Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

M$ plugins.

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Sjouke Burry

unread,
Feb 14, 2009, 3:18:19 AM2/14/09
to
Does anybody have a list of M$ plugins
which M$ has installed unasked in firefox ?

I suspect the ones listed here:

Adobe acrobat plugin version 6 for netscape
macromedia authorware web player Netscape plugin version 2004
microsoft drm netscape network object
microsoft drm store netscape plugin
realjukebox netscape plugin
adobe shockwave for director netscape plugin
Silverlight plugin

Ron Hunter

unread,
Feb 14, 2009, 3:25:17 AM2/14/09
to

Only The two drm plugins, and Silverlight are from Microsoft. The
others are from Real, and Adobe.


--
Ron Hunter rphu...@charter.net

Robert Strong

unread,
Feb 14, 2009, 3:27:04 AM2/14/09
to Firefox user help
Firefox searches in well known locations in the filesystem for plugins
and provides methods for plugins to install without asking so your
questions stating "which M$ has installed unasked in firefox ?" is
incorrect and misleading. All of those plugins you installed either used
the methods provided by Firefox to let Firefox know about them and
therefore use them or Firefox found them by itself.

btw: out of those plugins the only ones from Microsoft are


microsoft drm netscape network object
microsoft drm store netscape plugin

Silverlight plugin

the rest were likely installed using their respective company's installer.

Cheers,
Robert

> _______________________________________________
> support-firefox mailing list
> support...@lists.mozilla.org
> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-firefox
> To unsubscribe, send an email to
> support-fir...@lists.mozilla.org?subject=unsubscribe

Terry R.

unread,
Feb 14, 2009, 2:49:10 PM2/14/09
to
The date and time was Saturday, February 14, 2009 12:18:19 AM, and on a
whim, Sjouke Burry pounded out on the keyboard:

There are .NET plugins now also if you install version 3.5, which is a
combination of 2, 3, 3.5.

Of course that's overkill if no applications require it. If you have a
version of it installed, most likely an application installed it. So if
you're only using say, version 2, having the others installed isn't
needed. But of course MS is shoving the 3.5 down everyones network
cable in the WU/MS update.


Terry R.
--
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.

Tarkus

unread,
Feb 14, 2009, 2:56:09 PM2/14/09
to
Terry R. wrote:
> There are .NET plugins now also if you install version 3.5, which is a
> combination of 2, 3, 3.5.
>
> Of course that's overkill if no applications require it. If you have a
> version of it installed, most likely an application installed it. So if
> you're only using say, version 2, having the others installed isn't
> needed. But of course MS is shoving the 3.5 down everyones network
> cable in the WU/MS update.

How so? I only downloaded the updates after giving permission. And
there is an option to hide any update for which you're not interested,
so it won't ask again.

Terry R.

unread,
Feb 14, 2009, 3:59:14 PM2/14/09
to
The date and time was Saturday, February 14, 2009 11:56:09 AM, and on a
whim, Tarkus pounded out on the keyboard:

Do you REALLY think most users change their update settings? Only the
knowledgeable do it. If a computer only has version 2, WHY should MS
try to get 3 & 3.5 installed through WU? Even those WITH their settings
set to Notify would "assume" it's a needed update because MS tells them
they need it.

Ron Hunter

unread,
Feb 15, 2009, 4:34:53 AM2/15/09
to

It won't ask again, BUT it will remind you every time that you have
ignored 'important' updates.... Just like MS.


--
Ron Hunter rphu...@charter.net

Tarkus

unread,
Feb 15, 2009, 11:24:43 AM2/15/09
to
Terry R. wrote:
> The date and time was Saturday, February 14, 2009 11:56:09 AM, and on a
> whim, Tarkus pounded out on the keyboard:
>
>> Terry R. wrote:
>>> There are .NET plugins now also if you install version 3.5, which is
>>> a combination of 2, 3, 3.5.
>>>
>>> Of course that's overkill if no applications require it. If you have
>>> a version of it installed, most likely an application installed it.
>>> So if you're only using say, version 2, having the others installed
>>> isn't needed. But of course MS is shoving the 3.5 down everyones
>>> network cable in the WU/MS update.
>>
>> How so? I only downloaded the updates after giving permission. And
>> there is an option to hide any update for which you're not interested,
>> so it won't ask again.
>
> Do you REALLY think most users change their update settings? Only the
> knowledgeable do it. If a computer only has version 2, WHY should MS
> try to get 3 & 3.5 installed through WU? Even those WITH their settings
> set to Notify would "assume" it's a needed update because MS tells them
> they need it.

Users who are not knowledgeable are exactly the ones that NEED to have
MS hold their hands. Otherwise, they'd be a support nightmare.

Some programs require 3.5 (even SP1), and those less than knowledgeable
people would have no clue why they're not working.

Terry R.

unread,
Feb 16, 2009, 3:39:44 PM2/16/09
to
The date and time was Sunday, February 15, 2009 8:24:43 AM, and on a
whim, Tarkus pounded out on the keyboard:

> Terry R. wrote:
>> The date and time was Saturday, February 14, 2009 11:56:09 AM, and on a
>> whim, Tarkus pounded out on the keyboard:
>>
>>> Terry R. wrote:
>>>> There are .NET plugins now also if you install version 3.5, which is
>>>> a combination of 2, 3, 3.5.
>>>>
>>>> Of course that's overkill if no applications require it. If you have
>>>> a version of it installed, most likely an application installed it.
>>>> So if you're only using say, version 2, having the others installed
>>>> isn't needed. But of course MS is shoving the 3.5 down everyones
>>>> network cable in the WU/MS update.
>>> How so? I only downloaded the updates after giving permission. And
>>> there is an option to hide any update for which you're not interested,
>>> so it won't ask again.
>> Do you REALLY think most users change their update settings? Only the
>> knowledgeable do it. If a computer only has version 2, WHY should MS
>> try to get 3 & 3.5 installed through WU? Even those WITH their settings
>> set to Notify would "assume" it's a needed update because MS tells them
>> they need it.
>
> Users who are not knowledgeable are exactly the ones that NEED to have
> MS hold their hands. Otherwise, they'd be a support nightmare.
>

It still doesn't mean MS should install versions that aren't needed.
Users don't have an option on the 3.5 update to NOT install all the
components, which include 2, 3, 3.5 and related SP's. So if a user has
only v2, the others are added while not needed. That is a recipe for
disaster. I had many workstations on this last update get hosed on the
update and I had to remove ALL the versions and start over. It was a
pain. And there are quite a few reports in the MS newsgroups of it
happening, so it wasn't an isolated incident by any means.

> Some programs require 3.5 (even SP1), and those less than knowledgeable
> people would have no clue why they're not working.

Any program that requires .NET will include it on the install CD or a
link to it. If it's a download, you will be advised of installing the
version needed prior to install.

0 new messages