From 0e4c6e766f15bb892ffb452508ad80088d7d6b2c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: gorhill Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2014 04:53:51 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] Updated My answer to web store reviews where appropriate (markdown) --- My answer to web store reviews where appropriate.md | 8 ++++++++ 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) diff --git a/My answer to web store reviews where appropriate.md b/My answer to web store reviews where appropriate.md index 3159310..c79d16c 100644 --- a/My answer to web store reviews where appropriate.md +++ b/My answer to web store reviews where appropriate.md @@ -2,6 +2,14 @@ I can't answer to the review in web stores. It's unfortunate as sometimes I coul *** +#### David A (Chrome store, 14 September 2014) + +> Now I know why the cpu and memory is so low. This crap doesnt even save ad filters permanently. Even the ones you subscribed to. little ads come back when you refresh the page. Refresh a page again and they are gone? Its like its playing hide and go seek. + +The reason the memory and CPU is low (thanks for noticing) is the code was written from scratch with performance in mind, using benchmarks to drive development. It supports almost 100% of Adblock Plus filter syntax. The behavior your are seeing is not normal. If you could give me a URL where the problem occurs (see it as your contribution to the project), I could investigate. + +*** + #### Chris Whitaker (Chrome store, 2 September 2014) > Going to have to agree with another reviewer - this blocker is great on memory usage, but blocks many other fields (i.e. my insurance company's login fields, the Target.com search box). [...] [4-star rating]