This post is out of date: Please see the updated post on my new tech site–Green Mountain Geek
Adobe’s Flash plugin for Firefox has never offered the kind of quality performance that the equivalent plugin for Internet Explorer has but at least it handled most Flash based video fairly well. However, somewhere around the 14th of April the nightly builds of Firefox 3 began to seize up on websites that incorporated any sort of Flash based media at all be it video, images or advertisements. Sites that I had been able to view previously would lock up the browser completely and only a “Kill Process” via the Windows XP Task Manager would stop the CPU from having conniption fits about being maxed out at 99%.
This was annoying to say the least and more than troubling. What had been a consistently rock stable, memory friendly new version of Firefox was now no longer able to handle Flash based media? Off to the forums I go along with several other testers and early adopters as I found out when I got there.
Strangely enough I had had the presence of mind to test these sites using Opera 9.5 beta which I keep around for testing website rendering issues between browsers and all the sites that were killing the nightly builds were showing fine in Opera. Since Opera and Firefox use the same plugin this told me that something had changed in the nightly builds that was causing this problem. And since I’m not familiar with programming (yet, can’t teach an old dog new tricks? Watch me), it was up to convincing the Dev’s that this was indeed a serious problem.
I’ve got to hand it to the developers at Mozilla, the problem had been filed on 4/20/08 as a new bug, verified and confirmed and set as blocking Gecko 1.9 meaning Firefox 3. After only a couple days of digging around the code base of the latest nightly builds the developers at large found the problem and had it solved as of yesterday’s update for Minefield (name for any developer’s build of Firefox). Just a bit impressive if you ask me.
Certain types of Flash based media still comes up choppy and dropping frames as usual but that’s more due to the inherent problems of the Flash plugin for Firefox and Opera than anything browser related. I’m just glad that Firefox 3 is back to being a class act.
And kudos to the Dev’s at Mozilla. Nice work folks!
Possibly Related posts
Tags: Adobe Flash, Firefox, Firefox 3
May 26th, 2008 at 5:20 am
Hello,
I also experienced bugs with flash player for firefox 3. Especially with flash video. It freezes on the 2nd sec. and has no audio at all. I found an old version of the plug-in on adobe’s site which was only for dev’s testing purposes. That problem went away after installing it, but as you said - it’s still choppy and dropping frames. Very impressive reaction time on mozilla, thought…
May 26th, 2008 at 1:34 pm
@RAT (welcome!): It’s been pretty impressive all around as to what Mozilla has manage to accomplish with version 3. The browser performs amazingly well and beats anything currently out there.
I’m using the beta version of Flash 10 but with either 9 or 10 I still find some Flash videos running choppy, dropping frames and driving my CPU to 100% while others run without a hitch. I suppose it all amounts to how the video is embedded and how it was initially coded. There’s also a lot of fault to be laid on Adobe’s doorstep. The Flash plugin for Firefox and Opera (same one) has always been poor quality while they focused all the QA on the plugin for IE. Here’s hoping Firefox 3 turns things around, ay?
May 29th, 2008 at 12:48 pm
I have been having about the same problem.
Firefix told me I needed the Flash Plugin for
FireFox 3 RC1.
I just tried to install flash the flash plugin and
it looks like it installs, but when FireFox restarts
It keeps saying I need the plugin.
And I did not see any flash application under
options, applications.
You would think that Firefox would get the download plugin right and
installed.
Anyway, I tried the link:
http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/flashplayer10.html
And and all of a sudden the flash was working on Firefox3.
And now I a flash application under options, applications.
What gives here ?
June 5th, 2008 at 11:21 pm
Interesting article. . .
I’ve always had issues with flash plugin, although I’m still running Firefox 2. When I downgraded flash player to an earlier version (5 I think) I got less hangs, but they never entirely disappeared.
When I visited a completely flash-based site tonight (which required flash player 8 or later)
the flash content seemed very “clunky” and slowloading, even though I installed flash player 9.
Then, later I got the dreaded:
FIREFOX caused an invalid page fault in
module NPSWF32.DLL
. . .at another site.
Whether this issue is related specifically to the one mentioned in the article above is hard to determine. I guess upgrading to Firefox 3 with flash player 9 might fix the bug, but generally, I am pretty sure this issue hasnt been fully resolved by either Adobe or Mozilla Development Teams to date.
To be fair to Adobe & Mozilla, I’ll post back here after testing Firefox 3 and Flash Player 9 (or 10) - If anyone is interested?
June 6th, 2008 at 8:28 am
@Randall Glass:
Now that’s a bit weird. I too am using version 10 (beta) of the Flash plugin which works as you said but I had previously been using the latest version 9.x with no problem. It could depend on what extensions you have in installed (maybe) or it could be platform dependent (more likely). I’m currently running Windows XP Pro SP3 so I can’t say for Vista, OSX or Linux. Glad version 10 worked for you though.
June 6th, 2008 at 8:49 am
@_writer:
From what I’ve been seeing at the Mozillazine forums (Firefox builds) and Bugzilla over the past several months, associated with some considerable research on my own, it appears that the Firefox devs have done everything they can to clear up the Flash bugs on their end. The real problem lies in the (mostly admitted) fact that Adobe’s Flash plugin for IE is the only one that has had any serious work and QA done to it over a long period of time. It’s been carefully streamlined to work as well as possible in Internet Explorer. By comparison, the Flash plugin for Firefox and Opera (same one) is a cobbled together mess that’s mostly ignored in favor of the one for IE and the difference in performance in the field is blatantly obvious.
My take on the whole thing is that unless Firefox makes significant strides in overall usage where it’s worth it for them to invest more into development, Adobe is not going to bother with the additional cost and man-hours of improving the Firefox/Opera Flash plugin for browsers they don’t consider “mainstream”. Unfortunately, it’s the difference between Open Source and non-open source development of software. In non-open source development; if it ain’t worth the time and money…why bother?
So much for my opinion. And absolutely! Post your test results, I’d be very interested what you find out. Could you also include what platform you’re testing on and the extensions you’re running as well? That would give us a better idea what you’re findings may indicate.
June 8th, 2008 at 4:08 pm
Okay, Kirk M - Since you asked and kindly posted on the Flash Plugin issue in the first place, I’m an OS Dino still using Windows 98 SE (4.10.2222 A) running on a P2 with 64 MB RAM.
If software can run on my system, it can run on anything! Sorry, I never thought XP was worth the hype.
The OS “platform” factor you mention has got me thinking how well Adobe Flash cooperates with Old Win98 OS? RAT is right though, Firefox has always performed well in terms of “response times”. I guess thats like “memory load handling routines” - a significant factor on a 64 MB machine. Hard to get right in coding terms, but Mozilla sure goes that extra mile.
Anyway, I guess by “extensions running” you mean the plugins I have installed in Firefox 2?
Well, there are 17 in all, so I will post these here if you *really* want all 17, but for now here’s the flash plugin (I upgraded to Flash 9 tonight):
Shockwave Flash
File name: NPSWF32.dll
Shockwave Flash 9.0 r124
I retested this plugin by browsing http://www.doritos.co.uk on Firefox 2 (sorry its a commercial site) but since every part of it appears to be Flash-coded including its forms; it sure gives me a good idea how a browser is handling flash scripting.
Flash 9 & Firefox 2 didnt generate the dreaded IPF but since its an intermittant fault (and always was) I cant say this is an Extensive Flash 9 / Firefox 2 Test just yet. Curiously, Firefox 2 loads all the graphics *better* than MS IE V6 with Flash 9!
I tried downloading Firefox Version 3.0rc2 (windows) at:
http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/all-rc.html
No dice. Looks like Mozilla has gone the way of Adobe & MS and withdrawn support for Win98 Dinos like yours truly. (I cant really expect anything else with a 10 year old OS, right?) Although 3 cheers to Mozilla for supporting OS Dinos in Version 2.
Maybe its a deep irony the best software I find runs on Win 98 SE in 64 MB? (Rather than programs developed for XP & Vista!)
Hope I’ve helped, Kirk M. Let me know either way if you wish, I’ll post back here if required.
Regards, _writer.
June 11th, 2008 at 5:23 pm
flash plugin didn’t work for Firefox 3 RC3!!
June 11th, 2008 at 6:28 pm
@_writer:
Ah, Win98 and Firefox 2 is a whole different ballgame and one that has been over for awhile now although I can understand how easy it can be to become an OS dino.
Considering it’s going to be a bit difficult to get Windows XP Pro after June 30th for the average consumer, you might want to consider upgrading real soon here. It’s relatively cheap nowadays and don’t settle for less than a top end single core Intel or AMD processor (PC’s with those are dirt cheap) and absolutely no less than 1.0GB of memory (minimum requirements for Vista are a dual core processor with no less than 2.0GB memory…price is still reasonable). Take it slow getting used to a new OS…it takes awhile.
Thanks for posting your results. Looks like Firefox 2 and Flash are still working as it usually did. Any problems with Flash content and Firefox 3 is pretty much in Adobe’s side of the court. Version 10 is a bit better than the latest version of 9.0 but still needs work.
June 11th, 2008 at 6:34 pm
David,
Just so you know, you’re above statement doesn’t provide any info that can be used to find the cause of the problem. RC3 only included fixes for OSX and Windows and Linux users got the same build as RC2 if they attempted to download RC3:
(Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9) Gecko/2008052906 Firefox/3.0)
If you want help, please state your basic system specs and type of OS. Thanks.
June 12th, 2008 at 1:22 am
Hi Kirk M,
Thanks for your support for an old OS Dino! (An upgraded PC will be unavoidable soon but Microsoft wont be making an OS as easy to maintain as Win98 SE again, or maybe they will if I ask? )
Maybe I obsess over the Firefox/Flash Plugin fault? (Its almost like an old friend!) but I do like to solve Computing Mysteries.
… So I went digging round the Net (after reading your article & feedback) Stumbled on an Adobe Forum that has 50 or more complaints relating to Flash Crashes on various OS, browsers and plugin versions.
What amuses me is the number of different solutions attempted, including one guy resorting to reinstalling his sound card drivers … Go figure..?
I am beginning to wonder how OS & Browser-related this issue really is? Firefox and Flash work on many sites for me, most of the time. . . Its only certain sites that crash Firefox.
One techguy mentions flash plugin 9 passes an “illegal instruction” to some CPUs, including Intel Celeron & AMD K6-2. The instruction is called
PSHUFW and relates to SSE-1 “bit checking”. Flash 9 (ocx for sure) cannot determine correct CPU-type, so browser is forced to close.
Okay, I know ocx is the IE plugin, but it sure would explain why this plugin bug is so “elusive” (and why some PC users report no problems at all).
This flash cpu bug seems to tie in with your thoughts on Adobe, Kirk M. So I’m hoping what I just wrote constitutes progress.
. . Sorry its so “techie”!
Regards, _writer.
June 12th, 2008 at 10:05 am
@_writer:
“Techie” is no problem at all. I love techie which makes sense since I’m an old tech head from the Cold War era.
Glad you found some confirmation and I’m not surprised at all the so called “fixes” that probably never worked. It’s still boils down to the fact that a corporation like Adobe is not going to put a whole lot a of time, effort and $$$ into developing and QA-ing a plugin for anything other than IE for at least the near future (which makes absolutely no sense when you consider Firefox is in 2nd place and a close second just about everywhere else but the U.S.). Hopefully Firefox3 will change a few minds and the usage percentage will climb some. The higher it climbs, the more users will start banging on Adobe’s door.
BTW, if you manage to get a hold of an XP Pro machine, I think you’ll find that navigating your way around is just as easy as Win98 and even easier to manage. Besides making sure you do the usual house cleaning like defragging on a regular basis and making sure you empty out all your Temporary Internet files and such which is exactly the same as doing it in Win98, you’ll find that WinXP is easier to maintain than Win98 with little or no reboots needed just to recover resources.
And I don’t know about you but I never used any Win95, Win98 or WinXP system without installing good old “Crap Cleaner” (CCleaner) which has been around since Win95 first came out.
June 14th, 2008 at 2:37 pm
Hi Kirk M,
I had to smile at the phrase “Old Tech Head from the Cold War Era” - As a fiction writer, I’m sure there’s a bestseller waiting to be written about these experiences
Anyway, Firefox 2/Flash Plugin 9 (r124) seems to be running ok so far. The point about “resources” (under Win98) leads me to conclude flash-based sites would be less like watching treacle, if I had a cool 256 MB RAM in which to run Firefox! (P2 RAM is tricky to get, as it runs at 66Mhz, I think, rather than 100 Mhz)
I’m pretty sure only certain websites generate the IPF in Firefox by executing an invalid instruction sent by either Flash Plugin, or the flash script itself residing on the site. It’s also clear MS IE (6 at least) has the same flaw.
I did hear better things about XP Pro (rather than XP Home) when I worked as a PC Tech (Yes I am from the Cold War Era, too!)
But I sure didnt have much fun fault tracing on XP machines (misreporting device errors, unable to reinstall device drivers. . .) In comparison, Win 98 always struck me as having a straightforward interface. . . But I guess I’m speaking from a technician’s viewpoint.
Firefox have got their browser interface just right in my opinion. Mozilla Dev have increased functionality for modern net visitors with features like tabbing within one browser window and integrated popup blocker. Microsoft certainly didnt get this right with MS IE v6.
So, I guess I’ve got something to look forward to with Firefox 3 (though it looks like PCs are all being shipped with Vista now rather than XP Pro).
I sure do Defrag and “housekeep” regular, Kirk M with a P2 still running Win 98 SE (laughs). I even have a section on my web-blog about this topic, citing Firefox, cCleaner (or Webroot Window Washer) as improving ones “online experience”.
Since this is your webblog, rather than mine, I better stop plugging before I get carried away!
Kind Regards, _writer.
June 23rd, 2008 at 4:49 am
I’ve been running Firefox 3 and just couldn’t get any flash player installed:
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9) Gecko/2008052906 Firefox/3.0
the only thing that worked for me was to install the flash plugin and copy:
C:\WINDOWS\system32\Macromed\Flash\NPSWF32.dll
to this directory:
C:\Program Files\Mozilla Firefox\plugins
restart firefox and check installed plugins by browsing to about:plugins
HTH
Mike
July 11th, 2008 at 7:30 pm
This problem still exists, final release of Firefox 3, installed and unintalled and reinstalled flash and shockwave. No luck, still very choppy video and no audio.
July 11th, 2008 at 8:29 pm
Luke,
With Firefox 3.0 the problem solely exists on Adobe’s end of things as far as bringing the plugin up to the quality that the equivalent plugin for Internet Explorer has always had. Your problem is extreme though. Couple things you might try.
If you didn’t use the Adobe Flash uninstaller to uninstall the Flash plugin than you need to do this first before reinstalling the plugin. Using “Add/Remove Programs” no longer works properly as of the version 9.0 series. You can find the uninstaller at the Adobe website.
Make sure you do the stupid check and ensure you’re running the latest version (9.0 r124). You won’t know just by looking at the installer file name since it doesn’t include the version number.
Something else. A few folks who updated to Firefox 3 by installing over an earlier version end up with a corrupted profile which can cause the very symptoms you’re describing. If you think you might be one of these users my suggestion is to follow the procedure on my other website for completely uninstalling Firefox (after backing up your bookmarks of course) and then doing a fresh install. This is of course if you haven’t done this already.
http://www.greenmtngeek.com/20.....t-profile/
Note: This was written for Windows users but if you’re running a Mac or a Linux box I’m sure you can adjust accordingly.
Hope this helps some.
August 23rd, 2008 at 5:56 am
can I just add that before SP3 and FF3 everything was running fine for me… I then updated to SP3 and FF2 started to run flash content with the problems you mentioned, this made me update to FF3 and still the same…
August 25th, 2008 at 11:52 am
me,
The problem resides on Adobe’s side now and their refusal(?) to put as much effort into the Flash plugin for Firefox/Opera as they do for the IE version. For now, it’s something we just have to put up with until Adobe catches up.