Read more.Quote:
New version adds improved hardware acceleration for lower CPU usage.
Printable View
Read more.Quote:
New version adds improved hardware acceleration for lower CPU usage.
Never realised that Star Trek tops can be so figure flattering.
Great. 64-bit users left out again...
I would assume that Adobe believe you already have enough umph if you are running a 64bit OS, therefore they are focusing on the 32bit users initially, as that is where Apple and the press keep ribbing Adobe on flash power and performance issues.Quote:
Originally Posted by 3dcandy
The big growth market is still notebooks and tablets which are primarily 32bit platforms unfortunately.
Really depends on your browser preference, Firefox is only available in 32bit flavour even in 64bit Windows7.
Firefox 4 will be 64-bit. My point is that adoption rates of 64-bit ARE soaring....they're missing a trick with leaving out 64-bit users. Ever since Adobe took over Flash it seems to be heading down a one way street!Quote:
Originally Posted by duc
Or over a cliff. Not that it was great to begin with.Quote:
Originally Posted by 3dcandy
I'm pretty sure that the main focus of Firefox 4 will be 32-bit. The existence of a 64-bit version doesn't mean that anyone's putting their eggs in the 64-bit basket.Quote:
Originally Posted by 3dcandy
There's a reason why such little effort is being put into 64-bit browsers and plugins, and why even the latest IE9 beta is 32-bit. It's because there isn't much point in a 64-bit browser at the moment. Where is the benefit? Browsers don't normally use gigabytes of RAM or lots of CPU resources. Since 64-bit OSes run 32-bit software just fine, no trick is being missed. Adoption of 64-bit OSes doesn't mean we need 64-bit browsers.
There's no point *not* providing 64bit plugins for already existing 64bit browsers, because there's virtually no work required to do so if it wasn't developed by a total moron. Failure to cater for 64bit browers will mean more senselessly bitrotted software.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattus
Firefox does ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattus
But as I understand it, developing a 64-bit native app isn't too hard...so why is it stuttering along?
My beef with Adobe is....they have 64-bit versions of Lightroom, Photoshop etc. yet patently fail to bring out Flash in a timely matter. Also, you guys are talking Windows I guess...Linux was where I was looking forward to 64-bit more as it seems that it's a pretty mature platform all round on 64-bit. Ubuntu 10.10 in 64-bit flavour is a pretty credible alternative OS to Windows, yet the Flash plugins suck compared to other versions...
Because developers declare a load of ints and assume they're 32-bit and do bit twiddling based on that fact.Quote:
Originally Posted by 3dcandy
That's why I slap people around for using bit manips. The best part is they get really smug, thinking that they're being exceptionally clever because they figured out how to do it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve
As an embedded developer I have to use bit manips, and I'm proud of it :P
And if you do need to use them, then use a type library that has macros that'll give you types like u8, u32, s32, s64 etc, so you can guarantee the width of your variables, regardless of platform... and without messy #defines everywhere (or equivalent).
Well, not *have* to, but you can, safely. At least your target architecture isn't liable to change, and portability is of zero concern.