Adobe Flash 10.1 Beta Available for Win, Linux, Mac

By Jayayess1190
in Back Page News

 Share

Recommended Posts

Mentor

Robbie Ride

Posted
Posted
Did you install the right version? There's 2 different versions for Windows (a standard plugin, and one for IE)

Yeas but i'll have another look, just incase

Grand Master

Southern Patriot

Posted
Posted
It'll be out right after 64-bit Silverlight. ;)

Face it, they consider 64-bit browsing to be so fringe and unimportant that developing 64-bit versions is very low on the list of priorities.

Kind of chicken-and-egg there though, 64-bit browsing is used so little because of the lack of flash!

Grand Master

.Neo

Posted
Posted
Me 2, it is the only thing that is keeping me from using internet explorer 8 64bit.

Why can't Internet Explorer 64-bit can't use the 32-bit Flash plugin in the first place? Safari is able to run 32-bit plugins while running in 64-bit mode on Mac OS X Snow Leopard just fine.

How is the performance on Mac OS X compared to the previous version?

Veteran

Phantom Helix

Posted
Posted
Why can't Internet Explorer 64-bit can't use the 32-bit Flash plugin in the first place? Safari is able to run 32-bit plugins while running in 64-bit mode on Mac OS X Snow Leopard just fine.

How is the performance on Mac OS X compared to the previous version?

Cause they don't care to program that feature

and it is nearly the same since it doesn't have the new features yet

Mentor

Gary2MBz

Posted
Posted

Sucks for me as my Desktop has an Athlon 64 and a 7600GT which could be put to some very good use. Those puny ION platforms already outperform my old Athlon in terms of Flash HD playback :(

Grand Master

PyX

Posted
Posted

Well launching a YouTube movie into fullscreen mode seems to lag less and seems to result in... a fullscreen movie, unlike before when it kept on just crashing the whole browser. I have Safari 4 with an NVIDIA 7600GT on my iMac.

That being said, it still consumes a good 50-80% of my dual-core 2.16GHz. If I understand well, it's because of the 7600GT, it's too old apparently. We'll get to see that when the new iMac arrives in two days...

My opinion right now on this beta : slightly better, but I still hate it so much that I wish Flash were going down.

Especially with these YouTube things, aren't HTML tags now able to recreate a whole video player, with stylized play/stop/volume buttons, and the progress bar, etc? HTML 5 is the way to go, but it seems to take ages and ages before things are standardized on every browser. Even W3C makes it long - it should have been done a decade ago, not now.

Grand Master

The_Decryptor Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted
Kind of chicken-and-egg there though, 64-bit browsing is used so little because of the lack of flash!

The main issue with 64bit browsers, is that there's no reason to make them, that feeds into nobody really spending time making the browsers compile as a 64bit code (most of the browsers are old code bases), and even then there are barely any 64bit plugins because there aren't any reason to make 64bit versions of the plugins.

The only difference you'll see in a 64bit browser, is that it won't load 32bit plugins (unless it does out of process loading like Chrome/Safari), and having them both as 64bit provides no benefits either.

Oh yeah, and it won't have "* 32" next to it in the task manager, which I think is the main reason people want them to be 64bit.

Grand Master

Fred Derf Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted
Yeah, waiting for three years. I cannot believe nobody has the expertise and or guts to beat Adobe to it and build a solid 64-bit flash player.

Just for the fun of competing with a free product?

The main issue with 64bit browsers, is that there's no reason to make them, that feeds into nobody really spending time making the browsers compile as a 64bit code (most of the browsers are old code bases), and even then there are barely any 64bit plugins because there aren't any reason to make 64bit versions of the plugins.

The only difference you'll see in a 64bit browser, is that it won't load 32bit plugins (unless it does out of process loading like Chrome/Safari), and having them both as 64bit provides no benefits either.

Oh yeah, and it won't have "* 32" next to it in the task manager, which I think is the main reason people want them to be 64bit.

Hey, some people's porn viewing habits may require more than 4GB of RAM. :D

Explorer

mrbaba

Posted
Posted

Anyone else having the same issues as I am?

I've got the latest Nvidia drivers installed as well as the 10.1 flash player for IE and the rest. Youtube and iplayer both work in Internet explorer, but only youtube videos are gpu accelerated in firefox and chrome, not any iplayer hd videos.

Anyone have any ideas why this might be?

Proficient

RvXtm

Posted
Posted
10.1 doesn't work on revision3, just a heads up

It doesn't work for me neither.

I don't see any improvements as far as my quad machine CPU usage goes. I allways had like 15-20% on hd videos in firefox and 7-8% on hd videos in IE8

I's the same now, but after buffering on ie8 i got like 2-3% cpu usage in HD youtube.

Mentor

rawr_boy81

Posted
Posted
It'll be out right after 64-bit Silverlight. ;)

Face it, they consider 64-bit browsing to be so fringe and unimportant that developing 64-bit versions is very low on the list of priorities.

It remains a fringe because people keep it as a fringe by not addressing the demand. People not using it doesn't mean that people don't want it - it is because of the chicken and egg scenario.

There is no demand for a 64bit office suite but Microsoft realises that it is the future, same will occur with the plugins.

Grand Master

The_Decryptor Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

There is actually demand for a 64bit office suite, people at home might not be hitting the memory limits but corporations are.

But nobody's anywhere close to hitting the memory limit with web browsers or their plugins, people complain when Flash causes Firefox to hit 200MB of RAM, so they don't need it to handle 8TB of RAM any time soon.

Grand Master

Ci7

Posted
Posted
There is actually demand for a 64bit office suite, people at home might not be hitting the memory limits but corporations are.

But nobody's anywhere close to hitting the memory limit with web browsers or their plugins, people complain when Flash causes Firefox to hit 200MB of RAM, so they don't need it to handle 8TB of RAM any time soon.

o come on

don't tell me you belive x64 is all about "ram/memory size"

Grand Master

tsupersonic

Posted
Posted

x64 is all about Memory dude, 90% of the machines at my workplace have 4GB of RAM or more, yet we're still on XP32, thank god there's testing for Win. 7 64/32 going on. Why do you think people get a 64 bit OS in the first place? 99% of the time it's to use 4GB of RAM or more.

Collaborator

dyn

Posted
Posted
The main issue with 64bit browsers, is that there's no reason to make them, that feeds into nobody really spending time making the browsers compile as a 64bit code (most of the browsers are old code bases), and even then there are barely any 64bit plugins because there aren't any reason to make 64bit versions of the plugins.

It misses the word "yet". Right now systems are able to run both 32 and 64 bit software at the same time. In this case it really doesn't matter if a webbrowser is 32 or 64 bit. However, we might see 64 bit only systems in the future which causes a need for 64 bit webbrowsers as 32 bit can't run on those systems any more. Maybe that'll be sooner as some operating systems/webbrowsers have a setup in which they can't use 32 or 64 bit plugins in the webbrowser which is 32 or 64 bit. Compatibility and the ability to be able to use the webbrowser with the plugins is the reason why a 64 bit browser can exist and needs to exist. It's not always about the 64 bit features ;)

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.