dcsimg
A Flash Developer Resource Site

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 107

Thread: [Resolved] FLASH 6 Player - SLOWER ANIMATION (part 2)

  1. #21
    Developer
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    The Bluegrass State Will Flash For Food
    Posts
    3,789
    i'm guessing this is just one of the bugs that needs to be spit out of the beta version. macromedia probably has it fixed by now and it will be released shortly after mx?

  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Posts
    111
    if they had it fixed they would replace the betaplayer with a newer version with the fix included, wouldn't you?

  3. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    140
    Hey all, just a bit a info for ya...

    OK, there are a few things to keep in mind here...

    1. Processor speed does not have 100% effect upon the speed, as we educated computer people know, PIPESTREAMS are what matter. you can have a 10gHz system, and if it has a longer pipestream, the info ALL comes out at the same rate.

    PC Pentium (any gigahertz speed) uses a 21 pipestream
    Mac G4 (any gigahertz speed) uses a 7 pipestream

    my Dual 800 Quicksilver Macintosh is stable all the way around with this file, except in IE, just TAD slower, not 6 fps though.

    But IE is ALWAYS a bit slower with everything, not only flash. It's a more bulky browser requiring more system resources than other apps, thus slowing it down a bit. PLUS when has Microsoft done ANYTHING by industry standards? NEVER!! MS caused all the problems with compatibility on the web with their own version of JAVA, and they continue to mess it all up. This could be an issue, how about contacting Microsoft instead of Macromedia, afterall, Macromedia develops THEIR software arond industry standards, Microsoft never has.

    But nevertheless, the problem here seems to be on PCs, not Macs, which leads me to believe that it is a PC pipestream problem, because honestly, I dont really see any noticable difference.

    Just thought I would throw my 2 sense in.

  4. #24
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Posts
    71
    Only time will tell...

    However, I am fairly certain this is not fixed for the final version of the Flash 6 player. The only thing that makes me feel better about this is that the Flash 6 player can be updated easily by MM and then I can run a check on whatever site I have to look for a specific version of the player. Until then, we all have to suffer.

    How about some moderators who have the final release? Perhaps you can comment on your results with this...

    Once again -- the swf to test is here:

    http://www.kneeandshoulder.md/test.zip

    Try to open it under:
    1) Flash 6 standalone player -- note the avg fps.
    2) Flash 5 standalone player -- note the avg fps
    3) Netscape with Flash 6 plugin -- note avg fps.
    4) IE with Flash 6 activeX control -- note the SLOW fps.

    This makes me so frustrated. Developing content will be that much harder if we don't have a consistent speed base under all browser/player conditions.


  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    113
    you guys, we are discussing a few fps! I mean, before flash, the actual issue of FPS, as in teleivision wasnt even an issue, so cmon, if the comp can handle it, it can, if not, it cant. Maybe MM did this to even out the play back quality between Mac and PC....i mean, when it all comes down to it, theres probably a good reason why this is, and us as developers are going to have to work around it....

  6. #26
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Posts
    71
    BrianScott --

    You say IE is slower because it is a "bulkier" browser?? Well then, what about Opera?? That is a slick, light browser that is well written and fully complies to standards. It also uses the ActiveX player for Flash 6 and not the plugin type like Netscape. And there, too, I notice the exact same speed drop in fps that I do in IE. To reiterate, this is clearly a problem with the ActiveX version of the Flash 6 player.

    Also, this isn't something that IE always did. My version 5 player in IE was fine. Same fps there as anywhere else. I DON'T believe this is a problem with MS because Flash 5 worked fine in IE. Since MM is developing the Flash 6 player AFTER the release of IE 6, it is THEIR responsibility to ensure it runs AS FAST if not FASTER than the version 5 player did.

    Macromedia needs to examine this.



    Originally posted by BrianScott
    Hey all, just a bit a info for ya...

    OK, there are a few things to keep in mind here...

    1. Processor speed does not have 100% effect upon the speed, as we educated computer people know, PIPESTREAMS are what matter. you can have a 10gHz system, and if it has a longer pipestream, the info ALL comes out at the same rate.

    PC Pentium (any gigahertz speed) uses a 21 pipestream
    Mac G4 (any gigahertz speed) uses a 7 pipestream

    my Dual 800 Quicksilver Macintosh is stable all the way around with this file, except in IE, just TAD slower, not 6 fps though.

    But IE is ALWAYS a bit slower with everything, not only flash. It's a more bulky browser requiring more system resources than other apps, thus slowing it down a bit. PLUS when has Microsoft done ANYTHING by industry standards? NEVER!! MS caused all the problems with compatibility on the web with their own version of JAVA, and they continue to mess it all up. This could be an issue, how about contacting Microsoft instead of Macromedia, afterall, Macromedia develops THEIR software arond industry standards, Microsoft never has.

    But nevertheless, the problem here seems to be on PCs, not Macs, which leads me to believe that it is a PC pipestream problem, because honestly, I dont really see any noticable difference.

    Just thought I would throw my 2 sense in.

  7. #27
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Posts
    71
    theprodigy --

    A few fps means a noticeable performance drop. You can see this!! Trust me, I have been playing with this for days now.

    And again, an issue that you and others are forgetting is that there is only one place right now where the fps is dropping and that is in a browser that uses the activeX control for Flash 6. This doesn't happen in Netscape. This doesn't happen in Mozilla. And this doesn't happen with the standalone player.

    It happens in Opera. It happens in Internet Explorer.

    That's it. So I don't believe MM was trying to "even out the play quality" between MAC and PC since there is only one situation with a PC where it slows down. That, to me, is a bug, not a feature.



    Originally posted by theprodigy
    you guys, we are discussing a few fps! I mean, before flash, the actual issue of FPS, as in teleivision wasnt even an issue, so cmon, if the comp can handle it, it can, if not, it cant. Maybe MM did this to even out the play back quality between Mac and PC....i mean, when it all comes down to it, theres probably a good reason why this is, and us as developers are going to have to work around it....

  8. #28
    Senior Member tonypa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    8,227
    Originally posted by jgordon
    BrianScott --

    You say IE is slower because it is a "bulkier" browser?? Well then, what about Opera?? That is a slick, light browser that is well written and fully complies to standards. It also uses the ActiveX player for Flash 6 and not the plugin type like Netscape.
    What the hell? Opera uses Netscape plugins too, anyway, my Opera uses NPSWF32.dll for Flash.

  9. #29
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Posts
    71

    opera

    Oh my gosh...

    You are right. I went to the Opera site and looked at info about their plugin API and it seems they are using the Netscape plugin system. My mistake!!

    Well then, I suppose we have found one other browser where the Flash 6 player runs slowly. This is no longer an issue just with the activeX version of the Flash 6 player.

    Verrry strange.

  10. #30
    Senior Member tonypa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    8,227
    Flash has always been slow in Opera, from version Flash4. And it can hang up Opera so easily.

    Like those nice footers in FK

  11. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    140
    OK, jeez guys, you know what, you ask the questions to get responses from people based upon THEIR experiences. Well, let me tell you something about MY experiences:

    --> Been using Flash since the very first release.
    --> Been using computers and tearing them apart, building them, repairing them, troubleshooting them since I was 15 (16 years ago)
    --> Been doing fps-based video, audio, animation-based design for over 7 years now.

    OK, what I noted in my previous thread was MY experience, not yours. So please leave your cheezy one-liners at the front door. The FACT is that Microsoft has NEVER done ANYTHING to industry standards, and I have experienced nothing but problems with Microsoft products. hence, I stopped using them completely!!

    You want an answer? Here's your answer and you can not dispute it!

    With billions of computers, processors, people out there, and with how often technology changes, problems expand exponentially ever day, and all these things you try to fix are only going to matter to those who have the latest and greatest, and that ain't many my friend. Yes, 6 fps IS a big drop, but if you have a problem, put a DISCLAIMER on the front page or INFORM people that they need such and such browser, monitor prefs, etc...

    THAT is the only way to keep it 100% exact! THAT is just a fact. Things change too often and too fast for EVERYONE to keep up at the same rate.

    You want to argue Opera?! Oh my lord. In that case, I am developing a browser in my basement, I'm going to sit here and argue why ShaftMaster Websurfer browser does not handle Flash. Hell guy, come on, Opera is a trashcan application anyhow. Please, argue the big 2, not some 3rd party attempt to conform to such a big industry standard. NS and IE have been around for a LOOONG time, and even they still have a lot of issues, opera has only been around a few years in beta and only recently in release, you think there are not going to be big issues with the application?!?! Come on!

    END OF STORY, CUT AND DRY, THAT IS IT!!!!!

    If you do not like the end result, don't use the product that is causing the problem, otherwise you HAVE to wait until there is a fix for it, but then by then, there will be another issue.

    And or the love of God, do not argue MY experiences, as I would not argue what you have or have not experienced.

    thank you!
    [Edited by BrianScott on 03-14-2002 at 09:17 AM]

  12. #32
    Senior Member tonypa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    8,227

    Opera with F5 and F6

    Here is result of test.swf with Opera 6.01 for windows with both Flash5 plugin and Flash6 plugin:

    F5 plugin 24,4
    F6 plugin 24,6

    Cant say Flash6 plugin is slower in the Opera? They are all slow

  13. #33
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Posts
    7

    Re: opera

    And still no word from any micromedia guy roaming around these forums. I have a 1.7mhz pentium 4 512mb sdram memory computer and there is a an obvious slow down from flash 5 to this new flash 6 plug in. Its obviously a bug which micromedia wasn't really aware of and isn't probably commenting about it because it looks bad on them. And how about the moderators... where are thier big mouths... you only use it to accuse, disrespect, and play mr. detective? I'm kind of disapointed how you handle this issue of that of which i will not name but it starts with a W and ends with a Z... all you need to do is delete the dayum thread. Where are you opinions on the stuff that really matter?

  14. #34
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Posts
    3
    No difference...
    p3 600mhz

    Flashplayer 6 IE6: 30
    Standalone Flashplayer5: 30


  15. #35
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Posts
    71
    BrianScott --

    You need to breathe.

    No one is disputing your experience with Flash or any other app. And I already noted that Opera is a problem in and of itself since it apparently has always run flash content slowly. I thought it used activeX technology but clearly, since it is using a netscape plugin model, it has it's own issues. I am not too concerned about Opera since not many people use it. And for the record, I don't believe it's a trashcan. True it has not been out for that long in a stable form, but it has received a lot of praise and it is much more standards compliant than IE.


  16. #36
    Senior Member tonypa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    8,227
    Originally posted by BrianScott
    Hell guy, come on, Opera is a trashcan application anyhow. Please, argue the big 2, not some 3rd party attempt to conform to such a big industry standard. NS and IE have been around for a LOOONG time, and even they still have a lot of issues, opera has only been around a few years in beta and only recently in release, you think there are not going to be big issues with the application?!?! Come on!
    You cant call NS seriously a big industry standard. Yes, it was standard 10 years ago, but hardly anubody uses it today. Wake up, NS is dead long ago

  17. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    140
    Words spoken from a die-hard PC user tonypa.

    please, I have been doing serious big-time web design for over 7 years now.

    Sorry my friend, NS still conforms more to industry standards than IE does. NS has been around longer than any other browser, do you remember something called Mozilla? of course you don't, you haven't been doing this stuff for that long to have even used or seen it.

    Sorry m8, NS is still pumping out products, and what is sick is that it is owned by AOL and it is still better then IE! Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, NS is the only browser that is close to 100% consistent!

    THAT is a fact.

    OH, JGORDON, I am breathing, I just emphasized words to make sure that they are read correctly, as we all know, there is a tendency for people to react before they think on this board and I just like to cover my arse and make sure I did not leave something vague, so I make my points BLUNTLY and it might seem to be an upset, knee-jerk reaction, but it is not, trust me

    take care m8!
    [Edited by BrianScott on 03-14-2002 at 09:53 AM]

  18. #38
    Senior Member tonypa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    8,227
    Originally posted by BrianScott
    NS has been around longer than any other browser, do you remember something called Mozilla?
    Like I said, 10 years ago, it was standard. Even you refer only to its glorious past.


    Sorry m8, NS is still pumping out products, and what is sick is that it is owned by AOL and it is still better then IE!
    They can pump out products, just that people dont use them. Being better or not, I stopped using NS couple of years ago and havent regret it
    [Edited by tonypa on 03-14-2002 at 10:02 AM]

  19. #39
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Posts
    3
    Brian, webdesign for 7 years... yes that is impressing. Myself Ive been doing it for 4 years. If you wanna keep on doing webdesign you need to forget about NS... it is really a dead browser with loads of bugs. You cant sell an NS optimized website... well.. maybe 7 years ago you could...
    wake up man its 2002!

  20. #40
    Senior Member next2heaven's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Posts
    275

    Wink Netscape

    NS is going dowm baby!!!

    Checking the latest stats to a youth webpage that I've done, out of 534 people that have come to my site, only 23...count it! 23 people are using Netscape. 4% use the ol' Netscape. Sounds like a Macintosh story to me.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  




Click Here to Expand Forum to Full Width

HTML5 Development Center