updates, which is basically what your doing in the browser anyway. as for performance difference. there probably will be. in the browser thoough you get more control. You can specifiy on the fly objects to block or not block. Cant really to that with host files.
that's what it comes down to. Really probably the best way is to run an ip/domain based adblock on your router/firewall (if it has that ability), that will cover generic ads and such but it wont necessarily fix formatting issues.
Ah, I see. That completely slipped my mind! haha
Logan actually switched to MicroBlock or uBlock from the Chrome store. I think FireFox has it too. I use it and it is nice. It is a nice blocker better then adblock and uses less performance resources. Try it out. Google uBlock.
Editing your hosts file is definitely a good way to block ads, or anything for that matter, but then you have to update it manually. Not only that, but it doesn't actually hide the element that hosts the ad. So you will block the ad, but its box containing it on the site is still visible.
Along with what others have said, editing the hosts file requires administrative privileges, which you may or may not have on every box you use, but you probably want ads gone on all of them.
I agree! uBlock runs better.