Interestingly I tried the same 1080p video from YouTube in HTML5 and in Flash. (both in Chrome) The flash version took around 5% CPU, but the HTML5 version ran around 10%.
Curious.
Please provide screenshots or the URL. I'm interested in investigating it on my own.
Edit: It's not that I don't believe You, but just to have a closer look at the fact that when the stream is directed you'll have to sum up the CPU percentage of the plugin with that of the browser (+ decoder).
Plus you'll not see GPU-utilization in the Win Taskmanager.
If you have Safari installed go to the menu bar and and select the following path: develop/user agent/Mobile Safari iPhone.
Then browse around to a few of your favorite sites. Many optimized their sites for small screens. So, if your browser identifies itself as from a mobile platform, you will often see a different site then if you were using a standard computer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulMJohnson
Does anyone know why they would create a site specific for iPad? If they remove the need for Flash to create an iPad version, why wouldn't they just have that version as their main website? Does this not infer that there are things you can do with Flash that you can't with HTML5?
I don't really understand any of this, so if someone could explain for me, I'd appreciate it.
Steve Jobs our fearless leader has allegedly called Adobe stupid and/or lazy. Who are we to disagree with his wisdom?
Seriously though. You can't blame Apple from trying to stick it to Adobe a little. Apple gave Adobe birth. Yet, Adobe often has been a torn in Apple's side. It has often been sluggish about bringing Mac versions of products to market. At one point, it actually had a website up encouraging folks to get a PC. Adobe obviously would be happy if it only had to develop for one platform, but since the Mac makes up a significant portion of it's revenue it has had to stay loyal.
Apple doesn't like Flash not only because it is a CPU hog [which has a huge effect on its mobile products], but because it is so dominant on the web and controlled by Adobe. Apple rightfully wants open standards on the web so it doesn't have to worry in the future about it's products being supported.
I for one think Adobe would be well served if it did what Apple did with Snow Leopard. Take some time to really clean up the code. Your beloved Photoshop might be innovative, but it is bloated.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kotatsu
Before you acuse Adobe of being lazy or stupid, have a look at some videos of Photoshop CS5's Content Aware Fill feature. It's quite possibly the single most amazing piece of code I've seen in the past decade. It's absolutely ground breaking. Obviously unrelated to Flash, but it angers me when people acuse Adobe of laziness when they doing mind blowing work with Photoshop.
Getting back to the original point, I've heard conflicting things on Flash GPU acceleration on a Mac. According to to the TWIT guys, it's all Apple's fault, and as they're Apple fanboys, I can't imagine they are biased towards Adobe.
Still, it's fairly irrelevant anyway, as virtually all computers run a flavour of Windows, upon which Flash works great. Sorry, but that's the truth.
Just because you or anyone else here says its nonsense doesn't make it fact. Like I said, when you perform the test yourself come back and post. Until then you are not basing anything you say on factual data.
Fact is you will never test it out because you know you will be wrong on this topic. You just want to believe anyone Steve Jobs says rather then have a brain of your own.
This is so basic, API's being accessed to use GPU hardware acceleration to take the load of the CPU.
Hell I can post links again, I an post how hardware acceleration works but that would be a waste of time because you aren't interested in facts.
Well, I see others have already explained to you, once again, why the, "Apple must give Adobe private API access," argument is bunk, so I'll just explain to you why your "test that proves all" is completely meaningless.
You are basically saying, take plugin P and use it in browser B on operating system S1, then, take plugin P and use it in browser B on operating system S2. The problem is that if one performs this test, even though the browsers are similar, they aren't the same. Furthermore, the plugins represent completely different code, and the code of one plugin has been completely neglected (Adobe has as much as admitted this). Your claim is that the performance measured in this test proves that OS X is the problem. In fact, there are so many uncontrolled variables in this experiment that it doesn't prove anything at all about anything.
However, using what we know about the actors involved, it's completely logical to pin the blame on the OS X Flash plugin. You yourself (often at the same time you were taking up the private API call) have claimed on these forums that Adobe will provide Flash 10.1 real soon now with fabulous OS X performance, completely contradicting your claims that the fault lies with OS X.
And, frankly, while I'm happy to have very real performance problems as a hammer to beat Flash to death, and while Flash is a completely inappropriate technology for mobile devices (which is why Apple is one of many not providing Flash on it's mobile devices), the real reason to euthanize Flash is that it's just not acceptable to have people's ability to access web content at the mercy of a single vendor, Adobe. (And, no, the argument does not work if you substitute Apple for Adobe, because Apple is not the only avenue of access to any content, whereas Adobe is the only avenue of access for Flash content.)
Quote:
Sure Flash is going nowhere guess that is why they will be releasing AIR and Flash 10.1. You can check out Adobe AIR seeing I am sure you have no clue what it even is.
Oh, look, you're even pushing Flash 10.1 down here. But, won't it suck too because Adobe hasn't been given the private API access? AIR is likely to die an early death as well as people quickly realize this is the wrong direction to go.
You're wrong. For users who want to view the whole web, the iPad is simply not the device that's all. Since when are plug-ins evil? They add functionality to your browser. On my one Windows PC I have to download Quicktime and Safari and regular updates to them. There is nothing evil about it. I do it to view content that is not available any way else.
No, I'm right. You have everything backwards and are confusing cause and effect. For content providers and advertisers who want to reach the whole audience, Flash is simply not the right technology.
And plugins have always been "evil". Having to download them is a pain in the ass and they destabilize browser processes. I want the Quicktime plugin to go away just as much as the Flash plugin. And, thankfully, HTML5 will eliminate the need for a raft of plugins.
Before you acuse Adobe of being lazy or stupid, have a look at some videos of Photoshop CS5's Content Aware Fill feature. It's quite possibly the single most amazing piece of code I've seen in the past decade. It's absolutely ground breaking. Obviously unrelated to Flash, but it angers me when people acuse Adobe of laziness when they doing mind blowing work with Photoshop.
Well, not everyone would agree with your assessment of photoshop, but, even assuming that photoshop is "mind blowing" that has nothing at all to do with the fact that Flash is a dog and that it's an unsuitable technology for mobile devices.
Well, not everyone would agree with your assessment of photoshop, but, even assuming that photoshop is "mind blowing" that has nothing at all to do with the fact that Flash is a dog and that it's an unsuitable technology for mobile devices.
"Loading ALL the fonts you will NEVER use..."
"Loading ALL the plugins you don't even know that exist..."
Really boring article actually. I didn't get anything new that hasn't been said on a gazillion other sites. It also seems biased towards saving Flash from doom which is inevitable.
No, I'm right. You have everything backwards and are confusing cause and effect. For content providers and advertisers who want to reach the whole audience, Flash is simply not the right technology.
And plugins have always been "evil". Having to download them is a pain in the ass and they destabilize browser processes. I want the Quicktime plugin to go away just as much as the Flash plugin. And, thankfully, HTML5 will eliminate the need for a raft of plugins.
No matter how you argue, part of the web is still just that.
Before you acuse Adobe of being lazy or stupid, have a look at some videos of Photoshop CS5's Content Aware Fill feature. It's quite possibly the single most amazing piece of code I've seen in the past decade. It's absolutely ground breaking. Obviously unrelated to Flash, but it angers me when people acuse Adobe of laziness when they doing mind blowing work with Photoshop.
Getting back to the original point, I've heard conflicting things on Flash GPU acceleration on a Mac. According to to the TWIT guys, it's all Apple's fault, and as they're Apple fanboys, I can't imagine they are biased towards Adobe.
Still, it's fairly irrelevant anyway, as virtually all computers run a flavour of Windows, upon which Flash works great. Sorry, but that's the truth.
Just because Photoshop has an admittedly cool new feature does not mean it is all of a sudden a faster, smoother experience. Hell there is a site dedicated to how sloppy Adobe's apps have gotten. Let's not even talk about the fact that they for no other reason than to push Flash, have changed certain panels in the apps to run off of Flash. Also, seeing a new feature in a controlled environment means nothing. Once I can use it in real world scenarios, than I can correctly assess its value. Not only that, Photoshop and Flash are completely different programs with different engineering teams working on them. Hell, up until a few years ago, they were developed by different companies.
On topic, just because you think Flash runs great on virtually all computers, doesn't make it fact. There are plenty of users that have issues but don't know that they are related to Flash. Furthermore, there are hundreds of millions of mobile users, which by the way is the fastest growing segment of the market, that it either doesn't run well on or doesn't even run on at all. Why do you think Adobe is scrambling to get 10.1 out? One quick side note. They are limiting the release number to 10.1 when if you think about how much work they are having to put in it should be at least a 10.5, if not 11. They just want to tie it to CS5 as well as being able to say that there is nothing wrong with Flash 10. It's all marketing.
I was once a insanely loyal Adobe fan but they have lost their way. Their current CEO doesn't have a vision and the company as a whole doesn't seem to really have direction. I wish they spent some serious time making their code bases modern, instead of tacking on more bloat in order to entice you to upgrade. I'd pay good money for a lean, modern version of the Creative Suite. Hell, I'd pay even close to their outrageous asking price if it ran smoothly. Right now though, I don't see that happening. After the Macromedia deal, they had no real competition outside of MS and Apple on some levels and that is not to the benefit of the end user.
Comments
Interestingly I tried the same 1080p video from YouTube in HTML5 and in Flash. (both in Chrome) The flash version took around 5% CPU, but the HTML5 version ran around 10%.
Curious.
Please provide screenshots or the URL. I'm interested in investigating it on my own.
Edit: It's not that I don't believe You, but just to have a closer look at the fact that when the stream is directed you'll have to sum up the CPU percentage of the plugin with that of the browser (+ decoder).
Plus you'll not see GPU-utilization in the Win Taskmanager.
Not that any of the posts and content are different than what people post in the previous 100 threads.
Then browse around to a few of your favorite sites. Many optimized their sites for small screens. So, if your browser identifies itself as from a mobile platform, you will often see a different site then if you were using a standard computer.
Does anyone know why they would create a site specific for iPad? If they remove the need for Flash to create an iPad version, why wouldn't they just have that version as their main website? Does this not infer that there are things you can do with Flash that you can't with HTML5?
I don't really understand any of this, so if someone could explain for me, I'd appreciate it.
Flash isn't leaving lol
My girlfriend didn't leave either. Was easy to leave her though.
Flash is only a CPU hog on a Mac because Apple refuse to let Adobe use GPU acceleration. So blame Apple for this, not Adobe.
Why would you let a company use your GPU acceleration when it will eat it all up? Makes sense to me. Bye bye Adobe.
.
Seriously though. You can't blame Apple from trying to stick it to Adobe a little. Apple gave Adobe birth. Yet, Adobe often has been a torn in Apple's side. It has often been sluggish about bringing Mac versions of products to market. At one point, it actually had a website up encouraging folks to get a PC. Adobe obviously would be happy if it only had to develop for one platform, but since the Mac makes up a significant portion of it's revenue it has had to stay loyal.
Apple doesn't like Flash not only because it is a CPU hog [which has a huge effect on its mobile products], but because it is so dominant on the web and controlled by Adobe. Apple rightfully wants open standards on the web so it doesn't have to worry in the future about it's products being supported.
I for one think Adobe would be well served if it did what Apple did with Snow Leopard. Take some time to really clean up the code. Your beloved Photoshop might be innovative, but it is bloated.
Before you acuse Adobe of being lazy or stupid, have a look at some videos of Photoshop CS5's Content Aware Fill feature. It's quite possibly the single most amazing piece of code I've seen in the past decade. It's absolutely ground breaking. Obviously unrelated to Flash, but it angers me when people acuse Adobe of laziness when they doing mind blowing work with Photoshop.
Getting back to the original point, I've heard conflicting things on Flash GPU acceleration on a Mac. According to to the TWIT guys, it's all Apple's fault, and as they're Apple fanboys, I can't imagine they are biased towards Adobe.
Still, it's fairly irrelevant anyway, as virtually all computers run a flavour of Windows, upon which Flash works great. Sorry, but that's the truth.
Personally, I've been hoping for an AI reader/posting app. It would be really cool having an iPad formatted app also... oh, Kasper!
Haven't tried this but:
http://www.tapatalk.com/
Evidently appleinsider has to install a free vbulletin mod for this to work. AVForum has it. I wonder how well it works.
Just because you or anyone else here says its nonsense doesn't make it fact. Like I said, when you perform the test yourself come back and post. Until then you are not basing anything you say on factual data.
Fact is you will never test it out because you know you will be wrong on this topic. You just want to believe anyone Steve Jobs says rather then have a brain of your own.
This is so basic, API's being accessed to use GPU hardware acceleration to take the load of the CPU.
Hell I can post links again, I an post how hardware acceleration works but that would be a waste of time because you aren't interested in facts.
Well, I see others have already explained to you, once again, why the, "Apple must give Adobe private API access," argument is bunk, so I'll just explain to you why your "test that proves all" is completely meaningless.
You are basically saying, take plugin P and use it in browser B on operating system S1, then, take plugin P and use it in browser B on operating system S2. The problem is that if one performs this test, even though the browsers are similar, they aren't the same. Furthermore, the plugins represent completely different code, and the code of one plugin has been completely neglected (Adobe has as much as admitted this). Your claim is that the performance measured in this test proves that OS X is the problem. In fact, there are so many uncontrolled variables in this experiment that it doesn't prove anything at all about anything.
However, using what we know about the actors involved, it's completely logical to pin the blame on the OS X Flash plugin. You yourself (often at the same time you were taking up the private API call) have claimed on these forums that Adobe will provide Flash 10.1 real soon now with fabulous OS X performance, completely contradicting your claims that the fault lies with OS X.
And, frankly, while I'm happy to have very real performance problems as a hammer to beat Flash to death, and while Flash is a completely inappropriate technology for mobile devices (which is why Apple is one of many not providing Flash on it's mobile devices), the real reason to euthanize Flash is that it's just not acceptable to have people's ability to access web content at the mercy of a single vendor, Adobe. (And, no, the argument does not work if you substitute Apple for Adobe, because Apple is not the only avenue of access to any content, whereas Adobe is the only avenue of access for Flash content.)
Sure Flash is going nowhere guess that is why they will be releasing AIR and Flash 10.1. You can check out Adobe AIR seeing I am sure you have no clue what it even is.
Oh, look, you're even pushing Flash 10.1 down here. But, won't it suck too because Adobe hasn't been given the private API access? AIR is likely to die an early death as well as people quickly realize this is the wrong direction to go.
You're wrong. For users who want to view the whole web, the iPad is simply not the device that's all. Since when are plug-ins evil? They add functionality to your browser. On my one Windows PC I have to download Quicktime and Safari and regular updates to them. There is nothing evil about it. I do it to view content that is not available any way else.
No, I'm right. You have everything backwards and are confusing cause and effect. For content providers and advertisers who want to reach the whole audience, Flash is simply not the right technology.
And plugins have always been "evil". Having to download them is a pain in the ass and they destabilize browser processes. I want the Quicktime plugin to go away just as much as the Flash plugin. And, thankfully, HTML5 will eliminate the need for a raft of plugins.
Flash is only a CPU hog on a Mac because Apple refuse to let Adobe use GPU acceleration. So blame Apple for this, not Adobe.
OK, just read the comments above. This nonsense has been discredited time after time and you just look foolish repeating it.
Before you acuse Adobe of being lazy or stupid, have a look at some videos of Photoshop CS5's Content Aware Fill feature. It's quite possibly the single most amazing piece of code I've seen in the past decade. It's absolutely ground breaking. Obviously unrelated to Flash, but it angers me when people acuse Adobe of laziness when they doing mind blowing work with Photoshop.
Well, not everyone would agree with your assessment of photoshop, but, even assuming that photoshop is "mind blowing" that has nothing at all to do with the fact that Flash is a dog and that it's an unsuitable technology for mobile devices.
HTML5 is still a work in progress..
All HTML is continuously a work in progress, but it hasn't stopped the web from transforming how we work and play.
Long live open standards!
Kudos to Apple for providing the most significant push for this latest one.
http://m.alistapart.com/articles/flashstandards/
These guys really know their s**t
Well, not everyone would agree with your assessment of photoshop
"Loading ALL the fonts you will NEVER use..."
"Loading ALL the plugins you don't even know that exist..."
Can go on!
Here's an interesting article
http://m.alistapart.com/articles/flashstandards/
These guys really know their s**t
Really boring article actually. I didn't get anything new that hasn't been said on a gazillion other sites. It also seems biased towards saving Flash from doom which is inevitable.
No, I'm right. You have everything backwards and are confusing cause and effect. For content providers and advertisers who want to reach the whole audience, Flash is simply not the right technology.
And plugins have always been "evil". Having to download them is a pain in the ass and they destabilize browser processes. I want the Quicktime plugin to go away just as much as the Flash plugin. And, thankfully, HTML5 will eliminate the need for a raft of plugins.
No matter how you argue, part of the web is still just that.
No matter how you argue, part of the web is still just that.
That's the whole point of this discussion, making that part of the web go away. And it will, soon.
Before you acuse Adobe of being lazy or stupid, have a look at some videos of Photoshop CS5's Content Aware Fill feature. It's quite possibly the single most amazing piece of code I've seen in the past decade. It's absolutely ground breaking. Obviously unrelated to Flash, but it angers me when people acuse Adobe of laziness when they doing mind blowing work with Photoshop.
Getting back to the original point, I've heard conflicting things on Flash GPU acceleration on a Mac. According to to the TWIT guys, it's all Apple's fault, and as they're Apple fanboys, I can't imagine they are biased towards Adobe.
Still, it's fairly irrelevant anyway, as virtually all computers run a flavour of Windows, upon which Flash works great. Sorry, but that's the truth.
Just because Photoshop has an admittedly cool new feature does not mean it is all of a sudden a faster, smoother experience. Hell there is a site dedicated to how sloppy Adobe's apps have gotten. Let's not even talk about the fact that they for no other reason than to push Flash, have changed certain panels in the apps to run off of Flash. Also, seeing a new feature in a controlled environment means nothing. Once I can use it in real world scenarios, than I can correctly assess its value. Not only that, Photoshop and Flash are completely different programs with different engineering teams working on them. Hell, up until a few years ago, they were developed by different companies.
On topic, just because you think Flash runs great on virtually all computers, doesn't make it fact. There are plenty of users that have issues but don't know that they are related to Flash. Furthermore, there are hundreds of millions of mobile users, which by the way is the fastest growing segment of the market, that it either doesn't run well on or doesn't even run on at all. Why do you think Adobe is scrambling to get 10.1 out? One quick side note. They are limiting the release number to 10.1 when if you think about how much work they are having to put in it should be at least a 10.5, if not 11. They just want to tie it to CS5 as well as being able to say that there is nothing wrong with Flash 10. It's all marketing.
I was once a insanely loyal Adobe fan but they have lost their way. Their current CEO doesn't have a vision and the company as a whole doesn't seem to really have direction. I wish they spent some serious time making their code bases modern, instead of tacking on more bloat in order to entice you to upgrade. I'd pay good money for a lean, modern version of the Creative Suite. Hell, I'd pay even close to their outrageous asking price if it ran smoothly. Right now though, I don't see that happening. After the Macromedia deal, they had no real competition outside of MS and Apple on some levels and that is not to the benefit of the end user.