Tell me how apple is supposed to hardware accelerate flash (thus reduce battery drain for playing video) the way they hardware accelerate h.264 decoding?
Adobe added H.264 support in Flash Player 9 Update 3 back in December 2007. In Flash 10 they added hardware acceleration to compete better with Silverlight?s hardware acceleration. I?m guessing this doesn?t help with the resources used by Flash itself, but it does help with the streaming content. It?s better than nothin?.
Adobe added H.264 support in Flash Player 9 Update 3 back in December 2007. In Flash 10 they added hardware acceleration to compete better with Silverlight’s hardware acceleration. I’m guessing this doesn’t help with the resources used by Flash itself, but it does help with the streaming content. It’s better than nothin’.
For what hardware did they add the acceleration? My question is how does Apple add support for their own custom hardware? The answer is they can't, they are dependent on Adobe to do it. Why should Apple, or any other vendor, be dependent on a 3rd party for something as basic as video playback when there are now clear standards that allow them to implement and optimize the playback themselves?
It's just completely backwards to have a structure where implementation of a standard is considered incomplete without a proprietary 3rd party plugin that may have security issues that the browser designers cannot fix themselves. This simply will not continue indefinitely.
For what hardware did they add the acceleration? My question is how does Apple add support for their own custom hardware? The answer is they can't, they are dependent on Adobe to do it. Why should Apple, or any other vendor, be dependent on a 3rd party for something as basic as video playback when there are now clear standards that allow them to implement and optimize the playback themselves?
I assumed that any H.264 encoded video in Flash 10 running on any machine with a chipset that decode H.264 in the hardware would automatically benefit from this.
...American NCSA, which had been funded by congressman Al Gore...
Giving the author the benefit of the doubt, this is a half-truth at best. The last time I looked, the House Ways and Means committee appropriates "funding". This is then voted by the entire House and Senate, signed by the President, and paid for (funded) by the taxpayers.
I don't mean to belittle Al Gore's contribution, but to give him credit, as above, is a real stretch!
DED Knows this!
So I ask myself: Why did he do it, and why in that way?
*
Because, as is well known, Al Gore first introduced legislation to create and fund the work that was done. He sponsored that legislation, and it was passed. He deserves credit for his foresight in this area, though I know it's fun for people who didn't know how this happened, and his part in it, to belittle his contributions, because of some silly remarks once made about it. Gore was always interested in technology and research. I don't understand why some people think its funny when he gets credit for what he did.
And if you're saying that you're merely trying to be accurate, then you could have stated what I just did.
Because, as is well known, Al Gore first introduced legislation to create and fund the work that was done. He sponsored that legislation, and it was passed. He deserves credit for his foresight in this area, though I know it's fun for people who didn't know how this happened, and his part in it, to belittle his contributions, because of some silly remarks once made about it. Gore was always interested in technology and research. I don't understand why some people think its funny when he gets credit for what he did.
And I don't want to rely on Apple to tell me what I can and can't have on my phone. We don't always get what we want.
I have the option of switching vendors. I will be doing so as soon as my contract is up.
Apple's obsession with compete control and a closed system does not fit my life style. I made the mistake of purchasing an iPhone. I regret that everyday.
I'm curious, what phone are you going to replace it with?
Once you're rid of your iPhone, does it mean you won't feel the need to troll around here anymore?
Having a different viewpoint is fine, as long as you actually have something to contribute, which is unfortunately not your case.
Because, as is well known, Al Gore first introduced legislation to create and fund the work that was done. He sponsored that legislation, and it was passed. He deserves credit for his foresight in this area, though I know it's fun for people who didn't know how this happened, and his part in it, to belittle his contributions, because of some silly remarks once made about it. Gore was always interested in technology and research. I don't understand why some people think its funny when he gets credit for what he did.
And if you're saying that you're merely trying to be accurate, then you could have stated what I just did.
Actually, I prefer to frame my thoughts and state my opinions in my own way, with my own words.
If DED had made his citation as you did above (with a few references) I would have had no issue (except maybe, verbosity and relevance).
There are a lot of readers, here, who are not familiar with the history of the Internet/web.
It would be just as misleading to state that Ross Perot is responsible for the web/browser, because it is well known that it was developed on a NeXT computer, and he funded NeXT..
DED handled the NeXT citation properly, IMO.
Here is the proper DED citation on NeXT;
"The resulting system, prototyped using the advanced development tools of the NeXT Computer, became known as the World Wide Web".
Here is an improper citation-- the bold words are mine, and add nothing to the story:
"The resulting system, prototyped using the advanced development tools of the NeXT Computer, which had been funded by Ross Perot became known as the World Wide Web".
Here is DED's citation-- the bold words are his, and add nothing to the story, IMO:
"He cited the Mosiac browser being developed at the American NCSA, which had been funded by congressman Al Gore as a part of a broad effort to promote the development of high performance computing and communications by leveraging the power of market forces using strategic government investmen "
What the hell does Al Gore or Ross Perot have to do with the topic of this article?
Since silverlte and flash are for video , L felt i could mention two incredible sites which have fantastic video play back on my 15"MBP3,92GHz;
The first is the ABC-TV Video player . Nothing beats this. I even streamed two of the same shows from ABC-TV and HULU side by side >>and hulu looked pretty shabby ,.
And next story well i missed the NY JETS game and on monday bought A season pass from NFL>FILMS .Well i was forced to get firefox and let me say that f-ing sucked i love safari .
WHOA nelly !!! Once installed within a minute i was watching the finest football game ever .
I watch movies all day at work.i watched all nine seasons of the x files on my various macs
So a whoa nelly is big deal . I even did some slo-mo's and the resolution was mind boggling
So was it firefox or NFL GAMES that made such an incredible player ??
New QT player May equal these 2 others ,but not better ,
Actually, I prefer to frame my thoughts and state my opinions in my own way, with my own words.
If DED had made his citation as you did above (with a few references) I would have had no issue (except maybe, verbosity and relevance).
There are a lot of readers, here, who are not familiar with the history of the Internet/web.
It would be just as misleading to state that Ross Perot is responsible for the web/browser, because it is well known that it was developed on a NeXT computer, and he funded NeXT..
DED handled the NeXT citation properly, IMO.
Here is the proper DED citation on NeXT;
"The resulting system, prototyped using the advanced development tools of the NeXT Computer, became known as the World Wide Web".
Here is an improper citation-- the bold words are mine, and add nothing to the story:
"The resulting system, prototyped using the advanced development tools of the NeXT Computer, which had been funded by Ross Perot became known as the World Wide Web".
Here is DED's citation-- the bold words are his, and add nothing to the story, IMO:
"He cited the Mosiac browser being developed at the American NCSA, which had been funded by congressman Al Gore as a part of a broad effort to promote the development of high performance computing and communications by leveraging the power of market forces using strategic government investmen "
What the hell does Al Gore or Ross Perot have to do with the topic of this article?
*
It was about the history. As his contributions were an essential part of that history, he was mentioned. If you've gotten to CurtisEMayle's post, and his link, which I didn't know about earlier, you will see why Gore was so important to the development of the internet. If he hadn't done what he did over time, who knows what, if anything, it would be today?
And if you can't believe Cerf in this matter, then you can't believe anyone.
Then Adobe management has a lot to answer for with Acrobat. That piece of bloatware is as bad as Flash in terms of poor performance and resource use. (And then there are all the execrable installers associated with their various software packages...)
If what you claim is true, then the engineers at Adobe should stage a revolt and clear out the executive suites. I doubt that's the sole source of their problems, though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
What you're claiming is an exaggeration. You don't need to do that to make a point.
Which part is an exaggeration? Acrobat is no lightweight for viewing PDFs. Granted, it offers more functionality that Preview (although not much for most tasks), but in terms of startup times and memory footprint it can certainly tax lesser machines that handle Preview just fine.
Which part is an exaggeration? Acrobat is no lightweight for viewing PDFs. Granted, it offers more functionality that Preview (although not much for most tasks), but in terms of startup times and memory footprint it can certainly tax lesser machines that handle Preview just fine.
And don't get me started on Adobe's installers...
It works well enough. It also has a pretty good feature set.
Somewhat slow, but not a real problem.
So I might give it a rating of 7.5 out of 10. Not fantastic, but not bad either.
It was about the history. As his contributions were an essential part of that history, he was mentioned. If you've gotten to CurtisEMayle's post, and his link, which I didn't know about earlier, you will see why Gore was so important to the development of the internet. If he hadn't done what he did over time, who knows what, if anything, it would be today?
And if you can't believe Cerf in this matter, then you can't believe anyone.
Mmmm... FWIW, 3 members of the Keating five were co-sponsers of the enabling legislation
I assumed that any H.264 encoded video in Flash 10 running on any machine with a chipset that decode H.264 in the hardware would automatically benefit from this.
and you still don't get the significant flaw, do you?
The video is H.264 - a standard anyone can adopt
It's being played on an html web page - also a standard anyone can adopt
but there is a needless extra proprietary layer that is not a standard, and that doesn't run on EVERY browser, called Flash, that is required to play much of the content. This isn't required because flash is doing something special, it's required because the html standard was missing functionality. part of the enhancement to html5 eliminates the need for this proprietary plugin.
To play flash based H.264 video, a browser has to adopt a proprietary 3rd party plugin and all of it's baggage.
To play h.264 video in an HTML5 browser, no plugin is needed.
Comments
Tell me how apple is supposed to hardware accelerate flash (thus reduce battery drain for playing video) the way they hardware accelerate h.264 decoding?
Adobe added H.264 support in Flash Player 9 Update 3 back in December 2007. In Flash 10 they added hardware acceleration to compete better with Silverlight?s hardware acceleration. I?m guessing this doesn?t help with the resources used by Flash itself, but it does help with the streaming content. It?s better than nothin?.
Adobe added H.264 support in Flash Player 9 Update 3 back in December 2007. In Flash 10 they added hardware acceleration to compete better with Silverlight’s hardware acceleration. I’m guessing this doesn’t help with the resources used by Flash itself, but it does help with the streaming content. It’s better than nothin’.
For what hardware did they add the acceleration? My question is how does Apple add support for their own custom hardware? The answer is they can't, they are dependent on Adobe to do it. Why should Apple, or any other vendor, be dependent on a 3rd party for something as basic as video playback when there are now clear standards that allow them to implement and optimize the playback themselves?
It's just completely backwards to have a structure where implementation of a standard is considered incomplete without a proprietary 3rd party plugin that may have security issues that the browser designers cannot fix themselves. This simply will not continue indefinitely.
For what hardware did they add the acceleration? My question is how does Apple add support for their own custom hardware? The answer is they can't, they are dependent on Adobe to do it. Why should Apple, or any other vendor, be dependent on a 3rd party for something as basic as video playback when there are now clear standards that allow them to implement and optimize the playback themselves?
I assumed that any H.264 encoded video in Flash 10 running on any machine with a chipset that decode H.264 in the hardware would automatically benefit from this.
I'll revisit my original citation:
...American NCSA, which had been funded by congressman Al Gore...
Giving the author the benefit of the doubt, this is a half-truth at best. The last time I looked, the House Ways and Means committee appropriates "funding". This is then voted by the entire House and Senate, signed by the President, and paid for (funded) by the taxpayers.
I don't mean to belittle Al Gore's contribution, but to give him credit, as above, is a real stretch!
DED Knows this!
So I ask myself: Why did he do it, and why in that way?
*
Because, as is well known, Al Gore first introduced legislation to create and fund the work that was done. He sponsored that legislation, and it was passed. He deserves credit for his foresight in this area, though I know it's fun for people who didn't know how this happened, and his part in it, to belittle his contributions, because of some silly remarks once made about it. Gore was always interested in technology and research. I don't understand why some people think its funny when he gets credit for what he did.
And if you're saying that you're merely trying to be accurate, then you could have stated what I just did.
Mobile devices are already becoming much more powerful and will continue to get faster.
"Mobile devices with able to run Flash smoothly well before HTML 5 is a standard"
Now that is an example of making a statement which I can't back up with anything. Much like this article.
You can't back up ANYTHING you say. Besides you don't even remotely have the tech background that the author has.
Because, as is well known, Al Gore first introduced legislation to create and fund the work that was done. He sponsored that legislation, and it was passed. He deserves credit for his foresight in this area, though I know it's fun for people who didn't know how this happened, and his part in it, to belittle his contributions, because of some silly remarks once made about it. Gore was always interested in technology and research. I don't understand why some people think its funny when he gets credit for what he did.
For the interested, but unaware, this from Vint Cerf, one of the internet pioneers: http://amsterdam.nettime.org/Lists-A.../msg00311.html
And I don't want to rely on Apple to tell me what I can and can't have on my phone. We don't always get what we want.
I have the option of switching vendors. I will be doing so as soon as my contract is up.
Apple's obsession with compete control and a closed system does not fit my life style. I made the mistake of purchasing an iPhone. I regret that everyday.
I'm curious, what phone are you going to replace it with?
Once you're rid of your iPhone, does it mean you won't feel the need to troll around here anymore?
Having a different viewpoint is fine, as long as you actually have something to contribute, which is unfortunately not your case.
I'm curious, what phone are you going to replace it with?
Once you're rid of your iPhone, does it mean you won't feel the need to troll around here anymore?
Having a different viewpoint is fine, as long as you actually have something to contribute, which is unfortunately not your case.
I?ll buy everything Apple product he owns at original retail price if he promises never to return under any alias to these forums.
Because, as is well known, Al Gore first introduced legislation to create and fund the work that was done. He sponsored that legislation, and it was passed. He deserves credit for his foresight in this area, though I know it's fun for people who didn't know how this happened, and his part in it, to belittle his contributions, because of some silly remarks once made about it. Gore was always interested in technology and research. I don't understand why some people think its funny when he gets credit for what he did.
And if you're saying that you're merely trying to be accurate, then you could have stated what I just did.
Actually, I prefer to frame my thoughts and state my opinions in my own way, with my own words.
If DED had made his citation as you did above (with a few references) I would have had no issue (except maybe, verbosity and relevance).
There are a lot of readers, here, who are not familiar with the history of the Internet/web.
It would be just as misleading to state that Ross Perot is responsible for the web/browser, because it is well known that it was developed on a NeXT computer, and he funded NeXT..
DED handled the NeXT citation properly, IMO.
Here is the proper DED citation on NeXT;
"The resulting system, prototyped using the advanced development tools of the NeXT Computer, became known as the World Wide Web".
Here is an improper citation-- the bold words are mine, and add nothing to the story:
"The resulting system, prototyped using the advanced development tools of the NeXT Computer, which had been funded by Ross Perot became known as the World Wide Web".
Here is DED's citation-- the bold words are his, and add nothing to the story, IMO:
"He cited the Mosiac browser being developed at the American NCSA, which had been funded by congressman Al Gore as a part of a broad effort to promote the development of high performance computing and communications by leveraging the power of market forces using strategic government investmen "
What the hell does Al Gore or Ross Perot have to do with the topic of this article?
*
Hey I like your posts too.
Of a side note
Since silverlte and flash are for video , L felt i could mention two incredible sites which have fantastic video play back on my 15"MBP3,92GHz;
The first is the ABC-TV Video player . Nothing beats this. I even streamed two of the same shows from ABC-TV and HULU side by side >>and hulu looked pretty shabby ,.
And next story well i missed the NY JETS game and on monday bought A season pass from NFL>FILMS .Well i was forced to get firefox and let me say that f-ing sucked i love safari .
WHOA nelly !!! Once installed within a minute i was watching the finest football game ever .
I watch movies all day at work.i watched all nine seasons of the x files on my various macs
So a whoa nelly is big deal . I even did some slo-mo's and the resolution was mind boggling
So was it firefox or NFL GAMES that made such an incredible player ??
New QT player May equal these 2 others ,but not better ,
9
For the interested, but unaware, this from Vint Cerf, one of the internet pioneers: http://amsterdam.nettime.org/Lists-A.../msg00311.html
Very good. I wasn't aware of that letter, even though Cerf had made statements in support of Gore in public.
Actually, I prefer to frame my thoughts and state my opinions in my own way, with my own words.
If DED had made his citation as you did above (with a few references) I would have had no issue (except maybe, verbosity and relevance).
There are a lot of readers, here, who are not familiar with the history of the Internet/web.
It would be just as misleading to state that Ross Perot is responsible for the web/browser, because it is well known that it was developed on a NeXT computer, and he funded NeXT..
DED handled the NeXT citation properly, IMO.
Here is the proper DED citation on NeXT;
"The resulting system, prototyped using the advanced development tools of the NeXT Computer, became known as the World Wide Web".
Here is an improper citation-- the bold words are mine, and add nothing to the story:
"The resulting system, prototyped using the advanced development tools of the NeXT Computer, which had been funded by Ross Perot became known as the World Wide Web".
Here is DED's citation-- the bold words are his, and add nothing to the story, IMO:
"He cited the Mosiac browser being developed at the American NCSA, which had been funded by congressman Al Gore as a part of a broad effort to promote the development of high performance computing and communications by leveraging the power of market forces using strategic government investmen "
What the hell does Al Gore or Ross Perot have to do with the topic of this article?
*
It was about the history. As his contributions were an essential part of that history, he was mentioned. If you've gotten to CurtisEMayle's post, and his link, which I didn't know about earlier, you will see why Gore was so important to the development of the internet. If he hadn't done what he did over time, who knows what, if anything, it would be today?
And if you can't believe Cerf in this matter, then you can't believe anyone.
Then Adobe management has a lot to answer for with Acrobat. That piece of bloatware is as bad as Flash in terms of poor performance and resource use. (And then there are all the execrable installers associated with their various software packages...)
If what you claim is true, then the engineers at Adobe should stage a revolt and clear out the executive suites. I doubt that's the sole source of their problems, though.
What you're claiming is an exaggeration. You don't need to do that to make a point.
Which part is an exaggeration? Acrobat is no lightweight for viewing PDFs. Granted, it offers more functionality that Preview (although not much for most tasks), but in terms of startup times and memory footprint it can certainly tax lesser machines that handle Preview just fine.
And don't get me started on Adobe's installers...
Why does AppleInsider feel it has to interject politics into its posts? What do you guys gain from it, except a negative increase of subscribers?
It definitely turns me off.
Keep your hands above the keyboard next time .
rdtube is your speed
Which part is an exaggeration? Acrobat is no lightweight for viewing PDFs. Granted, it offers more functionality that Preview (although not much for most tasks), but in terms of startup times and memory footprint it can certainly tax lesser machines that handle Preview just fine.
And don't get me started on Adobe's installers...
It works well enough. It also has a pretty good feature set.
Somewhat slow, but not a real problem.
So I might give it a rating of 7.5 out of 10. Not fantastic, but not bad either.
It works well enough. It also has a pretty good feature set.
Including this little gem:
Flash security vulnerability exploited in PDFs
If nothing else, read the very first comment.
Including this little gem:
Flash security vulnerability exploited in PDFs
If nothing else, read the very first comment.
Yeah, I know about it. Tell me about all the OS's and software that don't have serious software vulnerabilities.
Security experts say that OS X has more vulnerabilities than Windows. Did you drop OS X for Windows because of that?
How about the fact that Windows users are still a thousand times more likely be get caught in one?
The point is that almost no one will see a problem because of this. much of it is exaggerated. And these problems get fixed.
It was about the history. As his contributions were an essential part of that history, he was mentioned. If you've gotten to CurtisEMayle's post, and his link, which I didn't know about earlier, you will see why Gore was so important to the development of the internet. If he hadn't done what he did over time, who knows what, if anything, it would be today?
And if you can't believe Cerf in this matter, then you can't believe anyone.
Mmmm... FWIW, 3 members of the Keating five were co-sponsers of the enabling legislation
I assumed that any H.264 encoded video in Flash 10 running on any machine with a chipset that decode H.264 in the hardware would automatically benefit from this.
and you still don't get the significant flaw, do you?
The video is H.264 - a standard anyone can adopt
It's being played on an html web page - also a standard anyone can adopt
but there is a needless extra proprietary layer that is not a standard, and that doesn't run on EVERY browser, called Flash, that is required to play much of the content. This isn't required because flash is doing something special, it's required because the html standard was missing functionality. part of the enhancement to html5 eliminates the need for this proprietary plugin.
To play flash based H.264 video, a browser has to adopt a proprietary 3rd party plugin and all of it's baggage.
To play h.264 video in an HTML5 browser, no plugin is needed.
Mmmm... FWIW, 3 members of the Keating five were co-sponsers of the enabling legislation
Now you're just being silly.