Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Free Apps Eat Your Smartphone Battery

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the om-nom-nom dept.

Software 214

judgecorp writes "Here's a reason to pay for smartphone apps: the free versions can spend three times as much energy finding and serving ads as they do serving their actual purpose. Research from a Purdue University scientist found that as much as 75 percent of the energy used by free apps (PDF) goes on accessing location services, finding suitable advertisements and displaying them."

cancel ×

214 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Not always true (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39405853)

The custom firmware I use on my Android smartphone redirects all ad domains to 127.0.0.1, so no ads for me.

Re:Not always true (1)

tommy8 (2434564) | more than 2 years ago | (#39405883)

What custom firmware is that?

Re:Not always true (3, Informative)

Noughmad (1044096) | more than 2 years ago | (#39405905)

All you need is root access, then there is more that one app to setup a redirect.

Re:Not always true (1)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 2 years ago | (#39405935)

Which goes to the point: the equivalent of AdBlock Plus needs to be an app for these phones - as a local proxy/filter.

Use the AdBlock lists to populate. Half the work is already done...

Re:Not always true (4, Funny)

courteaudotbiz (1191083) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406047)

But if you use AdBlock Free, does it suck up your battery to display ads?

Re:Not always true (2)

gabereiser (1662967) | more than 2 years ago | (#39405937)

in true hacker fashion... well played good sir, well played...

Re:Not always true (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39405983)

You think someone who has root access to his device and can set up redirects to 127.0.0.1, via an app on top of that, is a hacker?

Do you also think that people who can write config.sys files for MS-DOS are assembly programmers?

Re:Not always true (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39406023)

Of course not. But people that can program autoexec.bat? Gods, I say... Gods.

Re:Not always true (1)

jeffmeden (135043) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406123)

Considering windows batch scripting is really just a string of commands tied together with a few syntax options that in no way amount to what anyone with a sane mind would call "programming"... Yes, if you manage to construct a useful program out of nothing but a bat file, you sir are a God.

Re:Not always true (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39406395)

DOS BATCH is turing complete, so is windows batch programming.

No reason you can't do anything with it. If you put in the effort. :^D

http://www.csie.ntu.edu.tw/~r92092/ref/win32/win32scripting.html

Re:Not always true (1)

jimicus (737525) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406453)

DOS BATCH is turing complete, so is windows batch programming.

So is Intercal, that doesn't mean I want to do anything particularly complicated in it.

Re:Not always true (1)

hobarrera (2008506) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406003)

Actually, can't you just edit /etc/hosts, as you would on a desktop computer?

Re:Not always true (1)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406029)

Nope, that's outside of the SD card mountpoint, so you can't get to it from an external device - and applications can't modify system files (think if a normal user trying to edit in /etc without su/sudo - it's not going to work)

Re:Not always true (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39406069)

In other words "yes, but you need root access".

AdFree Android does this and keeps the list up to date automatically; you can download it from Android Market.

Re:Not always true (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39406095)

Sure you can (if you got root). Rooting Android _is_ basically getting sudo to work on your phone.

Re:Not always true (1)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406537)

Wasn't his whole point that you could just edit that file instead of rooting the phone? Well, no... because you need root to edit the file.

Re:Not always true (3, Informative)

erroneus (253617) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406195)

One thing that is done is that once root is attained, create a symlink at /etc/hosts pointing to a file on the SD or external_SD and then you can edit it without root. But root has to have happened at some point and in some way.

Re:Not always true (2)

bemymonkey (1244086) | more than 2 years ago | (#39405941)

Any custom firmware that comes with a modified hosts file, I'd assume...

You can also just root the handset and modify the hosts file yourself. Or download "Adfree" from the market and have it done automatically.

Re:Not always true (2)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406223)

hosts file

Noooo! Now you've summoned APK!

Re:Not always true (3, Informative)

erroneus (253617) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406167)

Not necessarily custom firmware. Just root the phone, install AdFree and there you go.

It helps quite a bit. As I heard it, going to address 0.0.0.0 is faster that 127.0.0.1 though.

That said, I have done it and yeah, it saves time, screen space and all that.

Re:Not always true (1, Insightful)

bonch (38532) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406013)

Even more amazing, the $0.99 I spend on an app completely removes ads without buggy third-party firmware or manual redirects, for all time. What will they think of next?

Re:Not always true (2)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406017)

Still the software is doing additional calls to try to get the data.
Plus your phone is taking time to process/reject those calls.

Re:Not always true (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39406189)

There is indeed a more efficient way to do it. If you use backsmali [google.com] you can disassemble the app, remove the Admob crap and rebuild it. It is trivial to automate the patching with perl/python. You will also save storage space since the resulting .APK is smaller. The thing here is to not let Google make a cent out of this.

--
mchurch

why so much effort? (1)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406067)

adblocker does this for you - as long as you have root, no need for custom firmware

Re:Not always true (1)

unixisc (2429386) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406149)

Or ::1, if IPv6 is being used

Re:Not always true (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39406469)

And once again proving that Android is just meant for the tech-heads with time to figure this stuff out. Good for you that you have that time. Most people don't (and won't) want to start treating their phone like a computer.

So for the 99.9& of everyone else that has no desire to implement redirects, this is still a valid concern.

Correction (4, Insightful)

Tyrannosaur (2485772) | more than 2 years ago | (#39405855)

Ads Eat Your Smartphone Battery

Re:Correction (4, Interesting)

QuasiSteve (2042606) | more than 2 years ago | (#39405907)

Ads Eat Your Smartphone Battery

More specifically, bad ad serving code eats your smartphone battery.

If your app connects to an ad server/framework every minute, or on particular events, etc. etc. each time... then yes, that's going to suck down energy real fast.

Instead, download multiple ads (in the background), serve from that pool.

Better yet, as somebody at a Dutch tech site suggested, let shared ad frameworks do this so that N ads downloaded can be shared across multiple apps.

There are down sides, of course:
- the ads in the pool may become outdated. I.e. if somebody searched for PNDs today, the ads downloaded yesterday won't be notifying you of the latest TomTom/Garmin/whatever offerings. This can be corrected by always refreshing after a set time.
- you may end up downloading more ads than you'll actually use before such a refresh, which means you actually used more energy (and bandwidth) than you would have under traditional methods.

But in general, all this opening/closing of connections which in turn may or may not lead to 3G / 4G modules kicking into action, etc. is just inefficient.

Re:Correction (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39406177)

More specifically, ads eat your smartphone battery.

Re:Correction (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39406267)

The only problem with this approach is you are asking the ad networks to do more work with no real benefit to themselves. Even after this 'revelation' that ads eat battery, most smartphone users will forget this by tomorrow, or just not care.

Re:Correction (1)

QuasiSteve (2042606) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406477)

The only problem with this approach is you are asking the ad networks to do more work with no real benefit to themselves.

Not quite. The ad networks (Google's, etc.) do just one thing.. serve up ads based on certain metrics that you send in a request.
If you send 5 requests, you get 5 ads.
There's no change required on that end.

Ad frameworks are a different matter. Most of the large ad networks also offer ad frameworks that make it easy to implement advertising based on their services - be that on your website or in an app. Those frameworks may not be well-suited to pre-loading multiple ads. The benefit to them is that they could also more efficiently grab ads. Whether that outweighs the loss of having up-to-the-second metrics (as opposed to, say, once per day), I'll leave up to them to worry about.

Developers, however, don't necessarily have to use these frameworks and, as long as their agreements allow it (usually when the payout isn't based on impressions, but on clickthroughs), grab 5 ads,10 ads, 100 ads and display those as needed.

I do agree though that most users are just going to shrug it off, as are most developers.

As it is, while these ad connections do sip battery power some, it's still the displays that easily take the most energy even with them forced to their lowest setting.

Re:Correction (4, Funny)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406295)

In other news:

Ads on television waste anywhere from 1/3rd to one-half the power used while watching TV. ;-) Back in the 1960/70s when ads were only 9 minutes per hour, TV ads only wasted 15% power.

Re:Correction (1)

erroneus (253617) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406299)

They do more than that. I have read where some ad based apps actually read and transmit your contacts database and other bits of information out of your phone to do unknown things with "our partners." (Not all of their partners are people who sell things... sometimes they are private intelligence and government.)

People are simply not careful when it comes to apps on Android... not like they are careful elsewhere, but you know?

I have been in discussions like these where "well meaning people" say things like "I cannot condone blocking ads. Those poor developers need to eat!" I'm sorry, but there's more at stake than their collecting ad revenue... tiny amounts of ad revenue. It just doesn't mean I need to open my doors to all that. I just hope the Ad-Free angry birds I bought from Amazon can be trusted.

With many useful things costing only a couple dollars or less, I'm fine with spending it. Also, since my wife also has android and I buy from Amazon's market, I just set Amazon market on her phone with my information and I get it twice... or even three times with my Samsung Galaxy Tab 7".

Anyway, smart users will control what goes in and out of their devices. I just wish there was something like "Little Snitch" for Android or even for Linux.

Free? (0)

dmacleod808 (729707) | more than 2 years ago | (#39405871)

Nothing is "Free" someone has to pay for the development, and any ongoing services... Anyone who thought "Free" apps were produced via goodwill (even Cydia apps serve ads) is just Naive.

Re:Free? (1)

CubicleZombie (2590497) | more than 2 years ago | (#39405991)

I see the dumbest simplest apps coming with ads. An ad supported stopwatch? Give me a freakin break. And ads or no ads, it's probably scraping my emails and contacts.

Re:Free? (1)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406053)

Well it took some time to learn how to code for that platform and make a usable application (even if it is a simple stop watch).
The problem is there are too many people who want to get rich quick. Make a junk app, make money off the adds, then just be happy that they made the money then go to the next scheme.

Re:Free? (2)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406253)

make money off the adds

I can't tell if that's a typo for ads or you mean attention deficit disorder sufferers - it seems to work either way...

Re:Free? (4, Insightful)

Noughmad (1044096) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406093)

Of course, just like writing Slashdot posts on a "free" operating system with a "free" desktop environment and a "free" browser is just drowning me in ads.

Re:Free? (1)

Zapotek (1032314) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406347)

Erm...there's plenty of F/OSS software that can prove you completely wrong.

Freedom Apps (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39406433)

Some apps are produced by spreading development costs across many organizations. Instead of maximizing profit, the business motivation is to reduce development costs. To ensure everyone's right to the final product, these programs exist under code "liberating" licenses. Open source software is truly free (as in freedom).

GPLed code is liberated from the shackles of corporations and individuals who want to incorporate it into their products, while preventing downstream users from enjoying the same freedom.

BSDed code conveys less freedom to the code in exchange for more freedom for the users. But it is still open source. There are many licensing schemes and paths that have led to the creation of very successful free software.

The problem lies with those that are looking for "free" (as in beer) software. This whole post is really referring to abandonware, adware, baitware, bloatware, censorware, demoware, donationware, malware, postcardware, shareware, and trialware. All of this software is proprietary, and as such does the bidding of the software author rather than the user.

Now we know (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39405877)

Now we know why Crapdroids have such a shitty battery life : the vast majority of free apps installed on the happy trash bin.

(come on Fanroids : you are welcome to use it as an excuse)

Re:Now we know (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39406251)

And therein lies the reason why Techweek only studied WP7 and Android. Anyone with an i* would think "omg these ads have been blessed, so they take no power".

AdAway (3, Informative)

macemoneta (154740) | more than 2 years ago | (#39405881)

Android + AdAway (free, in the market) on a rooted device == no ads. It also mitigates the security risks associated with third party ads.

Re:AdAway (3, Informative)

idontgno (624372) | more than 2 years ago | (#39405969)

Mostly. I got bit briefly by Airpush ads, which seem to be immune to hosts redirections, which both AdAway and (my choice) AdFree use.

To locate the apps that sneak in Airpush capabilities, I use AirPush Detector, which (quoting the author) "detects other installed applications which appear to use known notification ad frameworks and offers the user the ability to easily uninstall them.... This app is open source...."

Re:AdAway (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39406115)

Maybe DroidWall will work. It only allows network access to apps that you grant permission.

Ads? What are they? (1)

Noughmad (1044096) | more than 2 years ago | (#39405887)

Between not watching TV, having AdBlock on computers and AdFree on my phone, I can't remember the last time I saw one.

Re:Ads? What are they? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39405957)

Try getting out of your moms basement once in a while.

Re:Ads? What are they? (4, Funny)

artor3 (1344997) | more than 2 years ago | (#39405997)

Since you obviously read Slashdot, I'd say you see at least a couple every day. They're just disguised as stories.

Re:Ads? What are they? (1)

Noughmad (1044096) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406121)

There are stories on Slashdot?

Re:Ads? What are they? (1)

Oswald McWeany (2428506) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406265)

Yes, stories about products that you need to go buy... right now... go on... it will make you life better.

Re:Ads? What are they? (1)

Cinder6 (894572) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406323)

Leela: Didn't you have ads in the 20th century?

Fry: Well, sure, but not in our dreams. Only on TV and radio. And in magazines and movies and at ball games and on buses and milk cartons and T-shirts and written in the sky. But not in dreams. No, sir-ee!

What?!? (1)

JustAnotherIdiot (1980292) | more than 2 years ago | (#39405897)

You mean a extra program running to fetch ads over the internet takes more battery?!?
Oh my, it's such a big surprise!!!
Next you're going to tell me that turning up the brightness to max takes up more battery too!

Re:What?!? (3, Funny)

kenh (9056) | more than 2 years ago | (#39405961)

Apps that download ads use 100% more energy downlaoding ads than apps that don't download ads... Who knew?

Next up, parked cars consume 100% less gas than cars being driven down the road.

And there is a study underway in Europe that hopes to confirm my suspicion that empty boxes weigh less than full boxes.

Re:What?!? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39406025)

What about catholic bears?

Re:What?!? (1)

baudilus (665036) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406055)

Mathematically speaking, apps that download ads use infinitely more energy for that process than apps that don't. Either that or you divide by 0 and destroy the universe.

Then how about people start paying for the apps (1)

Necroman (61604) | more than 2 years ago | (#39405909)

App developers for iPhones and Android devices want to be paid for the work they do. Some of those developers release 2 versions of their apps: ones with ads for free, and another that costs money with no ads. Most people tend to vote for the "ads" version because it seems free to them.

If this article is right, it may be work paying for those $0.99 apps as it will save you money in electricity and time/announces.

Re:Then how about people start paying for the apps (2, Interesting)

bonch (38532) | more than 2 years ago | (#39405945)

Doesn't align with Google's strategy, which is to sell you to as many advertisers as possible. It's the reason Android exists at all and why they encourage free, ad-supported apps over paid apps.

Re:Then how about people start paying for the apps (1)

Jens Egon (947467) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406119)

And why they encourage ad-supported apps over free apps.

Notice how unhelpful the market* is at finding free apps.

* by whatever name.

Re:Then how about people start paying for the apps (1)

baudilus (665036) | more than 2 years ago | (#39405993)

Not if you only charge your phone at work. Let your employer pay that extra energy cost!

Re:Then how about people start paying for the apps (1)

coinreturn (617535) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406351)

Not if you only charge your phone at work. Let your employer pay that extra energy cost!

Or your Mom (in her basement).

Root (1)

p51d007 (656414) | more than 2 years ago | (#39405911)

Root it, use a ad blocker & block em.

The word "Free" is superfluous (1)

Colin Smith (2679) | more than 2 years ago | (#39405919)

Apps eat your smartphone battery.

And.. Who knew? We all thought it was the multicore faries.

Re:The word "Free" is superfluous (1)

Amouth (879122) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406083)

multicore faries

do you know how much of a pain they are to catch when they make it in to your data center?? especially now that most are getting rid of their Sun boxes, they just wander and hide in the closest glowing box, which are everywhere..

Blackmail? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39405923)

> "Here's a reason to pay for smartphone apps"

"Pay up or else!"

Not gonna happen.

Re:Blackmail? (1)

kenh (9056) | more than 2 years ago | (#39405979)

How many kilowatts can I buy for the 99 cents you think I should pay for a non-free app without ads?

How long will it take me to use that many kilowatts in my cellphone?

Re:Blackmail? (1)

glaqua (572332) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406217)

How many times has your smartphone died by 3pm, and how much would you have paid to have it continue to run until you return to the place you normally charge it?

Its not the cost of the power that is the issue, its the convenience of having a working phone at the end of my work day.

Re:Blackmail? (1)

Oswald McWeany (2428506) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406343)

I go weeks without charging my smart phone sometimes...

true... my smart phone isn't really a smart phone... it's actually a dumb phone- about as dumb as they come.

OK... my phone is an ancient flip phone... but still... point in tact... I go at least a week without charging usually (unless I'm talking alot).

Re:Blackmail? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39406385)

Your rhetorical question is cute, but let me give you an answer, or, more correctly, an upper boundry on the "how much would you pay" question.

You obviously wouldn't pay enough to buy an aux battery to recharge your phone, which I put at twenty five bucks [amazon.com] .

Most apps suck (2)

billcopc (196330) | more than 2 years ago | (#39405929)

As an app developer and heartless cynic, I'd say if the ads make up 3/4 of the power budget, that sounds like a really stupid and useless app. If it's not busy presenting content, calculating something, or entertaining the user, then it's a total waste of CPU not even worth the ad pennies.

There are so many moronic apps out there, designed with the sole purpose of duping the user and profiting the developer. Humanity is wasting countless man-millenia defrauding each other via these gadgets, thanks to undiscerning advertisers and the plague that is in-app purchasing. If you want to save energy, start by raising the standards for mobile apps a little higher than "paid the developer signup fee".

Re:Most apps suck (2)

gabereiser (1662967) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406011)

i completely agree with you... quality will bring in people to pay for apps... free apps compensate for lack of quality by making them free and then the app makers trying to capitalize on it fill it with garbage ads and such... There's only so much you can do to polish a piece of shit... (although myth-busters proved you CAN do it :D )

Re:Most apps suck (3, Informative)

mark-t (151149) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406045)

The problem is that the app store business model has generated a type of user that won't generally pay anything over even $.99 for any app, regardless of how useful it might seem to be. The only way to generate revenue from this extremely HUGE section of the market is to have advertisements in the application that can produce a continuous revenue stream from these people, with, of course, an option to make an in-app purchase that disables the ads, and perhaps unlocks additional features.

Oh noes! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39405943)

All of the GPL'ed software I downloaded are finding and serving ads to me!

Oh, wait. No they're not.

Instead of buying ad-free versions . . . (1)

baudilus (665036) | more than 2 years ago | (#39405951)

You could just purchase ONE application that manages all of this for you. Besides, I don't generally make it a habit of using applications that request location services yet don't seem to have a reason to do so. Oh right, you use an iPhone and you can't see those permissions before you download. Sorry.

Re:Instead of buying ad-free versions . . . (1)

coinreturn (617535) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406417)

You could just purchase ONE application that manages all of this for you. Besides, I don't generally make it a habit of using applications that request location services yet don't seem to have a reason to do so. Oh right, you use an iPhone and you can't see those permissions before you download. Sorry.

Oh quit trolling. On an iPhone the app will ask after you download and if you don't like that, just delete it. BFD!

free != ads (5, Informative)

Kenja (541830) | more than 2 years ago | (#39405975)

There are free apps without ads and there are paid for apps with ads. Title should be that ads eat up battery life, which is kind of a no brainer.

Re:free != ads (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39406159)

better no brainers than plain wrong titles.

Buffer the ads (1)

billcarson (2438218) | more than 2 years ago | (#39405981)

Why not run a daemon that buffers the ads in the background for all apps while there is a wifi connection?

Re:Buffer the ads (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39406357)

That's a win-win situation because all you need is to crack a single program and, voila! No more Ads, ever.

FTFY (0)

hobarrera (2008506) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406027)

Free Apps Eat Your Android Smartphone's Battery

Re:FTFY (1)

dreemernj (859414) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406155)

Android and Windows Phone, since the article is only about those two. The paper is basically a sales pitch for an energy profiler. It sounds like they've only implemented it on those two platforms so far. So, we'll have to wait for the numbers on power wastes on iOS.

Re:FTFY (1)

kwark (512736) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406245)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-17431109 [bbc.co.uk]
"Due to restrictions built into Apple's mobile operating system, the team was unable to run tests on the iPhone."

What ads? (1, Offtopic)

gox (1595435) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406039)

Use free software, don't support them by "seeing ads", support them with direct donations.

Poor title (1)

sl4shd0rk (755837) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406049)

That should really read "Adware drains your battery" which is not only more accurate, but makes the article both banal as well as un-surprising.

JuiceDefender (4, Interesting)

TheSpoom (715771) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406075)

I rarely shill for a product but if you have an Android phone with a less-than-optimal battery (like me), JuiceDefender [juicedefender.com] does wonders. It turns off your phone's wi-fi and data connections (except for situations you configure like a streaming radio app is open) when your screen is off, turning them back on every X minutes so apps like email an sync on a reasonable schedule while not killing your battery. This by itself can save a huge amount of battery life (though it can do a lot more).

By its own calculations (which I of course take with a grain of salt) it has more than doubled my effective battery life, and I would guess from practical use that it's nearly correct.

Re:JuiceDefender (1)

swillden (191260) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406369)

I'd like to use JuiceDefender, but I also use Tasker to reconfigure various settings, often based on proximity to specific Wifi access points (which provides cheap and fairly accurate geo-location), and JD turning the Wifi off and on all the time confuses Tasker.

Is there an adblock for smartphones? / nt (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39406085)

nt

Free Apps (1)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406097)

If those apps are free, just write a patch and recompile. *ducks*

Not a problem (0)

The Grim Reefer (1162755) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406179)

At least not for me. My phone is an HTC HD2 running Windows Mobile 6.5. I can't find any apps for it. I was going to put Angry Birds on it because everyone keeps talking about it, but I don't think it's available. At least I couldn't find it in the two minutes I spent looking for it. Other than that, it already does everything I need it to.

Re:Not a problem (5, Funny)

Oswald McWeany (2428506) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406291)

You can get angry birds easily on any platform.

1) Place phone on birdfeeder.
2) Fill birdfeeder with catfood.

Re:Not a problem (1)

davidag (562246) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406407)

No mod points, but that made me laugh.

Here is the problem. (1)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406185)

For small smart phone apps that are easy to use you have a few business models to help pay for your time.

1. Charge for the app. Because it cost money a lot of people will not want to pay for it even though they wast more money a day on coffee, as there is a risk involved making the choice for the app... And for those early iPod owners they realize a dollar per song/app adds up overtime if you are not careful.

2. Free App with adds. Basically give the app for free as a something useful enough for them to tolerate getting adds.

3. Free App to Sell your Charge for App. You get the free version you like it. Then you can either get the Full paid version or pay for upgrades.

4. Free App to augment your existing app. You have an other product line (Say for PC/Cloud) and you get a free app to help sell/keep customers on your wider product.

Right now the idea of making an App and charge for support isn't viable. Because the apps need to be easy enough to use that you really don't need to charge for support, or they just wont get it. If they are that tough then they will probably be part of #4.

Rooted phone with AdAway (1)

Picass0 (147474) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406209)

Use "AdAway" by Dominik Schurmann. Free in Google Market.

Also you could run "DroidWall" which allows you to white list what apps may connect to the web.

Since everyone else is mentioning their custom ROMs I'm running Blu Kuban on a Sumsung Galaxy S2 (Sprint Epic Touch version)

Does this apply to my Kindle too? (1)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406219)

It talks over 3G and retrieves ads for display on the Homepage and screen saver. I never thought about how much battery power that would drain. (Of course it lasts over month so not really an issue I guess?)

All things considered (1)

baudilus (665036) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406277)

If you calculate the actual energy requirements of the ad serving functions on the average users phone over the lifespan of said phone, I'm reasonably, almost 53% sure that the cost of that energy probably doesn't add up to a single purchase of the I Am Rich app.

Microsoft (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39406289)

Hmm, is it just coincidence, that Microsoft servers provide the study or is it just another method to disguise the differences between different license and business models?

Google App store should allow filter by funding (1)

Richard_J_N (631241) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406321)

The solution here is to ensure that the app store shows the funding model of the app to the user before installation.

Personally, I *really* object to adverts on my phone: it's my personal space, my privacy, and screen/bandwidth/battery are far too limited to waste.
We should be able to filter the app funding model. For example, when given 50 different apps that do basically the same thing, I'd consider:

[Best] ; F0SS (GPL/BSD etc) ; Free beer, closed source without ads. ; Paid ; Advert funded ; Demo ; Broken ; [Worst]

I filed a bug on this with google, but it was wontfixed.

What's really annoying is that some decent apps only exist in a free version with ads, and don't even have an option to get a paid, ad-free version.

Re:Google App store should allow filter by funding (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406483)

And apple not allowing scumbag app authors adding in apps on an update. I have bought a couple of apps that suddenly had ad's. the ONLY apps that should be allowed ad's are free ones.

In typical, pathetic IT manager fashion.... (1)

doston (2372830) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406349)

I chose to throw money at the problem. A new 3500 mAh battery solved all tedious "smartphone" battery problems. If you've got an iPhone.... ;( Yes, my phone is fat now, but it's also Phat

Obvious Guy says (1)

thoughtlover (83833) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406423)

turn off Location Services. Plus, I don't like the my phone keeping tabs on my every movement giving that data to who-knows-who.

Not for me. (2)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 2 years ago | (#39406465)

Jailbroken and custom hosts file makes them not serve any ads. I did not agree to pay for airtime for the ad's, so Until they pay for my data plan, I'm doing what I can to block ad's on my phone.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?