Google Will Soon Start Punishing Mobile Sites that Use Annoying App Install Ads(techcrunch.com)
techcrunch.com
Google Will Soon Start Punishing Mobile Sites that Use Annoying App Install Ads
http://techcrunch.com/2015/09/01/death-to-app-install-interstitials/
302 comments
Does that mean they'll block youtube? Try playing a video on a phone that does not have the youtube app installed, it's just about impossible to get it right, it's a roulette that's rigged with more than half the links going to the youtube app page on google play. Highly annoying since there is no reason why the youtube page of some video should even have that app installation link at all.
Ugh, maybe this will finally push forums to burn those infernal Tapatalk interstitials. Forum owners: I'm looking for one piece of information from a web search, not a whole dumb app that will completely ignore my search goals.
Best to read this twitter thread: https://twitter.com/mdudas/status/638792939842469893
This only applies to page covering ads for app installs. Not other interstitials. In fact Google recently did a study showing how 69% of people leave the page when faced with an interstitial [1], yet they also recently released an updated format for their own Google overlay ad [2] (although this is for apps). They don't want to lose web/search traffic to apps, but they make plenty of money running these formats themselves. A good summary of the various conflicts of interest is here [3].
1. http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2015/07/google-ca...
2. http://adwords.blogspot.com/2015/08/beautiful-new-designs-fo...
3. http://searchengineland.com/google-goes-app-interstitial-pro...
This only applies to page covering ads for app installs. Not other interstitials. In fact Google recently did a study showing how 69% of people leave the page when faced with an interstitial [1], yet they also recently released an updated format for their own Google overlay ad [2] (although this is for apps). They don't want to lose web/search traffic to apps, but they make plenty of money running these formats themselves. A good summary of the various conflicts of interest is here [3].
1. http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2015/07/google-ca...
2. http://adwords.blogspot.com/2015/08/beautiful-new-designs-fo...
3. http://searchengineland.com/google-goes-app-interstitial-pro...
Does this apply to "please subscribe to our stupid newsletter" that obscures many sites now?
What ad network is it that serves up ads that actually open up the iOS App Store, without having tapped on anything? That's super annoying.
They're looking at you http://www.ultimate-guitar.com
You know, at some point (and we are around that point) Google does cross a line where they are abusing their near monopoly on search. This is a pro consumer move, but it's another instance of Google saying do things our way or we punish you.
This is a little curmudgeonly, but this is how I feel...
If your developers are not capable of making your website mobible friendly in 2015, any app they develop is likely worse. This is especially true when your app demands access to everything on my phone even though it doesn't need any of it to function.
If your developers are not capable of making your website mobible friendly in 2015, any app they develop is likely worse. This is especially true when your app demands access to everything on my phone even though it doesn't need any of it to function.
Fantastic - so glad to see this. I use a browser to use facebook and twitter on my android phone. No I don't want to install an app, thanks!
Still, G's new policy allows small install the app links, which is fine because a lot of people do want the app versions of web properties.
Still, G's new policy allows small install the app links, which is fine because a lot of people do want the app versions of web properties.
Ha. Yet their advertising optimisation teams continue to tout the benefits of implementing an interstitial ad unit on mobile:
https://developers.google.com/mobile-ads-sdk/docs/dfp/androi...
Edit. More here:
https://www.thinkwithgoogle.com/products/mobile-ads-intersti...
Left hand doesn't know what right hand is doing.
https://developers.google.com/mobile-ads-sdk/docs/dfp/androi...
Edit. More here:
https://www.thinkwithgoogle.com/products/mobile-ads-intersti...
Left hand doesn't know what right hand is doing.
I'd really like to see a universal app / site rating service that judges apps / sites on their stability, privacy, security, legitimacy of requested permission, and general UX.
It could then provide alternatives to the app / site, and possibly even an anonymous whistleblower service for employees .
It could then provide alternatives to the app / site, and possibly even an anonymous whistleblower service for employees .
I think it's interesting that they are making this decision - one that clearly pushed users to stay on the mobile web which is beneficial for Google - based on a study that was pretty flawed. This article debunks their methodology pretty well: https://medium.com/@alexaustin/just-because-it-s-google-does...
I still do not understand the popularity of this approach. It seems to crazy increase bounce rates. You would think that negative user behavior would already make these undesirable without Google being explicit?
I read this as publishing and was getting mad, then I read the article and smiled. Thanks Google! I absolutely hate sites that do this.
In and of itself I really like this move, but I have to wonder if it's good thing in the long run to allow Google to assert its vision of good UX on the entire web. Where's the line? Of course nobody is forcing websites to do anything, but Google is such an important traffic driver it's hard to imagine a site not having to comply to survive.
Seems a bit hypocritical, considering they were using app install interstitial pages as recently as July:
http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.co.uk/2015/07/google-...
http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.co.uk/2015/07/google-...
I wonder if this is more search defense than it is user experience work. One of the things web driven access gives you is access to the search traffic through that web site, once you go to the App all that traffic goes with it. Its clear that an app for everything is getting pushed hard by content providers.
Does that mean the death of Tapatalk? 'cause I'm all in. Stop pestering me to install your stupid app, I like my browser just fine...
Isn't this a tiny bit concerning that one company can effectively force the web to comply with their standards by "punishing" any non-conformers? I know Bing exists, but still, this is something that would happen in a monopoly.
>Google Will Soon Start Punishing Mobile Sites That Use Competing Ad Platforms
And when will they punish advertisements that redirect to app stores? or even worse, websites that activate WAP subscriptions...
Content publishers have created a really bad situation for themselves on the web from these types of ads, slow Javascripts, and other "ad tech" excesses.
Apple is responding with ad blocking technology and a news app. Facebook has responded with articles that load quickly from their apps. These solutions represent an existential threat to the open web, and therefore Google.
I really hope Google doesn't just stop at app ads, and starts punishing websites that do objectively horrible things to end-user experience.
Apple is responding with ad blocking technology and a news app. Facebook has responded with articles that load quickly from their apps. These solutions represent an existential threat to the open web, and therefore Google.
I really hope Google doesn't just stop at app ads, and starts punishing websites that do objectively horrible things to end-user experience.
Hm, I've rarely seen such pushes for app installs. I've mostly seen banner-like ads. However, I hope they will also start penalising websites that use overlays for mailing list submissions and account creation - before even giving you chance to read the article you came in for.
The most annoying aspect of app install interstitials is when the publisher doesn't offer a version of their app for your platform, which for us Windows Phone users is pretty much all of them. One more indignity I guess :)
I hope they also stop serving adverts that redirect from Safari to the App Store too
May be only me, I dont really find those annoying, in fact i find them helpful when they tell me my favorite site has an App and I dont need to use Mobile Browser to Read.
What about sites that prompt you to enable push notifications?
Which seems to be like 90% of them. Good guy Google for once.
These kinds of ads are the reason I leave javascript disabled on my phone. It prevents all kinds of annoyances and saves a significant amount of battery as well.
Hopefully Google can distinguish them from the "By browsing this site, you accept the use of Cookies [X]"-popups that EU websites have to implement now.