FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > ArchLinux > ArchLinux General Discussion

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 06-16-2010, 04:08 AM
Caleb Cushing
 
Default dropping flashplugin x86_64

On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 9:18 PM, Heiko Baums <lists@baums-on-web.de> wrote:
> I completely disagree. Flash can, of course, do much more than just
> video. But video currently is the most important feature. And I never
> understood why all those video portals thought they had to implement
> those videos in this proprietary Flash than just using the already
> existing and well and better working video plugins like mplayer-plugin
> resp. gecko-mediaplayer.

I've used that too... it didn't work well for me either...

> I also hate these websites which are completely and only implemented in
> Flash. They are usually loaded and rendered much slower than simple
> HTML websites, look at least not better, sometimes even worse and can
> only be seen with such a proprietary plugin.

with the exception of a few movie websites which were kinda
entertaining I agree.

> There are very few exceptions. For building small games like
> Samorost 1 and 2 e.g. Flash is quite nice, because such games can easily
> be written and played in a webbrowser. Disadvantage again: If the
> proprietary plugin doesn't work or doesn't exist these games can't be
> played anymore. So better such games should better be written in C.

yes... and then how're you going to serve them up in a cross compat way?

> And last but not least there are those annoying flickering Flash ads.

before flash it was gifs...

don't get me wrong... I don't love flash but it's been much better to
me than everything else. Honestly I wish people would just stfu about
the death of flash. I'm not about to be adobe or apple's puppet. As
long as I can use the web the way I want I'm happy. Flash has been
about 95% good on that since 10. A few bumps here and there, but some
weren't the fault of 'flash' like any program they were the fault of
the programmer. I'm pretty sure the problems with the daily show were
how they've built their stack, because youtube and abc.go.com both
work flawlessly.

seriously it's easier to block flash than gifs and the caching on
mplayer-plugin never worked that well... javascript has been just as
obnoxious as flash if not more so, popups anyone? how 'bout 'alert'
messages.

guns don't kill people, people kill people
programming languages don't create bad programs... bad programmers do.

don't blame the tool. (and no I don't like proprietary software, I
wish flash were open source. but I'll wait for webm to be a proven
technology before I jump on that bandwagon)
--
Caleb Cushing

http://xenoterracide.blogspot.com
 
Old 06-16-2010, 12:59 PM
Heiko Baums
 
Default dropping flashplugin x86_64

Am Wed, 16 Jun 2010 00:08:09 -0400
schrieb Caleb Cushing <xenoterracide@gmail.com>:

> with the exception of a few movie websites which were kinda
> entertaining I agree.

These movie websites are just annoying, too. Why can't the studios
present their informations about a movie in plain HTML with a trailer
presented with a pure video plugin? Then you get every information
about the video you need and it's much faster and much more stable.

> yes... and then how're you going to serve them up in a cross compat
> way?

Build / compile a version for Linux, one for MacOS and one for Windows.
That's all. And then it runs much faster, smoother and much more stable
on every OS than with Flash or Java. Java is as annoying as Flash and
it's also much slower than native binaries.

> before flash it was gifs...

But gifs can be filtered or blocked much better than Flash animations
without being forced to block useful and wanted content by web filters.
And web filters can't only block gifs completely but alternatively just
show e.g. the first or the last image of a gif, so that you can see the
gif but without the flickering. That's not possible with Flash. With
Flash you can either block every Flash animation incl. the useful ones
or accept every Flash animation incl. the annoying ones.

> don't get me wrong... I don't love flash but it's been much better to
> me than everything else. Honestly I wish people would just stfu about
> the death of flash.

I hope, and I'm sure that the death of Flash will come, hopefully as
soon as possible.

> I'm pretty sure the problems with the daily show were
> how they've built their stack, because youtube and abc.go.com both
> work flawlessly.

After all a bug in Flash. Doesn't work Flash really so well?

> seriously it's easier to block flash than gifs and the caching on
> mplayer-plugin never worked that well...

If caching of mplayer-plugin doesn't work for you, you probably haven't
configured it well. You know that it has a separate config file?

These values work for me perfectly:
cache = 8192
cache-min = 20.0
cache-seek-min = 50

Set these in mplayer.conf, mplayer-plugin.conf and/or gnome-mplayer's
and gecko-mediaplayer's configuration and it should work.

> don't blame the tool. (and no I don't like proprietary software, I
> wish flash were open source. but I'll wait for webm to be a proven
> technology before I jump on that bandwagon)

I indeed blame the tool, because if those tools would exist then people
couldn't write software with these tools. And it's usually not the
software written by / for these tools (Flash animations, Java
applications, etc.) which make them slow and unstable, it's indeed the
tool itself, the Flash plugin and the Java runtime engine.

It's just because a native binary (written in C e.g.) can be loaded
directly into the computer's memory and be run from there directly on
the CPU, while for running Flash animations and Java applets
and applications first a big interpreter needs to be loaded into the
computer's memory as a native binary and be run from there on the CPU.
Then the user's software needs to be loaded into memory, interpreted
(not run natively) and translated into native code which then can be
run on the CPU.

You see the differences? You see that such "languages" like Flash and
Java can't be as fast as a native binary? That's just not possible. And
it takes more time until the software is loaded, because not only one
but two applications need to be loaded, one of them is usually pretty
big.

And because of the additional and rather unnecessary layer (the Flash
plugin or the Java runtime engine) you have several sources of trouble
more than with a native binary. If such a program doesn't work
correctly the bug can be in the code of the animation or application,
but it can also be in the plugin or the runtime engine. If a native
binary doesn't work correctly the bug can only be in the application's
code.

And if you need a proprietary plugin it's not possible to check the
plugin's code for bugs. So you rely on the plugin's developer's mercy.

Heiko
 
Old 06-16-2010, 01:20 PM
Gaurish Sharma
 
Default dropping flashplugin x86_64

Hi,
People can try minitube[1] from AUR. Its based on QT and plays youtube
without flash.


[1] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=34462
Regards,
Gaurish Sharma
www.gaurishsharma.com
 
Old 06-16-2010, 01:26 PM
Evangelos Foutras
 
Default dropping flashplugin x86_64

On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 4:20 PM, Gaurish Sharma
<contact@gaurishsharma.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> People can try minitube[1] from AUR. Its based on QT and plays youtube
> without flash.
>
>
> [1] http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?ID=34462
> Regards,
> Gaurish Sharma
> www.gaurishsharma.com

This is seriously awesome. Thanks.
 
Old 06-16-2010, 11:18 PM
Ray Rashif
 
Default dropping flashplugin x86_64

On 16 June 2010 09:21, C Anthony Risinger <anthony@extof.me> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 7:51 PM, Alexander Lam <lambchop468@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 7:57 PM, Caleb Cushing <xenoterracide@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 7:40 PM, C Anthony Risinger <anthony@extof.me> wrote:
>>>> let's just all chant together in hopes that flash video will endure a
>>>> quick, fiery demise, and webm/VP8 will rise from the ashes to claim
>>>> it's place.
>>>
>>> meh! flash works... I don't think I've tried the webm stuff... but I
>>> did try the youtube html5 beta and it just didn't work well. flash
>>> does more than just video anyways. I'll be ok with html5 <video> if it
>>> works as good as flash for the purpose... but flash does so much more,
>>
>> Javascript+HTML5 does a lot of what flash can do now (all of these
>> HTML5 demos work in firefox):
>> http://craftymind.com/factory/html5video/CanvasVideo.html
>>
>> And an asteroids game:
>> http://www.kevs3d.co.uk/dev/asteroids/
>>
>>
>>> and it will certainly is better than going back to the days of
>>> 'proprietary plugins, and codecs'.
>
> like... flash? ;-D
>
> alexander beat me to the punch; i was also going to say that the
> extensive javascript APIs present in HTML5 are more than sufficient
> for the vast majority of reasons people use flash today.
>
> my personal favorite:
>
> http://www.nihilogic.dk/labs/wolf/
>
> ... in javascript! *brilliant.

Near to the end of last year I had a project which involved recreating
a kind of simulation game done in Flash (a lot of videos, and a lot of
logic using ActionScript) and a number of commercial, proprietary
post-production tools. During the planning stages I promoted HTML5.
However, it was difficult to see any benefit, both to me and the
director.

I simply couldn't get the same elements with the same ease in time,
and thus failed to offer a presentation. They decided to stick with
Flash, but I kept the multimedia tools within the open-source domain
for post-production (simply because they couldn't care less and just
needed the end-result). Well, the project is on hold for now so I'll
see what kind of progress WebM/HTML5 has made up to this point.


--
GPG/PGP ID: B42DDCAD
 
Old 06-17-2010, 02:16 AM
Caleb Cushing
 
Default dropping flashplugin x86_64

On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 7:18 PM, Ray Rashif <schivmeister@gmail.com> wrote:
> I simply couldn't get the same elements with the same ease in time,
> and thus failed to offer a presentation. They decided to stick with
> Flash, but I kept the multimedia tools within the open-source domain
> for post-production (simply because they couldn't care less and just
> needed the end-result). Well, the project is on hold for now so I'll
> see what kind of progress WebM/HTML5 has made up to this point.

yeah that sounds about right.

as of right now I don't think <video> is ready. however I'm all for
many of the other improvements coming in html5 and I wish people would
focus on rolling those out.

Again, I don't care if something is open source if it doesn't work at
the same level. You can claim security all you want... but plenty of
bugs security and not to be had in all software.

I tried html5 again on youtube, my video took several minutes to load
compared to flash which works nearly instantly.Given since I'm on
chromium 5 I don't think it was a webm video... so that may matter...
but if this is what html5 is going to be like... not sure I want it.

as far as mplayer-plugin settings... if I have to spend time
configuring it to make it work decently then it's too much work, I
don't have to do that with flash.

In any sense I think flash works well when you use it in the right
scenario's, html5 etc work well when used in their right scenarios.
Don't use flash for a slideshow. Don't try to use js/canvas for a game
it's just not their yet. WebM isn't ready to replace flash for video
though it may be some day.

If you want to blame the problems of the internet somewhere blame them
on IE... and maybe soon firefox, who's standards adoption is slowing
down to where IE is catching up. What we need is standards support,
and maybe some additions to the standards. I'd love to use all the
http methods when sending forms, I'd love to be able to use ESI's in
browsers too (Imagine if you could cache more of a page). I'd love for
js not to be obnoxiously abused like flash is (if your site doesn't
work without js it better have a good reason, I hate enabling js to
read a blog or coment on it).

flash will die when it's no longer needed or no longer provides
advantages. That time hasn't come yet.
--
Caleb Cushing

http://xenoterracide.blogspot.com
 
Old 06-17-2010, 07:53 AM
Patrick Burroughs
 
Default dropping flashplugin x86_64

On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 19:16, Caleb Cushing <xenoterracide@gmail.com> wrote:
> as of right now I don't think <video> is ready. however I'm all for
> many of the other improvements coming in html5 and I wish people would
> focus on rolling those out.
>
> [...]
>
> I tried html5 again on youtube, my video took several minutes to load
> compared to flash which works nearly instantly.Given since I'm on
> chromium 5 I don't think it was a webm video... so that may matter...
> but if this is what html5 is going to be like... not sure I want it.

Personally, if it wasn't for HTML5 I wouldn't be able to use YouTube.
My laptop is ancient and decrepit, and cannot handle Flash on Linux,
but the <video> element works just fine, and loads as fast as I'm used
to Flash video loading. Maybe there's a bit of a slowdown versus Flash
if you have a cutting-edge system, but not everyone is in that
situation.

~celti
 
Old 06-17-2010, 07:59 AM
Philipp Überbacher
 
Default dropping flashplugin x86_64

Excerpts from Caleb Cushing's message of 2010-06-17 04:16:04 +0200:
> On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 7:18 PM, Ray Rashif <schivmeister@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I simply couldn't get the same elements with the same ease in time,
> > and thus failed to offer a presentation. They decided to stick with
> > Flash, but I kept the multimedia tools within the open-source domain
> > for post-production (simply because they couldn't care less and just
> > needed the end-result). Well, the project is on hold for now so I'll
> > see what kind of progress WebM/HTML5 has made up to this point.
>
> yeah that sounds about right.
>
> as of right now I don't think <video> is ready. however I'm all for
> many of the other improvements coming in html5 and I wish people would
> focus on rolling those out.

Why is the tag not ready?

> Again, I don't care if something is open source if it doesn't work at
> the same level. You can claim security all you want... but plenty of
> bugs security and not to be had in all software.
>
> I tried html5 again on youtube, my video took several minutes to load
> compared to flash which works nearly instantly.Given since I'm on
> chromium 5 I don't think it was a webm video... so that may matter...
> but if this is what html5 is going to be like... not sure I want it.
>
> as far as mplayer-plugin settings... if I have to spend time
> configuring it to make it work decently then it's too much work, I
> don't have to do that with flash.
>
> In any sense I think flash works well when you use it in the right
> scenario's, html5 etc work well when used in their right scenarios.
> Don't use flash for a slideshow. Don't try to use js/canvas for a game
> it's just not their yet. WebM isn't ready to replace flash for video
> though it may be some day.

Flash or some players seem to still be buggy. I recently booted a live
CD to watch a long video, and at some point, out of the blue, it was
simply impossible to seek forward or backward. The Volume controls did
nothing at all. Hurray for flash video?

Have you tried that asteroids game linked in an earlier post in this
thread? IMHO it works surprisingly well.

> If you want to blame the problems of the internet somewhere blame them
> on IE... and maybe soon firefox, who's standards adoption is slowing
> down to where IE is catching up. What we need is standards support,
> and maybe some additions to the standards. I'd love to use all the
> http methods when sending forms, I'd love to be able to use ESI's in
> browsers too (Imagine if you could cache more of a page). I'd love for
> js not to be obnoxiously abused like flash is (if your site doesn't
> work without js it better have a good reason, I hate enabling js to
> read a blog or coment on it).
>
> flash will die when it's no longer needed or no longer provides
> advantages. That time hasn't come yet.

I agree that js shouldn't be used when it's not necessary, and there are
plenty of problems with js, but the same is true for flash. I rather
have js than flash problems.

These work reasonably well for me with FF:
http://videos.videoonwikipedia.org/
It's not perfect yet, nor are the browsers or codecs, but I don't think
it's worse than flash.


--
Regards,
Philipp

--
"Wir stehen selbst enttäuscht und sehn betroffen / Den Vorhang zu und alle Fragen offen." Bertolt Brecht, Der gute Mensch von Sezuan
 
Old 06-17-2010, 09:15 AM
Caleb Cushing
 
Default dropping flashplugin x86_64

On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 3:53 AM, Patrick Burroughs
<celticmadman@gmail.com> wrote:
> Maybe there's a bit of a slowdown versus Flash
> if you have a cutting-edge system, but not everyone is in that
> situation.

yeah having a quad core with 6G of ram takes care of just about any
system performance issues (except nepomuk and related tools which I've
had to disable due to a massive memory leak that can eat all ram in a
day). I suspect it's that the caching and downloading works better. I
only get 180k down so it's easy for my entire network to flood. It
doesn't help that I can't see the cache for a html5 video on youtube
so it could all be perception... or just the fact that I tend to watch
1-2 hour video's on youtube and not the average 1-10 minutes.

--
Caleb Cushing

http://xenoterracide.blogspot.com
 
Old 06-17-2010, 09:17 AM
Caleb Cushing
 
Default dropping flashplugin x86_64

On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 5:15 AM, Caleb Cushing <xenoterracide@gmail.com> wrote:
> yeah having a quad core with 6G of ram takes care of just about any
> system performance issues

however I was using flash 10 on a much less beefy system not so long
ago... and didn't notice issues... so I'd be curious to know how low
of a system spec do you have to go to have an issue. (it was a 1.8ghz
athlon-xp that was my previous system)

--
Caleb Cushing

http://xenoterracide.blogspot.com
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 07:08 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org