Become a MacRumors Supporter for $25/year with no ads, private forums, and more!

Adobe Releases Flash Player 10.1, But Hardware Acceleration on OS X Not Supported

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
50,441
11,827
https://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogodarkd.png




Adobe today released Flash Player 10.1, the public version of its browser plug-in that has been available for testing in prerelease form since mid-November. The release, however, does not yet include hardware-accelerated decoding on Mac OS X.

Apple altered its policies in late March to allow third parties such as Adobe to tap into the hardware-accelerated decoding of H.264 video on machines with compatible video cards. Adobe did just that a month later, introducing its "Gala" prerelease version of Flash Player 10.1 for Macs running Mac OS X 10.6.3 and using NVIDIA GeForce 9400M, GeForce 320M or GeForce GT 330M video cards. The Gala functionality, highly anticipated by many users for its ability to free system resources and reduce loads, will be included in a future update to Flash Player 10.1.
Will Gala be generally available with the general availability of Flash Player 10.1 in the first half of this year?
It is expected that the Gala functionality - H.264 hardware decoding on Mac OS X 10.6.3 - will be available in an update following the release of Flash Player 10.1.
A second preview version of Gala remains available through Adobe Labs for those looking to test out the hardware acceleration.

Flash Player 10.1 is intended to integrate the Flash experience across a broad variety of platforms, including smartphones, with support for multi-touch and accelerometer controls. The so-called "Open Screen Project" is consortium of nearly 50 companies looking to bring a consistent Flash experience across all platforms, but Apple is notably absent from the group.

Article Link: Adobe Releases Flash Player 10.1, But Hardware Acceleration on OS X Not Supported
 

espanta

macrumors newbie
May 10, 2010
18
0
so it will still be a resource hog...

why even bother installing it until it supports hardware acceleration?
 
Comment

SeanMcg

macrumors 6502
Jun 1, 2004
333
1
slightly o/t

Will Gala be generally available with the general availability of Flash Player 10.1 in the first half of this year?

"...generally available with the general availablilty..."??????????

(Forget the coding complaints. That's been done to death. Here's something new to dislike about Adobe :) )
 
Comment

smithrh

macrumors 68030
Feb 28, 2009
2,517
1,130
Actually, thanks for pointing out the lack of HW acceleration - I might have gone ahead and installed it...

I've been using "Gala" since it was made available, and Flash (video at least) is entirely tolerable. 720p doesn't even bother the MBP, CPU usage is minimal.

Crashes, on the other hand, are frequent. Very frequent. But I'm willing to overlook those given the performance increase.
 
Comment

BuffyzDead

macrumors regular
Dec 30, 2008
115
75
How about on NVIDIA GeForce 9600M GT graphics processor?

This "hardware acceleration" is NOT supported on an NVIDIA GeForce 9600M GT graphics processor?

I don't see it mentioned above, but it lives alongside the NVIDIA GeForce 9400M of my 15" Macbook Pro, so I'm asking for clarification ??

Thank you
 
Comment

matticus008

macrumors 68040
Jan 16, 2005
3,330
1
Bay Area, CA
Apple altered its policies in late March to allow third parties such as Adobe to tap into the hardware-accelerated decoding of H.264 video on machines with compatible video cards. Adobe did just that a month later
That's not accurate to say. Third parties already had access to hardware H.264 decoding long before March, and the use of the H.264 dedicated API created in March is predicated on Cocoa. Flash Player did not become a Cocoa app until 10.1 (i.e., this very version), more than eight years after Apple warned of the deprecation of Carbon.

To imply that the feature was missing until Apple allowed Adobe to add it is both false and misleading. Adobe could have taken advantage of it at any point had they updated Flash player sooner or had they used a native-code approach to playback by building on top of Quicktime (the API, not the player).
 
Comment

longofest

Editor emeritus
Jul 10, 2003
2,858
1,416
Falls Church, VA
In general, even though I haven't gotten hardware decoding on my system (early 2008 MBP), the 10.1 betas have been more efficient than their predecessors, so a general release is still welcome. I'd still like to see Adobe make better versions of flash (or everyone just migrate to HTML5).
 
Comment

CdnBook

macrumors member
Nov 25, 2009
33
5
Wow... big surprise Adobe.

Still using "click to flash". Life is good without flash.
 
Comment

inlovewithi

macrumors 6502a
Sep 23, 2009
615
0
Not a comment about flash, but this does remind me that I recently bought an HP computer for my Aunt, I had it for a couple of days, and unlike using a laptop I never worried about the CPU. It was just so refreshing. With my macbook and other laptops I'm constantly conscious of anything that uses over 20% CPU power. So sometime we had to get into our heads that these things are design to use more than 20% CPU power. We limit ourselves when using these things, to the point where I for example would not play a SNES emulated game, etc, and other things that take 20 to 30% CPU power, and not worrying about that is refreshing.
 
Comment

FoxyKaye

macrumors 68000
You know, Adobe's not really helping their case with this.

Apple's pissing match with Adobe aside, this would have been an ample opportunity for Adobe to undermine Jobs' assertions about Flash and do something to change the public's perception.

So much for the consumer who's caught in between these two - it seems like our choices are Apple's pie-in-the-sky HTML5 or Adobe's crappy implementation of Macromedia's Flash.
 
Comment

swarmster

macrumors 6502a
Jun 1, 2004
623
89
Actually, thanks for pointing out the lack of HW acceleration - I might have gone ahead and installed it...

I've been using "Gala" since it was made available, and Flash (video at least) is entirely tolerable. 720p doesn't even bother the MBP, CPU usage is minimal.

Crashes, on the other hand, are frequent. Very frequent. But I'm willing to overlook those given the performance increase.

Actually, for those of you who use Flash, there is a reason you might want to consider updating, even without hardware acceleration. Namely, this supposedly plugs a big security hole being exploited in Flash since at least last week.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-27080_3-20007119-245.html

FYI
 
Comment

GQB

macrumors 65816
Sep 26, 2007
1,196
109
Yet another joy of my peaceful and quiet digital world of flashblockers... I don't have to bother downloading this PoC.
 
Comment

splashman

macrumors 6502
Jun 23, 2003
350
0
This new version is great! My Flash blocker seems much snappier.

Love it! You got me laughing!

Flash has been gut-shot by Apple, and is slowly dying. Adobe is the hysterical mother, cradling poor Flash in her lap, screaming, "No! You can't die! You're going to live forever!!!"

Alternate scene: "It's just a flesh wound!"
 
Comment

inkswamp

macrumors 68030
Jan 26, 2003
2,761
846
You know, Adobe's not really helping their case with this.

Apple's pissing match with Adobe aside, this would have been an ample opportunity for Adobe to undermine Jobs' assertions about Flash and do something to change the public's perception.

So much for the consumer who's caught in between these two - it seems like our choices are Apple's pie-in-the-sky HTML5 or Adobe's crappy implementation of Macromedia's Flash.

Or neither. Just block Flash altogether and carry on with your life like I do.

See, I grew up in the 80s and our computers didn't have Flash back then, and I turned out just fine. I can take it or leave it. :D
 
Comment
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.