Are Google's Ads So Relevant That People Won't Block Them?

Google Fine with Chrome Letting People Block its Ads

A while back, Google launched an extensions gallery for its Chrome web browser. Ad-blocking add-ons are among the most popular for Mozilla's Firefox, so it stands to reason that they will be for Chrome as well. With Google's primary source of revenue being its ads, a lot of talk has surfaced about Google letting people block its own ads with its own product.

Is Google was smart to allow ad-blocking extensions for Chrome? Discuss here.

A recent article from the New York Times has elevated the discussion, calling the allowance of ad blockers a "test" for Google.

Google wants people to use Chrome. For that to happen, it has to give people what they want. One point of view would be that the people who are most likely to block ads would just as use another browser that allowed them to do so if Chrome didn't.

Google doesn't think that ad blockers will have much of an impact on advertising anyway. In December, Google Engineering Director Linus Upson participated in a panel discussion about the subject. He, Charles McCathieNevile of Opera, and Mike Shaver of Mozilla discuss it in the following clip:

Add-on-Con '09 ads and adblockers (closing keynote) from Robert on Vimeo.

Upson says it's "unlikely ad blockers are going to get to the level where they imperil the advertising market, because if advertising is so annoying that a large segment of the population wants to block it, then advertising should get less annoying." He thinks the market will sort it out. The others appear to take similar stances.

The real question is how many people are really going to make the effort to block ads? As Wladimir Palant, who runs Adblock Plus on Firefox, told the NYT, ad blockers are still used by a "tiny proportion of the Internet population, and these aren’t the kind of people susceptible to ads anyway."

Based on what Upton had to say in the panel discussion, Google is pretty confident that it can deliver ads people actually want, and that people (for the most part) will not want to block them if they see that relevance.

What could hurt Google more is if Microsoft or Firefox implemented their own ad blocking capabilities by default. This would lead to average users browsing an ad-less web, because just as most people don’t go out of their way to download ad-blocking add-ons, they are unlikely to go out of their way to allow ads in such a scenario. However, it is pretty unlikely that this will happen, particularly on Microsoft's end. They of course have their own ads to worry about.

If ad-blocking from the browser actually did become a big problem for Google, one would have to wonder if the company woulnd't find some kind of work-around. For example, what would stop them from serving ads directly in the Chrome Browser itself (in a toolbar area for example)? One could envision sponsored link-style ads like those served via Gmail. With Google's interest-based advertising, relevance would still be at the forefront. But it probably won't come to that anytime soon (at least not as a solution to the perceived issue).

Wondering how many people actually use Chrome anyway? Ad-blocking from the browser does after all only matter if people are using that browser. Well, the latest numbers from Net Applications have Chrome's market share surpassing that of Apple's Safari browser. It's worth noting that Google just released Chrome for Mac last month as well.



As Doug Caverly mentioned, "Chrome's only been around for about 16 months, after all, and Safari's had something like six years to make friends."

Google's Chrome OS is set to make things interesting later this year, as well. Chrome use is growing and will continue to do. Ad campaigns from Google may ease that growth along.

Google made a bold move when it opened up its extensions gallery, allowing for ad-blocking extensions. Could this turn out to be a huge mistake on the company's part or is Google's confidence completely justified? Only time will tell for certain, but Google has long stood behind the promise of trying to deliver the best user experience. If users want to block ads, Google is going to let them. Share your thoughts here.

By Chris Crum

Chrome Cruises By Safari

Web browser market share changeup in December

Last month, Google acknowledged Apple's importance by releasing a beta version of Chrome for Mac. New statistics show that Google sort of put Apple to shame, too, however, as Chrome passed Safari in terms of market share.

The stats come courtesy of Net Applications, and according to the organization, Internet Explorer remained very much on top of the Web browser pile in December with a market share of 62.69 percent. Unsurprisingly, Firefox placed second, with a share of 24.61 percent.

Then came the changeup. Chrome was fourth in November, but with a market share of 4.63 percent, secured third place during December. And Safari's market share of 4.46 percent was only enough for fourth place during the same month.

Assuming the two browsers don't reverse course in January, this is a significant development. Chrome's only been around for about 16 months, after all, and Safari's had something like six years to make friends.

Count on Google maintaining or increasing its promotion of Chrome since the current approach has worked so well. It's possible that Apple will try to fight back and upgrade Safari in response to Chrome for Mac, too.

By Doug Caverly

Mozilla Exec: Mobile Version Of Firefox Almost Here

"Days away," at least for Nokia N900 owners

The mobile version of Firefox - also known as Fennec - is almost ready to launch. Indeed, a Mozilla exec was recently quoted as saying that a release could be "days away," so it's possible that the new mobile browser will appear in time for some tech-inclined individuals to play with it on New Year's Eve or even Christmas.

Word of this short-term goal comes via the BBC from Jay Sullivan, who's Mozilla's vice president of mobile. Apparently Fennec's going through a last phase of testing, and, barring any "showstoppers," will be available quite soon.

The catch relates to compatibility, meaning this rollout won't put Fennec in everyone's hands. Owners of Nokia's N900 phones will be the first to get their hands on the mobile version of Firefox. Then, as the BBC reported, "The organisation is also developing versions for Microsoft's Windows mobile and Google's Android operating system."

Something for the iPhone might follow, but not in the near future.

Still, given how long Fennec's been in development (well over a year), any release will still count as a major step forward. And this (probable) launch is especially interesting given that Firefox 3.5 recently topped all other desktop browser versions on a global basis.

By Doug Caverly