Adobe Releases New 64-Bit Flash Plugin For Linux 240
TheDarkener writes "Adobe seems to have made an about face regarding their support for native 64-bit Linux support for Flash today, and released a new preview Flash plugin named 'Square.' This includes a native 64-bit version for Linux, which I have verified works on my Debian Lenny LTSP server by simply copying libflashplayer.so to /usr/lib/iceweasel/plugins — with sound (which I was never able to figure out with running the 32-bit version with nspluginwrapper and pulseaudio)."
Is it still using 100% CPU (Score:5, Funny)
Right now I only use flash, if my room temperature drops to low.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I've had some versions of Flash that were actually rather solid, then they fix a few security holes then I'm suddenly using 100% CPU on YouTube videos and so my choices are to downgrade and get a security hole or keep having a nearly unusable plugin.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Hell if you're only wanting YouTube, then forget using the Adobe Flash player and use Gnash. Works fine for most of them in Standard Def (have no idea about the HD content) and it doesn't work with most adverts due to being compatible with flash 7.
Re:Is it still using 100% CPU (Score:5, Insightful)
I noticed that I can now watch 720p video without hitches, and neither of my cores were maxed out. You may need a new room heater.
Re:Is it still using 100% CPU (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Is it still using 100% CPU (Score:4, Interesting)
I installed Folding@home for precisely that reason. I used to do a "yes > /dev/null" but then thought I could donate those cycles for something useful.
It is a pig (Score:3, Interesting)
It is a pig. Playing videos with this uses about 5x the CPU and 35 watts more power as playing the same video with VLC (measured via a Kill-A-Watt). Details:
Running Ubuntu 10.04 on my Athlon II X4 635 in a 780G motherboard with on-board Radeon HD3200 graphics (using the Radeon driver), playing a 480p clip from Hulu scaled to 1080p full screenuses 220% CPU (eg, over two full cores). If I download the same video from hulu with get_flash_videos, I can play it in VLC with 35% CPU utilization (eg, less than 1
Re: (Score:2)
Does it kill the scroll wheel, too? Backward compatibility matters!
Re: (Score:2)
Hey Adobe! (Score:3, Funny)
Where the hell's the 64 bit version?!
Re:Hey Adobe! (Score:5, Funny)
I'm really sorry, that's just a knee jerk reaction every time I see the words "Linux" and "Flash" in the title of a Slashdot article.
Re: (Score:2)
Perfectly understandable, old boy.
w00t (Score:2)
I know flash gets much hate around here, but the old 64 bit version actually wokrs pretty well, and I must confess that I didn't uninstall in spite of the security holes. Now I can get an up to date version... rock. I will say that trying to use the 32 bit version using nspluginwrapper is like drilling a hole in your head, and I wonder how many complaints are really based around that rather than flash itself.
Re: (Score:2)
I'll bet pretty much all of them (besides video.) I've been running the old 64-bit player as well. This new one is VERY nice for video.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I know flash gets much hate around here....
Nah, not at all.
BTW, is the source code released? I want to add code that gives a fatal shock to developers and designers who use Flash.
Re: (Score:2)
I know flash gets much hate around here, but the old 64 bit version actually wokrs pretty well, and I must confess that I didn't uninstall in spite of the security holes.
Lets face it, all software has security holes found in it at some point. If you uninstalled every bit of software that was insecure in some way you machine would be pretty empty and useless.
Now in the case of software that you point at the web it does make sense for it to me treated with a slightly higher threshold but still, if you spend a lot of time browsing untrusted site you are asking for trouble sooner or later if you run still Windows. The main thing that keeps Linux and MAC users safe is not so muc
Also Mac and Windows (Score:2, Redundant)
Weather report (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
But does it work with Hulu? (Score:2, Redundant)
Hulu hasn't worked with x86-64 for some time. Hulu blames flash, and Adobe blames Hulu. Wonder if this new vesion will fix things.
Re: (Score:2)
I had never tried Hulu before. I just watched Rocky and Bullwinkle with this new plugin on amd64.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I've got a 64-bit Linux machine and Hulu has worked (mostly) fine for me, except for fullscreen transitions sometimes breaking. (Sometimes when I go fullscreen, the video appears BELOW all windows, not above them.)
I'll try the new version when I get back from a trip this weekend. :)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I should have been more specific....
Does it work with Hulu on Linux x86-64?
Not too many people are probably using windows7-64 bit.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
First time I've ever seen Hulu actually work. The 64-bit Linux plugin works like a charm with Hulu!
Re: (Score:2)
I tried with this 64 bit Flash and Hulu works.
I really don't think we should encourage this (Score:5, Funny)
Hulu works (Score:4, Informative)
Too Late (Score:2, Interesting)
Gnash works with youtube. Gnash development has picked up since Adobe dropped the 64bit support. And once you switch there is no reason to go back unless you enjoy your cpu melting and state of the art 0-days
Re: (Score:2)
Gnash doesn't work with Hulu...
Re: (Score:2)
I would check that “Allow third-party Flash content to store data on your computer” option in the Macromedia control panel [macromedia.com] is enabled, as some games seem to require that...
Re:Too Late (Score:4, Insightful)
Adobe really screwed the pooch here. If they intended to support 64 bit linux, why didn't they say so? Why simply drop the plugin and ignore the problem for so long? A simple "we're working on it" would have put a lot of people at ease.
Gnash sounds really good now. I do enjoy the occasional flash based shmup though, so I'll have to see how well the new plugin works.
Tar.GZ? Why? For the love of me, why? (Score:2, Interesting)
Tar.gz is not a good way. The manual dependency resolving is so outdated. The simple fact they made the same mistake again will cause me not to install it. The opensource version may not run as smoothly but it is easy to install.
do not want (Score:3, Interesting)
I refuse to use any of the universal package systems out there because they are all junk. Each distro maintainer is free to create a package that wraps the .tar.gz if they choose. That is what Debian/Ubuntu and Arch do.
OMFG (Score:3, Informative)
yaourt -S flashplugin-prerelease
I have never had fullscreen youtube even usable at 480 before, now I can run it fullscreen at 1080p and the controls are perfectly smooth and only using 70% CPU!!!
I never though this day would come. *sniff*
Coincidence? (Score:3, Insightful)
64 bit, nice. On what ISA? (Score:3, Insightful)
Pity it's only x86-64.
Guess that's the problem with closed source.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Version number here (Score:3, Informative)
Why Adobe chooses to not even say what version number they are releasing is beyond understanding....
But it is: 10.2.161.22
I was running an older Linux 64bit (I think it was 64 bit) version inside flashplayer-plugin-10.1.53.64-1mdv2010.1.rpm and it worked, but it crashed/froze often, requiring me to restart Firefox every few days (or more). This new version seems to run fine, but only time will tell if it is reliable.
Re:Why does linux get this? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
but, but... I want ARM version for my Pandora console!
Re: (Score:2)
And I want it for my N900...well, a newer version at least...
Re: (Score:2)
Which would be simple if they'd stop fucking around and just open source their player code. After all, it's only the player, not the creator.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Uh, you must be new if you're posting dumbass assertions and then making 'are you new' comments when you have your idiocy pointed out.
Trying being humble and accepting it.
Re: (Score:2)
Hmmm... I thought the follow-up comment actually was humble and accepting, in a self-deprecating humor sort of way. Props to the nitwit for admitting it. :-)
Re:Why does linux get this? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Why does linux get this? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Thank you.
Re:Why does linux get this? (Score:5, Insightful)
Linux is used a lot by visual effects companies (for workstations as well as for storage/rendering). They also tend to use Win/OS X for things like Photoshop; they would love CS5 on Linux.
Actually, I've met a lot of people who would love to switch to Linux, but are kept away by one critical app; usually it's Photoshop or some game. Adobe may not make as much as they do for Win/OS X, but there would be sales.
Re: (Score:2)
Probably because linux users are prone to bouts of highly vocal nerd rage. I know I am.
What version were we at when adobe yanked this a few months ago?
Re: (Score:2)
If Adobe actually pays attention to "nerd rage" then why aren't they supporting VDPAU yet?
That would be far more relevant than supporting 64-bit.
Although spitting out a 64-bit should be considerably easier.
Re: (Score:2)
After several people actually read TFA and told me that there is indeed a Windows version, I'm going to post a slight correction to my original comment:
I was wrong.
But I mean, misleading headline much? Why not say all OSes got 64-bit. Do they expect us to read the article or something? Honestly..
Re:Why does linux get this? (Score:5, Informative)
But I mean, misleading headline much? Why not say all OSes got 64-bit. Do they expect us to read the article or something? Honestly.
In a word, "yes". You can't expect your opinion to be taken seriously if you haven't at least tried to get your facts (however limited/speculative/subjective/fanciful they may be) from the article straight first.
The other half of the story is that there was a 64 bit flash plugin for Linux (which we only got some considerable length of time after Windoze users got theirs) which was unceremoniously dumped. To make matters worse, Gentoo went and blocked all old 64 bit versions at the same time because of "security issues". (as if the new version didn't have security issues!)
Re: (Score:2)
Last I checked, there was only one 64-bit browser for Windows that wasn't a preview release or beta, and that would be IE8.
Even if the people who visit this site use Windows, they don't generally use IE.
Ergo, 64-bit Flash plugin for IE has virtually no audience here.
That will surely change when Firefox releases a 64-bit Windows version, but until then, it's just a novelty.
Re: (Score:2)
What the hell? How many operating systems do you think there are?!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_operating_systems [wikipedia.org]
Re:Why does linux get this? (Score:5, Funny)
Even a random word generator would get things right more often than a Slashdot editor.
I disagree. This is what a random word generator got me:
Drawings can followed improved out sociable not. Earnestly so do instantly pretended.
True, it's close, but I still think the random word generator comes in second place.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm fairly certain that Windows has not had a 64bit version before now. GNU/Linux was the first operating system that got an early 64bit beta from Adobe.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The summary is just bollocks as usual, don't worry. It's not linux getting a 64 bit version, it's all the platforms flash was available on getting one. Both Mac OS and Windows got a 64 bit version today too.
Reading comprehension is important! (Score:2, Informative)
The word includes implies that it is not the only version. You merely made a false assumption based on a misinterpretation of what was actually in the summary. I agree the summaries are often wrong here, but in this case you are quite off base I'm afraid.
Re: (Score:2)
http://linux.slashdot.org/story/10/06/11/1 [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is that your entire point is mooted by the fact that this was posted in the Linux section. The very fact that it was posted in the Linux section is very much an implication of it being for Linux only.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nothing against linux, but why does linux get a 64-bit plug-in and Windows is still sitting around forcing users to use 32-bit versions of browsers in order to use plug-ins.
If you had bothered to click the link before your fr1st p0st, you would have seen this includes 64-bit Windows versions as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Because before Windows 7, no 64 bit home user Windows OS took off. xp 64bit was a butchery and a flop. Vista 64 bit was hardly heard of as there were no compatible drivers for anything. Windows 7 is the first consumer desktop OS which is readily available and accepted in 64 bit. There was no point to release one up until now. Handily, all three are released at the same time.
Windows kernel-mode code signing (Score:2)
Vista 64 bit was hardly heard of as there were no compatible drivers for anything.
At least some of this can be blamed on the fact that 64-bit versions of Windows Vista and Windows 7 doesn't load unsigned kernel modules except in a "Test Mode" that puts an always-on-top message on all four corners of the screen and which the user must manually turn on at boot time and reboot time. This means "Test Mode" and unsigned drivers automatically go away after a Patch Tuesday automatic restart. The price of signing your driver is chump change to a multinational peripheral maker but substantial (20
Re: (Score:2)
At least un the US (using that country because that's the pricing you quoted), $200 is chump change to anyone making any hardware of any sort whatsoever. Its also about 1/3 the cost of a low-end desktop machine. Is it free? No. Is it substantial, as you suggested? Also no. Eve
Re: (Score:2)
Its also about 1/3 the cost of a low-end desktop machine.
A certificate expires after one year. A low-end desktop machine lasts more than one year. Besides, it's not just the certificate but also the annual fee for a corporation or LLC in your state, as the CAs wouldn't sell to individuals the last time I shopped for a certificate.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
[quote]Windows 7 is the first consumer desktop OS which is readily available and accepted in 64 bit.[/quote]
From Wikipedia:
- Mac OS X v10.5 "Leopard" was released on October 26, 2007, [..] full support for 64-bit applications
- Windows 7 was released to manufacturing on July 22, 2009
Re: (Score:2)
because 64-bit linux has been mainstream for far far longer for linux users than 64-bit windows has for windows users.
we were using 64-bit circa 2004'ish
Re: (Score:2)
Hate to burst your bubble, but the poster said MAINSTREAM. DEC Alpha's were hardly mainstream. In that regard though, Microsoft actually released Windows for that platform back in 1993 as well. Nobody remembers now because almost nobody cared then.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
He does have a point, actually. The kernel code had to be 64-bit clean before it could be ported to the AMD64 architecture. I assume most of that work was done when Linus had that Alpha box. Therefore, Linux was indeed going "64 bit" back in 1993, although AMD64 support itself was not done until 2004.
Windows NT also had an Alpha version as well, and I'm sure that was available mid 90s. I guess that the code for this eventually made its way into the modern Windows 64 bit OS. Microsoft were never very bi
Re:Why does linux get this? (Score:5, Interesting)
Well in fairness haven't linux users been waiting longer? Seems to me Microsoft haven't exactly been forging ahead when it comes to 64bit.
Yes exactly. I've been trying to use 64-bit Linux as my desktop for 5 years now. At first I went ahead and did the 64-bit thing and worked with the 32-bit chroot'ed firefox/nspluginwrapper what the hell ever. In the end I just had enough with it being a crappy work around and had to use 32-bit Linux on my desktop. I'm glad they are finally giving it attention again before not having 64-bit linux becomes too limiting.
All the meanwhile, I haven't heard Windows users gripe and complain much that flash doesn't work for them very well. Most don't even know what 64-bit even is.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
That's the reason my home Windows workstation / gaming machine has a 64-bit version of Windows on it... it has 8GB of RAM (mainly for running VMs, but if I actually have Windows programs that can use it...)
Re: (Score:2)
PAE works fine in windows, server 2003 32bit handles it just fine, as did earlier versions of XP...
Newer 32bit desktop windows simply isn't licensed for use with more than 4gb of address space and thus won't let you use it... The restrictions are intentionally implemented as part of the licensing scheme, not a technical limitation of any kind. In fact, PAE is on by default to support the NX bit, support for memory above 4GB is explicitly disabled.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Huh? When I went to 32 to 64-bit Linux it was at least as easy as going from 32 to 64 bit Windows. The Flash Plugin was the only thing that became a PITA.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I must be one of the few that have had no issues with 64-bit Linux and Flash. Been running 64 bit flash version 10.0 r42 for nearly a year now. No browser crashes, no flash freezes. Works a charm.
Of course, I've downloaded this latest version and installed it. Wouldn't be a linux geek if I didn't live somewhat on the edge. So far, works well.
Re: (Score:2)
My Flash plugin hasn't given any trouble either, since I installed it. But I was lucky to have grabbed a copy in time.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I have been using the old 64 bit beta at work with debian lenny and a chrooted 32 bit version at home with sidux (now called aptosid) 64bit without a problem- But I am not a heavy user of youtube maybe I was lucky.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
When did you last try? I had some troubles with debian/ubuntu early on, but I can't remember how long it's been since I had ANY 64-bit issues (except for some really old binary linux game I tried to run about 18 months ago, which needed an extra 32bit library sourced and installed).
Honestly, this whole article surprises me, because the 64-bit linux support is so good now, I though
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
You have more patience than me. I tried it, now that I have enough memory that there's actually a reason for it, but I had to throw in the towel very quickly. Got Flash to work, but only very poorly (in particular fullscreen video was useless). Thought I'd use it to host a 32-bit system to do the stuff that was most practical in that, but I quickly realized I wouldn't get 3d acceleration then.
Get it while you can! (Score:2)
I wish I wasn't at work, I want to download it NOW before they change their minds again and take it offline! I barely caught the last 64bit Linux plugin in time!
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
No, and I'm confused about what's going on here; Linux has had native 64-bit Flash since 2008... In fact, it was the *first* platform to get 64-bit flash.
So, what part of this is an "about face"?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You may wish to try Minefield, (4.0 beta) if you can stomach using a beta. I've actually been using the nightlies for months and they're generally stable. You may want to try a release beta, however. (4.0b6 is good). There are 64-bit linux, Mac, and Windows versions.
Keep in mind that it's a beta, though and not intended for general consumption quite yet.
http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/all-beta.html [mozilla.com]
Because I hate Flash, I have a separate Firefox profile specifically for using the plugin. (Yes, ther
Re:We have had it for a while (Score:5, Interesting)
The 64-bit plugin for Linux has never had hardware acceleration enabled. The 32-bit version does... maybe they've finally enabled it in this new version. I'll switch to this if that's the case... otherwise, I'm happy with my 32-bit plugin and smooth full screen video.
Enable hardware acceleration (Score:5, Informative)
The 64-bit plugin for Linux has never had hardware acceleration enabled. The 32-bit version does... maybe they've finally enabled it in this new version. I'll switch to this if that's the case... otherwise, I'm happy with my 32-bit plugin and smooth full screen video.
Right-click, Settings...
[x] Enable hardware acceleration
Looks promising!
Re: (Score:2)
How did you do that? The "Settings..." option is greyed out here.
Re: (Score:2)
That was available in the old version(s), too - it just didn't work right. Seems more often than not the feature either didn't do anything or actually did the opposite of what it said it was doing: when acceleration was disabled, it actually accelerated.
No HW accel w/ Radeon 9250... sad... (Score:2)
There appears to be no HW accel. on my ATI 9250 - still 100% CPU. On this very same hardware on previous Fedora, many moons ago, there was HW accel; full screen with little CPU util.. but I was likely running the 32bit version.
Re: (Score:2)
$ strings /usr/lib/flashplugin-installer/libflashplayer.so|grep libGL
For future reference, the command that you are looking for is ldd on most *NIX systems. On Darwin, it is otool -L.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Or just wait for the distros to package it for you.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I installed the new player under Chrome and left the old 64-bit plugin in Firefox on this same machine. The old player stutters still. The new one doesn't.
Re: (Score:2)