Can't wait until that day! With real native apps that are fast and light and not expensive Adobe bloatware. The writing is on the wall. Adobe isn't long for this world at the rate they are going. Dinosaurware would be a better term.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Next Version Of Flash Player To See Performance Leap
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Ok, I give up.
Uninstalled Flash Player 9 (a step that shouldn't be necessary)
Installed Flash Player 10 UB in Mac OS X 10.4.11
Repaired disk permissions (Lots of disk permissions errors, will Adobe EVER learn how to make an installer???)
Rebooted.
Doesn't work, all pixelated video, unwatchable.
Is this not compatible w/ Safari 4 Developer Preview???
Apparently not.
And to add insult to injury, when you go through the Mac Uninstall instructions, you find this gem...
"Macintosh
Run the appropriate uninstaller available from this TechNote."
And the technote links to WINDOWS UNINSTALL instructions! GRRRRRRRR
Uninstalled Flash Player 9 (a step that shouldn't be necessary)
Installed Flash Player 10 UB in Mac OS X 10.4.11
Repaired disk permissions (Lots of disk permissions errors, will Adobe EVER learn how to make an installer???)
Rebooted.
Doesn't work, all pixelated video, unwatchable.
Is this not compatible w/ Safari 4 Developer Preview???
Apparently not.
And to add insult to injury, when you go through the Mac Uninstall instructions, you find this gem...
"Macintosh
Run the appropriate uninstaller available from this TechNote."
And the technote links to WINDOWS UNINSTALL instructions! GRRRRRRRR
Why would Adobe release a flash player compatible with a beta browser? How can you expect third-party developers to keep up with a moving target?
The Technote links to Windows, OSX and Linux uninstallers. I had no problem finding what I needed. Try looking.
The Technote links to Windows, OSX and Linux uninstallers. I had no problem finding what I needed. Try looking.
So in other words you're saying Adobe shouldn't be developing or testing Flash Player 10 for the next version of Safari which will probably be released soon? Or maybe Adobe should just concentrate on Flash for the 2.5G iPhone and wait on 3G testing??? Yes, that's my point. Why bother releasing this software if it doesn't work at all on certain Macs? I'd call this release ALPHA, NOT BETA. Sorry, but the truth hurts sometimes.
So I have a choice to make...
FAST SAFARI / SLOW FLASH PLAYER or SLOW SAFARI / FAST FLASH PLAYER
Guess what choice I'm making? BABYE Flash Player 10!
And by the way my "Technote" page never fully loaded or loaded the wrong document or Adobe has already changed the link because I see a DIFFERENT DOCUMENT NOW! So that explains why I didn't see the OSX Uninstall link. I'm not imagining things, a Windows specific document page came up with no mention of OSX whatsoever (maybe Adobe's website didn't recognize Safari 4???).
And I've tried uninstalling and re-installing, NOPE, doesn't work at ALL in SAFARI 4! Back to the drawing board Adobe.
And it's absolutely pathetic Adobe software design for Flash Player (ALL VERSIONS) to cause so many disk permissions errors during installation. I've found that Flash Player often doesn't even work properly until you fix these. How many Mac users repair disk permissions that often or want to have to just for a simple install like this?
Seriously, how can ADOBE be THAT MAC-STUPID after ALL THESE YEARS??? GRRRRRR
just did the disk permissions repair. i can confirm that there were a LOT of broken permissions that had to be fixed. back to testing. i am seeing a LOT of pixelization on anything i attempt to watch on youtube.
so far i see slight improvements in speed when loading a flash animation, for instance, the adobe home page. it became a lot quicker, but obviously not as smooth and fast as it was originally intended.
i personally feel like they have a long way to go with the flash player for mac. let's hope they don't give up and give us yet another lukewarm offering.......
so far i see slight improvements in speed when loading a flash animation, for instance, the adobe home page. it became a lot quicker, but obviously not as smooth and fast as it was originally intended.
i personally feel like they have a long way to go with the flash player for mac. let's hope they don't give up and give us yet another lukewarm offering.......
I'm glad iLife does not call home. Wait, it does. All of the apps.Adobe's bloated uninstallers for everything, not to mention that they love to make products that phone home...
Too bad, especially on this board, people always forget: Apple's crap does not smell any better than Adobe's or Microsoft's. But when most of the users here think Apple invented 3G GSM, why am I surprised?Anyhow, I believe to Adobe on this one and seems like they finally listened to the many problems CS3 faced. Acrobat 9, the 1st of the new batch, is incredibly fast and its install is the usual copy to App folder. Too bad it won't satisfy the
fans who always have something to whine about; except their precious . Installed and Tried it Out, but then "DOWNGRADED"
This Flash Player 10 beta 2 might offer some promised speed improvements, but far too many of the sites I visit delivering streaming video "would not work" with this new release (including all of CNN's streaming video).
CNN's website told me that I didn't have the Flash Player plug-in, so I 'uninstalled' and returned to the previous released v9.
I hope they can get this working well...
This Flash Player 10 beta 2 might offer some promised speed improvements, but far too many of the sites I visit delivering streaming video "would not work" with this new release (including all of CNN's streaming video).
CNN's website told me that I didn't have the Flash Player plug-in, so I 'uninstalled' and returned to the previous released v9.
I hope they can get this working well...
I always love 'up to' type speed claims. This printer prints up to 30ppm. Translated that means this printer will print 1 page every 4 minutes in color photo quality or 30 ppm in low dot-matrix-esque 'draft' quality using plain text only. It means that EVERY TIME. Oooh! This printer will print 8ppm in color! Right, more like 1 page every 8 minutes. It's absolutely deceptive advertising because the truth is printers still suck for speed, especially ink jets. You need laser to get any type of speed and even then it has to warm up, dump all to memory encoded as post script, etc. so even though the 'print' is fast, it takes a LONG time before it's ready to print. Now if you need 20 copies of the same thing, those copies will be fast on laser. On inkjet they'll take all day.
So call me skeptical, but 'up to 3 times faster' PROBABLY means 1.1x faster in real life situations.
So call me skeptical, but 'up to 3 times faster' PROBABLY means 1.1x faster in real life situations.
If the GPU is pripert leveraged, a la coreimage, 3x increase would be east to attain. I doubt that adobe would hook into another company's framework, but I can dream.
UPDATE...
Also doesn't work at ALL in Mac OS 10.5.4 with Safari 4 installed and yes, the installer causes all the same disk permissions errors as in Tiger, which in Leopard of course takes forever to fix. That also means it doesn't work with the open source Webkit browser either. And finally, if you have Safari 4 installed, it doesn't even work with FIREFOX 3.0 OR FIREFOX 2 EITHER! Grrrrrrrrrr. Thumbs down from me.
NEXT...
Also doesn't work at ALL in Mac OS 10.5.4 with Safari 4 installed and yes, the installer causes all the same disk permissions errors as in Tiger, which in Leopard of course takes forever to fix. That also means it doesn't work with the open source Webkit browser either. And finally, if you have Safari 4 installed, it doesn't even work with FIREFOX 3.0 OR FIREFOX 2 EITHER! Grrrrrrrrrr. Thumbs down from me.
NEXT...
Works fine with Safari 3.1.2 on Leopard (10.5.4). Although I had to repair permissions as well.
Compared to Flash 9 it's superfast (well, for a Mac. In reality, it's still not up to par with flash on the windows side of things) I can even go to youtube now without being too annoyed by anything other than the crap contents on that site. I guess that's not adobe's fault, though
Works fine with Safari 3.1.2 on Leopard (10.5.4). Although I had to repair permissions as well.
Compared to Flash 9 it's superfast (well, for a Mac. In reality, it's still not up to par with flash on the windows side of things) I can even go to youtube now without being too annoyed by anything other than the crap contents on that site. I guess that's not adobe's fault, though
Keep in mind if you are able to download the Safari 4 beta or even the latest open source WEBKIT (pretty close to the same thing I imagine), you experience increased speed on ALL WEBSITES. This Flash Player 10 beta only affects Flash sites so why bother?
If I'm forced to choose, I'd pass on this beta, since when Apple releases Safari 4, you're most likely going to have problems with YouTube and all other Flash sites unless Adobe gets their act together REAL QUICK!
This Flash Player 10 release sort of explains to me why there is no FLASH support on the iPhone. Adobe doesn't seem to have a clue.
It's like they're still developing and testing for YESTERDAY's Mac, browser, and even iPhone! You would sort of think Adobe would be in the loop on Safari 4 or Webkit right? Apparently not. :-(
Acrobat 9, the 1st of the new batch, is incredibly fast and its install is the usual copy to App folder. Too bad it won't satisfy the
I hope they don't make it require 400MB.... Oh wait ...
I really don't care if they make it faster. Nice bonus though, but let's be honest; this shouldn't be an issue to begin with.
What i would like them to do is make it use substantially less resources. Seriously, why does playing a flash movie in a browser need more than 50% CPU power with a 2,33GHz C2D??
What i would like them to do is make it use substantially less resources. Seriously, why does playing a flash movie in a browser need more than 50% CPU power with a 2,33GHz C2D??
The state of software development is so bad. Flash should take at most 5% of cpu time to run (except for video).
Edit: Wow Adobe updater also uses 100% of the CPU, this is a joke. Adobe here is my advice make a script for curl or wget and open the disk images/installers automatically.
Edit: Wow Adobe updater also uses 100% of the CPU, this is a joke. Adobe here is my advice make a script for curl or wget and open the disk images/installers automatically.
Uhhhh, who told you this? I use webkit all the time and I have no problem with youtube, just with flash 10 beta 2 do I have a problem which occurs in all browsers and that's why this is in beta .
If this means sites such as Youtube no longer bring my Powerbook to its knees, I'll be very happy. No need to upgrade to a Macbook Pro after all
If this means sites such as Youtube no longer bring my Powerbook to its knees, I'll be very happy. No need to upgrade to a Macbook Pro after all
my celeron 500mhz PC with 128mb ram played youtube videos with no issue what so ever, nothing (other than games) bogged the computer down when surfing (running Windows XP Pro)
my Digital Audio G4 533mhz 768mb ram running tiger or leopard gets bogged down playing youtube videos even when not in full screen or flash games. simple flash ads make safari bog down and stutter which makes it seem like its my PII 266mhz i use to have.
I just don't get it, why so many people have problems with 10.
I have none. None at all. It is wicked fast and stable for me on my iMac 2.16ghz. On all sites. YouTUBE included.
It is as fast as Flash 10 is on my Windows XP setup.
Oh well, go figure...
I have none. None at all. It is wicked fast and stable for me on my iMac 2.16ghz. On all sites. YouTUBE included.
It is as fast as Flash 10 is on my Windows XP setup.
Oh well, go figure...