Flash Player 10 on PPC macs SLOW... anyone else?

[MagnusVonMagnum]

yeah the card I had that burned up was the same card as yours, the 9800 Pro, w/ 128MB
So I put back the stock Nvidia and HD video improved to the point I could watch 720p.

Interesting. Unfortunately, I don't have an Nvidia to try. Mine came with a Rage 128 and it SUCKS (well it worked better in OS9 since the 9800 Pro isn't supported there with any acceleration, but then I get no sound in OS9 since I upgraded the CPU for some odd reason).

I wonder if the problem might actually be hardware acceleration, that is to say that the faster CPU might be better suited for 720p video than Core Video trying to take over "some" of the functions in hardware (obviously not the H264 decoding). I mean really I was sort of surprised 720p video wouldn't play with a 1.8GHz 7448 CPU. My PowerMac only rates 1/4 the speed of my MBP and that's with 1 CPU core instead of two (i.e. it would have been closer to 1/2 speed had I bought the dual 1.8GHz card). In other words core to core, it's nowhere near as slow as I would have thought for given the age of the machine... I mean think about it. An upgraded computer from 2001 is almost within 50% of the performance of a single core of a 2008 computer of a supposedly faster architecture. Even the overall GPU scores are only around 2.5x faster on the MBP and 3x on OpenGL (sad?) My hard drives had higher scores on the PowerMac until I recently upgraded the MBP's internal drive to a 500GB Hitachi 7200RPM and now it's only slightly faster. I bought the fastest RAM available for the PowerMac so I doubt that's it relative to yours. I think the bus speed might be the biggest bottleneck there.

If you had stock 500Mhz CPUs then your model is a Gigabit Ethernet. The Digital Audio had dual 533Mhz due to the 133Mhz bus versus the Giga's

Yeah, they were dual 533 now that you mention it. I pretty much forgot since I only had them in there a few months (bought it used at a computer show) before I upgraded it.

I've also noticed my DVD-Burner drive (Pioneer model) doesn't reliably burn DVDs in Leopard, but works fine in Tiger. I don't think Apple really cared to fix all the bugs in Leopard. They were too much in a hurry to dump PPC and move onto this "Snow Job" version of the OS, which quite frankly isn't noticeably improved in any noticeable aspect IMO on my MBP over Leopard (maybe the black pop-up menus look better). The MBP tested faster under Leopard! (so much for efficiency improvements....)

 

[lPHONE]

This is the perfect example of bloatware that harms the environment and creates e-waste. My mac g4 with OS 10.4 is a showcase of efficiency. All websites work and even the latest version of iTunes runs ok. But any normal person would not make the connection that flash 10 was the hog that made this computer seem ready for the dump. Most normal people would not be able to remove flash 10 and find and re-install flash 9. I'll be contacting adobe. If they are going to write such poor code their installer should halt and say that PPC macs can't support the flash 10 version. The flash 10 installer should leave a PPC mac untouched and working well with flash 9. And website developers should know to avoid flash 10 because they are forcing visitors to go away or go out and buy new computers in a world crazy with consumption.

Wow, you saved me from a huge headache and opened my eyes. I can see why Steve hates Adobe... They're responsible for THIS.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

If they are going to write such poor code their installer should halt and say that PPC macs can't support the flash 10 version. The flash 10 installer should leave a PPC mac untouched and working well with flash 9. And website developers should know to avoid flash 10 because they are forcing visitors to go away or go out and buy new computers in a world crazy with consumption.

Flash 10 works fine on my PPC machine. I would not want an installer that makes that decision for me. Besides, if you're letting Flash force you to buy a new computer, you must visit one heck of a lot of Flash sites. Apple seems to think you don't need to visit ANY since none of their mobile products support it at all, so your argument doesn't make much sense to me from that perspective.

Wow, you saved me from a huge headache and opened my eyes. I can see why Steve hates Adobe... They're responsible for THIS.

Yes, it's Adobe Flash has people getting rid of their '90s computers not actual technological obsolescence.

Spare me the bit about what Steve thinks because it's just plain nonsense. If Steve cared about making computers last longer, he would not purposely be building in obsolescence into both the operating system and tech gadgets (purposely removing support for older machines and smart phones just so you will HAVE to get rid of your old stuff and buy more stuff from Apple on THEIR schedule).

If companies aren't recycling their products as they should, that's their fault, not Adobe's and not Apple's. Companies CAN make their products less toxic and more recycling friendly, though. Apple has made some improvements in that regard in recent years.

 

[sgmorr]

If companies aren't recycling their products as they should, that's their fault, not Adobe's and not Apple's. Companies CAN make their products less toxic and more recycling friendly, though. Apple has made some improvements in that regard in recent years.

Even if electronics companies cared about recycling their products as they should, how often are these products getting back to the company in question? Not very, if ever is the likely answer. I don't think there are avenues available for the consumer to use to "easily" or even "with effort" get their discarded electronics back to the original manufacturer or to a really reputable (whatever that means) third party recycler.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Even if electronics companies cared about recycling their products as they should, how often are these products getting back to the company in question? Not very, if ever is the likely answer. I don't think there are avenues available for the consumer to use to "easily" or even "with effort" get their discarded electronics back to the original manufacturer or to a really reputable (whatever that means) third party recycler.

By companies, I was referring to the recycling companies that are apparently not recycling and just dumping this stuff in landfills.

 

[btdescape]

either try to do something else or stop saying ********.!

I own a power mac g5 with 6gb instaled memory and a dual processor for 4 years and you are saying that my tech is old so i should throw it?? In witch planet are you man?
Do you know the cost of a new mac?
I work as a photographer and i use my mac in a profesional way with no problem at all and your solution to a flash problem is... buy a new one??
.|.

Wow, this thread is still going on?

Anyways, you people complaining, either don't use Flash, or just buy a new machine. The rest of us running proper machines will move along, while you guys are stuck in the stone age of technology. If you guys want either Adobe or Apple to support older technology, good luck with that. It's like saying Apple should still support OS 9 years after it's been obsolete!

How else will technology move forward if companies keep supporting obsolete technologies? The point is, is that they DON'T. Yes, I agree Flash does suck and it's a resource hog, but you know, most websites use it now. So either deal with it or not. You're the only one that can make that happen.

I use older machines for more of "nostalgic" purposes rather than actually using it as a daily machine.

 

[sgmorr]

I own a power mac g5 with 6gb instaled memory and a dual processor for 4 years and you are saying that my tech is old so i should throw it?? In witch planet are you man?
Do you know the cost of a new mac?
I work as a photographer and i use my mac in a profesional way with no problem at all and your solution to a flash problem is... buy a new one??
.|.

How well does Flash work for you on that machine? I agree with you 100% that your tech is not old and SHOULD work, but for whatever reason lots of us have problems with Flash video on PPC systems. Shouldn't be that way but I guess it is.

 

[Loops]

How well does Flash work for you on that machine? I agree with you 100% that your tech is not old and SHOULD work, but for whatever reason lots of us have problems with Flash video on PPC systems. Shouldn't be that way but I guess it is.

Flash sucks.

The G5 is the new Lisa. Great technology and lame support.

 

[sgmorr]

Flash sucks.

The G5 is the new Lisa. Great technology and lame support.

Ha, ha. Well, I think the Lisa was lame from day one! The G5 started out great and was fine for quite a while wasn't it?

 

[Loops]

Ha, ha. Well, I think the Lisa was lame from day one! The G5 started out great and was fine for quite a while wasn't it?

Have you ever used a Lisa? I have. It was an amazing system.

Unfortunately, Apple made some mistakes — such as when the head of the Lisa team rejected the offer from a member of the Mac team to speed up the processor dramatically.

However, the original Mac was a rather mediocre product in important ways. It couldn't, for instance, even use a hard disk. The lack of protected memory forced Mac users to be stuck with freezes/bombs for many many years. It couldn't multitask. The OS was very primitive and required endless disk swapping. The screen resolution was too low. The RAM was only 128k. A productivity study gave the Lisa an A, the Mac a B, and the IBM PC a C.

 

[sgmorr]

Have you ever used a Lisa? I have. It was an amazing system.

Unfortunately, Apple made some mistakes — such as when the head of the Lisa team rejected the offer from a member of the Mac team to speed up the processor dramatically.

However, the original Mac was a rather mediocre product in important ways. It couldn't, for instance, even use a hard disk. The lack of protected memory forced Mac users to be stuck with freezes/bombs for many many years. It couldn't multitask. The OS was very primitive and required endless disk swapping. The screen resolution was too low. The RAM was only 128k. A productivity study gave the Lisa an A, the Mac a B, and the IBM PC a C.

No, I never had the opportunity to use a Lisa, although I certainly would have liked to have tried one. I need to read up on some more Apple history. Last summer I read "iCon" and "iWoz." Got any other suggestions?

So did the Lisa actually have protected memory?

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Flash works fine on my 1.8GHz 7448 G4 (within the machine's limitations; I cannot view 720P on it, for example but SD works fine). I have more problems with Firefox these days (pegs 100% once in while, maybe every other day for a minute and then goes back to working and does this on Intel and PPC. Chrome/Safari have lag on tabs when you load a new one and try to access the old one, at least on single core machines like the Netbook I use on many trips so none really appeal too much to me.)

 

[Loops]

No, I never had the opportunity to use a Lisa, although I certainly would have liked to have tried one. I need to read up on some more Apple history. Last summer I read "iCon" and "iWoz." Got any other suggestions?

Try the folklore.org website. It has some interesting anecdotes.

So did the Lisa actually have protected memory?

Yes.

It had protected memory, cooperative multitasking, a hard disk based (and therefore capable) OS, a built-in screensaver, a calculator with RPN and a paper tape, redundant storage of critical system files, hardware DRM (serialization of disks), block sparing, its memory boards could isolate specific faulty chips and the rest of the board would continue to be operational, it stored the state of the desktop, it had a task-centric rather than application-centric computing model (no need to memorize the random names of software programs, like "Safari", associating those names with the tasks you want to complete), three expansions slots, the ability to use up to 2 MB of RAM, an Office suite, soft power, a high-resolution screen with excellent sharpness, a full keyboard, dual 860k floppy drives, and more. The Lisa interface designers even came up with column view, and decided not to use it because they felt it was too confusing for beginners. The Lisa could also print in color on color printers, although it had a monochrome screen.

The Mac, by contrast, had no protected memory (which forced us to be stuck with freezes and bombs for many years), no multitasking, no hard disk capability, a paltry amount of RAM, a huge amount of disk swapping, a comparatively primitive OS, no screen saver, the less intuitive application-centric model, no expansion slots, a small screen, a truncated keyboard, a weak calculator, and so on.

The two things that Mac had going for it were audio (the Lisa could only beep) and a faster processor. Apple also replaced the high-capacity (but buggy) Twiggy minifloppy drives with a 400k Sony microfloppy shortly before production. So, while disk storage was drastically cut, necessitating lots of swapping, reliability was improved over the Lisa's disks.

Apple majorly botched both the Lisa and Apple projects by keeping them too separate, incompatible, and flawed. Each system had serious flaws. The Lisa was too expensive, the processor was too slow, it had no audio, and its floppies were too unreliable. The Mac was practically a toy it was so watered-down. In fact, Jobs and company actually resorted to using a 512k prototype to demo the original Mac, cheating, because the Mac 128k couldn't run speech synthesis.

 

[aliensporebomb]

Ah

Back to the original problem.

I was reporting flash bugs to Adobe when my G5 2.5 dual was running and
my configuration was with a nVidia 7800GS which gave me very high framerates
for everything except for Flash.

I was able to play 1080p video but just barely - this configuration was not
commonly available and unfortunately the power supply in my machine blew
so I never finished the testing but Adobe was well aware of the issue.