Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I have a small but annoying problem...

 

Does anyone know why Firefox keeps telling me that I need to download the quick time (plugin) when I use Quicktime Alternative to play quicktime content?

Posted

Thomas, Firefox is configured to use Quicktime for Quicktime content. You can change this to use what ever application you want by going into the Tools | Options | Downloads. Find the ones wanting to use Quicktime and edit them to use what ever program you want.

Posted

Yup. Wont work.

I also noticed after posting my last post that pdf files are set to be open with Acrobat Reader but opens with some plugin named acroexch for some reason.

Posted

Thomas, go to mozillazine.org and search the forums to see if it's a known problem. If you can't find anything, post a new message about it.

Posted

Ok, back from the mozilla forums...

I did not ask "original" quicktime question. Instead I asked same problem but about PDF/Acrobat reader. The problem is identical, just not same program as quicktime, since I figured, why make things harder to explain by involving Quicktime Alternative.

The answer I was given was

Tools Menu -> Options -> Downloads?

Acrobat Reader Edit Menu -> Preferences -> Internet -> Display PDF in browser?

This makes me wonder "Will Firefox be as userfriendly as I.E for instance, if the user not only have to change settings in FF but in the other programs as well".

Posted (edited)

Thomas, that's Acrobat's fault, not Firefox's.

 

Do you need to set any "Display movie in browser" option for Quicktime or Flash? ;)

 

Besides, that "let me install everything and run everything for you, so you'll think I'm being friendly" thing IE likes to do is precisely one of the many things that makes it so insecure ;)

Edited by TCH-Raul
Posted (edited)
Besides, that "let me install everything and run everything for you, so you'll think I'm being friendly" thing IE likes to do is precisely one of the many things that makes it so insecure

True, but as a "normal" user I assume that whatever opens when I click on something in explorer will also run when clicking on same thing in a browser.

And that is what I mean. The normal user probably does not know half of the settings in the other programs to change it.

 

Addition: When reading above, remember the acrobat thing is just an example.

Edited by Jikrantz
Posted (edited)

I don't agree with that, Thomas.

 

"normal" users need to be educated. They don't need to become power users but they do need to know, for example, that they should not trust their browser to just open files from the internet without them knowing what the files are.

The fact that software makes life easier and easier everyday for "normal" users resuted in every type of user having to cope with slow networks due to massive computer virus outbreaks and other similarly unpleasent things. People need to know what they are doing with a computer. They don't need to be the next Steve Jobs, Bill Gates or John Carmack but they do need to have some basic knowledge. :dance:

 

 

As for the rest, what software exactly do you need to set up both in Firefox and in the software itself?

Edited by TCH-Raul
Posted

I agree on all that Raul.

But I dont think the average person who is 25, studying on some univeristy or something and only uses the computer to surf for school, check email, maybe filesharing, will not need to learn how to set file associations. Atleast not those who fits in the description above that I know.

 

As for what software I need to set up with FF... Pretty much everything actually. :)

I know now how to do it, but I expected FF to open PDF with Acrobat, and mov with Quicktime (alternative in my case), mp3 with winamp, as they are associated with those programs in explorer.

Posted

You're hitting the nail right on the head, Thomas.

 

Associating file types and programs is not hard, because if you don't know what a certain file type is, then you probably don't need it. If you know what that file type is, chances are that you already use those files with some other program (or at least know which program you should use) and then you can tell your browser "from now on, always open this type of files using that program".

 

Just because Windows is configured to open certain file types with certain programs, that doesn't mean your browser should do that too, because the stuff you have in your computer is supposed to be safe (you should know what you let in into your computer), while the stuff you download from the internet may not be safe.

 

That's why the browser should ask the user what to do, instead of being pre-configured with default actions. I wouldn't like my browser to open .doc files for me when I clicked them on a web page because I could get infected by a Macro virus. I also wouldn't want my browser to run an executable file for me just because I clicked it's link on a web site.

Posted

Agrees one hundred and one percent Raul :)

 

But lets make a great example and the reason I asked about quicktime in the original post.

 

The other day (day before I made my original post) I was visiting a site with audiobooks (or what its called in english). This site has preview links so I can preview a short clip from this audiobook. I click the preview link and in this case I think it was an mp3 file which should be associated with winamp in my computer. There is no plugin in FF for mp3´s as far as I can see. So I assume it will open automatically in winamp.

It does not. Instead a popup shows up telling me I need to download the latest Quicktime. Already here its weird that it tells me I need quicktime to play mp3 when I do it normally in winamp. But ok, I download quicktime. Reastarts whole process of logging in to the site and it tells me once again I need to download quicktime. At this point I am pretty mad because I want it to play it with winamp.

And that is my point (I think) that sometimes I already have to have the player associated to be able to preview.

In this very specific case it was a little more weird too, since I not only think it should not have needed quicktime but also that I dont dont use quicktime, but I use quicktime alternative (link further up in thread), but FF did not accept this either.

 

Confused? :lol:

I am too :lol: :blink:

Posted

Well, I don't know that well how Firefox works on Windows but I'd say that's the plugin finder (or whatever it's called) telling you there is a plugin available (quicktime) that will allow you to listen to that MP3 in Firefox.

 

Apart from that, one thing is the file-type->program association you do in Windows; another thing is the file-type->plugin you do in Firefox. They're completely separate things (or at least they should be).

 

So when Firefox sees a file-type it still doesn't know what to do with, it asks you if you want to download a plugin to be able to view it. That's all I can make of it. I never experienced something like you're describing. Then again, I don't use my browser to view any other file types except HTML, possibly with some Java Applet of Flash movie in it. A browser was made to browse the web. A PDF reader was made to read PDFs. An MP3 player was made to listen to MP3. I don't mix them all under the same roof :unsure:

Posted
A PDF reader was made to read PDFs. An MP3 player was made to listen to MP3. I don't mix them all under the same roof

Me neither usually, but apparently the developer for lyssnarklubben.se thinks we should. :D

Thanks anyway for taking the time and as always, you are the FF and Linux god, Raul :)

Posted

:D

I'm no god, I'm just a stubborn guy when it comes to computer stuff :) :(

 

As for the site, I couldn't see anything there that makes you use a specific program. Can you please point me to the page you're having problems with? I'd like to try and figure out what's wrong.

Posted

You need to be a member to get access to the previewlistening too I found out. :(

I read their fAQ today (skipped that before), and it says its just normal mp3´s so I dont understand why FF will need to quicktime. I know you probably explained it (Im too newly awake right now), but I still think it doesnt make sense that FF can not use a player already installed.

Posted

Firefox can use external players. It's just a matter of telling it to always open that file type with that program. But an external program is one thing, a plugin is another. Firefox should only offer to download plugins or sometimes it will see that you already have a certain program associated (on the OS) with that file type and will offer itself to launch that program and open that file.

Which is your case?

Posted

You sort of lost me now but my case is that FF ignores that I have programs installed and file types associated to them and instead tells me to use plugins or to download the proper one, which I should not need, correct?

Posted (edited)

Well, Firefox will only tell you to download a plugin if it sees an embedded file on the page. Like a Flash movie, or a Java applet.

 

The second case I mentioned (FF offering to use an external program to open a file) will only happen if you click a link to a file or if the server redirects you to it.

 

Otherwise, if the file is embedded on the page, FF will ask you if you want it to search for a plugin that can handle that type of files. If you say yes, FF will search Mozilla's online plugin database and see if it can find a suitable plugin. If there is one, it will ask you if you want to install it.

Edited by TCH-Raul
Posted

It will tell you that it couldn't find any plugin for that file type :)

 

In such case, you may still have some luck with a Google search for "firefox <file type> plugin", where <file type> is the type of the file you want to open in FF, of course ;)

 

Sometimes there are unofficial plugins that work great.

Posted (edited)

I will try that Raul ;)

Speaking of FF, when they release the "offical" 1.0 (Nov, 9 I think) do you think they release a "new" 1.0 or same stuff but with "PR" removed?

Edited by Jikrantz
Posted

IT will be new stuff, I guess. Bugs removed, code polished.

Well, to the regular user, it will probably be the same. But I'm sure they're still polishing some stuff, maybe adding a tiny feature... who knows? ;)

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...