System Requirements for Shockwave for Director 12.0.2.122

I’m on a Mac running OS X 10.6.8.
Main browser Firefox 19.0.2 tells me my Shockwave for Director 12.0.0.112 Full 64 bit needs upgrading to 12.0.2.122, but the Adobe download site says the System Requirements are OS X 10.7.
Secondary browsers are an older Safari (5.1.8) and the current Chrome (26.0.1410.63). Do these meet Sys Reqs?

SouthernTrouble1975 wrote:
Hi Necromanthus!
Thanks for your help! I don't know why the path would be wrong as it is how it comes out during the install. I attempted the download as you suggested and still received the same error. I did notice however that going through this way did offer the full version and not just the "slim" version that is given off the standard download. However, the same error is given for both.
Any other suggestions? I am starting to think my computer is possessed! Oh, and as for the Admin rights, yes, I have full rights, I'm actually the only user on this computer.
Admin account without write permissions indicates infected OS and hijacked administrator account.
Anyway, Pat is right: you need to provide more details about your OS.
In case of Windows 7 64bit, the installation folder is C:\Windows\SysWOW64\Adobe\Shockwave 12\
Try the following:
- check out if you have any installed SW plugin. If yes, just remove it.
- download the full installer
- disconnect the network connection
- turn off the antivirus, firewall and any other "application locker"
- run the installer as administrator.
- see if everything is ok.
Good luck.

Similar Messages

I install latest update from my ipad 2, after the upgrade tablet running slowly. Probably the system requirements too high for my device. I think that users with older models should be able to install IOS 6.x.x on their devices or consider buying devices

I install latest update from my ipad 2, after the upgrade tablet running slowly. Probably the system requirements too high for my device. I think that users with older models should be able to install IOS 6.x.x on their devices or consider buying devices from other manufacturers ...
People are dissatisfied with the new update a lot, including some of my friends and acquaintances. Is it reasonable to wait until Apple implements the possibility to return to Ios Ios 6 to 7? And how soon it can be done?
Sorry for my english, i am from Russia.

I have a similar issue. I recently purchased an iPad Mini, and I started off by backing it up from the apps I had on my iPhone. Now, I have a number of apps that never downloaded and that I don't want on the iPad. Some of these are apps that I don't need, while others are the iPhone versions of apps. There are something like 23 apps that I have no use for, but iTunes tries to install every time I connect. I've also tried clicking the 'Will Install' buttons. There's no way to delete these apps from the iPad without first installing them, as far as I can see, and there's no way to NOT install them, in iTunes.
It''s not just annoying, it's causing problems with installation of larger files and movies. Now, every time I sync to the computer, I get a warning that I'm over capacity by 580 MB, and larger apps will not install! Clicking Revert and a bunch of other things doesn't work, either. And I can't just delete some of the apps, because I or my wife use them on our phones!

System requirements not met for free trials

When signing up for the free trial of cc, photoshop, and illustrator, I am getting an error message saying my operating system is not up to date when it in fact is! It wil not let me download further and keeps giving this error message.

What are your system specifications?

Illustrator CC System requirements (no support for XP)?

I'm under the impression that the preview build worked on XP, and obviously the information that Adobe sent to its retail partners listed XP as acceptable. Amazon and Newegg both list XP with SP3 as the minimum. Why did Adobe change this requirement? Now I can't download CC. Is there a (legal) workaround?

Considering XP's lifecycle has been extended out to just April 2014, why would Adobe want to support an out of lifecycle OS in less than a year. Espeically when Vista/7/8 are all have 4/7/10 years of lifecycle remaining The computer world needs to get away from a 12 year old OS and start getting with the times. 7 and 8 are so much more superior than XP. I would much rather have quality 64bit applications running the latest operating systems than them doctoring the applications to work on old operating systems.

Adobe Shockwave for Director Installer Availability

Why must we visit this forum and browse through posts and answers in order to obtain the hyperlink to download the Shockwave "Full Installer"??
It would be so much easier if Adobe would get its act together and make downloads for Shockwave Player and for Shockwave for Director easily accessible from the home page instead of trying to enable Google to install Chrome on everyone's computer system and make it the default browser. During the update of the previous version, Google installed Chrome on my computer system and made it the default browser without ever asking permission to do that. When I uninstalled it, that did not restore my system to the way it was, and I had to spend time and effort to track-down the problems remaining in the Windows Directory. But that was then and this is now.
When I attempted to update Adobe Shockwave via the Mozilla Firefox "Plug-in Update Check" page, the installation failed because the dialog in which the user is asked permission to install Google Chrome and make it the default browser was displayed on the desktop, behind the windows that were opened for Firefox. Of course, there was no way to know why the whole process stalled, since Adobe's software installation personnel still do not have a clue to this day as to how to design and implement a procedure to effectively install and update their software on a Windows computer system.
After I abandoned the update and exited Firefox, I discovered the dialog, which was irrelevant at that point. I responded "no" and it vanished. So I attempted to update Shockwave again. However, its plug-in was already uninstalled from Firefox 26. Why would that be a problem, you ask?
It's a problem because the Shockwave plugin is required to download and install the update for the Shockwave plugin! The San Francisco Bay Area is replete with competent software people. Apparently either Adobe just doesn't hire them, or they don't want to work for Adobe.
There is an option to install the requisite plug-in (which is not named in the notice that a plug-in is required). Using it displays a Firefox dialog to install Adobe Shockwave Player. The installation was reported as successful, but the update still did not proceed. Then again, if the installation was done correctly, installing the "required plug-in" would in and of itself update Adobe Shockwave Player, would it not?
When I checked the Firefox plug-ins, Shockwave was still not present, even after exiting and re-starting Firefox. Why that was so I could not discern.
So the only solution, if it is a solution, is to run the "full" Adobe Shockwave for Director installer. Looking for access to it requires far too much time and effort. Why should anyone bother??

''3DogNight wrote:''
Should I try uninstalling Shockwave for Director first?
Not necessarily, but that could eliminate some potential problems, so I do recommend it.
# Go to http://www.adobe.com/shockwave/download/alternates/#sp
# Save the Shockwave Player Uninstaller somewhere handy, like the desktop.
# Save the Full Installer for Netscape¹. If you plan on using Shockwave for Director in Internet Explorer as well, also save the Full Installer for Internet Explorer/AOL¹.
# Exit all browsers.
# Run the uninstaller.
# Once the uninstallation has completed, run the full installer for Netscape.
# Once the installation for Netscape has completed, run the full installer for Internet Explorer.
¹ Although the links on the page currently say "Shockwave Player 11", they point to the latest version, which at the moment is 12.0.7.148.

System requirements for BO Enterprise XI 3.0 with 3 cloned webi services

Helllo,
I'm wondering what the system requirements would be for a server to host a BO Enterprise system (XI 3.0) if it is connected to a SAP BW system.
The system should be able to cope with around 150 to 200 calls/requests maximum at a time.
The users log in into SAP and launches a request via an SAP screen with behind that an URL request that is constructed based on a guest account (max 200 requests at the time) for BO. Because it is always the same account (Guest) that is used over and over again I'm wondering what kind of additional requirements the system should support.
We did some stresstesting with 120 simultaneous users. Even with 3 cloned web intelligence processing servers it blocked several times.
For the moment it is running on following hardware specifications:
HRBOXI (Dell PowerEdge 2950 (Servicetag: GMZ834J))
Memory: 8 memory slots available on motherboard of which 2 are used (each is 2GB) Total available memory at this moment is 4GB.
CPU: 2 x Intel Xeon E5420 (quad core). There are 2 CPU sockets on the motherboard that are in use.
Disks: 2 x 146GB (15K) SAS
On that there is a 32bit operating system in use. We would like to start with upgrading that to 64 bit OS.
Can someone tell me if this machine is suitable for production purposes for BO Enterprise linked to an SAP BW on mainly HR-data? I mean by that does this machine has enough processors to be able to cope with 3 cloned webintelligence services at a time. And also enough RAM memory?
Many thanks Thierry Renaer

not of use anymore

What are the System Requirement for LC Rights Management

I went to the Adobe public and partner site, the only System Requirements I found for RM are on the public site. This link http://www.adobe.com/products/livecycle/rightsmanagement/ has the hight level system info like the OS systems supported etc. But does not provide minimum memeory, disk space info. If you have info on this, I would appreciate your input.

For Mac:
http://support.apple.com/kb/SP663
Software:
Mac OS X version 10.6.8 or later (intel-based hardware)
400MB of available disk space
iTunes in the Cloud and iTunes Match availability may vary by country.
Hardware:
Mac computer with an Intel Core processor and 512MB of RAM
To play 720p HD video, an iTunes LP, or iTunes Extras, a 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo or faster processor and 1GB of RAM is required.
To play 1080p HD video, a 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo or faster processor and 2GB of RAM is required.
Screen resolution of 1024x768 or greater; 1280x800 or greater is required to play an iTunes LP or iTunes Extras
Broadband Internet connection to use the iTunes Store
Apple combo drive or SuperDrive to create audio, MP3, or back-up CDs; some non-Apple CD-RW recorders may also work
Apple SuperDrive to back up your library to DVDs; some non-Apple DVD-RW drives may also work.
You can run OS X 10.6.8 in an Intel-based MacBook w/ first model, in retail DVD.
But it won't work in a power-pc architecture Mac... see specifications:
http://store.apple.com/us/product/MC573Z/A/mac-os-x-106-snow-leopard
Hopefully this helps.
Good luck & happy computing!

System requirements for Adobe Illustrator CS3?

Hello!
I have iMac and would like to install Adobe Illustrator CS3.(I've never installed any other adobe illustrator versions before.)
Mac OS x Version 10.4.11
1.83 GHz Intel Core Duo
512 MB 667 MHz RAM
Hard disk space available: 131.93 GB
Resolution: 1440x900
32-bit color
Will my iMac be able to handle Illustrator CS3 once I install the program?
Thank you for your time!

There are no single core Intel iMacs. The OP has a Intel Core Duo (Yonah) processor which is still dual core but just 32bit rather than the 64bit Core 2 Duos used in subsequent Macs.
The system requirements only call for a G4 and 512MB RAM. Although I would agree that upgrading to 2GB would be sensible:
http://www.adobe.com/products/illustrator/systemreqs/
http://www.ramseeker.com/memory/iMac-2gb/
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=303084
mrtotes

System Requirements Mac Web Premium Suite cs5

Hi, does anyone know what the system requirements will be for the cs5 upgrade? thank you....

The final "system requirements" will be released when the product is officially announced on April 12.
- Dov

SAP NetWeaver 7.01 ABAP Trial Version System Requirements:

Hi,
I have downloaded the SAP NetWeaver 7.01 ABAP Trial Version
I am about to instal in my system, this system already has the SAPGUI installed.
now my question is about one ofhte system requirement
""The SAP system requires serveral ports for communication services. Therefore the file %WINDIR%\system32\drivers\etc\services must not include an entry for the ports 3200, 3600 and 8000. A possible entry can be excluded by using the hash symbol (#).""
_ now what will happen to my entries in the services file if i install this one ?
Reg
Dsk

Hi ,
I dont know abt this version of netweaver
But as far as mini sap goes SAP has given the previlages to work in ABAP in Mini Sap .
You can write your code develop the tables but there is no fucntional part attached to it .
Thanks
Sahil

OBI EE : system requirements

Hi,
since a couple weeks OBI EE is available for download on OTN. I had a look at the system requirements, but unfortunately (for me), my machine doesn't meet them.
Has anyone good (or bad) experience with running Oracle Business Intelligence Suite Enterprise Edition (R3), on - let's say - 1Gb of RAM ?
Thanks for replies!
Grtz.

Hi,
When installing OBIEE you have the choice to perform a default install (based on OC4J standalone) or an Advanced install based on iAS. think the "Development mode" referred is the out of the box default install based on OC4J.
I run a full blown OBIEE in iAS on my release 12 database side and only a presentation server in iAS at the apps side. I haven't had real performance issues. It's obvious this is not a production installation but for testing and evaluating software it does the job perfectly.
I must say this is a linux install. What windows will do with it I can and will not predict :)
Greetings
Gert

Documaker Server - System requirements

Hi,
I would like to know the hardware requirements to install Documaker Server. I checked the Documaker Installation guide but it just says Documaker Desktop requirements (Windows, 2GB RAM, 150 GB HDD, Intel Core 2 2.13GHz). Is it the same for Production also? We are implementing Documaker in Production for the first time. So, any help regarding the set up would be helpful.
Thank you,
Phew

Hi there,
I believe you are referring to Documaker Studio 12.x Standard edition installation. As per the Install guide in Oracle's link, Documaker Studio or Documaker Desktop has the same System requirements.
But for a Production setup, you may have to be cautious with the Windows OS version (please refer through the Install guide with Windows Server edition OS requirments - Minimum Sandbox platform). Decision on the RAM and Hard disk capacity will have to be made specific to the proposed MAX load that your application might get in production. I would reccommend you to go for a much better configuration for a Production box (similar to Minimum Sandbox platform) like:
Windows Server edition OS,
4GB or 8GB RAM Memory, and
Much robust Server Processor rather than an Intel Core.
In addition to that:
Be sure to have the latest service packs installed.
Windows Server edition OS are available both 32 and 64-bit versions. I have never faced any issues with 12.x on 32 bit OS versions so far.
The configuration cited by you would be more appropriate for a development environment. Kindly let me know if you need more information.
Regards.

System Requirements Question

I am using Elements 7 for my video editing, and am thinking of upgrading my camcorder to HD to take advantage of Prel7's HD capability.
Question is, do I need to upgrade my computer too.
Currently, my desktop CPU has a dual core Pentium 2.8GB processor with 2GB RAM, running under Windows XP.
The suggested system requirements by Adobe for HD transfer and editing with Prel7 call for a 3GB processor speed and 2GB RAM.
I seem to have enough RAM, but can anyone tell me if the dual-core 2.8's will be enough to handle HD transfers and editing?
Thanks everyone.
Mike

Hunt - you said I could burn the project to a blu ray folder "for later" - but I can't see that option in the "Share" menu. It doesn't give me an option to burn to a folder under Blu Ray, unlike under the DVD option. Am I missing that?
Mike,
Unfortunately, I may have mispoken, regarding the capabilities of PrE to Burn to Folder for BD. I do not use PrE for my authoring, preferring to use Adobe Encore. I do seem to remember comments that PrE 7 cannot Burn to Folder for BD. I apologize for that. OTOH, one can Export from PrE and use a more powerful authoring program for the DVD/BD production. Adobe Encore is no longer available as a stand-alone, and is only bundled with CS3 & CS4 PrPro. However, Sony's DVD Architect gets some high marks for authoring. Steve Grisetti, MOD here and on Muvipix, has written a book about using DVD Architect. He would know of its capabilities regarding the ability to Burn to Folder for BD. As I only use Encore, I do not test a lot of other software, regardless of how good these might be.
Sorry that I confused Encore with PrE7. My bad.
As for the "quality loss" when down-rezing your HD material to SD - there are three things to think about:
1.) just the loss in resolution going to the smaller sized Project, i.e. from HD down to DVD-Video (big difference)
2.) the methods that Adobe NLE's use to down-rez - this is what Dan Isaac's article is all about *
3.) one's player's abilities and methods to then up-rez SD material to be viewed on an HD TV - can be big differences in the algorithms used by each player and player type.
Good luck, and thanks for both posting your findings and correcting me.
Hunt
* This is not that much different than resizing stills in PS vs letting the NLE do it. There are many of the same types of considerations

Firefox 4b8 not working with Shockwave for Director 11.5.9.615

Have installed Firefox 4b8 and Shockwave for Director 11.5.9.615. 
Also have Firefox 3.6.13 with '''separate profile'''. 
Director plugin works fine in Firefox 3.6.13 but not in Firefox 4b8. 
Loading a Shockwave for Director page is initially blocked in both Firefox versions by NoScript;
*clicking on the space for the game/whatever loads in Firefox 3.6.13
*clicking on the space for the game/whatever in Firefox 4b8, the entire space for the game/whatever disappears and never re-appears
What I have already tried:
#Uninstalled Shockwave for Director and re-installed - no change
#Firefox 4b8 in Safe Mode - no change
#Tested Firefox 4b8 on Mozilla plugins site - shows correct current version
#Tested Firefox 4b8 on Adobe site with games - won't work (Firefox 3.6.13 works on same site)
#Copied '''''np32dsw.dll''''' to Firefox 4b8 installation folder/plugins, ran same tests -no change
Any suggestions?

Found a solution based somewhat on cor-el's reply with some interesting differences in Firefox 3.6.13 and 4b8. '''cor-el''', please see my question at the end.
I added the item (boolean) ''dom.ipc.plugins.enabled.np32dsw.dll'' in about:config and set it to false. There was no change. I changed the value of that item to true and the box/area where the SWF item was to be located on the page did not disappear as before -- that was an improvement! -- but the SWF item would not load.
I then discovered that I needed to allow a site (temporarily) in NoScript and everything worked.
Some interesting differences and findings in Firefox 3.6.13 and 4b8 regarding this situation; all based on the same web site behavior with the 2 versions of Firefox:
#preference ''dom.ipc.plugins.enabled.np32dsw.dll''
#*Firefox 3.6.13 '''does not''' require the preference to exist in order to work
#*Firefox 4b8 '''requires''' the preference, set to true, for everything to work as expected '''
#**the preference ''dom.ipc.plugins.enabled'' can be set to '''false''' or to true with no negative difference in behavior (the preference ''dom.ipc.plugins.enabled'' when set to false seems to be ignored when ''dom.ipc.plugins.enabled.np32dsw.dll'' is set to true)
#NoScript (same version and exactly the same settings in NoScript for both versions of Firefox)
#*Firefox 3.6.13 '''does not''' require user to temporarily allow any other domain for the item to work properly
#*Firefox 4b8 '''requires''' the user to temporarily allow another domain for the item to work properly
'''cor-el:'''
*Should I post this in Bugzilla for investigation?
*It would be good to know what the difference is in 4b8 that necessitates the 2 above items in 4b8 and not in 3.6.13 on the same web site.

Universal Binary Shockwave for Mac? Is Director on its way out?

Anyone have any thoughts about if and when there will be a
universal binary version of shockwave for the Mac?
Also, Director seems to receive very little attention from
Adobe. Anyone know anything or care to speculate about Adobe's
commitment to maintaining Director. I'm guessing that adobe will
eventually ad 3D capabilities to Flash and do away with Director.
My company use to do a lot with Director, now we have a scant few
clients who bring us work that requires it.
As the Art Director for my company I have had a somewhat
passive role with Director, creating art and presentations that
only require basic navigation and animation and handing off to a
true programmer when more complex functionality is needed. Our
programmer has left and it seems on some level I am now assuming
the role of main director person, at least unofficially. I also
have a beginner to intermediate level of proficiency with Flash.
I'm pretty much left to teach myself what ever programming our
clients need as it is needed. My plate is full and I'm trying to
determine if I need to invest time in really learning lingo beyond
my rudimentary working knowledge, or just concentrate on expanding
my Flash knowledge base. If Flash did 3D, I would probably forget
about Director because it seems like it is on it's way out and most
of the things our clients need I think can be done in Flash
although for standalone presentations, I prefer the seamless flow
of Director to the "wait to load" result of Flash.
Any thoughts on this?

As Adobe says itself:
A new version of Director will be released in the first half
of 2007. It
will be sold under the name Adobe Director. No features list
available yet.
That's the only information we have and you'll have to live
with it until
the release (or beta program just before).
Adobe doesn't have anything else in its product range that
comes close to
Director and Shockwave. Shockwave 3D is still to this day the
most reliable
Web 3D plugin available (even if it has not the best
rendering quality but
sufficient for games, e-learning and 3D product assembly
instructions).
Adding 3D to Flash Player would mean a heavier download
(Flash Player 9 is
already 1 MB without the Yahoo toolbar).
The other news it that Tom Higgins, the Director Technical
Product Manager
left. I believe his position has already been filled
internally by someone
else at Adobe (it's a huge company) or will be soon (haven't
seen any job
offer yet for this role).
Best regards,
Karl Sigiscar.
http://www.chromelib.com/

System Requirements for Shockwave for Director 12.0.2.122

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for