Posted on 05/16/2016 10:03:47 AM PDT by dennisw
Google will soon close one more door on the Flash plugin in Chrome, requiring users to authorize each and every site where they want Flash to load, rather than running it automatically.
Google has detailed a proposal to make HTML5 the default in Chrome over Adobe's Flash Player.
If all goes to plan, by the fourth quarter of 2016 Chrome will not be using the Flash plugin for the vast majority of the web, and will only make an exception as the default media player for the world's top 10 sites that still rely on Flash.
For the time being, Flash will still be bundled with Chrome, but it will no longer automatically load Flash Player on sites that require it.
Instead, users will have to authorize each domain they wish to allow Flash to run on. That preference will be stored in Chrome, so that users don't have to authorize it again when they visit that particular domain in future.
Google outlined the plan in a presentation called 'HTML5 by Default', where it notes that the list of 10 excepted sites will expire after one year.
Presumably after that Chrome will not make any exceptions, meaning users will need to make a conscious choice of selecting each and every site for which they wish to load Flash.
The plan is the latest phase in a long-running effort by Google to move the web away from Flash, which is a constant source of vulnerabilities for desktop users.
Some of the risks from Flash have been reduced by bundling Flash with Chrome, which can force users to update Flash as soon as Adobe releases a patch.
Still, Adobe only last week patched its third zero-day flaw in Flash Player in the past three months, meaning that attackers had found a way to exploit a bug in Flash before Adobe had a patch for it.
Chrome began automatically pausing non-central Flash content on the web last year and Google has been pushing the online ad industry to adopt HTML5 instead of Flash for display ads. Last year it announced plans to go "100 percent HTML5" by January 2, 2017, when it will no longer run Flash display ads on its ad networks.
Adobe has also announced plans to move away from Flash and towards HTML5.
Google notes that in the new HTML5 by Default framework for Chrome, enterprises will have a policy setting for 'Always run Flash content'. Users will also have that option under Content Settings in Chrome.
headline should read:
“....10 LIBERAL Web Sites”
Apparently they are no longer supporting older OSS too like XP. Thankful for Firefox.
Hi hoe
Hi hoe
Can’t wait for the web to be a Flashless place. Then people can stop using PDF, and Adobe can just be flushed into the past where they belong.
When is Chrome going to provide an option to disable auto-play videos?
PDF is OK.... what don’t you like about it?
The only thin I’ll miss about Flash is ...Flashblock.
The format itself isn’t terribly efficient, it seems efficient because it’s better than Word, but that’s the kind of curve grading that let’s bad software seem good. And the Acrobat Reader is just plain a hunk of junk, bigger, slower and less stable every revision.
Good. They’ll lose even more customers.
Acroshat is NOT allowed on my machines.
Nowadays, I "print" pretty much everything to PDF in Chrome (in lieu of actually printing it).
That way, I don't have to mess with saved html - and I get everything that I want.
When I want to look at it, Foxit snaps it onto the screen.
Yep, Foxit is my main PDFer. Especially when I’m doing demos at work, Acrobat doesn’t support a low enough resolution to go through our (admittedly antique) projectors.
Drawback with HTML5 ads is there is no pop up blocker in the web browser that can stop the annoying popups.
Chrome loads PDFs lots quicker and surer than Firefox...... I use Foxit too for reading a saved PDF. It is a lighter program than Adobe Acrobat.
I like the PDF format...It is out of Adobe’s hands theses days. They don’t have a lock on it anymore.
Last I looked the Adobe Acrobat download was 70 or 90mb. All to read a stinkin PDF....and do other mischief.
I used to save webpages, but I didn't like the dissociation of the graphics files.
By printing to PDF, I get the pictures - and I can retrieve them individually from the actual webpage if I really want to.
What a RAM-sucking pig.
I just tried that out. Great little trick. I do "save" webs pages from time to time and I will do it this way sometimes. Saving a chrome webpage to PDF format. Tried it at Firefox...cannot do it that PDF way.
I use Firefox as primary browser and chrome for my #2. Firefox is less of a memory hog when you have say 25 tabs open across 4 browser windows. I have scrutinized Chrome and Firefox memory usage in Windows Task Manager and Firefox uses less memory.
One good thing about PDF is that any computer or mobile device can understand and read it right away. PDF has been around forever and IIRC it was the first format that you were easily able to get to print out the way it looked on the computer screen. WYSIWYG.
Now I see the Adobe Acrobat wiki and it has only been around since 1993. I thought it had been around since 1983.
If you really want to print to PDF from Firefox have a look at CutePDF Writer (free). It installs as a printer subsystem and you can print to PDF from any program.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.