Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Adobe Rants Over Linux Video Acceleration APIs

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by bash View Post
    So wait, this is the company that for Flash has not been able to produce a stable 64bit release (That one version for Linux was just officially just some alpha testing version).
    I've been running 64-bit Flash for a year and it's no worse than any other version of Flash. Ubuntu even handles it through the update manager so there's no need to manually download new versions anymore.

    Comment


    • #17
      I don't want anymore the flash plugin(and other closed source code) into my linux box.
      But from the Adobe perspective: why Flash Plugin is not expandable by plugins?
      If Adobe release an intelligent FlashAPI the opensource community can create the code needed to the plugin for work well on linux, solaris, *bsd, macosx, ecc..
      For example the Api can permit to create Video Acceleration Api backends, graphic output backends, audio output backends, in a more deep collaboration with the community is possible to create an efficient 2D acceleration.
      Adobe open the doors. Release the FlashPlugin like a kernel and let's the community a free api for create the "drivers".

      Comment


      • #18
        Maybe this guy needs to spend LESS time on m$ paint, and more time, you know, CODING.

        It's easy to arrive later at the party and say "meh, I don't like these APIs, they don't work". Why don't they work? How can they be improved? Where are you getting problems? -- Those are the lame, technical questions. Bitching and drawing a box graphic attacks the real issue, that is: er.., if I knew I'd be working for adobe.

        So there you go.
        Last edited by [Knuckles]; 01-27-2010, 03:28 AM. Reason: typo

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by L33F3R View Post
          and that argument will be finished eventually. however im still waiting on 64 bit flash. Lets see what comes first .
          Huh?
          http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/flas...r10_64bit.html

          Comment


          • #20
            I agree with the points made here.

            Adobe should work with the various communities and help them instead of complaining. You didn't see Mozilla complain that pango or cairo were no good. No, you have them working to improve the associated libraries to meet their needs.

            So, stepping back a little, what is the reason behind this?
            1/ Adobe being closed source does not want to contribute code to Open Source projects?
            2/ Adobe does not know where to talk about this in the respective communities (sound, pulseaudio, video)?
            3/ The developers are lazy?
            4/ They feel that their work will become yet another sound API or video acceleration API, or not get accepted upstream?
            5/ Pressure from management/the business to get a product out that supports the features, and not wanting to wait to get community approval, get the changes into the upstream projects and have them being adopted by the various distributions?
            6/ Adobe does not want to help Open Source projects because of their ties to Microsoft?
            6/ A combination of the above?

            If we don't know, then it just becomes another meaningless rant which will blow over, nothing will be done about it and will help colour peoples perception of Linux.

            And it's not like Microsoft change their graphics APIs (GDI, GDI+, DirectDraw, Direct2D, System.Drawing, System.Windows.Shapes, ...) or sound APIs and architecture (Vista) creating a confusing landscape on Windows is it? Yet Abobe does not rant about that, do they?

            Comment


            • #21
              well, in "A world without walls", nobody is aloud to complain.



              but anyway, linux would move a bit faster if everyone would just standardize things.
              one package management system, one api for whatever... etc.
              although i value that people like choices, just standardize some main things and leave open comfortable options.

              everyone just pick vdpau already!!!!! we need to give positive reinforcement to nvidia's open source efforts! negative attention will just make nvidia less likely to contribute to open source

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by bash View Post
                So wait, this is the company that for Flash has not been able to produce a stable 64bit release
                Which is totally unrelated to the subject at hand. I like abobe bashing as much as the next guy but remember that the player contains a VM with a fairly sophisticated JIT, it's not just a matter of recompiling... given the fact that the number of users running a 64 bit browser is pretty small I'm not surprised that Adobe is not investing much in this task (hey, even MS says that a 64bit Silverlight plugin is low priority)

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by bridgman View Post
                  XvBA is documented, just under NDA. It was originally designed for use with binary players.
                  What's the reason for not releasing them? HDCP?

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by tettamanti View Post
                    Which is totally unrelated to the subject at hand. I like abobe bashing as much as the next guy but remember that the player contains a VM with a fairly sophisticated JIT, it's not just a matter of recompiling... given the fact that the number of users running a 64 bit browser is pretty small I'm not surprised that Adobe is not investing much in this task (hey, even MS says that a 64bit Silverlight plugin is low priority)
                    Well I would agree if it would be some random feature. But 64bit is not some random feature and is not going to go away. 64bit is the future and it only a matter of time until 64bit will be the majority. Apple is quite ahead on that route, Linux offers good support for 64bit and word is the next Windows version will be 64bit only. So yea they will have to do a 64bit version of it. And the fact that they already released a first 64bit alpha flash-plugin for Linux shows that it's possible. They just don't seem to care much about it, as the next version (10.1) now is 32bit only again.

                    Originally posted by movieman View Post
                    I've been running 64-bit Flash for a year and it's no worse than any other version of Flash. Ubuntu even handles it through the update manager so there's no need to manually download new versions anymore.
                    Are you running an extra repo or ppa for 64bit Flash. The default version in all 64bit Ubuntu releases (including 10.04 so far) has been 32bit wrapped with nspluginwrapper. The only way to get 64bit was to manually download and install it. Unless someone created an extra repo for it, that I missed until now.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by bridgman View Post
                      That said, Adobe is already using GL for render acceleration so Xv wouldn't save much CPU relative to GL. If that's what you meant then "carry on"
                      Ufortunately, Incompetence spreads to that as well. They seem unable to accelerate gl while compositing is enabled. You can't even temporarily suspend it, you have to disable the extension from running before flash even considers using acceleration.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        All rants and no results.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          offtopic, 64bit flash again:
                          What is the reason distros don't offer 32bit browsers to run on 64bit kernels?

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            If VLC and MPlayer can play the 720p mp4 videos downloaded from youtube *smoothly* without any form of video acceleration (using the X11 renderer which is pure software even on the output level) why can't Flash? And this guy is supposed to be doing multimedia stuff since 1999? Give me a break.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by frische View Post
                              offtopic, 64bit flash again:
                              What is the reason distros don't offer 32bit browsers to run on 64bit kernels?
                              They do offer 32-bit browsers however that puts a whole shit load of libraries that would be unneeded otherwise onto the system and it still doesn't help when you run more then one browser. Flash is really the last missing piece in 64-bit . Everything else including java has been running reliably on 64-bit for quite some time. Even Moonlight is offered in 64-bit.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by frische View Post
                                offtopic, 64bit flash again:
                                What is the reason distros don't offer 32bit browsers to run on 64bit kernels?
                                Search for 'chroot'...
                                Also, supporting true multilib seems to be a pain to distro devs. I think they assume that most 64-bit users can figure out how to run a 32-bit browser. Hell, I used to post a lot on ubuntuforums.org's 64-bit subforum (now closed) and saw lots of n00bs follow random blogs/how-to's and install a 32-bit version of Firefox without realizing it.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X