To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
On my windows partition, I only enable Flash in IE (mainly for viewing YouTube), and most of the time I use FireFox. On Linux I did not even bother to install Flash, as I have Chrome installed and use VP8 for YouTube playback.
On my windows partition, I only enable Flash in IE (mainly for viewing YouTube), and most of the time I use FireFox. On Linux I did not even bother to install Flash, as I have Chrome installed and use VP8 for YouTube playback. "
Chrome ships with Adobe Flash pre-installed as part of the browser install. Thus, you do have Flash installed.
Just check the plugins page in Chrome, and you'll see it listed there. Even on Linux.
The last few weeks YouTube has been pushing out changes and A/B testing* changed to perfect their support for WebM/HTML5 video.
For example, if you enable html5-support for Youtube at: http://youtube.com/html5
And you visit a different site with a YouTube video enabled, it is very much possible it will be displayed in HTML5/WebM.
I've also seen that YouTube has started to enable HTTPS support.
That means that https://youtube.com/ could be the default in the future. This is to protect the login-cookie users use (used by people who upload and comment).
Only the video is downloaded over HTTP from the caching servers (it is a different domain, thus the cookie won't be sent in that case).
Also they are enabling HTTPS so they can enable the use of SPDY.
SPDY is the faster 'HTTP-transport'-method of loading pages from Google as implemented in Chrome and maybe Firefox 10, but probably Firefox 11.
* A/B testing is that certain users temporarily see the new version and other users see the original. This is to test what happends when you enable new code without impacting all users if something does not work.
My little experiment is meeting with mixed-success. Most techy sites have been reasonably usable. But apparently Taco Bell felt that having Flash on their front page was critical and told me I needed Flash ("This site requires that you have Adobe Flash installed on your computer. Click here to download and install Flash."). Thankfully I didn't really need their site to get the info I wanted.
Everyone? My computer has no Flash installed since about two years. Maybe I'm lucky, but all websites I consider worth visiting work. Embedded youtube videos don't show, but they work when watched on youtube directly, so I can live with that. Who knows, perhaps I even stumble upon a solution to that one day.
I use IE8 a lot, and only load Flash on selected white-listed websites (OSnews obviously not being one of them).
That's actually one of the neatest features in IE (second only to InPrivate Filtering): open the Tools menu > Manage Add-ons, select Shockwave Flash Object, click on More information (lower pane), then click on Remove from all sites.
Now every website that wants to run Flash will show a non-intrusive gold bar at the top, and let you choose whether you agree or not.
And then you realize that virtually every web site wants you to run it, even when there's no visible Flash content, and that its primary use is NOT as a multimedia framework, but as yet another user tracking system.
(Disabling local storage in Flash also somewhat limits its usefulness for trackers; but not running it at all if not needed it definitely the best option.)
Edited 2012-01-10 02:53 UTC





Member since:
2011-09-02
Everyone install Adobe's Flash Player 'just in case™'. I cannot see any reason to deliberately uninstall it. Until content providers reduce the amount of content that require Flash the situation will not change anytime soon. If you buy a new computer its at that point you decide what things you should install or you install it when its needed, people never actively decide to uninstall something unless it breaks.
Less focus on alternative operating systems this year I feel?
--
Discover Amiga, Discover AmigaOS
www.amigaos.net