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 06-17-2010, 09:28 AM
Caleb Cushing
 
Default dropping flashplugin x86_64

On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 3:59 AM, Philipp Überbacher
<hollunder@lavabit.com> wrote:
> 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?

that's you're example? I've had livecd's become useless run
environments due to IO problems... tell me your test was at least a
livecd environment loaded completely into ram.

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

no. don't do games much anymore. I personally don't care about them. I
have seen several decent js examples of games and canvas and whatever.
But I do believe in this stuff needing to be supported across all
major vendors before it's ready. It's not supported yet. I hate IE,
and I might leave 'features out' of my IE support but I think that
even IE users should be able to access my content. The reason I
believe this is I know how many site's screwed us for years (and still
are). I don't want to be screwed and I'm not screwing anyone else.

--
Caleb Cushing

http://xenoterracide.blogspot.com
 
Old 06-17-2010, 09:41 AM
Patrick Burroughs
 
Default dropping flashplugin x86_64

On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 02:17, Caleb Cushing <xenoterracide@gmail.com> wrote:
> 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)

I will admit, it's pretty low. My previous system was a 2GHz Athlon
XP, and while Flash wasn't instant on there, and occasionally lagged,
it worked. That died, and I haven't the means to replace it, so I've
been using an old Dell Latitude C610 (1.2GHz P3, 256MB RAM); Flash
just utterly fails on here.

Well, that's not quite true; if I download a lighter game, and run it
in the standalone Flash player as the only X client, it works, but
that's not exactly feasible for everything.

~celti
 
Old 06-17-2010, 09:46 AM
Jan de Groot
 
Default dropping flashplugin x86_64

On Thu, 2010-06-17 at 00:53 -0700, Patrick Burroughs wrote:
> 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.

I don't care much about performance, but what is irritating is that
whenever some website loads anything flash-related, my CPU gets
speedstepped to max frequency and my laptop fan prepares my laptop for a
takeoff. When you're on battery, this can mean you'll lose half of
battery runtime, just by having a browser window open that includes a
flash banner.
This isn't only a problem on x86_64, but on every non-windows platform.
Maybe it extends to windows also, but I haven't tested that in years.
Besides the performance problem, flash also makes browsers unstable. I'm
very happy with the out-of-process plugins in Firefox 3.6.4 prereleases,
it's just too bad that I don't use firefox for daily browsing.
 
Old 06-17-2010, 09:51 AM
Caleb Cushing
 
Default dropping flashplugin x86_64

On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 5:41 AM, Patrick Burroughs
<celticmadman@gmail.com> wrote:
> I will admit, it's pretty low. My previous system was a 2GHz Athlon
> XP, and while Flash wasn't instant on there, and occasionally lagged,
> it worked. That died, and I haven't the means to replace it, so I've
> been using an old Dell Latitude C610 (1.2GHz P3, 256MB RAM); Flash
> just utterly fails on here.

right... so that's ~10 years old... I'm guessing given a P3 which were
ending there cycle about 2000 with 1.2 GHz being the the upper
performance range... for comparison I'm using 1.2G of ram right now
without flash running... all of that between chromium and ktorrent. I
couldn't run most of what I do now on linux with that system... so yes
there are apps (like fluxbox) that would let me run that light. But
for the most part it's just not true anymore.

--
Caleb Cushing

http://xenoterracide.blogspot.com
 
Old 06-17-2010, 09:57 AM
Philipp Überbacher
 
Default dropping flashplugin x86_64

Excerpts from Caleb Cushing's message of 2010-06-17 11:28:48 +0200:
> On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 3:59 AM, Philipp Überbacher
> <hollunder@lavabit.com> wrote:
> > 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?
>
> that's you're example? I've had livecd's become useless run
> environments due to IO problems... tell me your test was at least a
> livecd environment loaded completely into ram.

I have no idea, it was simply the latest ubuntu live CD, i386 I believe.
I never claimed that it was scientific, just recent experience. I used a
live CD for this because I didn't want to install flash, but now I
couldn't install it if I wanted to (practically I could, but it would be
insane).
The whole thing is a great example why we should avoid proprietary
technologies. First we're used as a testbed, then dropped. It shows how
much you're at the companies mercy. That alone is reason enough for me
to not use stuff like flash or skype.

> > Have you tried that asteroids game linked in an earlier post in this
> > thread? IMHO it works surprisingly well.
>
> no. don't do games much anymore. I personally don't care about them. I
> have seen several decent js examples of games and canvas and whatever.
> But I do believe in this stuff needing to be supported across all
> major vendors before it's ready. It's not supported yet. I hate IE,
> and I might leave 'features out' of my IE support but I think that
> even IE users should be able to access my content. The reason I
> believe this is I know how many site's screwed us for years (and still
> are). I don't want to be screwed and I'm not screwing anyone else.

It wasn't about the game, but more about how well it runs. I was
surprised to say the least. It kind of defeats the 'flash is much more
than video' argument. Same is probably true for that wikipedia video
page I linked somewhere, it has well working controls, very similar to
those of flash players.

I've no idea about how well it is supported across browsers, only tried
FF. I agree that it should work across all browsers and also all
platforms (not sure flash does ppc and stuff). It might or might not
work in some alternative browsers, but they sadly still have plenty of
issues anyway. IE however will have to catch up in reasonable time if
it lags behind other major browsers. From what I remember, they said
they'll support webm, if only as codec you need to install separately.
Proper html5 and js support will have to happen too.

So maybe it's not all there yet, and flash isn't dead yet, but I think
(and hope) it won't take very long.
--
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, 11:06 AM
Caleb Cushing
 
Default dropping flashplugin x86_64

On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 5:57 AM, Philipp Überbacher
<hollunder@lavabit.com> wrote:
> I have no idea, it was simply the latest ubuntu live CD, i386 I believe.
> I never claimed that it was scientific, just recent experience. I used a
> live CD for this because I didn't want to install flash, but now I
> couldn't install it if I wanted to (practically I could, but it would be
> insane).

so... you're blaming flash for something that /could/ be a problem
with your environment... and certainly something flash was not
designed to run on... I've had livecd's with graphical environments
cease to respond after leaving them unattended. I blame the
environment... livecd's are great for recovery... but mediocre, at
best, for an actual environment.

> The whole thing is a great example why we should avoid proprietary
> technologies. First we're used as a testbed, then dropped. It shows how
> much you're at the companies mercy. That alone is reason enough for me
> to not use stuff like flash or skype.

right... as if open source never stops getting supported for long
periods of time... synergy anyone? or that we're never used as a
testbed *cough*kde 4.0*cough*.

> It wasn't about the game, but more about how well it runs. I was
> surprised to say the least. It kind of defeats the 'flash is much more
> than video' argument. Same is probably true for that wikipedia video
> page I linked somewhere, it has well working controls, very similar to
> those of flash players.

I'm sure it does...

> I've no idea about how well it is supported across browsers, only tried
> FF. I agree that it should work across all browsers and also all
> platforms (not sure flash does ppc and stuff). It might or might not
> work in some alternative browsers, but they sadly still have plenty of
> issues anyway. IE however will have to catch up in reasonable time if
> it lags behind other major browsers. From what I remember, they said
> they'll support webm, if only as codec you need to install separately.
> Proper html5 and js support will have to happen too.

it depends... I doubt many/any companies will do a full switch without
at least 50% market share. Which IE still holds, (flash has something
like 99% market share). Certainly it's not going away on youtube.

> So maybe it's not all there yet, and flash isn't dead yet, but I think
> (and hope) it won't take very long.

I suspect unless IE adopts webm it'll be around for a very long time.

--
Caleb Cushing

http://xenoterracide.blogspot.com
 
Old 06-17-2010, 12:33 PM
Heiko Baums
 
Default dropping flashplugin x86_64

Am Thu, 17 Jun 2010 07:06:23 -0400
schrieb Caleb Cushing <xenoterracide@gmail.com>:

> right... as if open source never stops getting supported for long
> periods of time... synergy anyone? or that we're never used as a
> testbed *cough*kde 4.0*cough*.

Let me think. I'm using open source (Linux) since many years now.
Everything I needed was supported and maintained during all the years.
If a tool isn't maintained anymore then there's a fork or a usually
better alternative which is maintained.

Closed source? Windows? Windows 98? Windows NT? Windows XP in the near
future? Flash for x86_64? Several anti-virus software for x86_64?
Zattoo for x86_64? Everything is unsupported or stopped getting
supported. Flash for x86_64 was supported only for a short while (about
1 or 2 years?) anyway.

So what is getting better and longer supported? Open source or closed
source?

"... we're never used as a testbed ..."

Somehow it sounds as if you were from Adobe.

> it depends... I doubt many/any companies will do a full switch without
> at least 50% market share. Which IE still holds, (flash has something
> like 99% market share). Certainly it's not going away on youtube.

I doubt that. Why has Flash a market share like 99%? Only because
portals like Youtube are using this and everyone wants to watch their
videos. As soon as Youtube and other video portals switch to HTML5
Flash's market share will rapidly decrease. I've already uninstalled it
due to the lack of x86_64 support and its security holes. For watching
Youtube videos without Flash and HTML5 I've found two nice Greasemonkey
user scripts, which let me watch the videos with the good working
gecko-mediaplayer.

> I suspect unless IE adopts webm it'll be around for a very long time.

I doubt that it will take too long until IE will adopt webm. And don't
overvalue IE. IE isn't as important as it was some years ago.

Heiko
 
Old 06-17-2010, 03:26 PM
Caleb Cushing
 
Default dropping flashplugin x86_64

On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 8:33 AM, Heiko Baums <lists@baums-on-web.de> wrote:
>
> Let me think. I'm using open source (Linux) since many years now.
> Everything I needed was supported and maintained during all the years.
> If a tool isn't maintained anymore then there's a fork or a usually
> better alternative which is maintained.
>
> Closed source? Windows? Windows 98? Windows NT? Windows XP in the near
> future? Flash for x86_64? Several anti-virus software for x86_64?
> Zattoo for x86_64? Everything is unsupported or stopped getting
> supported. Flash for x86_64 was supported only for a short while (about
> 1 or 2 years?) anyway.

kde1,2,3 aren't maintained anymore this saying windows nt, 98, xp is
just about the same. kde4 is very similar in how vista has gone into
7. don't confused unsupported with we released a new version and
aren't supporting the previous. open source actually supports it's old
versions a lot less in most cases. I only know 2 projects with really
long term support: postgres (5 years now) and the kernel (only certain
versions). wtf is zattoo (don't answer I don't care). reason AV's
don't have 64-bit support is windows is their only serious market and
windows hasn't had serious 64-bit support.

> So what is getting better and longer supported? Open source or closed
> source?
>
> "... we're never used as a testbed ..."
>
> Somehow it sounds as if you were from Adobe.

don't take this out of context. I was referring to kde 4.0 where all
the distro's decided to roll it out when kde explicitly said 'this is
a developer release only'.

>> it depends... I doubt many/any companies will do a full switch without
>> at least 50% market share. Which IE still holds, (flash has something
>> like 99% market share). Certainly it's not going away on youtube.
>
> I doubt that. Why has Flash a market share like 99%? Only because
> portals like Youtube are using this and everyone wants to watch their
> videos. As soon as Youtube and other video portals switch to HTML5
> Flash's market share will rapidly decrease.

right because that's the only flash site people use? I doubt hulu is
going to switch (and it never worked on 64-bit flash maybe that's why
adobe is (according to them) overhauling 64-bit flash), pandora could
have been implemented in js when it came out, they chose flash. I
believe flash had that market share when youtube was in its infancy
and maybe even earlier.

> I doubt that it will take too long until IE will adopt webm. And don't
> overvalue IE. IE isn't as important as it was some years ago.

yes it's becoming less important, and their's certainly a push to kill
IE6. I don't think that's going to matter to what I said though.

--
Caleb Cushing

http://xenoterracide.blogspot.com
 
Old 06-17-2010, 03:39 PM
Caleb Cushing
 
Default dropping flashplugin x86_64

also has everyone forgotten this
http://techcrunch.com/2010/03/30/flash-player-to-come-bundled-with-google-chrome-new-browser-plugin-api-coming/
? if google wants flash dead so bad why bundle it? I suspect that's
why adobe has cancelled support for now. I bet they have to rewrite
parts of 64-bit flash anyways in order to do this. Once it's done
they'll re-release.


--
Caleb Cushing

http://xenoterracide.blogspot.com
 
Old 06-17-2010, 04:29 PM
"Jeroen Op 't Eynde"
 
Default dropping flashplugin x86_64

On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 11:46:11 +0200, Jan de Groot <jan@jgc.homeip.net>
wrote:



I don't care much about performance, but what is irritating is that
whenever some website loads anything flash-related, my CPU gets
speedstepped to max frequency and my laptop fan prepares my laptop for a
takeoff. When you're on battery, this can mean you'll lose half of
battery runtime, just by having a browser window open that includes a
flash banner.
This isn't only a problem on x86_64, but on every non-windows platform.
Maybe it extends to windows also, but I haven't tested that in years.
Besides the performance problem, flash also makes browsers unstable. I'm
very happy with the out-of-process plugins in Firefox 3.6.4 prereleases,
it's just too bad that I don't use firefox for daily browsing.


I didn't like flash but kept it to play games occasionally (and yes,
youtube a little, max 1 vid a day). Since it doesn't run on x86_64 and
there isn't an easy way to install the 32bit version and make it work with
Opera 10.6 beta, I dropped it.


Opera 10.6 and Chrome 5 support WebM, so will Firefox 4, Opera 10.6 and
Firefox 3 both support Ogg Theora, so yes I think the <video> tag is
ready. IE is always slow on adopting new technologies so I can't see it as
a serious browser (no matter if it has 50% market share). I forgot about
Safari, well that is just a strange kid. Apple ports the browser to
Windows and claims to have a cross platform browser, what about Linux? :-s
On the codec side it doesn't support WebM nor Ogg Theora, a new IE6 if you
ask me.


For the games, <canvas> would be great, and indeed the Astroid game works
smooth. I think I should open a topic on the forums with more of these
games websites. I don't know how far the support for canvas is, but my
default browser Opera 10.6 does.


On the topic of open-source versus closed-source, I wont discus it. Both
have advantages and disadvantages, I just prefer to use the software that
just works (like Opera, WebM, Chromium, Firefox). Flash doesn't work for
me, the same with IE and Safari. Youtube should really convert ALL there
videos to WebM, old and new, it will become the standard in the next
months.


--
To read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Bottom-posting
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 08:03 AM.

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