On 2009-08-23, Markus Kesaromous <remotestar(a)live.com> wrote:
Well, I am no longer runing 64 bit kernel. Since I migrated to F11, I
am
using the 32 bit kernel.
Ah--I did see that, earlier, sorry. The other comment about 64-bit
threw me off.
Also, I did have to resort to the Adobe version 10 flash plugin.
AFA cpu load, it seems to have the lowest load: 70% of cpu while
a video is playing. As I said in my first post, the trouble with the
Adobe flash 10 is this: if I play a video, and after it finishes, I do not
close the window. I switch to other tabs or other tasks. If I come
back and try to play any other video, or even if I try to replay
the same video, I get totally stuttetered sound and then a repetitive
echo of some unitelligible sound. Does adobe even know about this problem?
I haven't had quite that level of problems--with Adobe 64-bit Flash, I
have no major complaints. Full-screen video is slow, but I'm not sure
whether Adobe or my Intel GPU is to blame for that.
I wonder if any graphics chips will provide a flash decoder so that
all the host has to do is send the flash stream directly to the graphics
controller.
While truly *awesome*, I don't think it will happen. I imagine it
would be much, much cheaper and easier for Adobe to fund a couple more
programmers on the Linux Flash port, than for anybody to commission a
dedicated HW design and incorporate it into GPUs. Adobe underfunds
Linux development because of a perceived lack of desktop market
share--they don't see enough Linux users to justify the costs. If
Linux market share ever grows big enough, Adobe's cheapest option will
just be to improve the Linux port.
I don't think 3rd parties could build/sell the hardware, either--Adobe
seems to have shut down F/OSS Flash 10 implementations (Patents? I
don't actually know.). Whatever the cause, though, I think the same
cost-evaluation logic applies to 3rd parties: If you could get
permission/exemption to implement Flash 10, wouldn't it be cheaper
just to improve Adobe's Linux software port, or write your own, rather
than design chips?
But I could be wrong about the comparative design costs--this is just
my wild speculation.
-R