FireFox 2 and Plug-ins

Can anyone explain the following oddity.

Using FireFox 2 on an XP box and attempting to access some Java content from a known site I get the option to install a plug-in.

Using FireFox 2 on a Vista box and accessing the same site, I do not even get to the option page as the browser hangs forcing me to close it an reopen. However, whenever I try on this box the browser hangs.

I have the Java virtual Engine installed because I can access the same site in Explorer 7 with no issues at all. Chrome requests a plug-in and Opera just goes ahead and installs it.

What is wrong with this installation of FireFox?

 

Upgrade to FF3. This should solve the problems.

 

Agreed, and that is the plan, but before i do I would like a clearer understanding of the issue.


Sad, I know, but that goes with an inquiring mind - or plain stupidity!

 

I also like to have an understanding of whats going on, but sometimes its just better not to ask

 

Installed FFX 3 and there is still a problem. How on earth can I get it to recognise a site that wants to download Java if I can't get to the plug-in page?

 

The Java Virtual engine is for Microsoft products. Refer to this article

 

The JRE, or whatever, is on the computer and IE works fine.


On FFX I apparently have the Java Platform SE6 Java Plug-in 1.6.0 installed. If it is disabled then I can get to the page wishing to download and the plug-in prompt appears. If it is enable the browser crashes.


Now, if I attempt to load the the software the report is that the Java Runtime Environment is not available and I have to use a manual installation.

Now, as I have the JRE how can I get FFX to9 load the plug in manually, and is the right thing to do.


Why is it manual and not automatic?

Perhaps I just don't visit Java enable sites in future.

 

If you type

in the Navigation toolbar, can you scroll down to the list of plugins, until you see:

, or whatever you have. The plugin is a link to the installed program.
I don't even know what is the significance of the automatic. I would never want to have anything happening automatically. Do you have something like Java(TM)6.x in your add/remove?

Note: I wrote out, the word colon, because something in this website makes ":" look weird.

 

"On occasions, you may want to prevent the text in your message being converted into smilies. You will see a checkbox which you can select when you make a new post, which will allow you to 'Disable Smilies'. "
http://www.windowsbbs.com/faq.php?faq=vb3_reading_posting#faq_vb3_smilies
on quick reply click go advanced, or click post reply to find this option. you can also enclose desired text wrapped in the code tag

Code:

about:plugins

to prevent conversion to a smilie.

now for java help see:
http://kb.mozillazine.org/Java

 

On occasions? I, never want the text to be converted to smilies? Not when it is in a middle of a word (more or less). Having said that could you tell me where the option is disabled? I have checked "No icon" at the base of post. Other than that I can't find anything. I have no idea what you are suggesting.
And, actually, I can do without smilies! There should be a simpler way!

I went to Advanced Options, and scroledl down, below the message box to find Miscellaneous options. The box in question is unchecked. I will try again: aboutluginsand the stupid thing is still showing up! If it is a joke, it is pretty tiring.

 

disable smilies

after the text field in the quick reply box, there is a button labeled Go Advanced or you can click on the Post Reply button below the last post in a thread and above the quick reply box. this takes you to the advanced reply box with font options at the top, smilies on the right, and the No icon option at the bottom. scroll down below the Submit Reply and Preview Post buttons to find the Additional Options which includes the check box for Disable smilies in text.

 

Thanks eisneun for the Java link. That helped me to resolve my issues and everything is now working fine.

 

aboutlugins
I was misreading the Miscellaneous options. Even if this works, why would this check mark be necessary? I don't know of any other website which does this.