MCBastos wrote:
Interviewed by CNN on 10/06/2013 21:56, LnrB told the world:
> I currently have Flash 10.3.183.86. It plays Everything I point it at.
> I have NO crash problems with SM2.17.1 (XP Home), certainly not with Flash.
>
> Like I always say, Newer is not necessarily Better. Don't blame
> SeaMonkey for Flash's shortcomings.
>
> Several archived versions of Flash are here:
> http://helpx.adobe.com/flash-player/kb/archived-flash-player-versions.html
> Find one you like and keep it somewhere safe.
The problem with that approach is that it's a "damned if you do, damned
if you don't" thing. You solve your immediate problem of avoiding
crashes, but you are deliberately using a plugin version with known
security exploits. Until last year, Flash was the #1 in the Hall of
Shame of plugin exploits (it has since been overtaken by Java).
So, you might be trading long-term security for short-term convenience.
By the way: I have been using "latest release version" Seamonkey and its
predecessors for, oh, since about Mozilla Application Suite went 1.0,
about eleven years ago. I also update plugins regularly. And somehow my
setup works fine.
So I don't think it's _just_ the newest releases of Flash to blame, nor
I think it's _just_ recent versions of Seamonkey to blame, or even the
two of them interacting; I think there must be a third factor there
somewhere causing the instability.
A few things that should be investigated:
1. Do you have been using the same profile for several years? It may
have accumulated enough cruft (in the form of weird forgotten settings)
to cause problems.
2. Flash does interact heavily with video. Maybe it's a video driver
problem? I have seen flaky driver versions from all major video chipset
makers (nVidia, ATI/AMD, Intel, S3...)
3. It's high time to move off Windows XP. Yes, I have seen all the
arguments defending it; the truth is, it's almost twelve years old, it
was originally designed at a time when Microsoft considered safe
programming practices unnecessary, and for the last five years
Microsoft's maintenance policy for it only cared about stopping viruses
-- if a security patch made XP slower, devoured RAM like crazy or made
it more crash-prone, well, they don't care. It has been becoming an
unmaintanable mess for a few years now. I still have some XP machines
under my care in some clients, and believe me, I'll be very happy the
day the last of them is retired or upgraded to Win7.
I do not for a moment deny that some people have "security issues" with
these programs. However I have not, and quite frankly I don't care how
"old" or "out of date" an application is, as long as it does what I want
it to do I'll keep it.
People told me a very long time ago that I was flirting with disaster
because I kept W98SE looong past the time M$ withdrew "support." I
*Never* had a single disaster in 12 years with 98SE!. In fact, I've only
begun to use XP since February 2012, and that was because the Net
finally moved out from under my Beloved W98 and it no longer did what I
needed it to do.
Flash, for example, stopped updating at v9.xx sometime in August 2010,
but I didn't really miss it and it wasn't for that reason I left my 98
behind, nor was it for "security" reasons. (Security is why we have
anti-virus programs and firewalls. I always keep my definitions up to
the minute.)
No, I always said I would keep 98 until there was something I *Really*
wanted to do that 98 simply couldn't handle. Then and *Only* then would
I move to XP. That happened in November 2011.
XP still supports *Everything* I need/want, which can't be said for W7,
and until it doesn't I won't be transferring. That time seems to be a
very long way off.
(';')
_______________________________________________
support-seamonkey mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
