Most of times, CPU/RAM-consuming flash threads are due to bad application design, not to the Flash Player itself, which is what we're judging here.
And, please, don't compare HTML5 (that non-standard-nothing) against a very different animal, which is a plug-in concibed to bring advanced features to the browser, just like Java or Unity apps. BTW, did you notice that previously, before the "html standards", browsers had a memory footprint similar to basic text editors or mail clients? Take a look to your main browser's threads and sum. Advanced features are not a low-cost, seamless transition ;-)
On my side, Flash Player uses to perform very well if you don't make use of pr0n-like websites (such as online magazines or newspapers). The Debugger version uses to be more buggy, but that's a reasonable behaviour when you're dealing intentionally with wrong code. Go blame the pr0n-like sites, so they hire good pros to create their ads, or just uninstall this absolutely optional "plug-in" if you can't find a real use for it.
For me, it's a top-ten if we take into account the broad audience, the long support to the internet community (you, youtube addicts and short-term gamers) and the overall performance across the years under smart developing conditions. Some critical bugs for the minorities persisted for a long time (such as weak unicode support in the text engine for linux and mac) and that's because I rate 3.5 for stability.
Surely you can make a post in a blog explaining in detail such limitations or point to an existing one. I'm running a flash-based virtual world and I would be very interested.
Well, there are many considerations to take into account. If that example video is in a totally unsolicited ad, then I understand the user hates it. But if that example video is the only reason because I arrived to that page, hosted in a site called "high-quality-music-videos.com", I wish it takes all the needed resources in my machine in order to play it the best quality and full-screen. I don't ever expect them to have low-quality versions (such as youtube). Or, if I'm offering a full-blown virtual world where you can interact with many people in real time, I'd expect that flash movie to take as much resources as possible to make it an enjoyable experience, just like if you were playing WoW full screen.
I don't really see an "automatic" way to inhibit or restrict resource usage without punishing at the same time good and bad developers.
For me, it's up to the web host the decission. For example, newspapers decide from time to time hosting ads containing hi-res video, loading external contents (ie, facebook data) and maybe with the worst programming available, as the marketing company ordered the developer to make the app so fast, without time for testing and so on... They're paying for the ad. The end-user is consuming 95% of resources to see the add, 5% to reach the contents. So, start the round: don't visit anymore that website or block the ads in your browser. That's the first step to make the things work better, IMHO. I think we should restrict bad habits, but not user habits. I deserve my rigths to install and run crap on my machine. Ie, what kind of "quality control" is that offered in the "app store" for the iPad/iPhone? I have my own quality controls, don't need someone else's, and we can't/shouldn't cap the users.
Your idea of controlling rendering and behaviour looks OK, but difficult to implement. What's up for example with movies not using many graphics resources, but loading 2MB of data only to display the info of all your friends in three social networks. Will you prevent as well loading external and unpredictable content? What if the man hosting the flash movies configures them all as high-quality and, appart from this, places 57 on every page? The "framework restrictions" have been broken. One more barrier is the user (that about "auto" you mentioned). It's the same. Auto or not auto? For me, it would be "auto" for some pages, "low" for others and "none" for most. If think it's better having a good content manager, where you can absolutely kill anything you want, including ads (flash or not flash-based), and everything tailored to your needs.
Anyway, I like that idea about the users having the option to render movies in "low quality mode" if they wish so, at least for that web browsing sessions when you must visit hundreds of sites in the same day ;-) I think this could be a new wonderful setting. And meanwhile a javascript-based extension for the main browsers: setup the "quality" tag to one of the available ones: http://helpx.adobe.com/flash/kb/flash-object-embed-tag-attributes.html#main_Optional_attributes => Although it still can be overrided from within the trojan horse, that's bad!
Yeah, already visited that page. The zip there (v 2.0.3) brings a 2.0.2 version dated from 2009. The source code points to a 404: . I found here a 2007 working jar file, as well as some dictionary files (just in case someone finds it useful): And after that I dropped further investigations ;-)
links stripped, they were:
404:
http://launchpad.net/babiloo/trunk/2.0.9/+download/babiloo-2.0.9.tar.gz
Old jar and some dictionary files:
http://code.google.com/p/babiloo/downloads/list
Seems like a nice environment, good design, bad music (although nice for this kind of game), but lacks of documentation. Controls? (appart from A and left-rigth arrows) Objectives? At least a prefs window where one could change some colors or something?
Appart from that, I was never able to connect to someone or someone to me, so I know I don't get the full concept.
Works fine here, but search results are so pooooor, unless you are looking for the same old songs or artists you never heard before (then I have different sources than choosing random ones thru an app).
-4
Adobe Flash Player
Julifos reviewed on 11 Apr 2012
And, please, don't compare HTML5 (that non-standard-nothing) against a very different animal, which is a plug-in concibed to bring advanced features to the browser, just like Java or Unity apps. BTW, did you notice that previously, before the "html standards", browsers had a memory footprint similar to basic text editors or mail clients? Take a look to your main browser's threads and sum. Advanced features are not a low-cost, seamless transition ;-)
On my side, Flash Player uses to perform very well if you don't make use of pr0n-like websites (such as online magazines or newspapers). The Debugger version uses to be more buggy, but that's a reasonable behaviour when you're dealing intentionally with wrong code. Go blame the pr0n-like sites, so they hire good pros to create their ads, or just uninstall this absolutely optional "plug-in" if you can't find a real use for it.
For me, it's a top-ten if we take into account the broad audience, the long support to the internet community (you, youtube addicts and short-term gamers) and the overall performance across the years under smart developing conditions. Some critical bugs for the minorities persisted for a long time (such as weak unicode support in the text engine for linux and mac) and that's because I rate 3.5 for stability.
-1
+18
+18
I don't really see an "automatic" way to inhibit or restrict resource usage without punishing at the same time good and bad developers.
For me, it's up to the web host the decission. For example, newspapers decide from time to time hosting ads containing hi-res video, loading external contents (ie, facebook data) and maybe with the worst programming available, as the marketing company ordered the developer to make the app so fast, without time for testing and so on... They're paying for the ad. The end-user is consuming 95% of resources to see the add, 5% to reach the contents. So, start the round: don't visit anymore that website or block the ads in your browser. That's the first step to make the things work better, IMHO. I think we should restrict bad habits, but not user habits. I deserve my rigths to install and run crap on my machine. Ie, what kind of "quality control" is that offered in the "app store" for the iPad/iPhone? I have my own quality controls, don't need someone else's, and we can't/shouldn't cap the users.
Your idea of controlling rendering and behaviour looks OK, but difficult to implement. What's up for example with movies not using many graphics resources, but loading 2MB of data only to display the info of all your friends in three social networks. Will you prevent as well loading external and unpredictable content? What if the man hosting the flash movies configures them all as high-quality and, appart from this, places 57 on every page? The "framework restrictions" have been broken. One more barrier is the user (that about "auto" you mentioned). It's the same. Auto or not auto? For me, it would be "auto" for some pages, "low" for others and "none" for most. If think it's better having a good content manager, where you can absolutely kill anything you want, including ads (flash or not flash-based), and everything tailored to your needs.
Anyway, I like that idea about the users having the option to render movies in "low quality mode" if they wish so, at least for that web browsing sessions when you must visit hundreds of sites in the same day ;-) I think this could be a new wonderful setting. And meanwhile a javascript-based extension for the main browsers: setup the "quality" tag to one of the available ones: http://helpx.adobe.com/flash/kb/flash-object-embed-tag-attributes.html#main_Optional_attributes => Although it still can be overrided from within the trojan horse, that's bad!
Babiloo
+18
+18
404:
http://launchpad.net/babiloo/trunk/2.0.9/+download/babiloo-2.0.9.tar.gz
Old jar and some dictionary files:
http://code.google.com/p/babiloo/downloads/list
Adium
Julifos rated on 24 Oct 2011
[Version 1.4.3]
-2
ClickToPlugin
Julifos reviewed on 03 Apr 2011
MacHacha
Julifos rated on 11 Jan 2011
[Version 4.0]
Krautscape
Appart from that, I was never able to connect to someone or someone to me, so I know I don't get the full concept.
Adobe AIR
Julifos reviewed on 10 Jun 2010
HiFijack
Adobe Flash Player
+1
Sequel Pro
Julifos reviewed on 04 May 2010