or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Hardware acceleration added to Flash Player 10.1 for Mac
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Hardware acceleration added to Flash Player 10.1 for Mac - Page 2

post #41 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by cnocbui View Post

I can't recall Flash crashing my browser at any time. I am always scratching my head - figuratively - at all the problems and hatred people on here seem to have with Flash as I don't experience any issues.

I can't remember the last time it crashed the browser on my Mac (though it does make it run very hot) but ironically it takes down the browser on my Windows laptop frequently, and its supposed to work better with Windows!
post #42 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by IronHeadSlim View Post

Seriously, do you even use Adobe CS products. You seem to be just copying what others say. As a matter of fact, "innovative" is a good thing.

I recently purchased the latest version of Adobe CS5 Master Suite and took classes this summer on how to use certain applications within the suite. I must say that an unnecessary degree of time was spent with the very kind and patient instructor (who uses both Mac and PC platforms) asking him to explain why Adobe seemed to do little "aggravating" things that would not be tolerated within the human interface for a program that Apple wrote.

His take was an interesting one - he said that it was his impression that both Adobe and Apple have global views for their own software environments that do not reflect or incorporate to a great degree what the other is doing or has done well. As a result, they often pass each other like two ships in the night, oblivious of their respective incongruities until they are forced to "collide" with each other *e.g., the recent Flash example). The bottom line, in his opinion, was that either would be immeasurably enriched were the other not in existence, but the computer world at large would be greatly compromised.

This was different, according to him from what he perceived as a malice-driven intent, wherein (his example) Microsoft releases Word for Mac but intentionally cripples it so that it will not have all the advantages of Word for Windows.

On the other hand, remember that I am brand new at all this Adobe lore and may have misunderstood the obvious intent of what he was trying to say. I am not trying to be unfair to either Adobe or Apple - just reporting what was said on the off-chance that others may be able to contribute or better define the rough parameters of my own understanding.

Have a great day, all!
post #43 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoolook View Post

Well I just installed this and can't say I notice a huge difference... Jon Stewart used 30% CPU before and still does, although I haven't tried Hulu yet. I have a MacMini 2009 (9400M)

What happens if you access this site:

http://www.e2-series.com/

I have an identical Mini. Did the upgrade. And that site keeps on flashing (pun intended) when loaded. Is yours stable?

Should I have re-installed the whole Flash or is there some way to just upgrade?
post #44 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by akauppi View Post

What happens if you access this site:

http://www.e2-series.com/

I have an identical Mini. Did the upgrade. And that site keeps on flashing (pun intended) when loaded. Is yours stable?

Should I have re-installed the whole Flash or is there some way to just upgrade?

I don't think it's your Mac as it does the same on my Vista machine (Flash 10.1). I've got Flash 10.1 on my Macbook '09 too, but I think I'll wait until the "Gala" HD accelerated version is out of beta.

I'll be happy when flash is gone, but in the mean time this will be nice for my notebook and perhaps PS3. The PS3 nearly falls over whenever there's a flash movie, which is a shame since it's ideal for watching internet TV.
post #45 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by meh 2 View Post

I recently purchased the latest version of Adobe CS5 Master Suite and took classes this summer on how to use certain applications within the suite. I must say that an unnecessary degree of time was spent with the very kind and patient instructor (who uses both Mac and PC platforms) asking him to explain why Adobe seemed to do little "aggravating" things that would not be tolerated within the human interface for a program that Apple wrote.

His take was an interesting one - he said that it was his impression that both Adobe and Apple have global views for their own software environments that do not reflect or incorporate to a great degree what the other is doing or has done well. As a result, they often pass each other like two ships in the night, oblivious of their respective incongruities until they are forced to "collide" with each other *e.g., the recent Flash example). The bottom line, in his opinion, was that either would be immeasurably enriched were the other not in existence, but the computer world at large would be greatly compromised.

This was different, according to him from what he perceived as a malice-driven intent, wherein (his example) Microsoft releases Word for Mac but intentionally cripples it so that it will not have all the advantages of Word for Windows.

On the other hand, remember that I am brand new at all this Adobe lore and may have misunderstood the obvious intent of what he was trying to say. I am not trying to be unfair to either Adobe or Apple - just reporting what was said on the off-chance that others may be able to contribute or better define the rough parameters of my own understanding.

Have a great day, all!

You do make a pertinent point about Adobe Creative Suite, and thanks for sharing your thoughts.

CS3 and CS4 are actually quite useable and though there are differences on both platforms, it's fairly smooth.

In terms of interfaces, certainly Adobe does things their way. Almost any "pro" level application doesn't quite exactly follow all the GUI conventions of their host operating systems. It's tough to do, because pro applications have so much more functions compared to regular applications.

You probably weren't using Adobe during the heady days of CS and CS2. The problem, was, this was when Apple transitioned to Intel. You had to, IIRC, run CS2 in Rosetta mode on Intel Macs, which was, not what you wanted to do when the deadline was around the corner, to say the least. During this time and say circa 2003, there was also other weirdness like Dreamweaver not having proper tabbed document windows on the Mac.

I wouldn't say Adobe is malicious, but they keeping up with Apple has always been a tenuous proposition. First was the transition to OS X. Then the transition to Intel. Then to Cocoa. Then to 64-bit. Somehow they were enough on the same page recently for software users to enjoy Adobe stuff on the Mac. Not all the blame can be put on Adobe, to be fair, Apple moves in certain directions and you can't expect Adobe to follow lockstep at every turn.

The sore point emerged due to iPhone and iPad being so huge, and Apple outright denying Flash usage. Adobe's assumption was always, well, we can release anything on the Mac as long as customers are happy *enough* with it, or they have no choice (eg. Flash websites and videos). The game changed when Adobe Flash and especially the big selling point of converting Flash to iPhone apps, was disallowed on iOS. This was a big shift. Suddenly Adobe is like, WTF?

The saga continues to unfold.
post #46 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by akauppi View Post

What happens if you access this site:

http://www.e2-series.com/

I have an identical Mini. Did the upgrade. And that site keeps on flashing (pun intended) when loaded. Is yours stable?

Should I have re-installed the whole Flash or is there some way to just upgrade?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Surfer Rosa View Post

I don't think it's your Mac as it does the same on my Vista machine (Flash 10.1). I've got Flash 10.1 on my Macbook '09 too, but I think I'll wait until the "Gala" HD accelerated version is out of beta.

I'll be happy when flash is gone, but in the mean time this will be nice for my notebook and perhaps PS3. The PS3 nearly falls over whenever there's a flash movie, which is a shame since it's ideal for watching internet TV.

Does it work with, say, a computer with Flash 9? It could be a bug in the site. Looks like it's somehow looping when it's not supposed to... You can right click on the site, untick "Loop" and it stops flashing. But then some other components keep popping and disappearing.
post #47 of 82
Even when Adobe moves in the right direction, you people sit here and bitch.
post #48 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster View Post

Even when Adobe moves in the right direction, you people sit here and bitch.

Well, the right direction would be to EOL Flash.
post #49 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoolook View Post

If you've used almost any video player on OS X, aside from Quicktime, there was no h.264 hardware decoding until very recently. It didn't matter if it was VLC, Boxee, XMBC or a derivative or Adobe's flash player or something else like Silverlight. Don't tell me, that's because no one other than Apple has a clue about coding, right? Wrong...

Ah, but VLC is finely engineered. I'm not sure what parts exactly are hardware-accelerated, but a 480p-ish XVID AVI on my 2ghz Macbook Aluminum takes up only 10% CPU. Could Adobe learn something from VLC? Maybe.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoolook View Post

Apple simply did not make the APIs available to allow this, and squawking 'that's what OpenCL is for' doesn't make any difference without the drivers supporting the rhetoric. The fact is, OS X has some very limited and fussy limitations when it comes to hardware video playback, and the only people to blame are Apple and their hardware partners.

There is a very simple reason why Windows users have had better video playback performance than OS X users (outside of Quicktime/h.264), and it's because it's easy to implement, because ATI and nVidia (as well as Microsoft) and made it that way. Apple needs to get out of its own way...

I understand what you're trying to say. But then, how come VLC runs so great on OS X compared to Flash videos? I know VLC primarily uses ffmpeg, does Adobe use that?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoolook View Post

Now things are actually improving. There was an app released very recently on the iPad that allows you watch xVid videos revently in the .avi format (cineXplayer). There is no hardware acceleration but it doesn't appear to affect battery life - the bet is that Apple will yank it - personally I don't know why anyone would need to use xVid when h.264 conversion with Handbrake is far superior, but that's hardly the point.

I tried cineXplayer on iPad, it does work well for some videos, it doesn't read some videos. I ponied up $4.99 for OPlayerHD, which was able to play back my xvid avi files. The latter played back the files but frame rates were suffering. The author claims that the next few revisions of the app will be able to do smooth 720p XVID AVI decoding without dropping frames.

I don't think Apple will yank these. I mean of course it will be used for basically all kinds of DVD rips, TV shows, and torrents, etc. But it's too late in the game to clamp down on these, PR wise it could be risky. I mean, they just play back other video formats, I don't see Apple being so protective of iTunes downloads.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoolook View Post

As for ATI... well, their hardware playback is a right mess, even on Windows. I know, I have a very powerful 4890 in my Windows gaming rig, and in particular hardware encode is low quality and buggy - so I fallback to the CPU, which luckily is a fast and inexpensive Phenom II from AMD.

See that's the thing too. Do we blame ATI or Adobe/other software makers in this case? Because if software makers wrote for CUDA, does that mean ATI must be left behind? Was ATI's Stream that bad or what?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoolook View Post

The 8600 not being supported is pretty contraversial... and you won't like the reason why. The 9400m is actually virtually identical to the 8600m... both have 16 stream processors and the 8600m has a slight bandwidth advantage because it has descrete memory, but aside from that, the performance is about the same. The 9600m has twice as many stream processors. So, the ONLY reason the 8600m is not supported, is because the OS X drivers don't allow it. That's not adobe's fault.

Interestingly, 9600M GT is not mentioned, which would be even more controversial. The thing I would like to point out is, sure, hardware decoding is all nice and sexy, but if we set aside that for a while, could CPU-only Flash video decoding be improved? Again, I'm just throwing out VLC as an example ~ why is it so fantastic on Mac and Windows?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoolook View Post

Now, before you accuse me of anything, I love my 3 macs, my iPad and my iPhone, and I can't wait for Flash to die... but Apple has as much to answer for here as adobe.

It's okay, my user name is not solipsism. (HAH!)
post #50 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoolook View Post

Well I just installed this and can't say I notice a huge difference... Jon Stewart used 30% CPU before and still does, although I haven't tried Hulu yet. I have a MacMini 2009 (9400M)

Tell John Stewart to get his own machine and stop using yours. He can afford it.
post #51 of 82

Originally Posted by djsherly:
The beauty of it is that if Adobe are using the documented APIs, once Apple get around to updating that support it should work right off the bat.

Originally Posted by kolchak:
I wouldn't hold my breath. Apple almost certainly won't add support for older cards. It's just not worth dedicating development resources to, in their opinion. They'd rather you upgraded to the latest and best.


so can i play devil's advocate here and say that Adobe is "being held hostage waiting for a FIRST party vendor to update it's software" ...as Steve Jobs would say?
post #52 of 82
The new adobe hardware accelerated flash build only supports nvidia chips when the new macs are shipping with ati chipsets only, now you know why flash is not allowed in ios devices.
post #53 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by gotApple View Post

I don't know what Flash smut you guys watch, I just watch the normal banner ads and play lots of Flash games, and Flash Player hasn't crashed for months here...

Well the thing that crashes them most assuredly is the new Stratos player from blip.tv. Other times I just get weird quirky failures like Wix.com Flash Sites simply not working. Oddly, YouTube's Flash Player as well as some others (Like embeds from MSNBC eg. of the Rachel Maddow Show clips) work fine. But when I call upon a blip.tv embed to play or interact with several other Flash players, the Browser hangs. Whether its Safari, Firefox or Chrome.

MacBook Pro 15" | Intel Core2 Duo 2.66GHz | 320GB HDD | OS X v10.8
White iPad (3G) with Wi-Fi | 16GB | Engraved | Blue Polyurethane Smart Cover
White iPhone 5 | 64GB | On 3UK

Reply

MacBook Pro 15" | Intel Core2 Duo 2.66GHz | 320GB HDD | OS X v10.8
White iPad (3G) with Wi-Fi | 16GB | Engraved | Blue Polyurethane Smart Cover
White iPhone 5 | 64GB | On 3UK

Reply
post #54 of 82
Just to clarify something about "hardware acceleration" here... the movie codec acceleration is not using OpenCL, it is using dedicated hardware on the GPU designed specifically for decoding movies. It isn't using the stream processors at all, AFAIK. While you could use OpenCL for doing this, it would be less efficient than using the purpose-built hardware that exists there for this purpose.

My understanding of the Mac's driver architecture isn't particularly sophisticated, but I believe that Apple had simply not prioritized putting an API in place to allow this specialized decode hardware to be used... and now that they have, thus far only the nVidia drivers have been updated to use it. I would guess that it is possible for the ATI drivers to be similarly updated, and for the new Apple machines I expect driver updates to be coming for other reasons... and perhaps those updates will include similar movie decode support. It is possible that the nVidia and ATI hardware is different enough and Apple's API is specific enough that it can't be made to work on ATI, but this would greatly surprise me. Apple is usually pretty good about their API design in this respect. Drivers are finicky things and take time to develop.

Its all pretty academic on the latest machines though. Just yesterday I happened to be watching some YouTube videos while having ActivityMonitor open, and I noticed that playing a video caused only a slightly elevation in one of the CPU threads load.
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
Providing grist for the rumour mill since 2001.
Reply
post #55 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Programmer View Post

Just to clarify something about "hardware acceleration" here... the movie codec acceleration is not using OpenCL, it is using dedicated hardware on the GPU designed specifically for decoding movies. It isn't using the stream processors at all, AFAIK. While you could use OpenCL for doing this, it would be less efficient than using the purpose-built hardware that exists there for this purpose.

My understanding of the Mac's driver architecture isn't particularly sophisticated, but I believe that Apple had simply not prioritized putting an API in place to allow this specialized decode hardware to be used... and now that they have, thus far only the nVidia drivers have been updated to use it. I would guess that it is possible for the ATI drivers to be similarly updated, and for the new Apple machines I expect driver updates to be coming for other reasons... and perhaps those updates will include similar movie decode support. It is possible that the nVidia and ATI hardware is different enough and Apple's API is specific enough that it can't be made to work on ATI, but this would greatly surprise me. Apple is usually pretty good about their API design in this respect. Drivers are finicky things and take time to develop.

Its all pretty academic on the latest machines though. Just yesterday I happened to be watching some YouTube videos while having ActivityMonitor open, and I noticed that playing a video caused only a slightly elevation in one of the CPU threads load.

Can you please give an honest assessment on whether within 1.5 years Adobe could have developed a Flash video/other player that leverages OpenCL on the Mac. That would help us try and understand what's going on.

Also, would you say that this GPU decoding is largely irrelevant for anything with a 2ghz Core i3 or greater?

Also, why is VLC so good compared to Flash, when it comes to video playback and CPU use...?
post #56 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoolook View Post

Well I just installed this and can't say I notice a huge difference... Jon Stewart used 30% CPU before and still does, although I haven't tried Hulu yet. I have a MacMini 2009 (9400M)

After the update, do you see this site correctly:

http://www.e2-series.com/

To me, it only flashes. Guess that's where the name comes? :P Does it look stable for you?
post #57 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by akauppi View Post

After the update, do you see this site correctly:

http://www.e2-series.com/

To me, it only flashes. Guess that's where the name comes? :P Does it look stable for you?

Weird, it was flashing before. Now it is fine.
post #58 of 82
with Apple being 5-10% of the pc market, Adobe only allocates about the same amount of resource to OSX development. figure CS takes about 95% of that and the remaining 5% is fought for between the two persons that work for flash and lightroom cubicles.
After 3 netbooks from acer, toshiba, hp, I find contentment in my 11.6 MB Air. Hoping the 8-hr battery version shows up soon.
Reply
After 3 netbooks from acer, toshiba, hp, I find contentment in my 11.6 MB Air. Hoping the 8-hr battery version shows up soon.
Reply
post #59 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by IronHeadSlim View Post

Seriously, do you even use Adobe CS products. You seem to be just copying what others say. As a matter of fact, "innovative" is a good thing.

Well, actually, it's true. I've been using Adobe's suite for more than a decade now and they do just get more and more bloated each step they move along. Some of the products, such as Adobe Acrobat Pro, just make me want to cry every time I have to spend hours using them. On the flip-side, I have to upgrade once and a while because of important features (64 bit support combined with two iterations behind in release) and Adobe's infuriating habit of ignoring serious bugs in fairly recent software releases (this infuriates me more than anything else). They make some of the best tools for what I do, so I use them, but I don't have the greatest amount of respect for them.
The true measure of a man is how he treats someone that can do him absolutely no good.
  Samuel Johnson
Reply
The true measure of a man is how he treats someone that can do him absolutely no good.
  Samuel Johnson
Reply
post #60 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidcarswell View Post

Funny thing adobe only supports nvidia. Apple just released their mac pros and aren't offering nvidia as an option. Once again adobe fails by falling behind.

Sorry, lack of GPU choice on Mac Pro is one of the most glaring reasons that I never recomend them unless one needs a specific Mac only app that needs PCIe interface cards. a $3000 "workstation" that cant do SLI Quadro FX cards is a joke, a really nice looking joke with a fast pair of CPUs...Apple needs to abandon the Macs, open source OSX and focus on iOS, let the community run with OSX since Apple delivers shite hardware on the high end for their amazing software
You can't quantify how much I don't care -- Bob Kevoian of the Bob and Tom Show.
Reply
You can't quantify how much I don't care -- Bob Kevoian of the Bob and Tom Show.
Reply
post #61 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by a_greer View Post

Sorry, lack of GPU choice on Mac Pro is one of the most glaring reasons that I never recomend them unless one needs a specific Mac only app that needs PCIe interface cards. a $3000 "workstation" that cant do SLI Quadro FX cards is a joke, a really nice looking joke with a fast pair of CPUs...Apple needs to abandon the Macs, open source OSX and focus on iOS, let the community run with OSX since Apple delivers shite hardware on the high end for their amazing software

A legitimate complaint for some of the Mac Pro uses, but a large part of their audience gets along perfectly well with Apple's GPU selection. Open Sourcing OSX is horrible counter-productive disaster of a suggestion.
The true measure of a man is how he treats someone that can do him absolutely no good.
  Samuel Johnson
Reply
The true measure of a man is how he treats someone that can do him absolutely no good.
  Samuel Johnson
Reply
post #62 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoolook View Post

Well I just installed this and can't say I notice a huge difference... Jon Stewart used 30% CPU before and still does, although I haven't tried Hulu yet. I have a MacMini 2009 (9400M)

360p HTML5 video via Safari, around 5%.
360p Flash video via Safari, around 31%

I do have the 9400M so I should be among the supported.

Funny thing about it though, when Idle Flash still takes about 8% with the video paused. HTML5 paused takes up 0%.

Adobe can't blame this just on the Mac OS either. Hardware accelerated flash on Windows doesn't perform hardly any better either unless you have a much higher end video card. Can't say for sure but it doesn't look like it's actually taking advantage of acceleration of H.264 in the graphics hardware, just making use of general video acceleration.

Sorry, but if 31% CPU usage on 360p video is the best they can do, goodbye Flash and good riddens!
post #63 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by meh 2 View Post

...

His take was an interesting one - he said that it was his impression that both Adobe and Apple have global views for their own software environments that do not reflect or incorporate to a great degree what the other is doing or has done well. As a result, they often pass each other like two ships in the night, oblivious of their respective incongruities until they are forced to "collide" with each other *e.g., the recent Flash example). The bottom line, in his opinion, was that either would be immeasurably enriched were the other not in existence, but the computer world at large would be greatly compromised.

This was different, according to him from what he perceived as a malice-driven intent, wherein (his example) Microsoft releases Word for Mac but intentionally cripples it so that it will not have all the advantages of Word for Windows.

...

Your instructor has a handle on part of the problem. The fact is that Adobe has been a very mercurial company for more than two decades. It predates Adobe's purchase of Macromedia and Flash. It predates Adobe's entry into publishing software with its purchase of Aldus, developers of PageMaker. It goes all the way back to the Font Wars, which Adobe precipitated and lost.

Adobe is notorious for making its customers' teeth grind--particularly its Mac customers. "We don't do compatibility upgrades" is Adobe's standard response to customer pleas for support for Apple's latest offerings. Adobe claims also not to do compatibility upgrades for its Windows customers.

At any rate, your instructor is correct. Adobe sees its products as a platform. It will produce its software the way that it sees fit. If Apple and its customers don't like it, then they can just go pound sand. Apple sees its products as part of a holistic experience. Everything added--both hardware and software--should fit into this vision. Personally, I don't see a natural conflict between the two visions. However, Adobe does see it. Because Adobe chose a path that is unnecessarily in conflict with the expectations of third-party Mac developers, we all suffer.
post #64 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by razorpit View Post

This is going to sound stupid BUT other than happening to catch stories such as this how does one know there are updates to flash? Are these updates installed automatically? I just ran a software update and my system was "up to date."

This is part of the beauty of Adobe's crapware. In spite of Flash providing the most widespread security holes on the planet, Adobe has never seen fit to provide an automatic update mechanism. The company doesn't even provide a straight-forward method for determining if an update is available. (First a user must interrogate their installed version on one site, then compare it against the latest version posted at another URL).

The conspiracy theorist in me wants to believe Adobe has forever neglected to provide an auto-update mechanism because the company wants to maintain security holes for third parties to utilize in commercially viable ways even if they are contrary to users' best interests. (I know, I'm reaching.)
post #65 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by zindako View Post

The new adobe hardware accelerated flash build only supports nvidia chips when the new macs are shipping with ati chipsets only, now you know why flash is not allowed in ios devices.

Did Apple perhaps make the switch to ATI just to screw Adobe?
post #66 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

You do make a pertinent point about Adobe Creative Suite, and thanks for sharing your thoughts.

CS3 and CS4 are actually quite useable and though there are differences on both platforms, it's fairly smooth.

In terms of interfaces, certainly Adobe does things their way. Almost any "pro" level application doesn't quite exactly follow all the GUI conventions of their host operating systems. It's tough to do, because pro applications have so much more functions compared to regular applications.

You probably weren't using Adobe during the heady days of CS and CS2. The problem, was, this was when Apple transitioned to Intel. You had to, IIRC, run CS2 in Rosetta mode on Intel Macs, which was, not what you wanted to do when the deadline was around the corner, to say the least. During this time and say circa 2003, there was also other weirdness like Dreamweaver not having proper tabbed document windows on the Mac.

I wouldn't say Adobe is malicious, but they keeping up with Apple has always been a tenuous proposition. First was the transition to OS X. Then the transition to Intel. Then to Cocoa. Then to 64-bit. Somehow they were enough on the same page recently for software users to enjoy Adobe stuff on the Mac. Not all the blame can be put on Adobe, to be fair, Apple moves in certain directions and you can't expect Adobe to follow lockstep at every turn.

The sore point emerged due to iPhone and iPad being so huge, and Apple outright denying Flash usage. Adobe's assumption was always, well, we can release anything on the Mac as long as customers are happy *enough* with it, or they have no choice (eg. Flash websites and videos). The game changed when Adobe Flash and especially the big selling point of converting Flash to iPhone apps, was disallowed on iOS. This was a big shift. Suddenly Adobe is like, WTF?

The saga continues to unfold.

Thank you for your reflections. As usual, I find your insights especially informative on what I am presently engaged in. You are so right - my experience with Adobe began with CS5 so I missed those interesting times you related that dealt with previous iterations.

I hadn't thought about it until you pointed it out - but Adobe has been between a rock and a "juggernaut" - especially given the unintended connection that has been thrust upon them with mobile computing. As you pointed out - the transition train went fairly quickly through OS X, then Intel, Cocoa, 64-bit, who knows what Apple has planned next (e.g., I remember reading about a position Apple was hiring for that involved a totally new parameter that had never been done before - or something like that). Viewed from the perspective you've painted, I can see where a reasonable person might be inclined to at least be empathetic, if not sympathetic, with the challenges confronting Adobe. When someone is in the middle of a sea change, it is not as obvious as it will be to the historian that writes about it decades later. In a sense, Adobe et al. may not be as aware of the "big picture" as one might - at first take - imagine. I'm sure they're getting there, however.

As you so aptly put it, the saga continues to unfold...

Again, thank you for your kind contribution. It is always appreciated.
post #67 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jensonb View Post

I wonder if this version also fixes te fact that Flash now crashes every browser on my Mac about 60% of the time.

Isn't Snow Leopard 64 bit supposed to sandbox Safari plugins to prevent them from crashing the entire browser? Has anyone seen this working?
post #68 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by gotApple View Post

I don't know what Flash smut you guys watch, I just watch the normal banner ads and play lots of Flash games, and Flash Player hasn't crashed for months here...

Gamehouse and King.com games crash the Flash plug in Safari on my MacBook Pro i7 all the time. Sometimes they crash Safari too.
post #69 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by bonklers View Post

i bought a 2008 macbook pro(512MB 8600GT) for more than $2,000 and it already feels obsolete
i have to make it last one more year until the 3yr warranty runs out. It sucks having an 8600gt and not being able to use its full potential!! do you think the hardware acceleration would make it run cooler?? if so i'll keep my an eye out some sort of hack.

Your macbook don't really need GPU "hardware acceleration", the only reason you may need it is if you are already using 80%+ of your CPU with other programs while watching YouTube, then gpu acceleration will be useful. It won't make it cooler, it will make it hotter in fact, GPU runs hotter then CPUs.

The ones that find it useful are the ones having a very crappy CPU paired with a kick asz graphics card, not likely. Or the guy is trying to be productive trying runing multiple sht in the background while watching youtube HD at the same time.

Since you sound like a tech noob, I'd recommend get a laptop cooler along with changing your heat paste to the latest Artic silver mx-3(won't short your circuits). Also buy some compressed air and blow the crap out of your macbook where ever there is a hole, should turn off your mac before doing that.
post #70 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Me View Post

Your instructor has a handle on part of the problem. The fact is that Adobe has been a very mercurial company for more than two decades. It predates Adobe's purchase of Macromedia and Flash. It predates Adobe's entry into publishing software with its purchase of Aldus, developers of PageMaker. It goes all the way back to the Font Wars, which Adobe precipitated and lost.

Adobe is notorious for making its customers' teeth grind--particularly its Mac customers. "We don't do compatibility upgrades" is Adobe's standard response to customer pleas for support for Apple's latest offerings. Adobe claims also not to do compatibility upgrades for its Windows customers.

At any rate, your instructor is correct. Adobe sees its products as a platform. It will produce its software the way that it sees fit. If Apple and its customers don't like it, then they can just go pound sand. Apple sees its products as part of a holistic experience. Everything added--both hardware and software--should fit into this vision. Personally, I don't see a natural conflict between the two visions. However, Adobe does see it. Because Adobe chose a path that is unnecessarily in conflict with the expectations of third-party Mac developers, we all suffer.

I wanted to also thank you for your time and interesting comments. As a rank beginner in the world of digital media application and development, I find it particularly helpful to hear about the backdrop of history that led to the present situation (as I now find it and experience it). Knowing how important it is to understand the historical aspect of a system (and being woefully lacking in this regard), I am really grateful when someone like yourself or NVIDIA2008 takes the time to express succinctly in a matter of a few paragraphs what it would otherwise take me much longer to approximate by personal research.

Your willingness to help a noobie like me in this regard - to appreciate the global aspects of a situation that underlie the application (or project) at hand - is just one of the things that makes this board a treasured resource for me.

I cannot thank you enough.

MEH II
post #71 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by WelshDog View Post

Gamehouse and King.com games crash the Flash plug in Safari on my MacBook Pro i7 all the time. Sometimes they crash Safari too.

I play the latest games on Kongregate, and I have i5 MacBook Pro 2010. They work pretty well. Hey, at least we have some games for our OSX!
post #72 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar View Post

Isn't Snow Leopard 64 bit supposed to sandbox Safari plugins to prevent them from crashing the entire browser? Has anyone seen this working?

It's my understanding that the sandbox is a Safari 5 feature, not a feature limited to the 64-bit fork.

Quote:
Originally Posted by meh 2 View Post

...

I hadn't thought about it until you pointed it out - but Adobe has been between a rock and a "juggernaut" - especially given the unintended connection that has been thrust upon them with mobile computing. ...

Adobe put itself exactly where it is. Many companies that have made a lot fewer bad decisions have gone out of business. The great mystery is why Adobe has not followed them.
post #73 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by IronHeadSlim View Post

Seriously, do you even use Adobe CS products. You seem to be just copying what others say. As a matter of fact, "innovative" is a good thing.

Excuse me - I do use the creative suites. WTF. MFPS.
post #74 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by SendMe View Post

Could you upgrade to an Nvidia card?

No. I wish. I have an early mac pro. Early pcie ati is back compatible. Nvidia not so nice.
I replaced two failed 7300 gt's with a pc video card an actual ATI branded radeon hd 4870/512. I flashed it with the Mac EFI rom and had it up and running in minutes. It thinks I have. No limitations on it either. I'm quite pleased. I can now use STEAM and my MAYA renders are much faster and look fantastic. Cost me $80. A steal at apple's price.
post #75 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bloodshotrollin'red View Post

Apple...Update...Support?

Never in a million years. Apple is lagging so seriously on GPU support that it just isn't funny. By the time they update their API's, Nvidia and ATI will have moved on by several generations.

But the sooner Flash goes away, the better.

I don't think that can happen while Windows users are happy with Flash - and they are. I wouldn't be surprised if number of people don't like it even more now that SJ is so pissed off with Adobe
post #76 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by hezetation View Post

360p HTML5 video via Safari, around 5%.
360p Flash video via Safari, around 31%

I do have the 9400M so I should be among the supported.

Funny thing about it though, when Idle Flash still takes about 8% with the video paused. HTML5 paused takes up 0%.

Adobe can't blame this just on the Mac OS either. Hardware accelerated flash on Windows doesn't perform hardly any better either unless you have a much higher end video card. Can't say for sure but it doesn't look like it's actually taking advantage of acceleration of H.264 in the graphics hardware, just making use of general video acceleration.

Sorry, but if 31% CPU usage on 360p video is the best they can do, goodbye Flash and good riddens!

The developer's blog notes the following:

Video clips will a width of 864 fallback to software H264 decoding on the nVidia GeForce 9400M. This is a known limitation of the GeForce 9400M drivers. Unfortunately, YouTube Clips at 480p resolution often use a width of 864. Switch to 720p or 1080p to benefit from hardware acceleration for these clips. The hardware decoder will not be used for video with frame dimensions smaller than 480×320. For video smaller than that size, the cpu/speed improvements for using the GPU rather than the CPU are negligible.
Those restrictions are dictated by NVIDIA and Apple.


But yeah, 31% CPU usage on 360p video, maybe they need to learn something from VLC.
post #77 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpsro View Post

Did Apple perhaps make the switch to ATI just to screw Adobe?

Nope, it's just that ATI's 5000 GPUs are really great GPUs... Nvidia has been struggling with 40nm production and their new Fermi architecture for the past year or so, and finally managed to get things moving again, and managed to deliver reasonable performance-per-watt with the Nvidia 460.
post #78 of 82
No worries, you're welcome. The biggest transition now for Adobe is the mobile space. And they need to get cracking on getting their current and new products working well on Android, Blackberry and iOS. But just like Microsoft, they're so heavily invested in desktop/laptop PCs and corporate environments, they're slowly adapting to the mobile market.

Quote:
Originally Posted by meh 2 View Post

Thank you for your reflections. As usual, I find your insights especially informative on what I am presently engaged in. You are so right - my experience with Adobe began with CS5 so I missed those interesting times you related that dealt with previous iterations.

I hadn't thought about it until you pointed it out - but Adobe has been between a rock and a "juggernaut" - especially given the unintended connection that has been thrust upon them with mobile computing. As you pointed out - the transition train went fairly quickly through OS X, then Intel, Cocoa, 64-bit, who knows what Apple has planned next (e.g., I remember reading about a position Apple was hiring for that involved a totally new parameter that had never been done before - or something like that). Viewed from the perspective you've painted, I can see where a reasonable person might be inclined to at least be empathetic, if not sympathetic, with the challenges confronting Adobe. When someone is in the middle of a sea change, it is not as obvious as it will be to the historian that writes about it decades later. In a sense, Adobe et al. may not be as aware of the "big picture" as one might - at first take - imagine. I'm sure they're getting there, however.

As you so aptly put it, the saga continues to unfold...

Again, thank you for your kind contribution. It is always appreciated.
post #79 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post

The developer's blog notes the following:

Video clips will a width of 864 fallback to software H264 decoding on the nVidia GeForce 9400M. This is a known limitation of the GeForce 9400M drivers. Unfortunately, YouTube Clips at 480p resolution often use a width of 864. Switch to 720p or 1080p to benefit from hardware acceleration for these clips. The hardware decoder will not be used for video with frame dimensions smaller than 480×320. For video smaller than that size, the cpu/speed improvements for using the GPU rather than the CPU are negligible.
Those restrictions are dictated by NVIDIA and Apple.


But yeah, 31% CPU usage on 360p video, maybe they need to learn something from VLC.

Apple could learn something from VLC, and it's associated H.264 decoders, far superior QT, not to mention it can play just about any video file.

As far as Flash, it does run well on Windows, primarily because the video drivers are better, and since I use Chrome, if it does crash, you just nuke that particular tab.

IIRC, Flash acceleration isn't supported on the Nvidia 8600 in OSX, but it is in Windows. Flash may be this or that on OSX, but Apple offers terrible video drivers, so even capable HW doesn't work, heck, Flash acceleration won't even work on the current crop of ATI GPU's, and I have a 5770 in my desktop, it maybe hits 35% when running 1080p or 4k content on YT.

It's almost like Apple is doing as much as they can, in order to make sure Flash dies on OSX too.
post #80 of 82
Quote:
Originally Posted by guinness View Post

Apple could learn something from VLC, and it's associated H.264 decoders, far superior QT, not to mention it can play just about any video file.

As far as Flash, it does run well on Windows, primarily because the video drivers are better, and since I use Chrome, if it does crash, you just nuke that particular tab.

Which is what comes across my mind - if VLC plays so well on Windows and Mac, what's their secret? Is there anything Adobe can learn from that?

VLC sure isn't saying, "oh, your video drivers suck so our performance goes down the toilet"... You can throw almost anything at VLC nowadays on Windows or Mac and it handles it all pretty well.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac OS X
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Hardware acceleration added to Flash Player 10.1 for Mac