How can I install a Flash update without installing McAfee?

[cynodontia]

I have tried twice to install and have cancelled both times because it seemed that McAfee was installing. I have Norton installed and am happy with it. I don't object to Adobe's encouraging the use of a competing product, but I do insist on the freedom to decline, and I didn't see a way of doing it.

[Noghar]

I registered specifically to let this forum know I had an identical experience this morning.  Google asked me to update Adobe, I downloaded and ran install_flashplayer11x32_mssa_aih.exe, and was immediately presented with a box showing Flash updating AND MCAFEE QUICK SCAN INSTALLING.  I had been given no option to opt out, even though I already have an AV program running and apart from anything elsde two AV programs running in tandem can be disastrous. 

I cancelled that install, and ran the download and install again, thinking I had missed an opt-out box.  The only opitons I saw were to have Adobe update automatically, notify me first, or never update.  I had to Google specifically for the phrase 'update adobe flash without antivirus' to find the download for the clean install and it wasn't easy - I found this forum first. 

You might be interested to know I did NOT choose to let Adobe update automatically because for all I know it will install another redundant, unwanted av program while I am not looking.  Adobe's assurances to the contrary on thjis forum do not convince me, because most of the posts from Adobe here seem to be denying there is any problem and/or claiming it cannot be reproduced. 

I thought this crass and unprofessional shovelware approach had been discredited years ago.  It's the sort of crap I associate with Chinese pirates and trojan-writers.

[GIinOZ]

Right on.  They sould go back to the way Flashplayer was originally done as a standalone download that once downloaded installed from the location on the computer without any other trash, or internet activity.

If you wat a partners software provide links not force download and install.

Could not it be considered cyber rape, forced invasion, deliberate and wilfull damage of one's systems to have something forced into it without the users ability to opt out or stop unwanted items being installed?

Should not a fee be given to Adobe or any others for wasting space and recources, and potetial security breaches caused by conflicting Anti virus softwares?

[God_I_hate_Adon_tbe]

@GlinOZ:  What's the point - Flash is becoming quickly obsolete anyway.  HTML5 provides video and animation methods without the need to pay high prices for poor software.

[chris.campbell]

@qwerty6054 - As I mentioned in my last post, I've forwarded the info along to the team responsible.  If reproducible bugs are found, I'm happy to follow up but I don't anticipate any fundamental changes to the way we do our major updates.  I haven't responded to this thread because I don't have anything additional that I can contribute.

As a heads up, the next major release will be Flash Player 11.8, currently scheduled for July.  This release will trigger the update notification dialog.  Your update options are explained in the FAQ below.

Flash Player installation and update questions and answers

For those that have experienced an update without the option to "opt out" in the past, please take note of this.  Record your update experience in detail (ie. screenshots or video of the update dialog, webpage displayed, etc) and if it occurs again, please create a new forum post and someone will follow up.

[God_I_hate_Adon_tbe]

Why does Adobe Flash Player installer include the option to download additional software?

Adobe offsets the ongoing development costs of Flash Player, which is made available for free, by offering users the option to download select software from Adobe partners.

I did notice this section in the FAQ link that you sent us, Chris.  But, that's not entirely true, is it?  Isn't there an editor to allow you to create Flash content?  In which case, isn't the cost of developing Flash Player, which just happens to be an inherent part of the Flash editor, actually offset against the exhoritant price of the said editor?...

[ReactionAtWork]

"Adobe offsets the ongoing development costs of Flash Player, which is made available for free, by offering users the option to download select software from Adobe partners."..

What a load of rubbish!  So a multi-billion dollar company cannot afford to develop one of its 'free' products from the proceeds of its other obscenely overpriced paid-for products?  Are we all to bow down and thank Adobe profusely for being so lucky to be given such free software, and then thank them again for being tricked into installing unwanted crapware?

As usual, Adobe insult their customers with ridiculous mealy-mouthed excuses for their endless cash grabbing (e.g. Adobe Cash Cow).

[C_F_McBlob]

ReactionAtWork wrote:

"Adobe offsets the ongoing development costs of Flash Player, which is made available for free, by offering users the option to download select software from Adobe partners."..

What a load of rubbish!  So a multi-billion dollar company cannot afford to develop one of its 'free' products from the proceeds of its other obscenely overpriced paid-for products?  Are we all to bow down and thank Adobe profusely for being so lucky to be given such free software, and then thank them again for being tricked into installing unwanted crapware?

As usual, Adobe insult their customers with ridiculous mealy-mouthed excuses for their endless cash grabbing (e.g. Adobe Cash Cow).

You've obviously never run a (profitable) business in the United States, but that's beside the point.

While there are a few (limited few) Adobe employees here in the forums from time to time, most of us (myself included) are just Adobe customers like you are. We don't have "ridiculous mealy-mouthed excuses" for "endless cash grabbing" because we neither run, nor work for, the company.

I personally witnessed a "no opt out" install of McAfee Security Scan during and update test two nights ago. I was deliberately looking for it and was able to screen shot it. One of the VIP members here submitted a report to DEV detailing the situation and included my screen captures, but as fellow users, that was and is, the best we can do.

I don't like anything installing that I didn't select or have the opportunity to opt out of and missed. However, I DO understand as a webmaster, that bandwidth costs money. So does development and updating of products that NOBODY who is downloading them... pays for. VLC Media Player, Opera. Chrome, hundreds of others... all offset their costs by using "sponsored downloads". The ONLY alternative to this is that you pay $10 or more every time you need to update so you can play "Farmville" on Facebook or watch the "cat that plays the piano" on YouTube. I don't want that any more than you do.

[God_I_hate_Adon_tbe]

C F McBlob wrote:

I don't like anything installing that I didn't select or have the opportunity to opt out of and missed. However, I DO understand as a webmaster, that bandwidth costs money. So does development and updating of products that NOBODY who is downloading them... pays for. VLC Media Player, Opera. Chrome, hundreds of others... all offset their costs by using "sponsored downloads". The ONLY alternative to this is that you pay $10 or more every time you need to update so you can play "Farmville" on Facebook or watch the "cat that plays the piano" on YouTube. I don't want that any more than you do.

Bandwidth is like anything else, the more you buy the cheaper it gets.  Some companies (like some of Adobe's associates) will actually provide the bandwidth required at astonishingly reasonable rates.  Let's face it, money attracts money, therefore bandwidth is no problem for Adobe.  Once again, as I stated in an earlier post, the cost of developing this software can easily be offset against the cost of developing the editing suite, especially as the greater chunk of the software is contained within the application.

Adobe have no excuse, really, for bundling leechware within their installers, especially if you have no opt out.  In the cases you present, such as Opera and VLC Media Player, what do you expect?  These are free products from companies that specialise in just that - your point is completely invalid there.

Google; their primary product is advertising, selling information and their search engine, so they are in the same boat as Adobe, really, and so have no excuse for attempting to palm off software in this manner.  Christ!  They don't even pay their taxes properly in England ... or in America.

The only driver in this whole show is pure, unadulterated greed.  In my humble opinion, I don't think there are any positives here that will convince anyone in this particular thread that Adobe packaging up extra software with their 'free' products is a good thing.

[ReactionAtWork]

@mandelbrot:  That just about sums it up perfectly.  In much the same way, do Oracle need to add that pesky check box to install the 'Ask toolbar' every time they release a Java update?  Adobe knows perfectly well that most people (as with the Java updates) will be trying to click through the update process as quickly as possible, since it is just an essential chore to be cleared, not a carefully considered software installation. They'll accidentally 'accept' the extra software and, I guess, Adobe gets a cut from McAfee.

[C_F_McBlob]

Well, you always have the option to switch to Linux and then you don't have to deal with all the "crapware" that can't be added to downloads because it doesn't run on the OS.

[God_I_hate_Adon_tbe]

LOL!  That's not a bad idea!

-- EDIT --

Just noticed a sleight mistake in my previous post, there, I said:

Once again, as I stated in an earlier post, the cost of developing this software can easily be offset against the cost of developing the editing suite, especially as the greater chunk of the software is contained within the application.

What I should have said was:

Once again, as I stated in an earlier post, the cost of developing this software can easily be offset against the revenue generation from developing the editing suite, especially as the greater chunk of the software is contained within the application.

[qwerty6054]

It's not a "bug" we're criticising.

It's a business decision and relationship destroying one at that, that we are criticising.

So in essence, your answer is that yes we're correct that Adobe have chosen to package this crap-ware mcaffee home user product (in my opinion), despite strong rebuff from professionals, and will continue to do so ... by proxy, and virtue of not having "anything additional that I can contribue"

In which case ... i really do hope the fiscal kickbacks Mcaffee and flowing McAffee's way are worth the damage you're doing to customer base and reputation.

The offset of cost (ie fiscal gain mentioned above) is a furphy given you charge for flash development.  Likewise with Adobe Reader vs Acrobat Pro. 

If you guys can't make a profit without using an inclusion like McAffee AV insidiously packaged, then you have a real serious grave issue.

Choosing not to respond directly to the root cause of these complaints, when we know you recieve notifications of replies, is your acceptance that the above is entirely true but choose not to acknowledge it to us.

[John_Probert]

I don't understand all the technicalities of the dialogue here, so if I say I want to keep it simple, I hope it won't appear simplistic. To me, there are two issues: (a) Flash upgrade installation provides the option to install McAfee, with the tickbox defaulted on; (b) some people, including myself, have managed to install McAfee accidentally, either by missing the tickbox, or, as I and others believe, by not having the tickbox appear at all, which would appear to be a bug.

Regarding (b) first, I recognise the request to provide evidence is reasonable, but wouldn't you agree that it's slightly difficult to provide evidence that something is not there, that something is not happening? Are you expecting us to record every screenshot in our next upgrade process just in case something hasn't appeared that you think should have? Surely "the team responsible", in response to so many comments that it doesn't appear, would at least have done a thorough test on the various upgrade processes? Or is that a pipe-dream?

Then regarding (a). Surely every self-respecting user has security software installed. And even a novice such as myself knows that security/antivirus packages are frequently incompatible with each other. So why would anyone ever want to tick that box? So why is it being offered? - apparently because Adobe have made some commercial arrangement with McAfee which is just unrealistic.

Am I missing something basic here? If I'm not, then surely you should take on board what people are telling you and feed it back to "the team responsible", and if "the team responsible" don't agree, tell us why they don't agree, and if we don't find that acceptable, surely you should escalate it above "the team responsible"?

[God_I_hate_Adon_tbe]

Very succinct, John, you've hit the proverbial nail.

[GIinOZ]

@mandelbrot: Hi thanks for reminding me of HTML5 is coming ..... coming..... oh well one day .

I guess the fact is that Adobe by nature like others are dictators forcing stuff on people and they like it like that.

I finally found what appears to be a standalone download (hmm not trusting Adobe any more they claim it does not have any extras either.)

I will run it later on notebook not connected to internet and see.

By the way I totally agree with your points and your one to Chris Campbell dated Jun 20 2013 12:52AM.

It proves beyond any doubt that FlashPlayer is free to users because of the exorbitant price they charge for the editor, as they have to provide a way for those that use the editor to reach it's target  audience failure to do so would result in a massive class action by those whom purchased the editor.

Thus Adobe want to maximise profit by forcing so called partner software on all its end users.

You can see this by the way Chris is avoiding answering the questions of this topic.

Now a new release is coming to bury this topic.

However the link Chris gives clearly shows that the AV is clearly selected by default again so if you have a problem and it starts to download you get the intended crap you may not want.

Adobe clearly do not care about us so HTML5 put this Adobe product and all that do similar down the loo with the rest of the po..

One day someone at Adobe may figure out that default downloading stuff damages their reputation

doubt that will happen in my  lifetime.

mandlebrot keep up the good work pitty Adobe don't understand or rather are ignoring what your saying.

[chris.campbell]

@sjfaust - What you saw was as designed.  By default this checkbox is checked.

[Xebecer1]

It never gave me the option of unchecking. And, it shouldn't be designed that way. But, thanks so much for your brilliant insight.

William McDermet

4 Second Street

Ipswich, MA

[John_Probert]

I seem to have started what was a dormant thread going again, as a result of which I am getting seemingly endless emails full of invective about Adobe's inclusion of a McAfee product in an installation with limited, or no, option to remove it. I was asked to provide evidence that this was happening, and I think subsequent emails indicate that it's happening when the desirability of a Flash upgrade is flagged up to an existing user, i.e. when the user is asked to upgrade rather than seeking to do so. Thus it's quite a difficult thing for such a user to replicate and demonstrate - it is in my case, anyway. It seems to me that you as Adobe representative are doing your best to defend what is probably a mistake, but surely by now you have enough evidence to track this down in your installation scripts. I tend to agree that if there is an agreement with McAfee to install their product with Flash, that agreement should either be terminated or made transparent. I can't be bothered to spend time finding alternatives to useful Adobe products, and I suspect most of your users are in the same boat but just don't compalin. I'm sure you know that the received wisdom is about the proportion of people who have a problem that actually complain about it! Can I now bow out of this discussion urging Adobe to believe the people who do complain, and find a way avoid foisting unwanted and possibly conflicting software on your users. Please!

[Noghar]

I don't think John Probert has restarted a dormant thread.  I think a lot of Flash installations have expired simultaneously and a lot have users updating have noticed this 'stealth install' of McAfee and come looking for a solution.

I wonder how many less savvy users now have multiple AV suites on their PCs and are wondering why their machine is running like a two-legged dog.

Anyhow, like JP, I didn't sign up for email notifications of every reply to this forum, but hey, look, I'm getting them anyway!  Seems like pretty typical behaviour for Adobe!

Signing off. 

[God_I_hate_Adon_tbe]

Hi Chris,

As you are staff, then please explain to me how I can uninstall this unwanted software from my girlfriend's laptop.  Being a very busy person she did not see this odious program lurking as an opt-out on the panel.  I have attempted to uninstall this rubbish through the control panel, using the link in the start menu and also by directly running the uninstall application from the program folder.

Can't you be a bit more sensible about this and have it as an opt-in? Please don't reel off your 'poor Adobe' speech about providing free software as a gift to its community blah blah blah (no one wants to hear it); there are lots of other companies who provide excellent free software and services, who don't bumble around trying to justify themselves - they realise the customer wants it hassle free.

Please just do as your customers want for a change rather than believing you think you know what they want.

Paul.

[chris.campbell]

Hi Paul,

I hear you on the request to make this an "opt in".  I will continue to let the group that is responsible for this page know about this request.

As for uninstalling, you should simply be able to do this using the uninstall feature in the Programs and Features control panel.

Thanks,

Chris

[Xebecer1]

Same bullshit response as before.  Seems I could probably suceed in a lawsuit, where these criminals installed a program on my computer (intruding on my property) without my permission...

[God_I_hate_Adon_tbe]

Unfortunately this didn't work, Chris.  As I said in my previous post I tried each of the uninstall methods stated and none of them worked properly - the uninstall crashed out each time without a message to tell me why.

Perhaps it would be more advisable to use two buttons on the page like so:

Surely this simple design feature isn't beyond the remit of your web guys?...

@sjfaust: Sorry, matey - had to borrow one of your images to prove a point!  ;o)

Paul.

[God_I_hate_Adon_tbe]

Chris,

Any comments on my previous post?

Paul.

[Xebecer1]

Why would they reply?  These bullshit artists don't give a f*u*c*k about you.