Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Chrome 27 Beta: ~5% Faster, New HTML5 Inputs

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Chrome 27 Beta: ~5% Faster, New HTML5 Inputs

    Phoronix: Chrome 27 Beta: ~5% Faster, New HTML5 Inputs

    There's some more interesting web-browser related news. Google has pushed out the beta of their Chrome 27 browser and it comes with several new user-facing features...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTM0MzY

  • #2
    Still no OSS audio support though, grr. I switched to Opera now, at least until it will be implemented (if ever).

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Nuc!eoN View Post
      Still no OSS audio support though, grr. I switched to Opera now, at least until it will be implemented (if ever).
      Considering OSSv4 was abandoned 6years ago I'm gonna guess you're a FreeBSD user?

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Nuc!eoN View Post
        Still no OSS audio support though, grr.
        Yeah, but I heard 27 was supposed to bring native pulseaudio support. Has anyone tested it out yet?

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by fa5hion View Post
          Yeah, but I heard 27 was supposed to bring native pulseaudio support. Has anyone tested it out yet?
          It doesn't already?
          Anyway, Google is developing its own audio server (CRAS) for Chrome OS

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by newwen View Post
            It doesn't already?
            Anyway, Google is developing its own audio server (CRAS) for Chrome OS
            Chrome wasn't using pulseaudio directly but through the compatibility layer (alsa) instead. And answering to myself, the new pulseaudio output seems to work fine. The application identifies itself as Chromium in the mixer though.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Ericg View Post
              Considering OSSv4 was abandoned 6years ago I'm gonna guess you're a FreeBSD user?
              OSSv4 does not appear to be abandoned. They did a release last year:

              http://www.opensound.com/forum/viewt...hp?f=19&t=4754

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by ryao View Post
                OSSv4 does not appear to be abandoned. They did a release last year:

                http://www.opensound.com/forum/viewt...hp?f=19&t=4754
                Weird... Arch must need to update their packages

                https://www.archlinux.org/packages/c...ty/x86_64/oss/ (look at the name)

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Ericg View Post
                  Weird... Arch must need to update their packages

                  https://www.archlinux.org/packages/c...ty/x86_64/oss/ (look at the name)
                  2007 is not the year but the build number. I use ArchLinux not BSD.

                  Chromium has no OSS support, it only works through ALSA emulation (didn't work for some releases but in 26 it's been fixed).
                  https://code.google.com/p/chromium/i...tail?id=158478
                  https://code.google.com/p/chromium/i...etail?id=19470

                  OSS has the least latency and I don't see no reason to use ALSA or even Pulse (although pulse works also on top of OSS I think). With ALSA my latency was unacceptable.

                  Here are very good articles comparing Linux sound systems:
                  http://insanecoding.blogspot.de/2007...-in-linux.html
                  http://insanecoding.blogspot.de/2009...-so-sorry.html

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Nuc!eoN View Post
                    2007 is not the year but the build number. I use ArchLinux not BSD.

                    Chromium has no OSS support, it only works through ALSA emulation (didn't work for some releases but in 26 it's been fixed).
                    https://code.google.com/p/chromium/i...tail?id=158478
                    https://code.google.com/p/chromium/i...etail?id=19470

                    OSS has the least latency and I don't see no reason to use ALSA or even Pulse (although pulse works also on top of OSS I think). With ALSA my latency was unacceptable.

                    Here are very good articles comparing Linux sound systems:
                    http://insanecoding.blogspot.de/2007...-in-linux.html
                    http://insanecoding.blogspot.de/2009...-so-sorry.html
                    if you're on a desktop I'm sure it works fine but on laptops... OSS still doesn't support suspend or jack detection.
                    Last edited by Ericg; 04-04-2013, 07:24 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Ericg View Post
                      if you're on a desktop I'm sure it works fine but on laptops... OSS still doesn't support suspend or jack detection.
                      I use it on both, my PC and laptop. I make use of a simple suspend script as described in Arch wiki. There is also some new suspend code written by a user but I've never tested it https://github.com/l29ah/proxyoss.

                      About jack detection I don't really know what's the matter there. Everything seems to work for me.
                      EDIT: How can one check if jack detection works?
                      Last edited by Nuc!eoN; 04-04-2013, 08:58 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Nuc!eoN View Post
                        Here are very good articles comparing Linux sound systems:
                        Are you serious? Both of those articles are outdated and the author is mostly clueless about the subject. Only good thing about the latter article is the comments where Paul Davis (dawhead, the lead developer of the Jack sound server and Ardour digital audio workstation) argues with Hannu Savolainen (the lead/only OSSv4 developer). There's also couple of comments from the profilic Linux kernel developer Theodore Tso. I can't imagine a single reason other than the support for some niche hardware to use OSS. If you have latency problems with ALSA then there's problem with your drivers.

                        Originally posted by Nuc!eoN View Post
                        although pulse works also on top of OSS I think
                        In theory, yes. In pratise, no. The bare minimum support was implemented when the PulseAudio was first released; I don't think there has been any major work since then.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Teho View Post
                          If you have latency problems with ALSA then there's problem with your drivers.
                          I have yet to re-test ALSA ( or PulseAudio or whatever DebianSid has now ) on my XonarDX since OSSv4 works as expected since day one. I switched since I got pops and sound stops when using the system as normal when sound was playing. Compiling/copying something in the background was painful.

                          But yeah development seems to have stopped since last year: http://opensound.hg.sourceforge.net/...und/opensound/

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Licaon View Post
                            But yeah development seems to have stopped since last year: http://opensound.hg.sourceforge.net/...und/opensound/
                            I don't think it has (it's just terribly slow). OSSv4 is "semi-propietary" software; they only do seldom code drops. Here's the forum page for the latest release), people were asking for source code without an answer. It took them over two months to release it after the binaries were released.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Teho View Post
                              I don't think it has (it's just terribly slow). OSSv4 is "semi-propietary" software; they only do seldom code drops. Here's the forum page for the latest release), people were asking for source code without an answer. It took them over two months to release it after the binaries were released.
                              the git shows some action: http://opensound.git.sourceforge.net...ound;a=summary but I can't see those changes.

                              Anyway, the dreams ( http://is.gd/UaVN5t ) are ruined.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X