Changes At Youtube?

[Dronecatcher]

One of my ways to play Youtube in recent times (alongside SMTube etc) was to use a particular mobile device user agent in Safari or Omniweb and go to https://m.youtube.com - though playback was instant it was quite demanding on the CPU.
Tonight, out of the blue, the same method has yielded different results. For a start the Youtube home page now looks like I'm using a user agent from an earlier device (eg Nokia N90) but more significantly and more impressively, whether I choose Normal or HQ playback, the video renders in a different playback screen and uses 20-30% less CPU.

The net result of this is that even my 800Mhz Powerbook running Tiger is playing 360P Youtube in stock Safari with no stuttering or framedrop at 50-60% CPU after fully loading (75 - 90% whilst loading) - not bad considering, "PowerPC Macs can't do Youtube."

This is the user agent I'm using (either copy into Safari via Develop menu or permanently add to the Safari useragent.plist):

Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; MSIE 10.0; Windows Phone 8.0; Trident/6.0; IEMobile/10.0; ARM; Touch)

 

[timidpimpin]

I'm not around a PowerPC system, but using the same user agent on Safari 11.1.2 on ElCapitan it only consumes 4% CPU (to watch in the mobile site) on my C2D MacBook. Pretty impressive... I normally use Firefox on YouTube, with the standard interface, and it uses about 15-20% @ 360-720p.

 

[wicknix]

Thanks for the tip! Not tested on 10.4 yet, but here is yet another YouTube app for 10.5.

Cheers.

 

[Dronecatcher]

Thanks for the tip! Not tested on 10.4 yet, but here is yet another YouTube app for 10.5

Is this using the useragent I referenced?

On my TiBook TenFourTube stopped working - as with Safari, the layout changed as if browsing from an earlier device and it tries to play the 3gp video which launches Quicktime - as discussed before, through some bizarre reason, certain internet providers somehow stop this from working - mine included. MAybe connected with tethering restrictions??

 

[wicknix]

Yep, same UA you posted is used in this. I noticed tenfourtube doing the same on my end also. Thankfully tenfivetube is not affected with this quirk.

Cheers

 

[Imixmuan]

On a Macbook 4,1 10.6.8 and stock Safari this method gives me 360p youtube at 15% CPU(s), making it my new preferred youtube playback method in SL. The macbook stays cool and the fan doesn't come screaming on. By comparison in Arctic Fox I get 60% CPU(s) in the browser and burn a hole in my pants.

This however begs the question: How low can it go?

 

[timidpimpin]

On a Macbook 4,1 10.6.8 and stock Safari this method gives me 360p youtube at 15% CPU(s), making it my new preferred youtube playback method in SL. The macbook stays cool and the fan doesn't come screaming on. By comparison in Arctic Fox I get 60% CPU(s) in the browser and burn a hole in my pants.

This however begs the question: How low can it go?

15% seems a bit high compared to my results. I was using a MacBook 6,1, which has a similar C2D CPU, and it was only using 4% CPU at 360p. This was with Safari 11 on El Capitan.

 

[Imixmuan]

Better graphics card? More RAM? (I only have 4GB in this thing), also....even though I've re thermal pasted the CPU and cleaned out the fan numerous times this thing runs HOT.

 

[timidpimpin]

Better graphics card? More RAM? (I only have 4GB in this thing), also....even though I've re thermal pasted the CPU and cleaned out the fan numerous times this thing runs HOT.

Mine has 8GB of RAM, and while I'm sure the things you mention have some bearing on the differences in our results... it shouldn't be almost 4x better for me. My hardware certainly isn't 4x more powerful. Are you using the same user agent as the OP?

 

[Imixmuan]

Mine has 8GB of RAM, and while I'm sure the things you mention have some bearing on the differences in our results... it shouldn't be almost 4x better for me. My hardware certainly isn't 4x more powerful. Are you using the same user agent as the OP?

Yes, same user agent. I always do as Dronecatcher commands.

For ***** and giggles I downloaded Yewtube just to see if it would work under Rosetta. It runs and loads m.youtube but spits up a webkit Error loading frame.

 

[timidpimpin]

It runs and loads m.youtube but spits up a webkit Error loading frame.

I hope you were wearing eye protection!

 

[AphoticD]

Better graphics card? More RAM? (I only have 4GB in this thing), also....even though I've re thermal pasted the CPU and cleaned out the fan numerous times this thing runs HOT.

Yes, the Nvidia 9400m graphics in the MB6,1 makes a massive difference in video decoding performance over the integrated GMA X3100 in the 4,1. I have both models and although the 4,1 is still a very capable Mac, it is far more limited than the 5,2 or 6,1/7,1.

The 4,1 does run hot too, especially the 2.4GHz model.

My favourite white MacBook has to be the MB5,2 (Early/Mid 2009) - it looks like any other A1181, but under the hood, it has much of the same tech as the Aluminum unibody series.

 

[Dronecatcher]

I've been trying this out over the past few days with this particular user agent, over various browsers and in Tiger & Leopard - what I've found is my 800Mhz Powerbook with Tiger has a 10% less CPU lead over my 1.33Ghz iBook and Powerbook with Leopard.
I know Leopard is a little heavier but that's a huge difference considering the CPU hike the 1.33 machines have - must be a sweetspot for Tiger and that 1Mb L3 cache?
I've also noticed, unlike all my previous TiBooks, this 800 DVI model rarely uses it's fan - this morning I did a video benchmark and the CPU ran at 100% for 14 minutes before switching on.

 

[timidpimpin]

I've been trying this out over the past few days with this particular user agent, over various browsers and in Tiger & Leopard - what I've found is my 800Mhz Powerbook with Tiger has a 10% less CPU lead over my 1.33Ghz iBook and Powerbook with Leopard.
I know Leopard is a little heavier but that's a huge difference considering the CPU hike the 1.33 machines have - must be a sweetspot for Tiger and that 1Mb L3 cache?
I've also noticed, unlike all my previous TiBooks, this 800 DVI model rarely uses it's fan - this morning I did a video benchmark and the CPU ran at 100% for 14 minutes before switching on.

Do you have the 6,5 or 6,7 iBook 1.33GHz? I ask because the 6,5 has a Radeon 9200 which doesn't support core image. The 6,7 has a Radeon 9550 which does support core image. I'm guessing you have the 6,5 based on your results.

The 6,5 models would cause the CPU to handle core image because Leopard forces it on your system whether you want it or not. This is why I prefer Tiger... because it only utilizes core image if you have a compatible GPU.

 

[Dronecatcher]

Do you have the 6,5 or 6,7 iBook 1.33GHz? I ask because the 6,5 has a Radeon 9200 which doesn't support core image. The 6,7 has a Radeon 9550 which does support core image. I'm guessing you have the 6,5 based on your results.

It wouldn't account for the poor performance from the 1.33 Powerbook though?

No, it's the 6,7 with Radeon 9550. I also have all Leopard GUI features turned off and ShadowKiller in place on all my G4 Leopard Macs.

 

[Raging Dufus]

@Dronecatcher, could it be down to the difference between Safari 4.x (Tiger) and 5.x (Leopard)?

Does it perform as well on the TiBook with Omniweb? I know Omni uses a proprietary version of Webkit, but I'd think it would be closer to Leopard's version of Safari than Tiger's.

Would also be interesting to see if/how well this would work with Camino.

 

[timidpimpin]

It wouldn't account for the poor performance from the 1.33 Powerbook though?

No, it's the 6,7 with Radeon 9550. I also have all Leopard GUI features turned off and ShadowKiller in place on all my G4 Leopard Macs.

I guess this is just more evidence for how Tiger is vastly more efficient than Leopard. IMO Tiger, Snow Leopard and El Capitan are the best Mac OS X out there. Those are the three I use and put my faith in. All my PowerPC systems have Tiger.

 

[Raging Dufus]

I guess this is just more evidence for how Tiger is vastly more efficient than Leopard. IMO Tiger, Snow Leopard and El Capitan are the best Mac OS X out there. Those are the three I use and put my faith in. All my PowerPC systems have Tiger.

In general I would agree with you, and particularly in reference to sub-1GHz G4's. But the surprising thing here is that Leopard has always had an advantage when it comes to streaming video, simply because of software support. I can't help but wonder what prompted Google/YouTube to make whatever change they've made (and will it last?) because you can be sure that whatever it was, it had nothing to do with our old Macs.

 

[Dronecatcher]

Does it perform as well on the TiBook with Omniweb? I know Omni uses a proprietary version of Webkit, but I'd think it would be closer to Leopard's version of Safari than Tiger's.

Omniweb 5.11.2 is the best performer on the TiBook (Tiger) and the iBook (Leopard) - on the Powerbook (Leopard) it's poor - high CPU and lots of framedrop...most strange.

I guess this is just more evidence for how Tiger is vastly more efficient than Leopard.

In the past Leopard seemed to have better in browser Youtube playback by virtue of Quicktime 7.7

I can't help but wonder what prompted Google/YouTube to make whatever change they've made

As far as I can tell the change is how it responds to the mobile device user agent and somehow serves the video differently, forcing it to be streamed in a blank window instead of the webpage.

 

[timidpimpin]

Just imagine how much better Leopard would have been if it was as efficient as Snow Leopard.

 

[Dronecatcher]

I didn't have Perian installed on the Powerbook, adding it has brought Omniweb back in line to become the most efficient performer.
It's not installed on the TiBook either...might make a difference...

EDIT: And it has - just got into the habit recently of not installing Perian as nothing ever cried out for missing codecs!
TiBook still ahead as most efficient player despite the 500Mhz gap!

 

[wicknix]

@Imixmuan : Have you tried these on snow leopard? (HookTubeX and the original YewTube for 10.6)
https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...r-youtube-option.2103937/page-2#post-25845294
Curious how they compare CPU use-wise.

Cheers

 

[Imixmuan]

@Imixmuan : Have you tried these on snow leopard? (HookTubeX and the original YewTube for 10.6)
https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...r-youtube-option.2103937/page-2#post-25845294
Curious how they compare CPU use-wise.

Cheers

Yup, tried them, but neither one work for me, I get a black screen. I haven't pursued fixing it.

 

[wicknix]

I can confirm I also have Perian installed on my snow leopard installs. Lack of might be causing Imixmaun's black window issue. I guess I never thought much about Perian either, but both apps still working on my end.

Cheers

 

[dbdjre0143]

Just tried out @wicknix's YewTubePPC App above that uses this UA. Strangely enough, I'm seeing vastly higher CPU usage than y'all are mentioning on my DLSD PB with Leopard. Throughout a roughly 30min video, the usage hovered around 60-65%. I do have Perian installed. Any idea what the difference in my setup may be?