DL & install of Flash Player

[quisizyx]

Greets-  I sincerely thimpk that IT people are going brain dead. I seem to see web site after web site with strange or just plain stupid designs.  My favorite is  login page that has ID & password fields but the text cursor is NOT already in the ID field.  Seeing as how there is not anythang else 2 do on a login page why do U have 2 click in the ID field first B4 you start typing?  What the heck else R U there 4?

    In this case it is about the choice 2 NOT install Tool Bar & Chrome.  Have Chrome, don't want it DLed & installed again.  I have browsers the way I want them.  Don't want fracking tool bars.  Use mostly a realitively slow notebook most of time when surfing iNet.  This means small screen real estate, slow clock cycles compared to latest new offerings, & limited mem expansion.  Don't need lot'sa stuff eating overhead by running in the background.  Don't need lot'sa tool bars & other garbage (BHOs) engorging my browser header reducing the window that displays what I want 2 C.  It's just stuff that I would have 2 uninstall &/or remove.  This frags the Registry & eats my time.

    When notice of update for Flash Player popped up I connected 2 iNet & told it go.  It opens IE & goes to Adobe site.  Now here is where, in their infinit wisdom, that people decided to do different from the industry standard.  Instead of asking the install question of the Chrome & Tool Bar in a requester box of installer it was on the web site.  It looked like an example of what to expect during an install when in fact  it was where U unselect Chrome & Tool Bar.  I didn't look that closely so missed this fact.  All other updates/installs I have done asks this question during install.  It took 2 attempts to finally find this, canceling the install both times to stop the Chrome/Tool Bar install.

    My question?  Why vary from what the public expects to do thangs diff?  IF going 2 do thangs diff then why not make it an obvious part of the page and NOT look like an example of what to expect during install.  It waisted 20 min of my time doing the DL & cancel, looking for contact info which doesn't exist (support@adobe.com?),& having 2 create an account so I can post in this "forum".  This started to B a quick no brainer action & ended up, including typing this, an hour & a half flail.  Flailing is indication of ineffeciency.  I was doing somethang else but that is delayed while I deal with this.  So again;  Why change from what is practically a generally & publicly accepted  industry standard for somethang confusing & essentially non-intuitive?  I'm extremely curious, please, why?

[C_F_McBlob]

This being a user-to-user forum, you've probably just wasted about five MORE minutes typing a post that nobody who makes corporate decisions (which ultimately determine website design policy) will ever see.

And It's NOT different from the industry standard. Don't believe it? Download VLC Media player, or Java. BOTH come with "sponsored" downloads as part of the install. Not just freeware either. Roxio Media Creator ($99.99) and Corel WinDVD ($49.99) BOTH offer other "free trials" in their installers.

If you think this will go away simply by you (or everyone for that matter) complaining or even threatening a boycott, you're sadly mistaken. This practice is only going to become more prevalent with time.

The so-called "blind installs" during updates HAVE BEEN reported and hopefully, (no guarantees) they will be either eliminated or given the "opt out" like the full downloads. Again, no guarantees.

I use Chrome for testing webpages, and I've never used their awful toolbar, nor have I ever used McAfee Security Scan, because I've tested McAfee products and they're more like the viruses they're supposed to  protect people from.

In the future I'd recommend NOT updating through website links and ONLY through the Adobe offline installer (which DOESN'T come bundled with other "junkware")

http://helpx.adobe.com/flash-player/kb/installation-problems-flash-player-windows.html#main-pars_hea...

[quisizyx]

Greets- I wasn't complaining about added stuff, this is not new 2 me, have

seen it many times B4... was complaining about opting out of

added stuff. Most DLs I have done have the opt out in a requester box of

the installer. I was in a hurry & the little window on the page looked

like an example of what to expect during DL & install. After 2 attempts I

finely noticed that it was on the web page, NOT an example of what

U would C during install. All of which was in the text I left in the

forum.

As 2 the people seeing it that need 2 C it.... I looked 4 some direct

contact such as support@adobe.com & didn't find it (which was also

mentioned in the post). The only thang I could find was a place the site

suggested that the best way 2 contact would B thru the forum, so thus the

post.

I wouldn't call this a "blind" install but definitely non-intuitive as

the unselect is on the page & not in a requester box of the install.

I update thru web site links because that is what the Flash auto-update

does. B4 it was fine until this update. They must have recently changed

the update process as I never had to uncheck on the web site to

opt out of extra garbage. If they R going to change stuff then they should

make it obvious. DO NOT put it in a graphic that looks like a window that

is an example of what U will C during a DL. If it had been in a section of

plain text w/out any border or "window" around it I would have read it & no

huhu. It would negated all the flailing. Intuitive. Given the experience

I will now B looking 4 this @ adobe & other sites.

Also will possibly turn off the auto-update & do as U suggested &

do it manually. I do windows updates manually as I hate thangs that flail

in the background w/out my knowledge. If somethang barfs during DL/install

then I have better chance of fingering out what happened if I C it as it

happens instead of relying strictly on windows log files. I had been using

WhatChanged, HiJackThis, & a reg save file util regularly in between

updates & installs 2 keep track of changes in files & reg. Kind'a got

out'a the habit.

If U have a direct contact link then please send as when I encounter

this kind'a stuff I like 2 complain. If enuff people complain maybe

they'll listen. IT people sometimes don't thimpk about John Q. Public's

use of their process, new or otherwise.

quisizyx

[C_F_McBlob]

quisizyx wrote:

    If U have a direct contact link then please send as when I encounter

this kind'a stuff I like 2 complain.  If enuff people complain maybe

they'll listen.  IT people sometimes don't thimpk about John Q. Public's

use of their process, new or otherwise.

quisizyx

My experience (working at AOL - the worst in history for customer service - and Intuit - one of the best for customer service) is that, if it makes them or saves them money, unless EVERY LAST USER complains they won't change it. And AOL refused to change even after 34 million people left them. Adobe has more users than AOL ever did, so it ain't likely. I'm not prone to accepting unwanted stuff on my systems. My Windows and Mac OS's are "tweaked" in ways that no average user would ever imagine. I watch every download and install for stuff I don't want. I also spend an inordinate amount of time looking for "full installers" that don't come bundled with unnecessary and unwanted junk.
I'm with you on this, but I know that it isn't going to change.