No, but that's what improvements in utilizing Core Animation and Time address in 10.1 (see: http://www.kaourantin.net/). Feel free to download the 10.1 beta today to give your fans a rest.
While I'm in no doubt that improvements have been made, I fail to see how Core Animation should improve the performance of something that doesn't even move but still sees fit to chew up processor time like a child in a chewing-gum factory.
While I'm in no doubt that improvements have been made, I fail to see how Core Animation should improve the performance of something that doesn't even move but still sees fit to chew up processor time like a child in a chewing-gum factory.
Thats like blaming a computer for a programmers mistake... Or shooting your television with a shotgun because you don't like whats on (if your old school)
Not all flash banners max out your CPU. The ones that do obviously have something sinister running in the backround.
It's not all Adobe's fault. A lot of the fault rests with the flash developers and websites that overuse it. All these same problems that occur with flash can also occur with HTML5 given the opportunity.
I predict in 2 years we will see HTML 5 come alive.
So far many businesses are probably asking whether their site should be non-flash.
Like Virgin Airlines has realized this already. They just changed their website to non-flash for iPhone users. Why? Cos iPhone users are the ones who usually are the demographic to go online to check their flights.
This is the first step and it always takes a few to lead the pack.
Not surprising coming from CEO's like Steve Jobs and Richard Branson who has changed the world with innovative thinking to their businesses.
I would think Flash will slowly ebb away.
Have you also noticed in the last 5 years, the trend in designer's websites that don't use flash at all?
This means something, a subtle force of change. Does Apple use flash on their site? They seemed to have a way to show their information with impact and retain simplicity.
The flash banner running above the reply box whilst I am typing this is animating like crazy with headlines and flashing graphics.I haven't bothered reading it. Do we ever?
... and I'll just add that I think people are being a little disingenuous with the whole "it's not the video, it's the flash ads that are spinning my fans up". Here's my pic, AppleInsider homepage with 5 flash ads running concurrently... 4% CPU usage. Not perfect... but not fan-worthy.
That said, I'm sure no one at Adobe is loosing sleep over the possibility of HTML5 taking over the banner-ad space. Please, take it.
the fact that one (728X90) banner ad can use up 4% CPU is pretty freaking scary.
the fact that one (728X90) banner ad can use up 4% CPU is pretty freaking scary.
One banner could use 100% of your CPU or it could use less than 1%. Neither of them would be inherent to the Flash plug-in itself, but is more directly correlated to the content creator. The ubiquity of Flash and the ease of using the IDE == anyone who wants to, can create a banner ad. In fact, this type of work is most often relegated to the least experienced content creators because those with the actual wherewithal to create a decent low-bandwidth animation are working on bigger things.
||
Some idiot made that banner, and if that same idiot made a banner in JS it would be twice as horrible.
One banner could use 100% of your CPU or it could use less than 1%. Neither of them would be inherent to the Flash plug-in itself, but is more directly correlated to the content creator. The ubiquity of Flash and the ease of using the IDE == anyone who wants to, can create a banner ad. In fact, this type of work is most often relegated to the least experienced content creators because those with the actual wherewithal to create a decent low-bandwidth animation are working on bigger things.
||
Some idiot made that banner, and if that same idiot made a banner in JS it would be twice as horrible.
I have rarely seen any javascript that's so badly coded that it could slow down a browser, except Google Wave. Even then that could be avoided or prevented by the javascript runtime. With Flash you just have to wait for it to hang so bad it it eventually dies in it's own sandbox or crashes the browser.
The sad thing is the person who posted this most likely believes it.
HTML5 can potentially do almost everything flash can do except DRM.
Thanks for completely missing the point of my post entirely. Having developed in flash I'm entirely aware of the difference between each platform.
Let me explain further. HTML5 can't do DRM because its an open standard. You can't have DRM with open source. This means secure content providers cannot use it. This is a plus for Apple because it forces content providers to use iTunes or the App store.
Also, pushing open standards on the web gives Apple more control with how their own devices interact with the internet.
The disadvantage is I've found some useful sites which make use of Flash, notably maps.google.co.uk and finance.google.com. The other sites are mainly travel sites.
What's odd is that I've accessed these sites on the Flash free iPhone with no reduction in info presented (well useful info), which hints that it's quite easy to do away with flash altogether.
I don't know about the UK version but the only aspect of Google Maps that seems to use Flash is Streetview.
Here is a very slick example of how Google Finance can be implemented with open source code. This is much faster than using Flash.
It's not the same, they have 300% more internet because they can play flash efficiently!
But it doesn't address why they would hang out in a website for Mac users. It would be like me going over to Activewin or the Windows section of a multi-platform site to then troll and rant about how 'cool' Mac's are. The fact that a person needs to go into an Apple forum and parade Windows tells me that the person is either a troll or hate the idea of an alternative to their operating system of choice.
I love it when people start talking about something they obviously have no clue about.
Core Animation has nothing to do with hardware acceleration of video. It can utilise the GPU but it's for user interface animation.
OpenCL also has nothing to do with hardware acceleration of video. This is where a GPU can be used for general purpose processing not graphics or video processing.
This article is strange in that they talk about 10.1 as though it's what Steve Jobs was talking about. Steve was referring to 10.0 which also hogs the CPU on my Core i7 PC when I go on web pages overloaded with Flash content. It's not isolated to Mac. 10.1 isn't even a current release. So sort of unfair. Adobe also lets the Mac development lag behind for no valid reason. Adobe never likes using Apple's Core features as it thinks it can do things better. They just don't want to learn how to tap into the appropriate means of accelerating the video.
Thank you. It's true for the UK version too that Flash is only required for the Street View.
However the iPhone's Map App offers Street View too so it's possible to implement it without Flash, if only they can do that for the computer version too.
Thanks for the example, I hope Google is taking notes!
Core Animation has nothing to do with hardware acceleration of video. It can utilise the GPU but it's for user interface animation.
OpenCL also has nothing to do with hardware acceleration of video. This is where a GPU can be used for general purpose processing not graphics or video processing.
Core Animation opens up the combined power of Mac OS X graphics technologies by simultaneously compositing layers of text, graphics and video using powerful keyframe animation techniques. Taking advantage of the capabilities of the GPU and multicore CPUs, Core Animation dynamically renders these layers together, complete with transparency and Core Image filter effects. Core Animation also allows developers to enhance their applications with amazing animated user experiences and rich visualisations without needing to know expert graphics and animation techniques.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ontheinside
OpenCL also has nothing to do with hardware acceleration of video. This is where a GPU can be used for general purpose processing not graphics or video processing.
Comments
No, but that's what improvements in utilizing Core Animation and Time address in 10.1 (see: http://www.kaourantin.net/). Feel free to download the 10.1 beta today to give your fans a rest.
http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashplayer10/
While I'm in no doubt that improvements have been made, I fail to see how Core Animation should improve the performance of something that doesn't even move but still sees fit to chew up processor time like a child in a chewing-gum factory.
While I'm in no doubt that improvements have been made, I fail to see how Core Animation should improve the performance of something that doesn't even move but still sees fit to chew up processor time like a child in a chewing-gum factory.
Thats like blaming a computer for a programmers mistake... Or shooting your television with a shotgun because you don't like whats on (if your old school)
Not all flash banners max out your CPU. The ones that do obviously have something sinister running in the backround.
It's not all Adobe's fault. A lot of the fault rests with the flash developers and websites that overuse it. All these same problems that occur with flash can also occur with HTML5 given the opportunity.
So far many businesses are probably asking whether their site should be non-flash.
Like Virgin Airlines has realized this already. They just changed their website to non-flash for iPhone users. Why? Cos iPhone users are the ones who usually are the demographic to go online to check their flights.
This is the first step and it always takes a few to lead the pack.
Not surprising coming from CEO's like Steve Jobs and Richard Branson who has changed the world with innovative thinking to their businesses.
I would think Flash will slowly ebb away.
Have you also noticed in the last 5 years, the trend in designer's websites that don't use flash at all?
This means something, a subtle force of change. Does Apple use flash on their site? They seemed to have a way to show their information with impact and retain simplicity.
The flash banner running above the reply box whilst I am typing this is animating like crazy with headlines and flashing graphics.I haven't bothered reading it. Do we ever?
Does anyone else find it funny that Safari, on Windows, does better with Flash than IE?
Having had the displeasure of using even recent versions of IE, not really, no. Doesn't surprise me a bit.
You do realize Windows users have access to the same internet as Mac users don't you?
Trust me, logic isn't going to work in this instance.
HTML5 can do everything Flash can do except DRM.
The sad thing is the person who posted this most likely believes it.
... and I'll just add that I think people are being a little disingenuous with the whole "it's not the video, it's the flash ads that are spinning my fans up". Here's my pic, AppleInsider homepage with 5 flash ads running concurrently... 4% CPU usage. Not perfect... but not fan-worthy.
That said, I'm sure no one at Adobe is loosing sleep over the possibility of HTML5 taking over the banner-ad space. Please, take it.
the fact that one (728X90) banner ad can use up 4% CPU is pretty freaking scary.
the fact that one (728X90) banner ad can use up 4% CPU is pretty freaking scary.
One banner could use 100% of your CPU or it could use less than 1%. Neither of them would be inherent to the Flash plug-in itself, but is more directly correlated to the content creator. The ubiquity of Flash and the ease of using the IDE == anyone who wants to, can create a banner ad. In fact, this type of work is most often relegated to the least experienced content creators because those with the actual wherewithal to create a decent low-bandwidth animation are working on bigger things.
||
Some idiot made that banner, and if that same idiot made a banner in JS it would be twice as horrible.
One banner could use 100% of your CPU or it could use less than 1%. Neither of them would be inherent to the Flash plug-in itself, but is more directly correlated to the content creator. The ubiquity of Flash and the ease of using the IDE == anyone who wants to, can create a banner ad. In fact, this type of work is most often relegated to the least experienced content creators because those with the actual wherewithal to create a decent low-bandwidth animation are working on bigger things.
||
Some idiot made that banner, and if that same idiot made a banner in JS it would be twice as horrible.
I have rarely seen any javascript that's so badly coded that it could slow down a browser, except Google Wave. Even then that could be avoided or prevented by the javascript runtime. With Flash you just have to wait for it to hang so bad it it eventually dies in it's own sandbox or crashes the browser.
The sad thing is the person who posted this most likely believes it.
HTML5 can potentially do almost everything flash can do except DRM.
Thanks for completely missing the point of my post entirely. Having developed in flash I'm entirely aware of the difference between each platform.
Let me explain further. HTML5 can't do DRM because its an open standard. You can't have DRM with open source. This means secure content providers cannot use it. This is a plus for Apple because it forces content providers to use iTunes or the App store.
Also, pushing open standards on the web gives Apple more control with how their own devices interact with the internet.
The disadvantage is I've found some useful sites which make use of Flash, notably maps.google.co.uk and finance.google.com. The other sites are mainly travel sites.
What's odd is that I've accessed these sites on the Flash free iPhone with no reduction in info presented (well useful info), which hints that it's quite easy to do away with flash altogether.
I don't know about the UK version but the only aspect of Google Maps that seems to use Flash is Streetview.
Here is a very slick example of how Google Finance can be implemented with open source code. This is much faster than using Flash.
It's not the same, they have 300% more internet because they can play flash efficiently!
But it doesn't address why they would hang out in a website for Mac users. It would be like me going over to Activewin or the Windows section of a multi-platform site to then troll and rant about how 'cool' Mac's are. The fact that a person needs to go into an Apple forum and parade Windows tells me that the person is either a troll or hate the idea of an alternative to their operating system of choice.
Core Animation has nothing to do with hardware acceleration of video. It can utilise the GPU but it's for user interface animation.
OpenCL also has nothing to do with hardware acceleration of video. This is where a GPU can be used for general purpose processing not graphics or video processing.
This article is strange in that they talk about 10.1 as though it's what Steve Jobs was talking about. Steve was referring to 10.0 which also hogs the CPU on my Core i7 PC when I go on web pages overloaded with Flash content. It's not isolated to Mac. 10.1 isn't even a current release. So sort of unfair. Adobe also lets the Mac development lag behind for no valid reason. Adobe never likes using Apple's Core features as it thinks it can do things better. They just don't want to learn how to tap into the appropriate means of accelerating the video.
I don't know about the UK version but the only aspect of Google Maps that seems to use Flash is Streetview.
Here is a very slick example of how Google Finance can be implemented with open source code. This is much faster than using Flash.
Thank you. It's true for the UK version too that Flash is only required for the Street View.
However the iPhone's Map App offers Street View too so it's possible to implement it without Flash, if only they can do that for the computer version too.
Thanks for the example, I hope Google is taking notes!
Core Animation has nothing to do with hardware acceleration of video. It can utilise the GPU but it's for user interface animation.
OpenCL also has nothing to do with hardware acceleration of video. This is where a GPU can be used for general purpose processing not graphics or video processing.
you are more clueless than you can even imagine.
Core Animation has nothing to do with hardware acceleration of video. It can utilise the GPU but it's for user interface animation.
http://www.apple.com/uk/macosx/what-...ics-media.html
Core Animation opens up the combined power of Mac OS X graphics technologies by simultaneously compositing layers of text, graphics and video using powerful keyframe animation techniques. Taking advantage of the capabilities of the GPU and multicore CPUs, Core Animation dynamically renders these layers together, complete with transparency and Core Image filter effects. Core Animation also allows developers to enhance their applications with amazing animated user experiences and rich visualisations without needing to know expert graphics and animation techniques.
OpenCL also has nothing to do with hardware acceleration of video. This is where a GPU can be used for general purpose processing not graphics or video processing.
http://www.apple.com/uk/macosx/technology/
Instead, once developers begin to use OpenCL in their applications, you?ll experience greatly improved speed in a wide spectrum of applications.
For example... Media applications can perform complex, intensive operations with larger video and graphics files.
I love it when people start talking about something they obviously have no clue about
so you must really love yourself...
...or do you wish to suggest Apple is clueless about its own OS?