No at all. I could care less how content is streamed because for me it just simply works and I understand to what browsers to use given the OS I am running at the time. I am not an Adobe fan or an HTML5 fan, I am a fan of the facts.
No at all. I could care less how content is streamed because for me it just simply works and I understand to what browsers to use given the OS I am running at the time. I am not an Adobe fan or an HTML5 fan, I am a fan of the facts.
Hopefully you can clarify this for me, because I didn't see it in the article (unless I missed it), but what was the specs of the hardware it was running/tested on. Both for Mac and PC machines?
I'm guessing that plays into it as well if it's running on a netbook or on a supped up "gaming machine".
No at all. I could care less how content is streamed because for me it just simply works and I understand to what browsers to use given the OS I am running at the time. I am not an Adobe fan or an HTML5 fan, I am a fan of the facts.
OpenCL is not some sort of Apple secret sauce that only Apple can use.
Also hardware acceleration is only available on Macs using certain Nvidia chip, even for Apple's first party apps.
Fact of the matter is with CPUs nowadays, you really don't need hardware acceleration to decode a freaking mp4 file without using 50% CPU. Hell I can ENcode MP4 files with less effort.
Why would HTML5 hulu be a paid subscription? I think it is possible to put ads into HTML5 vids, no? Or is the whole site transitioning to subscription now, as has been rumored for a while now?
Because the company is having a hard time making money. They see a subscription as a way to increase their revenue.
In this regard. Can anyone explain to me why CBS and Disney didn't allow Apple to make a subscription service if they were apparently on-board with it?
Fox and NBC are very invested in Hulu and if/when Hulu goes subscription they are going to have no incentive to go with Apple. So this dream of an all-in-one subscription site online is little more than a pipe dream at this time.
Besides, if CBS sports and Disney owned ESPN were to part of that subscription plan the Apple subscription would kick the living bejesus out of Hulu. Especially if Apple doesn't follow Hulu's asinine lead with limiting back episodes available.
Of course, as with everything else Apple HAS to keep the price reasonable. Which is not a given where media companies are concerned. As they have a very bad habit of over-valuing what they have to offer.
Oh, right, because those are such unimpeachable sources that always get their facts straight. The fact is that Flash is a pig on OS X because Adobe have put no real effort into making it otherwise. This whole "we must have direct hardware access" nonsense is just a bunch of smoke and mirrors from Adobe. This isn't a secret, this is common knowledge.
Even assuming that Flash's problems were not do to Adobe's unwillingness to invest resources in improving it on non-windows platforms, it's not like plenty of developers haven't achieved quite acceptable graphic performance without direct hardware access. It's simply a pathetic excuse from Adobe.
This move had nothing to do with any clout that Apple has or that Flash is dying. CBS and others are attempting to sell media anyway they can and if Apple will not allow Flash they will simply code to their content to run via HTML5.
This is an Apple driven issue not an Adobe issue. The problem is an OSX issue not a Flash 10.1, the problem is people here that spout off about it simply regurgitate anything Steve Jobs says rather then attempting to understand how technology currently works.
First off, don't go mentioning 10.1 when it's still in beta. As of today, the most stable version of Flash, is still a CPU hog on the Mac.
Air: 85 percent CPU, gameplay noticeably ramped up to a more challenging speed
Mac Pro: 60 percent CPU, gameplay noticeably ramped up to a more challenging speed
It is ridiculous that watching a Hulu video takes up 56% of a Mac Pro's CPU.
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater
Let use an example even someone like Quadra can understand yet still won't accept.
We can all agree that Safari is owned , supported and coded by Apple. When streaming video via Safari on OSX using Flash 10.1 CPU utilization has been tested at 32.07
Take the same version of Safari for Windows run the stream the same content using Flash 10.1 and the CPU utilization is 7.43%!!!!!!!!
WOW how could that be seeing Flash is a CPU hog?
It's funny you mentioning this considering that Flash is only offering h.264 hardware acceleration when video is not only the main problem but websites and annoying ads made in Flash which will continue to be CPU hog and battery life killer. You also forget to mention that most of the recent malware have been exploits through Flash.
Charlie Miller, white hat hacker: “There probably isn’t enough difference between the browsers to get worked up about. The main thing is not to install Flash!”
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater
The issue is Apple is too stupid to give Adobe the information they need to allow Flash to use hardware acceleration via OSX. By allowing access to the correct API's this allows the stress to be taken off the CPU and allows the GPU to render a good bit of the processing needed to stress Flash web content.
Anytime you say that "Apple is too stupid", you are making a fool of yourself. Did you actually read the article you're posting about? Why should Apple go out of their way to provide deeper access to the OS for the sake of a proprietary plugin?
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater
The problem is Steve Jobs has an agenda and his isn't allowing Flash to become more efficient on OSX.
So instead of being like many of the other sheep here try and educate yourself on how this really works and come to grips with the fact that Steve Jobs is the issue not Adobe or Flash.
Yeah Jobs has an agenda and it is working. If his claims were unfounded, no one would be even be performing these tests.
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater
Which by the way has little to no impact on the rest of the world that runs Windows so Flash isn't going anywhere anytime soon.
Maybe you should also get some education. IE9 will be supporting HTML5. This means for video and web page content that Flash is on life support. I'm sure Flash will still be around to hog CPUs on cheesy casual games but for anything else it is dead.
yeah the people complaining about the lack of flash in the ipad need to just buy a cheap PC and stfu. the major video sites like youtube and dailymotion support html5, at least in beta form. other video sites should follow.
i do wish there was consensus on the codecs for html5, and i do wish google and apple were on board with ogg rather than mpeg. firefox supporting ogg and safari/chrome supporting mpeg needs to change.
there is definitely an argument for flash support, however. non-video sites and applications using flash are all over the place.
even my slow env touch has flash support and can play videos off the full desktop youtube site (although they stutter just a bit too much for it to be useful, it proves that a very low speed device can handle flash)
flash can be completely replaced with html5 though, and there are even examples online of full games being created using html5. it's a really good thing for the internet that the iphone doesn't support flash, although it doesn't making owning one any better. in 5 years or less i think flash will be wiped off the web, but living with a flash world with an iphone is a bit painful.
luckily with the app store just about anyone that has a complicated flash site has an iphone app to compensate.
Apple could quite easily have said Quicktime Plugin was the standard for the iPad, but instead they went with the new HTML video tag. They are helping to bring the web back to the vendor neutral medium it was always meant to be.
Of course, they make most their money through iTunes, so they don't need web lock-in tricks anyway.
Do you believe that this link supports your position? First off, the site is devoted to Web standards advocates, not to the standards themselves. Second, your link is to 2006, more than a lifetime in computer years. Having said that, perhaps, you should read what these advocates say:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben Henick
The Web is meant to be an open system, and limited-rights tools (including Flash) practically insult that virtue… without which the web would hardly be worth a damn. ... The objection’s not that Flash et. al. are instrinsically bad, it’s that their combined popularity and limited-rights status significantly reduces the realized value of the entire network. ...
I urge members of this forum to click through to your link and read the entire piece including responses. No Flash-basher could have said it better. Both Flash-bashers and Flash advocates on the site know what they are talking about.
Hopefully you can clarify this for me, because I didn't see it in the article (unless I missed it), but what was the specs of the hardware it was running/tested on. Both for Mac and PC machines?
I'm guessing that plays into it as well if it's running on a netbook or on a supped up "gaming machine".
Just wondering.
Actually it doesn't list the hardware but you can perform the same test yourself if you are running a Macbook, iMac or Mabook Pro running Windows via bootcamp.
The results will vary depending on your system setup. As an example my Windows system runs a extreme edition quad core and an Nvidia 280GTX. Clearly my system is not the average and with hardware acceleration streaming Flash 10.1 uses under 5% CPU. Yet again my system would not be considered average.
The point I was trying to make is while Flash can be a CPU hog the fact is Adobe is certainly made good improvements with version 10.1 using hardware acceleration which has been used in gaming for a while now.
If Apple and Adobe would stop fighting they could certainly work together to not only make Flash run far better on OSX but also on the iPhone/Touch and iPad.
Then the simple fact is the end user wins all the way around and you don't even have to think about what is streaming your content because it just works. Isn't that suppose to be how Apple wants it, it just works?
Air: 85 percent CPU, gameplay noticeably ramped up to a more challenging speed
Mac Pro: 60 percent CPU, gameplay noticeably ramped up to a more challenging speed
It is ridiculous that watching a Hulu video takes up 56% of a Mac Pro's CPU.
It's funny you mentioning this considering that Flash is only offering h.264 hardware acceleration when video is not only the main problem but websites and annoying ads made in Flash which will continue to be CPU hog and battery life killer. You also forget to mention that most of the recent malware have been exploits through Flash.
Charlie Miller, white hat hacker: ?There probably isn?t enough difference between the browsers to get worked up about. The main thing is not to install Flash!?
Anytime you say that "Apple is too stupid", you are making a fool of yourself. Did you actually read the article you're posting about? Why should Apple go out of their way to provide deeper access to the OS for the sake of a proprietary plugin?
Yeah Jobs has an agenda and it is working. If his claims were unfounded, no one would be even be performing these tests.
Maybe you should also get some education. IE9 will be supporting HTML5. This means for video and web page content that Flash is on life support. I'm sure Flash will still be around to hog CPUs on cheesy casual games but for anything else it is dead.
First off I am highly educated and on your best day you wouldn't understand 10% of what I know about coding.
Where did I say anything about IE9?
Just because Flash 10.1 is still in beta doesn't mean anything. Clearly is shows Adobe moving in the right direction and hardware acceleration has been used in other areas for a while now. Then again you wouldn't know about that now would you.
"It is ridiculous that watching a Hulu video takes up 56% of a Mac Pro's CPU."
You are right it is, so Apple should get their shit together and supply Adobe with the information they need so that problem can be resolved.
As a programmer you don't attempt to kill something that can be fixed. Which is exactly the case with Flash and its issues with OSX.
The fact is this is an Apple only issue which is why Flash isn't going anywhere before for 95% of the population that uses Windows this is a non issue.
Oh, right, because those are such unimpeachable sources that always get their facts straight. The fact is that Flash is a pig on OS X because Adobe have put no real effort into making it otherwise. This whole "we must have direct hardware access" nonsense is just a bunch of smoke and mirrors from Adobe. This isn't a secret, this is common knowledge.
Even assuming that Flash's problems were not do to Adobe's unwillingness to invest resources in improving it on non-windows platforms, it's not like plenty of developers haven't achieved quite acceptable graphic performance without direct hardware access. It's simply a pathetic excuse from Adobe.
You can do the test yourself. You don't have to believe Abobe or Apple you can simply run the test yourself.
This has nothing to do with smoke and mirrors and if you knew anything about coding or even how hardware acceleration worked you would know better.
If this was such a major issue Windows users would be screaming about dumping Flash also and they aren't. This is an Apple only issue because OSX is the problem.
I mean clearly Apple has never held back information from developers....LOL
The reality is Fanboys like you will simply believe whatever Steve Jobs tells you and you will fight the reality and the facts to the end. However the reality is Windows still controls 95% of the market share, Adobe has greatly improved Flash with 10.1 so its not going anywhere.
The reality is Fanboys like you will simply believe whatever Steve Jobs tells you and you will fight the reality and the facts to the end. However the reality is Windows still controls 95% of the market share, Adobe has greatly improved Flash with 10.1 so its not going anywhere.
The fact is that Flash still runs better on WIndows than Mac, so Apple has been trying to get rid of it, so that it and Google have more of a chance against Microsoft. And in any case, as people pointed out, no one wanted to do comparison tests with animations in Javascript and tests with Flash, because Flash is still a CPU hog there. I'm willing to bet that Javascript does less work overall, because it's optimized for the browsers (not on Internet Explorer though). Secondly, H.264 on Flash is okay, but the problem is that its still encapsulated in a plugin. Why bother with a plugin when you can have support immediately without downloading any plugin in web standards? Answer how a closed-source plugin is better than not having a plugin and developing in open web standards that anyone can improve the performance of?
BTW, please stop putting up the strawman argument.
First off I am highly educated and on your best day you wouldn't understand 10% of what I know about coding.
Where did I say anything about IE9?
I don't care what you know about coding. This is about common sense. You neglected to mention IE9 so I did for you. Adobe has cited IE as being one of the main reasons for Flash's continued dominance. IE9 will support HTML5 and h.264. This means that the writing is on the wall for Flash. Why would there be a need to forever continue serving Flash videos? Linux, OSX and Windows will now have the choice of using Safari, Firefox, or Chrome to view h.264. Mozilla and Opera will be forced to adopt h.264 whether they like it or not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater
Just because Flash 10.1 is still in beta doesn't mean anything. Clearly is shows Adobe moving in the right direction and hardware acceleration has been used in other areas for a while now.Then again you wouldn't know about that now would you.
Of course it means something. Basically all of us are using Flash 10. It still sucks. It no longer matters if Adobe is heading in the right direction. HTML5 is already here and quite usable even without the standard being official. The funny thing about that last sentence is that you have proven nothing I have cited as being wrong. BTW it doesn't take too much to be a Flash programmer. That may also be part of the problem.
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater
"It is ridiculous that watching a Hulu video takes up 56% of a Mac Pro's CPU."
You are right it is, so Apple should get their shit together and supply Adobe with the information they need so that problem can be resolved.
So let me get this straight. You are blaming Apple for something that is Adobe's fault? Apple is forcing everyone to change away from Flash, why would Apple need to help Adobe after years of Adobe essentially neglecting the Mac & also Linux? Whether it is intentional or not by Adobe, this is the problem that occurs when you have one company controls the access to content on the web. I'm also pretty sure that the ton of people Adobe has been laying off won't really help in advancing Flash for the future.
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater
As a programmer you don't attempt to kill something that can be fixed. Which is exactly the case with Flash and its issues with OSX.
The fact is this is an Apple only issue which is why Flash isn't going anywhere before for 95% of the population that uses Windows this is a non issue.
That is what you're not getting. In order to move on with the future, the past needs to put away. HTML5 is the future. Not Flash. Anyone can see this is coming.
"Your old road is rapidly aging
Please get out of the new one if you can't lend a hand
The reality is Fanboys like you will simply believe whatever Steve Jobs tells you and you will fight the reality and the facts to the end. However the reality is Windows still controls 95% of the market share, Adobe has greatly improved Flash with 10.1 so its not going anywhere.
As soon as the iPad hits the market, Flash is going bye bye.
As a programmer you don't attempt to kill something that can be fixed.
As a programmer, you absolutely kill things that can be fixed. Killing them and moving on to something better is absolutely the right thing to do at times. As a programmer, knowing when it's the right time to throw something away, instead of trying to fix it, is essential. This sort of ruthlessness is something that Apple currently understands very well.
Comments
http://developer.apple.com/graphicsimaging/opengl/
http://developer.apple.com/mac/snowleopard/opencl.html
Aren't you just taking Adobe's BS as gospel?
No at all. I could care less how content is streamed because for me it just simply works and I understand to what browsers to use given the OS I am running at the time. I am not an Adobe fan or an HTML5 fan, I am a fan of the facts.
Here are two links you can look at.
http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives..._new_tests.php
http://www.streaminglearningcenter.c...-depends-.html
No at all. I could care less how content is streamed because for me it just simply works and I understand to what browsers to use given the OS I am running at the time. I am not an Adobe fan or an HTML5 fan, I am a fan of the facts.
Here are two links you can look at.
http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives..._new_tests.php
http://www.streaminglearningcenter.c...-depends-.html
Hopefully you can clarify this for me, because I didn't see it in the article (unless I missed it), but what was the specs of the hardware it was running/tested on. Both for Mac and PC machines?
I'm guessing that plays into it as well if it's running on a netbook or on a supped up "gaming machine".
Just wondering.
No at all. I could care less how content is streamed because for me it just simply works and I understand to what browsers to use given the OS I am running at the time. I am not an Adobe fan or an HTML5 fan, I am a fan of the facts.
Here are two links you can look at.
http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives..._new_tests.php
http://www.streaminglearningcenter.c...-depends-.html
That basically means Chrome's not optimized yet.
OpenCL is not some sort of Apple secret sauce that only Apple can use.
Also hardware acceleration is only available on Macs using certain Nvidia chip, even for Apple's first party apps.
Fact of the matter is with CPUs nowadays, you really don't need hardware acceleration to decode a freaking mp4 file without using 50% CPU. Hell I can ENcode MP4 files with less effort.
Why would HTML5 hulu be a paid subscription? I think it is possible to put ads into HTML5 vids, no? Or is the whole site transitioning to subscription now, as has been rumored for a while now?
Because the company is having a hard time making money. They see a subscription as a way to increase their revenue.
In this regard. Can anyone explain to me why CBS and Disney didn't allow Apple to make a subscription service if they were apparently on-board with it?
Fox and NBC are very invested in Hulu and if/when Hulu goes subscription they are going to have no incentive to go with Apple. So this dream of an all-in-one subscription site online is little more than a pipe dream at this time.
Besides, if CBS sports and Disney owned ESPN were to part of that subscription plan the Apple subscription would kick the living bejesus out of Hulu. Especially if Apple doesn't follow Hulu's asinine lead with limiting back episodes available.
Of course, as with everything else Apple HAS to keep the price reasonable. Which is not a given where media companies are concerned. As they have a very bad habit of over-valuing what they have to offer.
I am a fan of the facts.
Here are two links you can look at.
http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives..._new_tests.php
http://www.streaminglearningcenter.c...-depends-.html
Oh, right, because those are such unimpeachable sources that always get their facts straight. The fact is that Flash is a pig on OS X because Adobe have put no real effort into making it otherwise. This whole "we must have direct hardware access" nonsense is just a bunch of smoke and mirrors from Adobe. This isn't a secret, this is common knowledge.
Even assuming that Flash's problems were not do to Adobe's unwillingness to invest resources in improving it on non-windows platforms, it's not like plenty of developers haven't achieved quite acceptable graphic performance without direct hardware access. It's simply a pathetic excuse from Adobe.
This move had nothing to do with any clout that Apple has or that Flash is dying. CBS and others are attempting to sell media anyway they can and if Apple will not allow Flash they will simply code to their content to run via HTML5.
This is an Apple driven issue not an Adobe issue. The problem is an OSX issue not a Flash 10.1, the problem is people here that spout off about it simply regurgitate anything Steve Jobs says rather then attempting to understand how technology currently works.
First off, don't go mentioning 10.1 when it's still in beta. As of today, the most stable version of Flash, is still a CPU hog on the Mac.
A test conducted on Flash 10 at ArsTechnica:
Flash 10
Air: 17 FPS, 108 percent CPU
Mac Pro: 28 FPS, 140 percent CPU
Hulu Video:
Air: 84 percent CPU
Mac Pro: 56 percent CPU
YouTube
Air: 70 percent CPU
Mac Pro: 40 percent CPU
2advanced.com
Air: 20 percent CPU, peaked at 55
Mac Pro: 28 percent CPU, peaked at 66
Winterbells
Air: 85 percent CPU, gameplay noticeably ramped up to a more challenging speed
Mac Pro: 60 percent CPU, gameplay noticeably ramped up to a more challenging speed
It is ridiculous that watching a Hulu video takes up 56% of a Mac Pro's CPU.
Let use an example even someone like Quadra can understand yet still won't accept.
We can all agree that Safari is owned , supported and coded by Apple. When streaming video via Safari on OSX using Flash 10.1 CPU utilization has been tested at 32.07
Take the same version of Safari for Windows run the stream the same content using Flash 10.1 and the CPU utilization is 7.43%!!!!!!!!
WOW how could that be seeing Flash is a CPU hog?
It's funny you mentioning this considering that Flash is only offering h.264 hardware acceleration when video is not only the main problem but websites and annoying ads made in Flash which will continue to be CPU hog and battery life killer. You also forget to mention that most of the recent malware have been exploits through Flash.
Charlie Miller, white hat hacker: “There probably isn’t enough difference between the browsers to get worked up about. The main thing is not to install Flash!”
The issue is Apple is too stupid to give Adobe the information they need to allow Flash to use hardware acceleration via OSX. By allowing access to the correct API's this allows the stress to be taken off the CPU and allows the GPU to render a good bit of the processing needed to stress Flash web content.
Anytime you say that "Apple is too stupid", you are making a fool of yourself. Did you actually read the article you're posting about? Why should Apple go out of their way to provide deeper access to the OS for the sake of a proprietary plugin?
The problem is Steve Jobs has an agenda and his isn't allowing Flash to become more efficient on OSX.
So instead of being like many of the other sheep here try and educate yourself on how this really works and come to grips with the fact that Steve Jobs is the issue not Adobe or Flash.
Yeah Jobs has an agenda and it is working. If his claims were unfounded, no one would be even be performing these tests.
Which by the way has little to no impact on the rest of the world that runs Windows so Flash isn't going anywhere anytime soon.
Maybe you should also get some education. IE9 will be supporting HTML5. This means for video and web page content that Flash is on life support. I'm sure Flash will still be around to hog CPUs on cheesy casual games but for anything else it is dead.
i do wish there was consensus on the codecs for html5, and i do wish google and apple were on board with ogg rather than mpeg. firefox supporting ogg and safari/chrome supporting mpeg needs to change.
there is definitely an argument for flash support, however. non-video sites and applications using flash are all over the place.
even my slow env touch has flash support and can play videos off the full desktop youtube site (although they stutter just a bit too much for it to be useful, it proves that a very low speed device can handle flash)
flash can be completely replaced with html5 though, and there are even examples online of full games being created using html5. it's a really good thing for the internet that the iphone doesn't support flash, although it doesn't making owning one any better. in 5 years or less i think flash will be wiped off the web, but living with a flash world with an iphone is a bit painful.
luckily with the app store just about anyone that has a complicated flash site has an iphone app to compensate.
Of course, they make most their money through iTunes, so they don't need web lock-in tricks anyway.
Test? I thought it just worked.
And BTW Flash is the web standard for motion:
http://www.webstandards.org/2006/08/...ium-and-water/
Do you believe that this link supports your position? First off, the site is devoted to Web standards advocates, not to the standards themselves. Second, your link is to 2006, more than a lifetime in computer years. Having said that, perhaps, you should read what these advocates say:
I urge members of this forum to click through to your link and read the entire piece including responses. No Flash-basher could have said it better. Both Flash-bashers and Flash advocates on the site know what they are talking about.
Hopefully you can clarify this for me, because I didn't see it in the article (unless I missed it), but what was the specs of the hardware it was running/tested on. Both for Mac and PC machines?
I'm guessing that plays into it as well if it's running on a netbook or on a supped up "gaming machine".
Just wondering.
Actually it doesn't list the hardware but you can perform the same test yourself if you are running a Macbook, iMac or Mabook Pro running Windows via bootcamp.
The results will vary depending on your system setup. As an example my Windows system runs a extreme edition quad core and an Nvidia 280GTX. Clearly my system is not the average and with hardware acceleration streaming Flash 10.1 uses under 5% CPU. Yet again my system would not be considered average.
The point I was trying to make is while Flash can be a CPU hog the fact is Adobe is certainly made good improvements with version 10.1 using hardware acceleration which has been used in gaming for a while now.
If Apple and Adobe would stop fighting they could certainly work together to not only make Flash run far better on OSX but also on the iPhone/Touch and iPad.
Then the simple fact is the end user wins all the way around and you don't even have to think about what is streaming your content because it just works. Isn't that suppose to be how Apple wants it, it just works?
First off, don't go mentioning 10.1 when it's still in beta. As of today, the most stable version of Flash, is still a CPU hog on the Mac.
A test conducted on Flash 10 at ArsTechnica:
Flash 10
Air: 17 FPS, 108 percent CPU
Mac Pro: 28 FPS, 140 percent CPU
Hulu Video:
Air: 84 percent CPU
Mac Pro: 56 percent CPU
YouTube
Air: 70 percent CPU
Mac Pro: 40 percent CPU
2advanced.com
Air: 20 percent CPU, peaked at 55
Mac Pro: 28 percent CPU, peaked at 66
Winterbells
Air: 85 percent CPU, gameplay noticeably ramped up to a more challenging speed
Mac Pro: 60 percent CPU, gameplay noticeably ramped up to a more challenging speed
It is ridiculous that watching a Hulu video takes up 56% of a Mac Pro's CPU.
It's funny you mentioning this considering that Flash is only offering h.264 hardware acceleration when video is not only the main problem but websites and annoying ads made in Flash which will continue to be CPU hog and battery life killer. You also forget to mention that most of the recent malware have been exploits through Flash.
Charlie Miller, white hat hacker: ?There probably isn?t enough difference between the browsers to get worked up about. The main thing is not to install Flash!?
Anytime you say that "Apple is too stupid", you are making a fool of yourself. Did you actually read the article you're posting about? Why should Apple go out of their way to provide deeper access to the OS for the sake of a proprietary plugin?
Yeah Jobs has an agenda and it is working. If his claims were unfounded, no one would be even be performing these tests.
Maybe you should also get some education. IE9 will be supporting HTML5. This means for video and web page content that Flash is on life support. I'm sure Flash will still be around to hog CPUs on cheesy casual games but for anything else it is dead.
First off I am highly educated and on your best day you wouldn't understand 10% of what I know about coding.
Where did I say anything about IE9?
Just because Flash 10.1 is still in beta doesn't mean anything. Clearly is shows Adobe moving in the right direction and hardware acceleration has been used in other areas for a while now. Then again you wouldn't know about that now would you.
"It is ridiculous that watching a Hulu video takes up 56% of a Mac Pro's CPU."
You are right it is, so Apple should get their shit together and supply Adobe with the information they need so that problem can be resolved.
As a programmer you don't attempt to kill something that can be fixed. Which is exactly the case with Flash and its issues with OSX.
The fact is this is an Apple only issue which is why Flash isn't going anywhere before for 95% of the population that uses Windows this is a non issue.
Oh, right, because those are such unimpeachable sources that always get their facts straight. The fact is that Flash is a pig on OS X because Adobe have put no real effort into making it otherwise. This whole "we must have direct hardware access" nonsense is just a bunch of smoke and mirrors from Adobe. This isn't a secret, this is common knowledge.
Even assuming that Flash's problems were not do to Adobe's unwillingness to invest resources in improving it on non-windows platforms, it's not like plenty of developers haven't achieved quite acceptable graphic performance without direct hardware access. It's simply a pathetic excuse from Adobe.
You can do the test yourself. You don't have to believe Abobe or Apple you can simply run the test yourself.
This has nothing to do with smoke and mirrors and if you knew anything about coding or even how hardware acceleration worked you would know better.
If this was such a major issue Windows users would be screaming about dumping Flash also and they aren't. This is an Apple only issue because OSX is the problem.
I mean clearly Apple has never held back information from developers....LOL
The reality is Fanboys like you will simply believe whatever Steve Jobs tells you and you will fight the reality and the facts to the end. However the reality is Windows still controls 95% of the market share, Adobe has greatly improved Flash with 10.1 so its not going anywhere.
First off I am highly educated and on your best day you wouldn't understand 10% of what I know about coding.
Generally speaking, if you have to tell people how well educated and intelligent you are, you are probably greatly overestimating your abilities.
The reality is Fanboys like you will simply believe whatever Steve Jobs tells you and you will fight the reality and the facts to the end. However the reality is Windows still controls 95% of the market share, Adobe has greatly improved Flash with 10.1 so its not going anywhere.
The fact is that Flash still runs better on WIndows than Mac, so Apple has been trying to get rid of it, so that it and Google have more of a chance against Microsoft. And in any case, as people pointed out, no one wanted to do comparison tests with animations in Javascript and tests with Flash, because Flash is still a CPU hog there. I'm willing to bet that Javascript does less work overall, because it's optimized for the browsers (not on Internet Explorer though). Secondly, H.264 on Flash is okay, but the problem is that its still encapsulated in a plugin. Why bother with a plugin when you can have support immediately without downloading any plugin in web standards? Answer how a closed-source plugin is better than not having a plugin and developing in open web standards that anyone can improve the performance of?
BTW, please stop putting up the strawman argument.
I think it's cool people can watch cbs stuff on their ipad, but I just think it's a shame that all the shows on CBS are crap
Not to worry. Other networks will follow suit.
First off I am highly educated and on your best day you wouldn't understand 10% of what I know about coding.
Where did I say anything about IE9?
I don't care what you know about coding. This is about common sense. You neglected to mention IE9 so I did for you. Adobe has cited IE as being one of the main reasons for Flash's continued dominance. IE9 will support HTML5 and h.264. This means that the writing is on the wall for Flash. Why would there be a need to forever continue serving Flash videos? Linux, OSX and Windows will now have the choice of using Safari, Firefox, or Chrome to view h.264. Mozilla and Opera will be forced to adopt h.264 whether they like it or not.
Just because Flash 10.1 is still in beta doesn't mean anything. Clearly is shows Adobe moving in the right direction and hardware acceleration has been used in other areas for a while now.Then again you wouldn't know about that now would you.
Of course it means something. Basically all of us are using Flash 10. It still sucks. It no longer matters if Adobe is heading in the right direction. HTML5 is already here and quite usable even without the standard being official. The funny thing about that last sentence is that you have proven nothing I have cited as being wrong. BTW it doesn't take too much to be a Flash programmer. That may also be part of the problem.
"It is ridiculous that watching a Hulu video takes up 56% of a Mac Pro's CPU."
You are right it is, so Apple should get their shit together and supply Adobe with the information they need so that problem can be resolved.
So let me get this straight. You are blaming Apple for something that is Adobe's fault? Apple is forcing everyone to change away from Flash, why would Apple need to help Adobe after years of Adobe essentially neglecting the Mac & also Linux? Whether it is intentional or not by Adobe, this is the problem that occurs when you have one company controls the access to content on the web. I'm also pretty sure that the ton of people Adobe has been laying off won't really help in advancing Flash for the future.
As a programmer you don't attempt to kill something that can be fixed. Which is exactly the case with Flash and its issues with OSX.
The fact is this is an Apple only issue which is why Flash isn't going anywhere before for 95% of the population that uses Windows this is a non issue.
That is what you're not getting. In order to move on with the future, the past needs to put away. HTML5 is the future. Not Flash. Anyone can see this is coming.
"Your old road is rapidly aging
Please get out of the new one if you can't lend a hand
For the times they are a changing "
The reality is Fanboys like you will simply believe whatever Steve Jobs tells you and you will fight the reality and the facts to the end. However the reality is Windows still controls 95% of the market share, Adobe has greatly improved Flash with 10.1 so its not going anywhere.
As soon as the iPad hits the market, Flash is going bye bye.
Adobe is lazy.
As a programmer you don't attempt to kill something that can be fixed.
As a programmer, you absolutely kill things that can be fixed. Killing them and moving on to something better is absolutely the right thing to do at times. As a programmer, knowing when it's the right time to throw something away, instead of trying to fix it, is essential. This sort of ruthlessness is something that Apple currently understands very well.