hey, on my new 11inch MBA (nothing added, 2gb etc) flash is apparently taking up 104% of my cpu and making it run unusably slowly... is this normal?
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.
11inch MBA flash slowing it down extremely
- Thread starter tinny the cat
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
VERY helpful ... thank you. Was unaware 10.2 was out and the tip on uninstalling first -- helpful!
It is always a good idea to install to install a Flash blocker for any browser. I use the AdBlock and FlashBlock extensions in chrome and have been very happy with them. By default, Flash enabled material does not load until and unless I authorize it with one of my Flash blockers. It has worked so well, I have decided not to download and install Flash 10.2 beta. I am going to wait until after the beta program ends and 10.2 is put into general release.
Luck? Truck? Pluck?
Yeah, as others are saying, just download 10.2. Really shameful that Adobe has refused to make a decent version of Flash for Mac after all this time. There was no reason for it other than sabotage.
Thanks, I'm only happy to help. As already stated, use ClickToFlash (use newest beta version) in Safari. This will automatically block flash ads/animations on webpages, and thus reduce CPU-load considerably. You can easily (and permanently) unblock flash videos and specific websites.
MBA 13-inch user here.
I use Firefox + FlashBlock all the time simply because, even with 10.2, running a full-screen Flash video brings my CPU up to 75ºC. Obviously, the fan kicks up and my quiet subtle machine is no longer subtle and quiet. I just wanted to watch a video. :C
I cannot wait until the day that we move past this terrible phase of Flash fixation. HTML5 video will take over eventually, as it works across all browsers, on all operating systems, on any device; unlike Flash.
I use Firefox + FlashBlock all the time simply because, even with 10.2, running a full-screen Flash video brings my CPU up to 75ºC. Obviously, the fan kicks up and my quiet subtle machine is no longer subtle and quiet. I just wanted to watch a video. :C
I cannot wait until the day that we move past this terrible phase of Flash fixation. HTML5 video will take over eventually, as it works across all browsers, on all operating systems, on any device; unlike Flash.
I think you'll be massively disapointed then. As it stands, Flash is much more compatible in devices/browsers/operating systems than HTML5 video is. The problem is not in the video tag itself, but rather in the codec choice for videos. Mozilla/Opera do not support the same codecs that Apple/Microsoft does. Google supports everything in their Chrome browser, making them the most compatible.
The problem is MPEG-LA's insistance on charging license fees for encoders/decoders for H.264 for commercial purposes.
Use CoolBookController and undervolt your CPU. That will make a huge change in temperature. In other words, this program will not change the speed of the CPU, but will make the CPU consume less power - ie. less heat and longer battery life. On my MBA 11' I can use the lowest volt-setting on all CPU-frequencies.
Although I posted yesterday that I was not prepared to download and install Flash 10.2 until its beta program ended and it was placed in general release, I changed my mind. Yesterday I watched a number of videos and was reminded how much impact on battery life constantly using Flash has. I downloaded a set of instructions concerning how I could update the Google Chrome Flash installation from version 10.1 to 10.2. It required me to get under the hood and delete the original Chrome Flash extension, rename the new one, and copy it into the Chrome Internet Plugins folder. I will be interested to see what all of this does for me.
You obviously never used any mobile devices.
"The problem is MPEG-LA's insistance on charging license fees for encoders/decoders for H.264 for commercial purposes."
WRONG. Free for those that do not charge for content. And if they are making money from the content and benefits from reduced H.264 bandwidth usage, why shouldn't they pay? You pay for electricity don't you?
Really, at the end of the day, the problem with Flash is that it's a client one company holds control over. HTML5 support is depended on the browser, so if Apple decided next week to stop working on html5 in Safari we can simply switch to Chrome or firefox.
The issue (for firefox,) is that it is only free till 2016.... If they'd come out and say free for life FF would implement it.
MPEG-LA announced that they would make it free for life late this past summer.
http://www.engadget.com/2010/08/26/mpeg-la-makes-h-264-video-royalty-free-forever-as-long-as-its/
Nope, since August, it's free forever:
MPEG LA, the group that oversees licensing for a number of Internet media standards, today announced that Internet broadcast content using the H.264 video coding standard will remain royalty-free for the entire life of the license, quashing fears that the standard could suddenly become subject to royalty payments in 2016 after the current licensing term expires and is required to be renewed.
Source
Thoughts on using something like Flashblock vs using Chrome (assuming it's not your default browser) when you want to view Flash content?
I decided to endure life without Flash installed at all on my Mac a couple weeks ago, and it sure is hell as a Firefox user (I'm stubbornly loyal). Instead of clicking to play a non-HTML5 YouTube vid from my Facebook wall, for example, I need to click to open the page, copy the link, then open it using Chrome!
I am thinking about returning to 10.2, which was unstable as hell the last time I tried it. I dislike Flash, but I dislike inconvenience more...
I decided to endure life without Flash installed at all on my Mac a couple weeks ago, and it sure is hell as a Firefox user (I'm stubbornly loyal). Instead of clicking to play a non-HTML5 YouTube vid from my Facebook wall, for example, I need to click to open the page, copy the link, then open it using Chrome!
I am thinking about returning to 10.2, which was unstable as hell the last time I tried it. I dislike Flash, but I dislike inconvenience more...
I just installed Flash 10.2 beta in Chrome this morning. Chrome is my default browser. Installing Flash 10.2 in Chrome requires the deletion of some files and the renaming of others but is basically easy to do. I really haven't had much trouble with 10.2 today. Flash 10.1 was stable, too, and I haven't really noticed that 10.2 gives me much better battery life, which leaves me wondering whether 10.2 is really doing anything for me.Thoughts on using something like Flashblock vs using Chrome (assuming it's not your default browser) when you want to view Flash content?
I decided to endure life without Flash installed at all on my Mac a couple weeks ago, and it sure is hell as a Firefox user (I'm stubbornly loyal). Instead of clicking to play a non-HTML5 YouTube vid from my Facebook wall, for example, I need to click to open the page, copy the link, then open it using Chrome!
I am thinking about returning to 10.2, which was unstable as hell the last time I tried it. I dislike Flash, but I dislike inconvenience more...
I also have the FlashBlock extension for Chrome, which allows me to avoid opening any graphic without first clicking to open it. FlashBlock has worked well in both Flash 10.1 and 10.2 so I plan to stick with it for the foreseeable future.