Latest Flash 10.1 on mobile proves Jobs right

By flexkeyboard
in Back Page News

 Share

Recommended Posts

Grand Master

SkyyPunk Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

Works fine on my EVO too...and even if it was a little stuttery (it usually isn't), would you rather not be able to navigate a site at all or have a little stuttery navigation and still get to where you are going :p

Rising Star

____

Posted
Posted

Dude, way to steal my avatar :(

It's contagious.

As for the discussion of no flash vs optional allegedly bad flash it's a complete joke. No one requires you to use Flash on Android and having the option to use it is better than not having the option hands down, there is no reasonable argument against it.

Neowinian

dyinman

Posted
Posted

I am fine without flash. I like HTML 5 better.

Enjoy your JS heavy pages then. They're far more resource hoggish than flash.

I don't get the argument about Flash using tons of resources (over JS). It depends on the application. All I know is when I see people using JS for animations, it brings my browser to a cripple. A flash application that does the same thing hardly makes a blip on my system.

Grand Master

zeroday

Posted
Posted

"Ian Hickson, editor of the HTML5 specification, expects the specification to reach the Candidate Recommendation stage during 2012.[8] The criteria for the specification becoming a W3C Recommendation is “two 100% complete and fully interoperable implementations”.[8] In an interview with TechRepublic, Hickson guessed that this would occur in the year 2022 or later.[9] "

Enjoy the wait Flash bashers. I'd rather have the choice to run it then be told nope, not without Steve Jobs' say so.

(Quote from HTML5 wiki page)

Grand Master

Chasethebase Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

Since owning an iOS device (2008), whilst using them, I've never had a problem with not having Flash installed once. The only things I needed it for was to watch YouTube videos, and there's the native app and HTML5 mobile site for that.

Grand Master

.Neo

Posted
Posted

I just love how it runs fine on my HTC Desire.

Taking along quite a fair amount of battery in the processes. And before you begin claiming otherwise, I have a HTC Desire and Legend lying next to me right now.

Also, I'm not claiming Flash doesn't run "fine" on the above configuration. It does, however, use an insane amount of processing power.

Rising Star

mr.r9

Posted
Posted

I just love how Flash uses up to 65% of my 2.66 GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon CPU while watching a 720p movie.

On Windows or OSX or what exactly?

Pre 10.1 I used to see my Q6600 go to 40-60%, after 10.1 it's aways under 20%. 1080 on youtube uses 25-30%.

Flash on the HTC Desire works generally good, but I actually don't care about it therefore it's not on my device, takes about 10-12 Mb of my precious internal mem :p

Grand Master

techbeck

Posted
Posted

Is it me, or do all the site on Google reporting this link back to laptopmag.com?......

But anyway, this again hasnt been proven to be a widespread issue and until then, who cares. If it is an issue then I would hope Adobe would do something about it. They cannot afford to fail right now. Wish I could test this myself but as of now, I cannot install Flash on my phone...soon tho...soon...:)

Mentor

1759

Posted
Posted

I just love how Flash uses up to 65% of my 2.66 GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon CPU while watching a 720p movie.

That's what you get for using OSX...

1080p vids on YT use about 30-35% of my GPU, an ATI 5770, because MS doesn't gimp what cards are allowed to accelerate what codecs. CPU is a quad-core i5, and OS is 7 64-bit. Hulu Desktop also runs flawlessly as well, just gorgeous watching them on my HDTV. If you want games and multimedia, you don't do it on a Mac. (media creation is different).

On my Mac Mini, Hulu Desktop would easily take up 100% of the C2D, but I blame that on Apple and partially on Adobe for making a poor plugin, but their hands are sort of tied, and that my Mini is ~3 years old.

Grand Master

.Neo

Posted
Posted

That's what you get for using OSX...

1080p vids on YT use about 30-35% of my GPU, an ATI 5770, because MS doesn't gimp what cards are allowed to accelerate what codecs. CPU is a quad-core i5, and OS is 7 64-bit. Hulu Desktop also runs flawlessly as well, just gorgeous watching them on my HDTV. If you want games and multimedia, you don't do it on a Mac. (media creation is different).

On my Mac Mini, Hulu Desktop would easily take up 100% of the C2D, but I blame that on Apple and partially on Adobe for making a poor plugin, but their hands are sort of tied, and that my Mini is ~3 years old.

It wasn't much better on Windows either until very recently. The issue doesn't lie with Apple or Adobe when it comes to offloading stuff to the GPU. It probably lies with the GPU card makers that don't provide proper drivers on Mac OS X. Something I do blame Adobe is the amount of CPU Flash requires in the first place. It's nowhere near as high when playing other media types that aren't being offloaded to the GPU.

There are enough other things that bother me about Flash: No 64-bit support (luckily Safari 64-bit can run 32-bit plugins, but that isn't the case with browsers on Windows) and no multi-core support either from what I can tell.

Grand Master

Mr. Gibs

Posted
Posted

It wasn't much better on Windows either until very recently. The issue doesn't lie with Apple or Adobe when it comes to offloading stuff to the GPU. It probably lies with the GPU card makers that don't provide proper drivers on Mac OS X. Something I do blame Adobe is the amount of CPU Flash requires in the first place. It's nowhere near as high when playing other media types that aren't being offloaded to the GPU.

Well until recently Apple didn't make that code available so there was nothing adobe could do.

And even before 10.1, a 1080p movie on youtube would take up 40-60%. With 10.1 its like 20%.

There are enough other things that bother me about Flash: No 64-bit support (luckily Safari 64-bit can run 32-bit plugins, but that isn't the case with browsers on Windows) and no multi-core support either from what I can tell.

Well I think the only 64bit browser on Windows is IE. I dunno about multi-core support, but since so much of it is now offloaded onto the gpu it really isn't needed.

Grand Master

.Neo

Posted
Posted
Well I think the only 64bit browser on Windows is IE. I dunno about multi-core support, but since so much of it is now offloaded onto the gpu it really isn't needed.

64-bit browsers won't come off the ground pretty much because of plugin suppport right? As far as I'm aware Safari 4 and 5 on Mac OS X Snow Leopard are the only two browsers that can run in 64-bit while maintaining 32-bit plugin support. Multi-Core support would be nice on Mac OS X. :laugh:

Well until recently Apple didn't make that code available so there was nothing adobe could do.

And even before 10.1, a 1080p movie on youtube would take up 40-60%. With 10.1 its like 20%.

There wasn't much point in making the code available since the driver backend didn't exist. For most cards, like my ATI Radeon HD 4870, it still doesn't exist.

Grand Master

Mr. Gibs

Posted
Posted
64-bit browsers won't come off the ground pretty much because of plugin suppport right?

I think that goes both ways..adobe can just claim well no 64bit browsers exist and get away with it.

That said, I do think its time they actually bother designing one and more browsers go 64bit.

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.