On 7 February 2013 10:17, Gareth France <gareth.fra...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 07/02/13 10:14, alan c wrote: >> >> On 07/02/13 10:03, Gareth France wrote: >>> >>> On 07/02/13 10:01, Colin Law wrote: >>>> >>>> On 7 February 2013 09:52, Gareth France <gareth.fra...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On 06/02/13 23:41, Philip Stubbs wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On 6 February 2013 23:05, Gareth France <gareth.fra...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> To the best of my knowledge I wasn't using Adobe Air at the time. And >>>>>> as >>>>>> for Flash, of course I don't choose how others design their sites. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> But you can choose what software to run on your computer. Have you >>>>> tried a >>>>> flash blocker? Or a different browser? Or a different version of the >>>>> flash >>>>> plugin? If you open the same tabs in Chrome, does it behave >>>>> differently? I >>>>> seem to remember that Chrome comes with its own flash plugin, so may >>>>> well be >>>>> worth a try. It could be that the new machine hits a bug in the flash >>>>> plugin >>>>> that the old machine did not. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Philip Stubbs >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Yes, I can choose not to use flash in much the same way as I can choose >>>>> to >>>>> drive my car without wheels! It's an unfortunate fact of life that some >>>>> of >>>>> the websites I use require it. I can try chrome and see how it goes. >>>> >>>> Your first priority is to identify what is causing the problem. If >>>> you install flashblock then you have the ability to choose when you >>>> use flash. Initially do not use it at all and see if that cures the >>>> speed issues. Having identified that flash is the problem (if you do) >>>> then you can decide on the best course of action. >>>> >>>> Colin >>>> >>> Sounds like a plan. I'll give it a go and see what happens. >> >> >> I routinely use noscript in firefox. It gives a lot of control, and you >> can disable it when you wish >> > Thanks Alan. I think the thing that gets to me is that aside from whatever I > may choose to run on it I expect a machine I paid £300 for to run properly > to begin with. None of these solutions address the problem. They more sort > of side step it. I doubt I'm going to find the problem, I'll just have to > avoid Packard Bell next time I upgrade.
I don't think you can blame Packard Bell yet. If, for example, it turns out that you are using a buggy or out of date flash plugin (just one of the possibilities) then that is hardly their fault. I think it most unlikely that it is a hardware issue. Colin -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
