D'oh! Forgot about that. It's still only the 9400M and 320M, isn't it? MBA arrives today, so will try on that.
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.
Flash 10.2 beta and the MacBook Air
- Thread starter vd0t
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
D'oh! Forgot about that. It's still only the 9400M and 320M, isn't it? MBA arrives today, so will try on that.
If you install the click-to-flash in safari, youtube will default to playing html and at the same time you can choose yourself if and when you want to play flash in the webpages you browse to.
64 bit should be this one:
http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/flashplayer10_square.html
A bit hidden on their page an no mentioning of GPU acceleration, but it's definitely in there. Guess they just don't advertise it.
http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/flashplayer10_square.html
A bit hidden on their page an no mentioning of GPU acceleration, but it's definitely in there. Guess they just don't advertise it.
Funny how a positive story on Flash, backing up what adobe has always said is not advertised on the front page anywhere.
yet a negative one would be page 1 headline.
anyone still believe anything Jobs says?
yet a negative one would be page 1 headline.
anyone still believe anything Jobs says?
What does this have to do with what Jobs said? This update is something new, and yes, adobe's plan to release flash versions better optimized for machines like the MacBook air was news displayed up-front. I think everybody heard about that. But this still comes long after the issues were brought up about flash. Without such front page news about adobe's slow to move on supporting platforms, you probably wouldn't even have stuff like this happening.
They'd be in the same boat as Sony or Nintendo, who have long supported flash in their browsers and haven't gotten one update in eons. So they have nice flash players that can't play jack, completely defeating the purpose of having flash in the first place.
On the other hand, this is adobe's kind of silent beta release, so I wouldn't be surprised if this isn't made a big deal yet. I've hardly heard of any beta by them being a big headline. Let's wait for the full release with it, to find out how it affects headlines. Note that even iOS 4.2 was pretty much kept silent (outside of the rumor mill here) until the full release.
They'd be in the same boat as Sony or Nintendo, who have long supported flash in their browsers and haven't gotten one update in eons. So they have nice flash players that can't play jack, completely defeating the purpose of having flash in the first place.
On the other hand, this is adobe's kind of silent beta release, so I wouldn't be surprised if this isn't made a big deal yet. I've hardly heard of any beta by them being a big headline. Let's wait for the full release with it, to find out how it affects headlines. Note that even iOS 4.2 was pretty much kept silent (outside of the rumor mill here) until the full release.
Last edited:
ya see, thats the point there were NO issues with flash before this and there was then and there still isn't now, any viable alternatives to do ALL that flash can do.
you don't think that if they both wanted to that Apple and Adobe couldn't make a really good version of flash for iOS and OSX?
really..??
Apple ported their complete OSX to a new platform in under 8 months!!
Apple trying to push flash away from all their platforms has ZERO to do with any technical limitations and all to do with what flash could do to Apples bottom line from the app store....
you also think its co-incidence that Apple's attack on Adobe ramped up as the plans for Lion (Mac App store) were finalised?
naive doesn't come close...
So you are saying it is ok it only took 10 years to get a workable version of flash out and it only works on the MacBook Air?
How does this help the other notebooks in Apple's lineup? Yeah, it doesn't.
And last, it is beta.
The point is, that flash on Mac OS X is still a pile of baboons vomit.
Anyone else noticing that kernel_task seems to taking up a lot of (15-20%) cpu usage while playing back video using flash? (doesn't seem to matter which version; 10.1 or 10.2 beta), at least on the MBP 13" 2010 and also tried on the 2009 model
Haven't had time to investigate that much, it might be somewhat related to the network traffic tho, badly coded wifi driver?? But even after having cached the whole youtube clip, it still eats up a bit(7-10%) a lot while the video is playing, will be hard to reach 0% total cpu usage, with kernel_task eating up that much..
When the computer is idle it kernel_task seems to hover around 1-2% cpu usage
Haven't had time to investigate that much, it might be somewhat related to the network traffic tho, badly coded wifi driver?? But even after having cached the whole youtube clip, it still eats up a bit(7-10%) a lot while the video is playing, will be hard to reach 0% total cpu usage, with kernel_task eating up that much..
When the computer is idle it kernel_task seems to hover around 1-2% cpu usage
true it was probably less than that...!
Its more than ok,especially given the lack of support they've had from the platform.
Adobe needs access to key API's to make flash run better, support they haven't had.
Ever wonder why the GPU acceleration only works on some cards but not others?
I have no problem with Apple doing anything they want with their platform.I just think that for once they should be HONEST about the reasons why..
Last edited by a moderator:
Only the Nvidia GeForce 9400M, GeForce 320M, and GeForce GT 330M are supported. This is a limitation of OS X, not of Flash Player.
The APIs may be a good reason for Adobe, if they really indeed were trying to get those APIs from the beginning. Then again, it took them quite a bit of time for the PCs, as well. Not sure if it was because they were getting the same issue from Microsoft or not. Wonder if those other companies are holding APIs from Adobe?
Hey everyone,
Forgive me for hijacking this thread (1st Mac is on the way, should be here today is FedEx holds up their end).
If I'm running Chrome, will I still need to install Flash? If so, what's the benefit?
Cheers,
Annewb
Chrome has built-in Flash. Problem with it is that you cannot upgrade it manually as Flash updates are included in Chrome updates. Thus you cannot use e.g. beta versions like the current 10.2 is. With Safari or other browsers you can select the Flash version of your choice
There's a Flash Player uninstaller on Adobe's site. It should be linked from the same page you downloaded Flash Player 10.2 from.
You can easily disable flash inside Google Chrome and use flash 10.2 installed in your system. See here:
http://lifehacker.com/5705588/how-to-get-the-flash-102-beta-working-in-google-chrome
I guess people are assuming it will only work on these chipsets, since previous flash for mac hardware acceleration only works on those before. ( Which it could very well still only support those chipsets ). In doing reading on flash 10.2 it does not mention on what graphic cards it will work on as far as I could tell. The only mac that I don't have those chipsets are my mac pro 8 core using ATI 4870 which is very hard to tell if its using hardware acceleration based on CPU usage alone. Did compare 10.2 and older version and was showing 2%-3% on the 10.2 and around 3%-4% using older flash plugin. Not the most accurate way of testing though.
Last edited:
It was done on a 8 core mac pro. I was talking in reference to graphic card support perhaps there might be in more then just the 9400M & 320M.
Sorry, my question was in relation to other MBAs. For instance, Andrmgic has a lower spec MBA than mine yet is much lower utilization.