Re: Why not use swfdec-mozilla? (was Re: Installing Flash on the OLPC)
On Thu, Jan 1, 2009 at 9:14 PM, Brian Pepple bpep...@fedoraproject.org wrote: Quick clarification. We discussed making swfdec installed by default during the development of Fedora 9, but decided against doing so since we felt it wasn't quite ready for that. Ah, thanks for the clarification, I don't run Fedora so I wouldn't know :) I'm not sure if it was considered, but as the maintainer of swfdec in Fedora I can state that swfdec is very cpu-intensive, and I have my doubts whether the performance on the XO would be comparable to gnash's, though it might be worth investigating. That has been my experience too, but I always thought that the CPU-intensive stuff was only for complex Flash-9 things, and because my ATI open source drivers sucked ;p I guess I should compare gnash/swfdec/adobe flash performance-wise too. -- ~Nirbheek Chauhan ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Why not use swfdec-mozilla? (was Re: Installing Flash on the OLPC)
I'm not sure if it was considered, but as the maintainer of swfdec in Fedora I can state that swfdec is very cpu-intensive, and I have my doubts whether the performance on the XO would be comparable to gnash's, though it might be worth investigating. That has been my experience too, but I always thought that the CPU-intensive stuff was only for complex Flash-9 things, and because my ATI open source drivers sucked ;p I don't believe its a video driver issue as I've seen it on both nvidia and intel using the default open source drivers included in Fedora. Peter ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Why not use swfdec-mozilla? (was Re: Installing Flash on the OLPC)
Hello everyone,
(top-posting due to tangent nature of discussion)
Just a thought here, in my experience, swfdec[1] works far better than
gnash for flash websites; why not use that? There's a Firefox/Gecko
plugin called swfdec-mozilla which works beautifully.
swfdec{,-mozilla} use gstreamer, are LGPLed, and support most of the
Flash 9 features whereas gnash supports only a few of the Flash 9
features. swfdec is also the default Flash player on Fedora, and is
the preferred flash player on Ubuntu.
Were there some specific problems with using swfdec? Or was it not
under consideration due to some factors?
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 5:11 AM, S Page i...@skierpage.com wrote:
Dear genesee, Carlos Nazareno, Everybody,
gently Many more people are going to read
http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Adobe_Flash page than follow this mailing
list. Your effect on XO users by only answering problems here is
limited, you're just making the smart smarter still.
--
~Nirbheek Chauhan
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Why not use swfdec-mozilla? (was Re: Installing Flash on the OLPC)
On Thu, 2009-01-01 at 14:16 +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
swfdec{,-mozilla} use gstreamer, are LGPLed, and support most of the
Flash 9 features whereas gnash supports only a few of the Flash 9
features. swfdec is also the default Flash player on Fedora, and is
the preferred flash player on Ubuntu.
Quick clarification. We discussed making swfdec installed by default
during the development of Fedora 9, but decided against doing so since
we felt it wasn't quite ready for that.
Were there some specific problems with using swfdec? Or was it not
under consideration due to some factors?
I'm not sure if it was considered, but as the maintainer of swfdec in
Fedora I can state that swfdec is very cpu-intensive, and I have my
doubts whether the performance on the XO would be comparable to gnash's,
though it might be worth investigating.
Later,
/B
--
Brian Pepple bpep...@fedoraproject.org
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Bpepple
gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 810CC15E
BD5E 6F9E 8688 E668 8F5B CBDE 326A E936 810C C15E
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
Re: Why not use swfdec-mozilla? (was Re: Installing Flash on the OLPC)
swfdec{,-mozilla} use gstreamer, are LGPLed, and support most of the
Flash 9 features whereas gnash supports only a few of the Flash 9
features. swfdec is also the default Flash player on Fedora, and is
the preferred flash player on Ubuntu.
Quick clarification. We discussed making swfdec installed by default
during the development of Fedora 9, but decided against doing so since
we felt it wasn't quite ready for that.
Were there some specific problems with using swfdec? Or was it not
under consideration due to some factors?
I'm not sure if it was considered, but as the maintainer of swfdec in
Fedora I can state that swfdec is very cpu-intensive, and I have my
doubts whether the performance on the XO would be comparable to gnash's,
though it might be worth investigating.
I've found it very cpu intensive on Fedora 9 and 10 with a penryn dual
core processor. It basically pins one of the cores to 100% CPU but if
I download the video by saving it from the properties box within the
plugin I don't see that issue using the swfdec-gnome player so there's
probably some low hanging fruit within the actual plugin that might be
able to improve the problem easily for someone that knows where to
look.
Peter
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.org
http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel
