On 06/16/2010 01:29 PM, Wolfgang S. Rupprecht wrote: > "Robert G. (Doc) Savage"<dsavage@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> I can't imagine what has prompted Adobe to pack up their proverbial bat >> & ball and go home, abandoning 64-bit Flash development for all >> platforms. I hope there's another explanation, because this is just >> beyond dumb. >> > I was reading an article about llvm, the new just-in-time-capable > C-compiler and lo and behold they mentioned Adobe Flash as being one of > the users of this on the Apple Mac target. It appears LLVM bytecode > gets converted to Flash "actioncode", which I assume is interpreted by > an interpreter inside the flash executable. Adobe seems to have built > this Frankensteinein monster when most people simply want to play > videos. Surely we don't need a full-blown bytecode language to play > videos??? > > Giveen that they have been working on a 64-bit version of flash for over > 2 years now and having only limited success, I'd wager that their > actioncode and/or their interpreter itself is littered with address-size > assumptions where they wantonly stuff addresses into ints and expect the > process to be reversable. (I've seen this in far too many "clever" > programs.) Adobe themselves admits that there are "architectural" > issues preventing them from simply recompiling flash for a 64-bit > target. > > -wolfgang > Right! It is this horribly inefficient monster that sucks 60 to 90 percent of my cpu every time I play a flash video online. There has to be a better player of videos. I hope someone comes up with a different way other than flash for playing video content within the browser - a way that will not be a cpu killer. -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
