InformAction Forums

I dl the new roboform, all worked last night. This morning the crashes are back

Holly crap, seems like something on your system might be interfering with the changes or you are stuck in a fringe edge case that is causing issues. Let me review your PM and get back to you on that.

I have the same issue. Just installed "noscript" yesterday and today trying to enter a site using RoboForm caused FF to crash instantly. RoboForm V7.7.4 FireFox V11.0.

Gary

I give up. I only use noScript when browsing. Roboform says it's not them?

I have spent hours on this, with no resolve.

jeryray wrote:I give up. I only use noScript when browsing. Roboform says it's not them?

I have spent hours on this, with no resolve.

Check out Password Safe. All of your troubles will be gone, very quickly.

GaryG wrote:I have the same issue. Just installed "noscript" yesterday and today trying to enter a site using RoboForm caused FF to crash instantly. RoboForm V7.7.4 FireFox V11.0.

Gary

Gary, you are using chrome, so I am not sure how that's relevant. But if you are truly on Fx and using NS and RF Desktop, then I am sure its not NoScript causing it. Check with a clean profile, NS only and see if it still happens.I have been using NS and RF for just about the same amount of time and I have never had any issue with them together.

If you are using RF Lite or the RF Bookmarklet for them, its possible but then again the code for those two is pretty crap, so I am not surprised.

jeryray wrote:I give up. I only use noScript when browsing. Roboform says it's not them?

I have spent hours on this, with no resolve.

Not sure what's going on with you buddy but I am 100% sure its not NoScript. It doesn't interfere with the Desktop version at all and I know this for a fact. They are lying to you, I can say that with certainty because I am dealing with them on a filling issue that is based on the RegEx algorithm and they keep fighting me on it and I am certain that in the next release they will show it in the change log as something that got fixed but when dealing with the users, its not us, its something else with them ALWAYS. That's what you get when you outsource your support to the lowest common denominator of technical idiots.

Unless you get the senior dev team, you are not going to get a straight answer or support from Siber, that's a fact, but that doesn't make it NoScript's problem. Take it up with them or get a credit and use what Tom suggested, I am just helping as a matter of courtesy and being a user, anything beyond that and take your frustrations to them please.

GµårÐïåñ wrote:Unless you get the senior dev team, you are not going to get a straight answer or support from Siber, that's a fact, but that doesn't make it NoScript's problem. Take it up with them or get a credit and use what Tom suggested, I am just helping as a matter of courtesy and being a user, anything beyond that and take your frustrations to them please.

Please don't take offense. I believe you, and did try all the helpful suggestions you offered. It's just a matter of being worn down. I have spent too much time with this. I work at my own business 6-7 days a week, 12 hours a day.

I just don't have any more time to spend. I just have to use the programs where they work. Tech support these days is terrible.

One of the reasons I use Godaddy is for their support. I don't use quicken support at all, I use a private firm that know their products better than they do.

jeryray wrote:Please don't take offense. I believe you, and did try all the helpful suggestions you offered. It's just a matter of being worn down. I have spent too much time with this. I work at my own business 6-7 days a week, 12 hours a day.

No offense taken, this particular post was directed in general to everyone, the one I directed to you had your post in it.

I just don't have any more time to spend. I just have to use the programs where they work. Tech support these days is terrible.

I know the feeling and I don't blame you.

One of the reasons I use Godaddy is for their support. I don't use quicken support at all, I use a private firm that know their products better than they do.

Not a big fan of GoDaddy actually, but that is despite being friends with the owner who happens to be a former Marine like myself. I know the feeling about people knowing more about a company's software than their own, check out my blog and you will see that I solved problems with TurboTax and Adobe Acrobat that even their own respective companies had no idea how to fix. I get more users STILL checking those posts and writing me thank yous than anything else I ever posted, go figure.

GµårÐïåñ wrote:Unless you get the senior dev team

It also has to be the right person from the team (hopefully still working there). It might be that a person working on a different part would not give you much more helpful answers than the support.

GµårÐïåñ wrote:

GaryG wrote:I have the same issue. Just installed "noscript" yesterday and today trying to enter a site using RoboForm caused FF to crash instantly. RoboForm V7.7.4 FireFox V11.0.

Gary

Gary, you are using chrome, so I am not sure how that's relevant.

Gary's UA:
AppleWebKit/535.11 (KHTML, like Gecko)

Also, many users have more than one browser. It's not automatically suspect if they post here from another browser.
Some spammers do that, but then the contents show it even more rapidly than the "IE" in the UA.

Still don't understand why not at least check out Password Safe. It's free, 2MB, no reboot required, can be run from HD, flash drive, or both. Don't like it? Delete it. Two minutes spent vs. all of this annoyance, frustration, poor support, and lost time.

I've never had an issue with PWS. Simple coding and totally self-contained.

@Tom, true on everything you said but the part your referenced is valid, but not indicative that its Fx, specially this part (Chrome/17.0.963.83) its like Gecko, doesn't mean it is. He posted from Chrome, simple as that. Now I rotate my UA with all kind of stuff, so that its never a good indicator of what I am actually on, but I am a regular, my non-guest, non-anonymous posting pretty much vets me. But someone jumping anonymously on the bandwagon of "me too" bugs the hell out of me.

GµårÐïåñ wrote:... He posted from Chrome, simple as that. Now I rotate my UA with all kind of stuff, so that its never a good indicator of what I am actually on,

Maybe others do that, too?

but I am a regular, my non-guest, non-anonymous posting pretty much vets me. But someone jumping anonymously on the bandwagon of "me too" bugs the hell out of me.

Why? It was a short post, nothing remotely resembling spam, and a confirmation of an issue, which is good to get.

Whether it was a legit post or not (hard to understand what motive there would be for a fake post here), so what?
Relax, Brother, and enjoy.

I have no problem with the post regardless of the UA or the anonymous status, just that if you say I am having the same problem, offering nothing more than that, it doesn't lend support, it just littering in a conversation without actual contribution.

PS. Sure others can do that too, maybe that's the case, if so then bad on me.