[Resolved] [Resolved] [Resolved] [Resolved] [Resolved] [Resolved] [Resolved] [Resolved] [Resolved] [

[jimmod]

Originally posted by MikeChambers

Originally posted by Criticalflicker
http://www.were-here.com/forums/show...6&pagenumber=5

The latest at were-here from Mike this morning was that it would be released "shortly".

yep, sorry i haven't posted here yet. i was planning to post this afternoon when i would hopefully have a little more info.

mike chambers

mesh@macromedia.com

Mike, Is MM going to update the stand alone players? (You did this for v23...) I see someone already posted examples of the SAME bug found in ActiveX on the Mac and Windows stand alone players.

I have been experiencing slow downs in my internet connection when I test run flash movies in the stand alone player and do the load movie command with MX and now I know why.... (Its not my machine! I have a fast processor and loads of ram.)

-james

[MikeChambers]

i am not sure if the standalone will be avaliable the same day as the player, but it will be updated.

mike chambers

mesh@macromedia.com

[sonwah]

bump

[sonwah]

bump.
again.

[Kraken]

bump...

[offdahook]

so whats the current news on the new version's release date.... i desperately need it before my broadband client looks at the website on a 56K line!

[dennie]

Another week and we have been waiting a month. Isn't time to tell us when we can expect the new player. How long do I have to tell my clients it will be repaired.

[sonwah]

bumpity bumpity !!BUMP!!

[sneazus]

Whats the philosophy in keeping to distibute a buggy player from Macromedias website for allmost a month?

Isn't more people in this way gonna download it and experince the streaming bug hence talking and making a fuss about it hence making it even more difficult to convince potential costumers to use Flash.

allso we will have visitors at our sites who will not be willing to download it again even though promted to do so since they are sure they allready downloaded it once before.

Allso if you try to download the old flash5 player cabfiles from macromedia you will get version 6,0,23,0
I guess they screewed up a bit.

And yes I did notify Macromedia about the flash5playerCab files containing version 6,0,23,0

now if they here is another question.:-)

[angstrom]

MM should discontinue deployment of the plugin until this issue is resolved. Market Penetration is crucial for the plugin, but penetration with a bad plugin(no matter how small the error may seem to mm) will be pain for all of us.

my company is still developing for flash 4, and only in the last 2 months have we started developing client sites in 5.('cos of the percentages) I will be looking at client sites in 6 when proliferation is >70% .So what are we at now? ... 10% of users with the 'bad' version 6 ?
how do I explain this faulty streaming/caching issue to my clients/end users without looking like I've supplied the wrong solution?

[thenerdyguy]

*bump*

[sonwah]

that latest Flash Player available from
http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/...ShockwaveFlash
is version 5,0,30,0

I guess thats why the lack of information in the last week.
what the hell is going on?
I've given MM the benefit of the doubt since MX's release,
but this really is turning into a major ****up.

[shamiraj]

certainly could do with clearer communication from macromedia on this...been over 3 weeks ever since this came to light...!!!

[MikeChambers]

Originally posted by shamiraj
certainly could do with clearer communication from macromedia on this...been over 3 weeks ever since this came to light...!!!

we have been very active in keeping the community up to date with what has been going on.

1. i have been posting on all of the message boards. despite this, we still got complaints that there was no info on the website.

2. there is now info on the website:

http://www.macromedia.com/v1/developer/SecurityZone/

i am not sure how else we can communicate the information. Suggestions?

mike chambers

mesh@macromedia.com

[oldnewbie]

Does that mean the new revised player IS available for download?
Checked your link, but when saying "in 7-10 days...", without dating the note, hard to say if I'm early or late!

[webartisan]

Originally posted by MikeChambers

Originally posted by shamiraj
certainly could do with clearer communication from macromedia on this...been over 3 weeks ever since this came to light...!!!

we have been very active in keeping the community up to date with what has been going on.

1. i have been posting on all of the message boards. despite this, we still got complaints that there was no info on the website.

2. there is now info on the website:

http://www.macromedia.com/v1/developer/SecurityZone/

i am not sure how else we can communicate the information. Suggestions?

mike chambers

mesh@macromedia.com

Mike,

Thanks for putting up the page on MM's site, however - the page does not render in IE_5.1.4 (latest) for the Mac. All that shows is the text, "The parameter is incorrect. ". I had to view it in Netscape to see the page.

Also, There isn't mention of the standalone player streaming issue that I've documented. Has this issue been confirmed by MM?

Thanks.

[sonwah]

Mike
The reason I'm getting pissy is that I'm watching (and bumping) this thread daily, literally watching the clock, and there has been stretches of 4+ days with no updates or information forthcoming.
I realise that you have given out information freely when you have had it available.
I am being rather impatient here and I apologise, I realise it's as important for you to solve as for me to have it solved.

Obviously it's a tricky problem, thanks for keeping us in the loop.

[gadawg]

I have been following this issue ever since this post was first started and I have definetly lost some respect for Macromedia by the way they have handled this situation. It has been almost a month since this bug was found and they are just now putting up something on their website. They market Flash MX as having these new capabilities to dynamically load JPEG, MP3, & have video support, but if you try to implement these new features they really do not work because they might possibly crash an end users browser or computer. This was a major selling point for me and I am very dissapointed and upset that I wasted $200. One last question if someone just comes to your site out of the blue and you crash their browser do you think they will come back? The main reason I posted this is so I can stay updated about this issue, but I had to say something about the very unprofessional handling of this situation by MM.

[oldnewbie]

The bug's in the player! And the player is free!

Just a thought!

[webartisan]

I agree with gadawg and others that are dissatisfied with the way in which this situation has been handled by MM. I am also concerned about the impact that this bug will have on the user population, and more specifically how MM plans to deal with it.

While I understand that, "In most cases this will not affect performance", many developers have used the capabilities MARKETED by MM to create sites (in F5) that are currently made unusable by the F6 player.

The NUMBER ONE issue here is the distribution of the de-bugged player version (v.6.0r25+). Developers are a major channel by which the player is distributed; the fewer developers that post F6 player dependent swfs - the less the impact of penetration of the buggy player. As I am unaware of any other major distribution channels for this release (like including it in OS installs, etc.), it is imperative that the developer community be made aware of the problem that exists, and requested not to post F6 swfs until which time an updated player is available. The severity of this bug warrants not a reference in the obscure http://www.macromedia.com/v1/developer/SecurityZone/ but rather on the front page of http://www.macromedia.com/desdev/mx/flash/

In addition, and this should have been done within days of the confirmation of the bug by MM, an email describing the issue in detail should be sent out to all registered users of FMX, so that the penetration of the buggy player can be minimized.

I am hopeful that MM is aware of the disaster that could be created by the distribution of this player, and that they will take responsible measures to ensure that the developer community is brought up to speed. Perhaps the FMX Dev team is too busy trying to repair the bug to be bothered with informational releases related to the bug, however, each 6.0 ->6.0r23 player that is distributed is one more that needs to be replaced by the new version - and it is MM's responsibility to minimize this to the best of their ability. It is in this repect that those of us complaining feel that MM has, to date, failed.
[Edited by webartisan on 04-21-2002 at 11:11 PM]