Talk:Flash

"Flash 8 crash issue" workaround

I replaced "NoScript" uninstall with "Flashblock" version requirement referenced in PluginDoc, here. I also removed the "browser.sessionhistory.max_viewers" solution for Flash 8 crashes the other day (after updating the preference for Fx1.5) because I couldn't find a reference for it. After a long search I found Elfguy's Solution for Flash 8 crashing Firefox 8th Aug 2005 forum post and a comment in bug 300756 Flash 8 Player (Public Beta) crashes Deer Park] referring to this "workaround". From what I see in Bug 300756 the issue has been resolved. Alice Wyman 19:17, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

 bug 300756
------- Comment #42 From Jay Patel  2005-09-28 16:26 PST  [reply] -------
v.fixed on branch with Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8b5)
Gecko/20050928 Firefox/1.4 and Shockwave Flash 8.0 r22, no crashes with urls in
this bug and other Flash content I see daily.

Just link to PluginDoc

This article seems like it's mostly a mirror to PluginDoc. Should we just provide a link there instead?--Np 20:08, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

I think the Quicktime issue should be kept since it comes up so many times in the forum and a link to this article makes sense, plus the PluginDoc reference is somewhat outdated, referring to QT6 "Browser Plug-in" from the dropdown menu (our article is updated for QT7). Maybe the install and extension interaction issues should be replaced with links, though. Alice Wyman 22:36, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Also, our intro and security alert give more information than PluginDoc does. We can trim down the article but I wouldn't go as far as replacing the entire article with a link. Alice Wyman 22:48, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Change article name to Flash?

Since "Macromedia Flash" is now "Adobe Flash", I was wondering if anyone had any objections if I moved the article to rename it "Flash". I already changed the old macromedia links to the new adobe ones. Alice Wyman 19:51, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

(Received in PM) On the about:plugins page the plugins are shown as Shockwave Flash and Shockwave for Director. Those names are a bit long for using inside an article, but should be ok for an article title?

The "about:plugins" list actually refers to the Flash plugin npswf32.dll as "Shockwave Flash" and refers to the Shockwave plugin np32dsw.dl as "Shockwave for Director". The intro to this article states that Even though the Flash plugin is referred to as "Shockwave Flash", it should not be confused with the Shockwave plugin that handles "Shockwave for Director" content. Since we already have an article named "Shockwave", I thought that this article should be renamed simply "Flash", which I did just now, before I noticed the PM. I think that's less confusing then renaming both articles to include "Shockwave" in the name, if that was what was meant. I also didn't want to name the article 'Adobe Flash" for similar reasons (we already have an "Adobe Reader" article). Alice Wyman 18:39, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Flash 9.0.r28 and earlier

Is there any advantage in installing Flash 9.0.r28 or earlier over the latest version? The article makes it sound like r45 works perfectly whereas r28 and earlier require some work for ZIP builds and other browsers. If that's true, should we even be suggesting r28 and providing instructions?--Np 18:56, 18 May 2007 (UTC)