Wow. I too am running a quad-core i7, with only 4 gigs of Ram, and firefox reports only 1% to 3% CPU usage.
If I were to use Safari, do you think my results would be different?
The music on that website is mucho annoying.
On Quad G5, CPU load in activity monitor for Safari is about 150% higher when jimcarrey.com is open in a big window. (170% vs. 20%). Safari is only about 110% higher when I have jimcarrey.com open in a very small window. I have never had Flash problems on PPC or Intel Macs. I have Flash 10.0.45.2(whatever is newest)
I, for one, am hoping that Adobe is actually getting their stuff together with Flash 10.1 and performance is going to be greatly improved. The early benchmarks show 'phenomenal' and 'magical' improvements on HD video on Intel Macs. Adobe indicates 10.1 will be the last release that supports the G3 processor. Perhaps part of the improvements in 10.1 are that they are finally supporting Alti-Vec and SSE?
This matter comes down to user numbers and resources. As wonderful as our Mac computers are they are still the vast minority of global users. Adobe has no incentive to spend millions in fixing Mac related issues when they can put that money towards the other 95% of the market.
I hate that apps like Photoshop are 64bit and faster on windows but again 95% vs 5% of the market, guess who gets more resources thrown at it? It was my choice to play on the Mac side of the tracks and I accept it. Plus now that Apple is bashing Adobe on a regular basis and creating competing products (FInal Cut and now Aperture) I'm sure Adobe is even LESS interested in the Mac market.
Until Apple can grab a significant portion of global users this isn't going to end anytime soon. We all chose to side with the underdog and there are always downsides to that decision.
The problem with your argument is that the situation is far more complicated than the 95%-5% marketshare statistic that you cite. If it were that simple, then Adobe wouldn't care that Apple has refused Flash access to some of Apple's products. Whatever the marketshare numbers are, I would argue that Apple's share of the mobile browser market is way more significant, and likely to become even more so once iPad hits the market. If you believe that Adobe isn't concerned, then you aren't paying attention.
In my view, herein lies the problem for Adobe. They set their policy with regard to their Macintosh software development based on the 95% vs 5% meme, and the notion that Apple's significance would continue to decline. Neither of those things are really true presently, and on top of that, Apple's surprise success in mobile has made Adobe's decision look bad.
I think Adobe is in a bad spot regarding Flash. One essentially of their own making.
A Ferrari cost around $300k, is that too much? Just go get some more money - what's the problem. Want Flash to run on your netbook... Sorry no can do. Go get some more ram and CPU power.
I don't think you or your alter-ego "iGenius" have ever been within ten feet of a Mac.
Isn't there a nice Windows forum somewhere that you two could hang out at together?
When YouTube is transitiong to HTML5, with Vimeo and others following suit, you know that the current "standard" is about to change.
With Google and Apple pushing HTML5 Adobe doesn't stand a chance. With the impending proliferation of iPads, this is more true now than ever. If you're backing a standard that is incompatible with Apple devices you're playing the wrong game. It's just that simple.
Mstone, iGenius and others are to the Comment Section of AppleInsider.
The symmetry is remarquable.
My opinions are my own and I defend Adobe and Flash and CSx because they are the best professional tools available to working designers, programmers, application developers etc. If something else better comes along, we will be the first to adopt it. So far, nothing is on the horizon.
Please go HTML 5 yourself into a professional corporate marketing, sales. design, advertising gig preaching your holier than thou 'standards' and suffer along until the tide finally turns in your favor. While you are preaching to the idealists I'll be raking in the cash programming with the most robust and ubiquitous protocols in the industry. By the time your beloved HTML 5 makes its mark it will be passé and I'll still be cashing in on whatever is in style just like I have been doing for 25 years.
Flash is the best programing tool available? Are you joking?
Flash is a piece of shit and you know it. You may indeed make money from it, but you might want to consider brushing up on some alternate programming skills. Flash has had its day in the sun, and sunset is approaching.
Flash is the best programing tool available? Are you joking?
Flash is a piece of shit and you know it. You may indeed make money from it, but you might want to consider brushing up on some alternate programming skills. Flash has had its day in the sun, and sunset is approaching.
'dude' I doubt you have ever programmed a single line of code in your life. There are dozens if not hundreds of PhDs working on Flash, Actionscript, Air and Flex at Adobe that would probably take offense by your derogatory remarks which are an insult to decades of hard work and research. You try to come off as some sort of authoritative and knowledgeable expert but you haven't a clue what you are talking about. Please STFU or post something that validates your expertise on the subject.
If you're backing a standard that is incompatible with Apple devices you're playing the wrong game. It's just that simple.
Thing is that Apple devices are currently targeted at consumers who are notoriously cheap. They want everything for free. I'm on the side where the money is. For me that is business applications. Sure 100,000 farts apps can't be wrong, but I'll stick with business clients. As soon as the winds shift, I'll adapt in a second so there is no time wasted endorsing a future trend until it is ready for prime time.
I have the same clients I have retained for 15-20 years. The only side of the business I need to be on is what they want. I don't need to chase after the latest 'in thing' unless it is going to make money right now. As far as HTML5/Ajax is concerned, We have been integrating that into our applications for some time now. Many people don't even realize that MS invented it a decade ago. (innerHTML)
So glad we didn't invest too much time in Rails, what a disaster that turned out to be. You never know what is going to catch on.
I believe Apple is trying to kill Flash, at least to the extent that it is any kind of internet standard. I believe they will succeed. They are already selling millions of mobile internet devices every quarter that don't support Flash. That number is going to increase, substantially I believe, when iPad ships. The tide is turning, and not in Adobe's favor.
Bingo!!!
There are already 75 million iPhone/iTouch's in the wild that CANNOT view those Flash ads... And now the iPad too.... Those numbers will definitely make an impact and cause most advertisers to reconsider using Flash going forward.
And the whole spiel about Mac marketshare being "so much smaller" that it doesn't make a difference is ridiculous.. Apple sold about 11 million Macs last year, and about 9 million the year before, that's about 20 million current Mac users not to mention another approximate 10 or so million with computers over 2 years old..
So were talking approximately 30 million Mac users out there.. And those Mac users are at the top end of the Pc market, computers over $1000 dollars.. People who buy $1000 and up computers are the demographic that generally have more disposable income. Those 30 million people are the ones who advertisers want seeing their ads.
So between the 75+ million iDevices and the 30 + million Mac users, well, let's just say that Adobe definitely needs Apple's customers...
Old inefficient software is supplanted and replaced by newer and more nimble software all the time. Its inevitable and necessary.
You do have admit Adobe has its hands full trying to push Flash forward all by itself. There are far more people working on HTML5.
What you have to consider is the fact that all of the newest mobile platforms use HTML5 right now. Apple, Google, Palm, Nokia, very soon RIM all ship phones that make use of HTML5 right now. They have all worked to make their platforms HTML5 compliant.
Its exactly the opposite for Flash. Adobe will be all by itself attempting to adapt Flash to work on all of these different platforms with little to no difference in functionality and performance and no help from any OS makers. That is a tall order.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone
There are dozens if not hundreds of PhDs working on Flash, Actionscript, Air and Flex at Adobe that would probably take offense by your derogatory remarks which are an insult to decades of hard work and research.
Thing is that Apple devices are currently targeted at consumers who are notoriously cheap. They want everything for free. I'm on the side where the money is.
Seeing as the app store and peripherals for Apple's iDevices are multibillion dollar business. The fact that an iPod dock is built into nearly every consumer electronic device that makes noise, I don't think your statement quite holds up under the weight of reality.
Quote:
Many people don't even realize that MS invented it a decade ago. (innerHTML)
MS has added some important pieces to HTML, but they certainly did not invent it.
Very good point, to even further it. Palm, Google, Nokia, (very soon) RIM are shipping hundreds of millions of devices that make productive use of HTML5 right now.
Web developers are already making use of HTML5 and H.264 video without the need for Flash today.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solsun
Bingo!!!
So between the 75+ million iDevices and the 30 + million Mac users, well, let's just say that Adobe definitely needs Apple's customers...
I'm surprised at how uninformed some of the posters here are.
1) Adobe has announced that the forthcoming version of Flash CS5 will be able to output stand-alone app code, that will be useable on the iPhone/iPad... I suspect for games mostly.
2) Here is a great example of HTML5 Video: Sublime Video
I also agree that someone (Apple?) needs to come out with software and tools that make creating content (HTML5 with CSS, Java, whatever) easier. I say Apple, because it's in their best interests considering the iPhone... and especially the upcoming iPad, for designers/publishers to easily and expediently get their content re-purposed for Apple's mobile devices. I would expect the software could also be used to make those "Albums" that Apple has been pushing.
The benefit is obvious, but considering that this software would be outputing Standards complaint code, it would also more than likely be the software of choice to create content for any "standards complaint browser". This would be the fastest route to "suspending" Flash and Silverlight development and adaptation.
Adobe should have reacted the moment flash blockers started to appear for browsers. The very fact that these exist show that Flash is indeed a problem for internet usability and pleasantness. If Flash was so great, do you think that Flash blockers would be the most downloaded add-ons for Firefox and Chrome ? (I'm mentioning those 2 because their add-on pages allow to compare the popularity of various add-ons.) In business, there is the 1:10 rule : for every person that complains or show dissatisfaction, there are 10 other people out there who are the same but didn't say so. So Flash blockers are a very serious symptom that something is wrong in Flashland.
The second reason Adobe should have reacted is because the Flash blockers allow users to realize that one can live without Flash and it's not that bad to not have Flash in your web pages. So people start wondering why they should install this security hole in the first place. Leading to less and less demand for Flash. This in turn leads to a downward spiral : less demand, less sites requiring Flash. Less site requiring Flash, less interest for Flash...
It's the ad's people disike, but the truth is, there will always be ads. Not like the days of BBS. LOL. For streaming video though, it rocks. I have it on SL 10.61,62, Tiger and Leopard 1058 and never had a problem with it. Xvid is also very good but much larger. QuickTime can be very large. Ist really about the ads and file size and by comparison, Flash is very small.
The only reason we don't see it on the iPhone is twofold, battery life and iTunes would take a hit from users going to the networks instead of buying it from iTunes. Personally, I see this $1.00 test as a way that Jobs is getting the message and that many netbooks, smart phones, and all computers will have it. I never see it going away. If HTML5 is so great (which will be about five years for all the web programs to adopt, Macromed.... I mean Adobe will work on it and get the compression very small. Whoever gets the compression the best and smallest wins. I think I said that about ten years ago. CIO
You purchased a Mac. Mac's cannot handle Flash well, and this is widely known. Yet, it is a pastime for Mac users, and those who are on these forums, to berate Adobe. So who's fault is it? Is it Adobe's, for not bending over backward to the whims of Jobs, his needy customers, and the obstructiveness of OS X? Or is it your fault, for making the decision to buy a product you knew full well does not support Flash- a rich media format used extensively throughout the web? I have to tell you, my non-Apple desktop at home has much the same specs as yours, and Flash just works (to quote a familiar tag line). Do not complain about it after the fact, as you're doing at the very end of your post.
And as of yet, Adobe still hasn't released a Mac suitable version of Flash. From a business perspective, which do you cater to first? The 80% of the market which uses PCs and has very little to no issues with Flash and whose hardware can handle it? Or do you cater to <15% of the market which uses Macs, a company that openly chastises your product, and whose products feature software (and possibly hardware?) that cannot adequately handle Flash? I wonder.
As you said, your post also speaks for itself.
EDIT: misc grammatical stuff
This post made me realize something. Most pcs come with a dedicated gpu wheras MacBook use onboard gpu. I wonder if that plays a role. I have a few macs, all dedicated GPU, zero problems.
Your posts speak for themselves. If you are trying to make some other point with those comments, you'll forgive us if we missed it. If there were any probing questions in there, I must have missed those too.
Adobe's CEO outright admits that Flash over utilizes the CPU on Macs. It is abused beyond belief, unsafe, ignores browser cookie settings, requires more bandwidth than simple text and images, and is IMO, just gives a bad experience on the web.
Web sites like that speak for themselves. I'm running a Quad I7 with 8GB of ram, and it's utilizing 30% just for a web page.
Inexcusable.
We'l since we've never found code that does this, at the hardware EE micro photolithography level, there could be a conspiracy to tripple the CPU whenever flash code is found on motherboards with Apple chips. Is it happening, naa, but for fun I thought everyone should know. Hee hee.
Wai a second. While what youbsaybis 100% true, those were Aldo the days when Apple was Chic' and store employees were told not to bother the customer and the studio was filled with Logic, Shake, and FCP users and NOT baby strollers (we do love chidren though, can't wait to have our own), and people with their dogs, iPods and iLife ads on-screen, running on an endless loop.
Those days are long gone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJRumpy
Your posts speak for themselves. If you are trying to make some other point with those comments, you'll forgive us if we missed it. If there were any probing questions in there, I must have missed those too.
Adobe's CEO outright admits that Flash over utilizes the CPU on Macs. It is abused beyond belief, unsafe, ignores browser cookie settings, requires more bandwidth than simple text and images, and is IMO, just gives a bad experience on the web.
Web sites like that speak for themselves. I'm running a Quad I7 with 8GB of ram, and it's utilizing 30% just for a web page.
Inexcusable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by spliff monkey
Are you such a fraking idiot that you can't remember where adobe started? We should feel so lucky that Adobe would develop for the Mac? Oh yes we are blessed and humbled that the great Adobe has not forsaken us. (Bloated POS software maker) Your belief is not only arrogant but illogical and misinformed. Adobe wouldn't have had a platform to develop for if it weren't for the mac OS and the Apple computer. Those computers were the first to offer color displays and other features needed by graphic artists. There was no other platform to develop for at the time of Photoshop V1. Pc's were and are still primarily office machines. Only in the 90's did things change and designers finally felt comfortable switching to PC.
While there may be millions more PC's than Mac users (22million of us) but that says nothing about Adobe's client share of each. The percentage of mac users with PS installed is much higher than on PC's no doubt about that . Your attitude is probably the same attitude that lead Apple to build Aperture and Iphoto and F_-K Adobe.
Comments
Wow. I too am running a quad-core i7, with only 4 gigs of Ram, and firefox reports only 1% to 3% CPU usage.
If I were to use Safari, do you think my results would be different?
The music on that website is mucho annoying.
On Quad G5, CPU load in activity monitor for Safari is about 150% higher when jimcarrey.com is open in a big window. (170% vs. 20%). Safari is only about 110% higher when I have jimcarrey.com open in a very small window. I have never had Flash problems on PPC or Intel Macs. I have Flash 10.0.45.2(whatever is newest)
I, for one, am hoping that Adobe is actually getting their stuff together with Flash 10.1 and performance is going to be greatly improved. The early benchmarks show 'phenomenal' and 'magical' improvements on HD video on Intel Macs. Adobe indicates 10.1 will be the last release that supports the G3 processor. Perhaps part of the improvements in 10.1 are that they are finally supporting Alti-Vec and SSE?
Everyone breathe in, now exhale.
This matter comes down to user numbers and resources. As wonderful as our Mac computers are they are still the vast minority of global users. Adobe has no incentive to spend millions in fixing Mac related issues when they can put that money towards the other 95% of the market.
I hate that apps like Photoshop are 64bit and faster on windows but again 95% vs 5% of the market, guess who gets more resources thrown at it? It was my choice to play on the Mac side of the tracks and I accept it. Plus now that Apple is bashing Adobe on a regular basis and creating competing products (FInal Cut and now Aperture) I'm sure Adobe is even LESS interested in the Mac market.
Until Apple can grab a significant portion of global users this isn't going to end anytime soon. We all chose to side with the underdog and there are always downsides to that decision.
The problem with your argument is that the situation is far more complicated than the 95%-5% marketshare statistic that you cite. If it were that simple, then Adobe wouldn't care that Apple has refused Flash access to some of Apple's products. Whatever the marketshare numbers are, I would argue that Apple's share of the mobile browser market is way more significant, and likely to become even more so once iPad hits the market. If you believe that Adobe isn't concerned, then you aren't paying attention.
In my view, herein lies the problem for Adobe. They set their policy with regard to their Macintosh software development based on the 95% vs 5% meme, and the notion that Apple's significance would continue to decline. Neither of those things are really true presently, and on top of that, Apple's surprise success in mobile has made Adobe's decision look bad.
I think Adobe is in a bad spot regarding Flash. One essentially of their own making.
A Ferrari cost around $300k, is that too much? Just go get some more money - what's the problem. Want Flash to run on your netbook... Sorry no can do. Go get some more ram and CPU power.
I don't think you or your alter-ego "iGenius" have ever been within ten feet of a Mac.
Isn't there a nice Windows forum somewhere that you two could hang out at together?
With Google and Apple pushing HTML5 Adobe doesn't stand a chance. With the impending proliferation of iPads, this is more true now than ever. If you're backing a standard that is incompatible with Apple devices you're playing the wrong game. It's just that simple.
I don't think you or your alter-ego "iGenius" have ever been within ten feet of a Mac.
Isn't there a nice Windows forum somewhere that you two could hang out at together?
As an exercise in Logic:
Flash is to the Mac OSX creative environment what
Mstone, iGenius and others are to the Comment Section of AppleInsider.
The symmetry is remarquable.
As an exercise in Logic:
Flash is to the Mac OSX creative environment what
Mstone, iGenius and others are to the Comment Section of AppleInsider.
The symmetry is remarquable.
My opinions are my own and I defend Adobe and Flash and CSx because they are the best professional tools available to working designers, programmers, application developers etc. If something else better comes along, we will be the first to adopt it. So far, nothing is on the horizon.
Please go HTML 5 yourself into a professional corporate marketing, sales. design, advertising gig preaching your holier than thou 'standards' and suffer along until the tide finally turns in your favor. While you are preaching to the idealists I'll be raking in the cash programming with the most robust and ubiquitous protocols in the industry. By the time your beloved HTML 5 makes its mark it will be passé and I'll still be cashing in on whatever is in style just like I have been doing for 25 years.
My opinions are my own and...
Flash is the best programing tool available? Are you joking?
Flash is a piece of shit and you know it. You may indeed make money from it, but you might want to consider brushing up on some alternate programming skills. Flash has had its day in the sun, and sunset is approaching.
Flash is the best programing tool available? Are you joking?
Flash is a piece of shit and you know it. You may indeed make money from it, but you might want to consider brushing up on some alternate programming skills. Flash has had its day in the sun, and sunset is approaching.
'dude' I doubt you have ever programmed a single line of code in your life. There are dozens if not hundreds of PhDs working on Flash, Actionscript, Air and Flex at Adobe that would probably take offense by your derogatory remarks which are an insult to decades of hard work and research. You try to come off as some sort of authoritative and knowledgeable expert but you haven't a clue what you are talking about. Please STFU or post something that validates your expertise on the subject.
If you're backing a standard that is incompatible with Apple devices you're playing the wrong game. It's just that simple.
Thing is that Apple devices are currently targeted at consumers who are notoriously cheap. They want everything for free. I'm on the side where the money is. For me that is business applications. Sure 100,000 farts apps can't be wrong, but I'll stick with business clients. As soon as the winds shift, I'll adapt in a second so there is no time wasted endorsing a future trend until it is ready for prime time.
I have the same clients I have retained for 15-20 years. The only side of the business I need to be on is what they want. I don't need to chase after the latest 'in thing' unless it is going to make money right now. As far as HTML5/Ajax is concerned, We have been integrating that into our applications for some time now. Many people don't even realize that MS invented it a decade ago. (innerHTML)
So glad we didn't invest too much time in Rails, what a disaster that turned out to be. You never know what is going to catch on.
Maybe you're right, but maybe not.
I believe Apple is trying to kill Flash, at least to the extent that it is any kind of internet standard. I believe they will succeed. They are already selling millions of mobile internet devices every quarter that don't support Flash. That number is going to increase, substantially I believe, when iPad ships. The tide is turning, and not in Adobe's favor.
Bingo!!!
There are already 75 million iPhone/iTouch's in the wild that CANNOT view those Flash ads... And now the iPad too.... Those numbers will definitely make an impact and cause most advertisers to reconsider using Flash going forward.
And the whole spiel about Mac marketshare being "so much smaller" that it doesn't make a difference is ridiculous.. Apple sold about 11 million Macs last year, and about 9 million the year before, that's about 20 million current Mac users not to mention another approximate 10 or so million with computers over 2 years old..
So were talking approximately 30 million Mac users out there.. And those Mac users are at the top end of the Pc market, computers over $1000 dollars.. People who buy $1000 and up computers are the demographic that generally have more disposable income. Those 30 million people are the ones who advertisers want seeing their ads.
So between the 75+ million iDevices and the 30 + million Mac users, well, let's just say that Adobe definitely needs Apple's customers...
You do have admit Adobe has its hands full trying to push Flash forward all by itself. There are far more people working on HTML5.
What you have to consider is the fact that all of the newest mobile platforms use HTML5 right now. Apple, Google, Palm, Nokia, very soon RIM all ship phones that make use of HTML5 right now. They have all worked to make their platforms HTML5 compliant.
Its exactly the opposite for Flash. Adobe will be all by itself attempting to adapt Flash to work on all of these different platforms with little to no difference in functionality and performance and no help from any OS makers. That is a tall order.
There are dozens if not hundreds of PhDs working on Flash, Actionscript, Air and Flex at Adobe that would probably take offense by your derogatory remarks which are an insult to decades of hard work and research.
Thing is that Apple devices are currently targeted at consumers who are notoriously cheap. They want everything for free. I'm on the side where the money is.
Seeing as the app store and peripherals for Apple's iDevices are multibillion dollar business. The fact that an iPod dock is built into nearly every consumer electronic device that makes noise, I don't think your statement quite holds up under the weight of reality.
Many people don't even realize that MS invented it a decade ago. (innerHTML)
MS has added some important pieces to HTML, but they certainly did not invent it.
Web developers are already making use of HTML5 and H.264 video without the need for Flash today.
Bingo!!!
So between the 75+ million iDevices and the 30 + million Mac users, well, let's just say that Adobe definitely needs Apple's customers...
1) Adobe has announced that the forthcoming version of Flash CS5 will be able to output stand-alone app code, that will be useable on the iPhone/iPad... I suspect for games mostly.
2) Here is a great example of HTML5 Video: Sublime Video
I also agree that someone (Apple?) needs to come out with software and tools that make creating content (HTML5 with CSS, Java, whatever) easier. I say Apple, because it's in their best interests considering the iPhone... and especially the upcoming iPad, for designers/publishers to easily and expediently get their content re-purposed for Apple's mobile devices. I would expect the software could also be used to make those "Albums" that Apple has been pushing.
The benefit is obvious, but considering that this software would be outputing Standards complaint code, it would also more than likely be the software of choice to create content for any "standards complaint browser". This would be the fastest route to "suspending" Flash and Silverlight development and adaptation.
Adobe should have reacted the moment flash blockers started to appear for browsers. The very fact that these exist show that Flash is indeed a problem for internet usability and pleasantness. If Flash was so great, do you think that Flash blockers would be the most downloaded add-ons for Firefox and Chrome ? (I'm mentioning those 2 because their add-on pages allow to compare the popularity of various add-ons.) In business, there is the 1:10 rule : for every person that complains or show dissatisfaction, there are 10 other people out there who are the same but didn't say so. So Flash blockers are a very serious symptom that something is wrong in Flashland.
The second reason Adobe should have reacted is because the Flash blockers allow users to realize that one can live without Flash and it's not that bad to not have Flash in your web pages. So people start wondering why they should install this security hole in the first place. Leading to less and less demand for Flash. This in turn leads to a downward spiral : less demand, less sites requiring Flash. Less site requiring Flash, less interest for Flash...
It's the ad's people disike, but the truth is, there will always be ads. Not like the days of BBS. LOL. For streaming video though, it rocks. I have it on SL 10.61,62, Tiger and Leopard 1058 and never had a problem with it. Xvid is also very good but much larger. QuickTime can be very large. Ist really about the ads and file size and by comparison, Flash is very small.
The only reason we don't see it on the iPhone is twofold, battery life and iTunes would take a hit from users going to the networks instead of buying it from iTunes. Personally, I see this $1.00 test as a way that Jobs is getting the message and that many netbooks, smart phones, and all computers will have it. I never see it going away. If HTML5 is so great (which will be about five years for all the web programs to adopt, Macromed.... I mean Adobe will work on it and get the compression very small. Whoever gets the compression the best and smallest wins. I think I said that about ten years ago. CIO
thank you. exactly...
But nearly 100% for networks ala NBC, CBS,FOX,ESPN,MLB,ABC. You get it.
You purchased a Mac. Mac's cannot handle Flash well, and this is widely known. Yet, it is a pastime for Mac users, and those who are on these forums, to berate Adobe. So who's fault is it? Is it Adobe's, for not bending over backward to the whims of Jobs, his needy customers, and the obstructiveness of OS X? Or is it your fault, for making the decision to buy a product you knew full well does not support Flash- a rich media format used extensively throughout the web? I have to tell you, my non-Apple desktop at home has much the same specs as yours, and Flash just works (to quote a familiar tag line). Do not complain about it after the fact, as you're doing at the very end of your post.
And as of yet, Adobe still hasn't released a Mac suitable version of Flash. From a business perspective, which do you cater to first? The 80% of the market which uses PCs and has very little to no issues with Flash and whose hardware can handle it? Or do you cater to <15% of the market which uses Macs, a company that openly chastises your product, and whose products feature software (and possibly hardware?) that cannot adequately handle Flash? I wonder.
As you said, your post also speaks for itself.
EDIT: misc grammatical stuff
This post made me realize something. Most pcs come with a dedicated gpu wheras MacBook use onboard gpu. I wonder if that plays a role. I have a few macs, all dedicated GPU, zero problems.
Your posts speak for themselves. If you are trying to make some other point with those comments, you'll forgive us if we missed it. If there were any probing questions in there, I must have missed those too.
Adobe's CEO outright admits that Flash over utilizes the CPU on Macs. It is abused beyond belief, unsafe, ignores browser cookie settings, requires more bandwidth than simple text and images, and is IMO, just gives a bad experience on the web.
http://jimcarrey.com/
Web sites like that speak for themselves. I'm running a Quad I7 with 8GB of ram, and it's utilizing 30% just for a web page.
Inexcusable.
We'l since we've never found code that does this, at the hardware EE micro photolithography level, there could be a conspiracy to tripple the CPU whenever flash code is found on motherboards with Apple chips. Is it happening, naa, but for fun I thought everyone should know. Hee hee.
Those days are long gone.
Your posts speak for themselves. If you are trying to make some other point with those comments, you'll forgive us if we missed it. If there were any probing questions in there, I must have missed those too.
Adobe's CEO outright admits that Flash over utilizes the CPU on Macs. It is abused beyond belief, unsafe, ignores browser cookie settings, requires more bandwidth than simple text and images, and is IMO, just gives a bad experience on the web.
http://jimcarrey.com/
Web sites like that speak for themselves. I'm running a Quad I7 with 8GB of ram, and it's utilizing 30% just for a web page.
Inexcusable.
Are you such a fraking idiot that you can't remember where adobe started? We should feel so lucky that Adobe would develop for the Mac? Oh yes we are blessed and humbled that the great Adobe has not forsaken us. (Bloated POS software maker) Your belief is not only arrogant but illogical and misinformed. Adobe wouldn't have had a platform to develop for if it weren't for the mac OS and the Apple computer. Those computers were the first to offer color displays and other features needed by graphic artists. There was no other platform to develop for at the time of Photoshop V1. Pc's were and are still primarily office machines. Only in the 90's did things change and designers finally felt comfortable switching to PC.
While there may be millions more PC's than Mac users (22million of us) but that says nothing about Adobe's client share of each. The percentage of mac users with PS installed is much higher than on PC's no doubt about that . Your attitude is probably the same attitude that lead Apple to build Aperture and Iphoto and F_-K Adobe.