Jump to content

Welcome to MSFN Forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. This message will be removed once you have signed in.
Login to Account Create an Account


Photo

Question - Best Flash Player Version For XP ?

- - - - -

  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1
monroe

monroe

    Friend of MSFN

  • MSFN Sponsor
  • 898 posts
  • OS:XP Pro x86
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator

I see today there is a new version of flash player again ... Flash Player 14.0.0.125. I would just like to hear from others what version of flash player they are currently using with their XP setup. Have you been updating with these newer versions or have you elected to stay with an older version, say from the 10x or 11x series?

 

I have XP with IE8 installed and my last flash player version is 13.0.0.214  which seems to be the last version of the 13x series with today's new 14x release.

 

I have a Pentium M - 1.6 but Adobe says the system requirements are:

 

* 2.33GHz or faster x86-compatible processor, or Intel® Atom™ 1.6GHz or faster processor for netbooks

 

... the whole requirement block.

 

Microsoft® Windows®

 

* 2.33GHz or faster x86-compatible processor, or Intel® Atom™ 1.6GHz or faster processor for netbooks

 

* Microsoft® Windows® XP (32 bit), Windows Server 2008 (32 bit), Windows Vista® (32 bit), Windows 7 (32 bit and 64 bit), Windows 8 (32 bit and 64 bit), or Windows Server 2012 (64 bit)

 

* Internet Explorer 8.0 or later, Mozilla Firefox 17 or later, Google Chrome, or Opera 11

 

* 512MB of RAM (1GB of RAM recommended for netbooks); 128MB of graphics memory

 

Flash Player 13.0.0.214 seems to work OK on my setup but I am not sure how to tell if it is the best version for me to be using ... or going back to an "older" version.

 

thanks ...


Edited by monroe, 10 June 2014 - 08:35 AM.



How to remove advertisement from MSFN

#2
vinifera

vinifera

    <°)))><

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 961 posts
  • OS:Windows 7 x86
  • Country: Country Flag

if it works ok, don't revert to older

especially since older have quite some bugs


If you want true Windows user experience
try Longhorn builds: 3718, 4029, 4066

#3
monroe

monroe

    Friend of MSFN

  • MSFN Sponsor
  • 898 posts
  • OS:XP Pro x86
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator

In my earlier post I may have been wrong that FP v13.0.0.214 was the last 13x version with the 14x version being released today. I just came across a list showing the versions that were released today (June 10th) ...

 

# (Released 6/10/2014) Flash Player 14.0.0.125 (159 MB)

# (Released 6/10/2014) Flash Player 13.0.0.223 (149 MB)

# (Released 6/10/2014) Flash Player 11.2.202.378 (32.03 MB)

# (Released 5/13/2014) Flash Player 13.0.0.214 (149.10 MB)

 

I admit that I am now thoroughly confused ... there is a version 13.0.0.223 that was also released today. I thought FP v14.0.0.125 was the next "new" version but I don't know why version 13.0.0.223 was also released today.

 

Flash Player Archives

 

http://helpx.adobe.c...r-versions.html

 

 

Extra: I just found this minutes after I posted ... I guess FP v13.0.0.223 must be ...

 

Extended Support Release - Flash Player 13.0.0.223


Edited by monroe, 10 June 2014 - 03:36 PM.


#4
Ponch

Ponch

    MSFN Junkie

  • Patrons
  • 3,261 posts
  • OS:none specified
  • Country: Country Flag

The experts at Adobe will probably say that the last version is the best choice.Unless you have specific issue, it is difficult to say something else..



#5
vinifera

vinifera

    <°)))><

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 961 posts
  • OS:Windows 7 x86
  • Country: Country Flag

if 9 supported youtube HD i'd stay on it

somehow 10 and above became bloat


If you want true Windows user experience
try Longhorn builds: 3718, 4029, 4066

#6
nostaglic98

nostaglic98

    Junior

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 51 posts
  • OS:Windows 7 x64
  • Country: Country Flag

if 9 supported youtube HD i'd stay on it

somehow 10 and above became bloat

 

Flash IS bloat.

 

Waste of CPU cycles and INCREDIBLY inefficient. Its part of the reason why processors are getting more powerful - since no-one is bothering to write software that isn't glitchy and inefficient (i.e. Windows, Photoshop)



#7
dencorso

dencorso

    Adiuvat plus qui nihil obstat

  • Supervisor
  • 5,842 posts
  • OS:98SE
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator

When you 1st posted your question, monroe, I had no answer for it, because I hadn't, then, yet tested the newer Flash version.

But, now, I've already tested it (and actually remain using it), so I can tell you confidently I see no reason at all to avoid updating to Flash Player 14.0.0.125.

You're quite right, Flash Player 13.0.0.223, the Extended Support Release, also exists and it *is* an altenative, to be used were there any reason not to upgrade... but it's not actually needed at this time, IMO.



#8
monroe

monroe

    Friend of MSFN

  • MSFN Sponsor
  • 898 posts
  • OS:XP Pro x86
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator

Thanks dencorso for the information concerning the new 14x version. Until you posted I had made the decision to stop with the last 13x version ... 13.0.0.214 ... everything seems to be working OK but I will put the new 14x version on my setup ... I have read for years that some people were staying with older versions because of the CPU cycles and such ... I have the last versions of 10x and 11x stored away to use with XP if I decide to go back one day.

 

The 13x versions seemed to be working but with any newer versions ... I wasn't sure if they would still be OK with XP.

 

I am saving the last 13x version to return to, should it become necessary one day.

 

You and others know how to measure some of these programs with CPU usage and other criteria ... I pretty much just search around to see if others are complaining about a certain version and going back to an older version.

 

thanks again ...


Edited by monroe, 13 June 2014 - 06:10 AM.


#9
vinifera

vinifera

    <°)))><

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 961 posts
  • OS:Windows 7 x86
  • Country: Country Flag

 

if 9 supported youtube HD i'd stay on it

somehow 10 and above became bloat

 

Flash IS bloat.

 

Waste of CPU cycles and INCREDIBLY inefficient. Its part of the reason why processors are getting more powerful - since no-one is bothering to write software that isn't glitchy and inefficient (i.e. Windows, Photoshop)

 

 

you can say that case with any non compiled app

anything made in scripts (flash, java) or stupid MS .net is waste of cpu cycles and unoptimized crap

 

but who will listen ?


Edited by vinifera, 13 June 2014 - 08:35 AM.

If you want true Windows user experience
try Longhorn builds: 3718, 4029, 4066

#10
monroe

monroe

    Friend of MSFN

  • MSFN Sponsor
  • 898 posts
  • OS:XP Pro x86
  • Country: Country Flag

Donator

Vinifera ... you bring up a good point with .NET Framework ... I only have .NET 2.0 on my setup, decided to stop there. Every so often I find a program that I would like to have on my XP setup but it requires .NET Framework, most of the time I am lucky that .NET 2 will be enough.

 

Perhaps that could be a "problem" someday that I might need all the newer versions of .NET installed but I have no plans to ever go beyond .NET 2. I am not sure about flash player ... I don't see .NET listed as a requirement for flash player:

 

Flash Player Requirements

 

Microsoft® Windows

 

* 2.33GHz or faster x86-compatible processor, or Intel® Atom™ 1.6GHz or faster processor for netbooks

 

* Microsoft® Windows® XP (32 bit), Windows Server 2008 (32 bit), Windows Vista® (32 bit), Windows 7 (32 bit and 64 bit), Windows 8 (32 bit and 64 bit), or Windows Server 2012 (64 bit)

 

* Internet Explorer 8.0 or later, Mozilla Firefox 17 or later, Google Chrome, or Opera 11

 

* 512MB of RAM (1GB of RAM recommended for netbooks); 128MB of graphics memory


Edited by monroe, 13 June 2014 - 11:11 AM.


#11
vinifera

vinifera

    <°)))><

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 961 posts
  • OS:Windows 7 x86
  • Country: Country Flag

flash was only example regarding Action Scripting, which also eats cpu cycles

 

regarding .net, i'm on win 7 and also have only barebones which is .net 2 (SP2)

and I never plan to install any higher

 

in fact the only thing good comming our way is QTframework

which unlike piece of s*** .net framework, runs fast exactly because it is COMPILED via c++

and not some s*** a** JIT


Edited by vinifera, 15 June 2014 - 06:57 PM.

If you want true Windows user experience
try Longhorn builds: 3718, 4029, 4066




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users



How to remove advertisement from MSFN