Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Adobe Enables Mac Hardware-Accelerated Decoding in Updated Flash Player 10.1

KnightWRX said:
Yeah, Flash hogged so much CPU on my P2-333 running under Linux. I seriously couldn't have spent so much time in the early 2000s on newgrounds.com.

Yep, all my imagination. :rolleyes:

BRLAWYER IS DEAD. APPLE IS DEAD.
Click to expand...

Amazing that such a ridiculous plugin can cause all these problems, ain't it? Go visit Jim Carrey's "Flash-powered" website and you'll understand my point...:rolleyes:

MS IS DEAD. AND SO IS ADOBE.
 
BRLawyer said:
Amazing that such a ridiculous plugin can cause all these problems, ain't it? Go visit Jim Carrey's "Flash-powered" website and you'll understand my point...:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I recently played around the Iron Man 2 site. Full flash, tons of animations, menus, interactive content, all done through Flash.

Fans never came on. Flash has been doing vector graphic animations and code execution since the early 2000s, back before the technology was even a glimmer in Adobe's eye and the company responsible for it was Macromedia.

What people have issue with is video decoding. The software video decoder is slow. Youtube, Vimeo and other video sites is what people complain about when they complain about Flash.

Or ads. But ads in HTML5 aren't better than ads in Flash. The problem is not the technology behind the ads, it's the ads themselves.

Again :

BRLAWYER IS DEAD AND SO IS HIS ARGUMENTS.
 
RMo said:
It can be turned off--and, in fact, is automatically for any simulatenous videos playing beyond the third if you have multiple ones playing at the same time (really small ones don't count, presumably to avoid accelerating ads).
Click to expand...
I hope you're talking about the hw acceleration in the new Flash version and not the GPU switching (turning that off means switching to the powerconsuming 330M). If that's true than it's worth upgrading to the new version.
 
KnightWRX said:
That's the thing, you're a mediocre OS X programmer. You probably just embedded the quicktime component in your app. Adobe needs access to decoded frame data before it is displayed. They don't use the quicktime component to draw on screen because they do extra processing after the decoding process (stuff to add overlays to video and other flash functionality).

In essence, you don't understand at all what is required here. QTKit is not the answer, adobe needed this API as many others do (Plex and VLC for instance).
Click to expand...

Actually I was decoding non-Apple x.264 video in various containers, .mkv, .avi, and I even found a .mpg of Who Framed Roger Rabbit. I said I was a mediocre OS X programmer, not a mediocre programmer. Please don't talk down to me.
 
SPUY767 said:
Actually I was decoding non-Apple x.264 video in various containers, .mkv, .avi, and I even found a .mpg of Who Framed Roger Rabbit. I said I was a mediocre OS X programmer, not a mediocre programmer. Please don't talk down to me.
Click to expand...

And again, my comment was about your OS X programming ability. You talked down to yourself.

And you still obviously don't get what I meant when I said Core Video is too high level. If you don't want the display, only decoded frames so that you can do your own post-processing on them, Core Video will not help you. At all. Hence this new framework. It isn't just a duplicate of Core Video, it was truly needed. :rolleyes:

So please, pretty please, if you're not a mediocre programmer, inform yourself about what is being discussed here and the difference between it (the Video Decode Acceleration framework) and Core Video.
 
batchtaster said:
Could NOT care less.

Could. NOT.

Could NOT care less.

COULD NOT

Geez.

If you "could care less" then your care-o-meter is above zero, and there is room and potential for you to care less. Meaning you do care.

Why do so many people struggle to understand basic English?

ObFlash: As a user, I find it to be a necessary evil rather than desirable. As an administrator, I'll take what minor improvements they eke out of it while I have to support Adobe's poorly thought out products. (Although AAMEE is an improvement.)
Click to expand...

How do you know if what he wrote in the first place wasn't what he meant? ;)
 
RRmalvado said:
So no GPU acceleration on older models... will CPU utilization still be lowered?
Click to expand...

Nope, actually CPU usage will be greater and videos will suffer from it.

Even though i don't own a newer Mac i do own a somewhat newer PC then my Mac (made in around 2005) but it has a P4 2.8ghz northwood, 2gb Ram, 6800 GT video card (not supported by 10.1 because of the nvidia drivers don't support it for my card).

this is why i stayed with flash 10.0 for as long as i did until things stopped working and required you to update to 10.1 .

before Youtube ran around 20% CPU usage max at any given time, now its up towards 50% and greater on my PC which can lead to slideshow videos, and non responsive web browser (firefox). now i have to set youtube to its lowest setting to get smooth playback.

but i can almost bet that there could be a way to edit a kext file to enable this funtion on older hardware (think of it like enabling QE on a PCI only Mac http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/8979/pci-extreme!)
 
Any word on when Apple will update the Video Decode Acceleration API to provide hardware acceleration on the ATI cards in the latest iMac models?
 
Hm.

macros73 said:
Any word on when Apple will update the Video Decode Acceleration API to provide hardware acceleration on the ATI cards in the latest iMac models?
Click to expand...

There seems to be some indication of continuing dialogue between Apple and Adobe about development on this feature - see the responses here: http://www.bytearray.org/?p=1957

I'd love it myself. If my G5 can't do it, my Corei7 iMac should be able to.
 
BRLawyer said:
With or without this more-than-late hardware "acceleration", Flash is a CPU-hog and probably the greatest example of lazy, bad coding on OS X...but I don't need to get into that again...Flash is moribund, after all.
Click to expand...

So basically its Adobes fault for Apples hardware choices?
 
ranReloaded said:
Should Apple open up hardware-level access to a third party developer, I think it's a valid question in terms of design phylosophy/security. Can't blame Apple right away.
Click to expand...

It's a dumb question. Any person can add new kernel extensions to OS X. Any kernel extension can muck with anything in the system.

goosnarrggh said:
2) Follow Microsoft's lead with the DXVA framework,
Click to expand...
Wow. According to wikipedia, Microsoft has supported hardware accelerated video decoding since Windows 98.
 
Wait a minute. I thought this update was supposed to make videos play smoother. After the update, Youtube videos are playing a lot choppier for me, especially the 1080p ones.
 
TheScavenger said:
I just ran a quick youtube test. CPU usage went up from 25% to 30% while watching an SD youtube video after installing the 10.1 update. Somethings pretty messed up here :mad:
Click to expand...

Yeah ever try turning off GPU acceleration and comparing CPU usage with 10.0 and 10.1, oh boy its a mess.

you would have thought that the CPU usage would remain the same if not get a little better without acceleration between 10.0 and 10.1, but it started using allot more, and get allot better with it turned on. that is why i stayed with 10.0 for as long as i could before sites required me to update to 10.1.

people should go to adobes forum and complain about this to no end until they fix the issue for both Mac and PC.
 
KnightWRX said:
Fans never came on. Flash has been doing vector graphic animations and code execution since the early 2000s, back before the technology was even a glimmer in Adobe's eye and the company responsible for it was Macromedia.
Click to expand...

Too bad Adobe killed everything made by Macromedia huh?

Though I feel nostalgia has a factor here.
 
Mr. Retrofire said:
This API is an abstraction layer and allows the usage of other graphics cards/GPUs, as they become available. Even, if some ATI GPUs have the necessary decoder units, Apple must make sure, that their end users do not get an unfinished product. Video decoders work directly together with the Mac OS X kernel through several APIs. An ATI-specific video decoder acceleration framework, which does not work as it should (could also be a bug in the ATI hardware or graphics card firmware) can cause millions of kernel panics worldwide, if the unfinished framework is distrbuted via a Mac OS X update.
Click to expand...

Except ATI Stream works just fine to accelerate Flash video in Windows...

Still, video is the absolute worse use of Flash imaginable.
 
bmb012 said:
Still, video is the absolute worse use of Flash imaginable.
Click to expand...

LULZ

http://www.adobe.com/products/flashmediaserver/

for some reason everyone else is able to make flash work for them. If Apple wants to make things difficult, eh, what can you do.

Well, one thing you can do on an older machine is boot into windows on the very same hardware and get spectacular results.

hrmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
 
MorphingDragon said:
Too bad Adobe killed everything made by Macromedia huh?

Though I feel nostalgia has a factor here.
Click to expand...

Flash and Dreamweaver were retained.

Macromedia Director I'm not surprised was cut. Macromedia had abandoned it themselves before they were acquired by Adobe.

Macromedia Freehand was a much better product than Illustrator in addition to being much leaner and more efficient. The only thing Illustrator really had on it was more comprehensive typographic control.

Of course, Flash was the only thing Adobe was interested in at the time - especially after a failed attempt via their Live Motion product to capture the Flash market and the GoLive HTML editor failed to capture Dreamweaver's market. We're in the era where if you can't beat'em, acquire'em!

To anyone here who are quick to say that Apple should cut all ties to Adobe, I say keep dreaming!

If Apple were to do that, they can kiss their whole pro market goodbye (not that it is already bad neglected). While no longer a substantial segment of their business as it once was, it would be a very embarrassing episode for Apple nonetheless.

iPhone/iPod/iwhatever users can live without Adobe on their gadgets, but graphics professionals cannot. In that vein, Apple needs Adobe more than Adobe needs Apple.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back