How excited is Google about the ad blocker for Chrome?

With one quick download, Google's browser will soon enable users to do something that the company can't be happy about -- block online ads.

Google Chrome, the company's recent entry into the Web browser market, will begin accepting software extensions developed by third parties, similar to what Mozilla Firefox has offered for years.

The company, which derives the vast majority of its revenue from online advertising, recently made an API tool kit available to developers that would help them create powerful extensions to Chrome.

These third-party features aren't available yet to the public, but an extension called AdSweepwill be one of the first on tap. Similar to a popular extension for Firefox, AdSweep hides advertising on Web pages.

The extension has been available since March, but Google hasn't yet cemented a way to easily install such features.

Asked for comment, Google did not directly address the issue.

"We are designing Google Chrome's extensions to be flexible enough to support all different types of features, and we are encouraged by the development that we've seen in this area so far," a Google spokesperson wrote in an e-mail.

Surely AdSweep, specifically, isn't the source of that encouragement, right?

"Put a different way, we are encouraged by the work that developers are doing as they experiment with building tools on our extensions platform," the spokesperson wrote.

Google, being an advertising company at its core, probably won't benefit from ...

... this particular extension, which, if it ever became popular, could bleed money from Google's ad revenue. After all, the wide array of free tools the company puts out couldn't exist if not for the ad revenue that supports them.

Realistically though, this probably won't be the catalyst that propels ad blockers beyond the avid Web surfer niche.

"I don't think this really puts a dent into Google's revenue," wrote AdSweep developer Charles-Andre Landemaine in an e-mail. "There are so few users of Chrome, let alone AdSweep, so the loss of revenue for Google is peanuts, really."

Still, we certainly wouldn't expect Google to shoot any sort of "there's an extension for that" commercialspromoting AdSweep.

As more companies are opening up their software for independent developers to tinker with, they should expect to encounter plenty of third-party applications that they might not want. Baby Shaker, anyone?

-- Mark Milian

Comments

[David]

You know I download a lot of free stuff from the web illegally the least I can do is allow adverts to run through my browsers, as a way of paying a little back into the economy,

Internet has to be paid for and if everyone switches to adblock or adsweep then the internet will just evolve into a pay to view websites, with little free content available or virtually zero content the is viewable with out signing up to something.

And this would be bad for every one.

Plus just to add google already did some damage by developing the omi url bar which enable to bypass adverts place on your searches, as it often lead me straight to the website.
I am surprise no one else mention this when chrome first launches.

[Axel F]

Since I activly avoid brands with annoying ads most companies would probably benefit from me blocking them.

[Scott]

Interesting issue that will evolve. While Chrome may have a negligible user base (for now), Firefox does not. Furthermore, if web ads do become an annoyance, Microsoft will be forced to put something equivalent onto Explorer or lose even more market share.

On the other hand, if people are searching to make a purchase, they will likely turn ad blocker programs off. If these are the searches where Google & ad merchants make most of their money, ad blockers won't hurt them that much. Maybe Google has done the analysis & that's why it doesn't seem that concerned.

[Warren Lee]

As David mentioned, the internet is primarily supported by advertising, and users interaction with advertising. I understand that ads can be a bit of an annoyance, but there is a trade-off. Users can put up with ads and continue to receive content from web publishers for free, or they can get used to the idea of paying for the content that they access. Maybe one of the extensions that is developed is a meter that keeps track of ads blocked, ascribes a dollar amount to them and charges the blocked users for the content that they have accessed. With a system like this at least the publisher is getting payed.

I think that this is really where the rubber meets the road: Pay for content or support the content by participating in the current economic model.

[1024]

Google's ads are text ads. They load fast, they don't pop up, they don't flash. I really think they don't bother anyone. On the other side, flashy fat banners which say "shoot five iPhones" (<-- I mean, really :S ) and then take your click as if you clicked on the add and redirect you should be blocked!
It would be interesting if this AdSweep would only block graphical ads (but I don't think that's gonna happen)

[Phil]

There are other options, e.g. Google could insert ads into emails as plain text with a link and an ad blocker wouldn't be able to detect them.
If too many people blocked ads to cause a problem then Google could change it's strategy and insert sponsored ads into the search results - not what I'd want to happen but a possible avenue.

Not all companies rely on ads for their revenues, Microsoft could put ad blocking in internet explorer and it would actually benefit them as many of their current competitors rely on ad revenue.

I wonder if someone can come up with a clever way to identify if their ads are being blocked and then deny access if they are.

[Charles]

"It would be interesting if this AdSweep would only block graphical ads (but I don't think that's gonna happen)"

Actually, I'm thinking about offering 2 versions of Adsweep :)

[Dahunsi semiyu olusola]

i will advise you to join me because am too simple

[Haakon]

Having been a paid user of the now ancient AdShield and a contributor to several hosts file distributions over the years, it is Adblock Plus alone that defines me as s Firefox evangelist. While effective blocking schemes are available for IE and Opera, Adblock Plus is install-and-forget. I have become so accustomed to "quiet" Web surfing, I cannot tolerate anything less.

I try Chrome and OMG, the levels of spinning, strobing, flashing, bouncing, sliding, pulsating content and overwhelmingly obnoxious audio is astounding; it's worse than ever. Advertisers and Webmasters need only to look at their crap to understand why ad blocking evolved and is so sought after. Until it can be implemented in Chrome, Firefox will remain my browser of choice.

[Houston NightClubs and Bars]

Its nice to know there are checks and balances between yahoo msn and google. Google has all the search traffic and makes over 95% of its revenue from Adwords. While Microsft controls 75% of the browser market. Google's worst nightmare would be if Microsoft not only allowed an adblocker on IE, but if it made it standard, and active by default. Google's revenue would drop. I doubt Google will allow a blocker on their browser as it would give Microsoft the ok to do it on theirs, and this would hurt google alot