New Flash Update installs McAfee without permission

[El Heggunte]

Let's also remember that many of the Adobe Flash Player updates patch vulnerabilities so simply not updating is not exactly a safe practice.

In my NSH opinion, Flash Player MUST be disabled by default.

But if an "average user"

a) sees no problem in pages which replace HTML with ActionScript, plus

b) likes to believe that «tons of unrequested CPU-eating ads == GREAT user-experience» ,

well, ......

[p_l]

Let's also remember that many of the Adobe Flash Player updates patch vulnerabilities so simply not updating is not exactly a safe practice.

In my NSH opinion, Flash Player MUST be disabled by default.

Disabled, or uninstalled? Is there any difference?

[nic2k4]

I can tell you that without flash I can't view the specials at my favorite computer shop's website. Any site that implements HTML5 can be viewed without flash using a browser that supports the HTML5 functions used. No browser fully supports all the HTML5 features nor do they support the same features. Webkit based browsers are at the front of feature support; Google being one of the biggest proponent of HTML5 obviously works hard to make all of their products work.

Opera 12.xx uses the Presto rendering engine, starting with version 15 they switched to Blink (like Chrome). Logically, the v12 updater won't offer to update to a different engine, but if there's an update in the V12 line it will; last May they updated from 12.16 to 12.17. If you visit the site they will offer to update to v22.

Since I usually have to update flash for multiple machines I always get the latest release through the archive (one zip file with everything), as a bonus it never tries to side install crap.

[johns0]

One thing about html5 is that you can only select 360/720 in resolution.

[racer-x]

One thing about html5 is that you can only select 360/720 in resolution.

Not true, here is a common example of 4k vp9:

[johns0]

It's true for people who use firefox or palemoon.