Joost Kremers wrote:
Ignoramus18728 wrote:
On 2008-01-07, Joost Kremers <joostkremers@yahoo.com> wrote:
he may, using gnash <http://www.gnu.org/software/gnash/>.
How do you like this gnash, does it work very well?
i have it installed on my ibook G3 under linux (powerpc, for which there's
no adobe flash player), but i hardly use it. for simple flash stuff it
works ok (not perfect, but ok, although with high cpu load), but anything
that's a bit more complex than just a moving ad usually doesn't function
very well. youtube videos (or any other videos for that matter) don't work
for me at all.
Running on many systems is one of the great things going for Gnash.
however, i once read a review of gnash that was much more positive. the
writer said most flash stuff works, and he had little trouble watching
youtube videos. so perhaps it's my setup or a bad configuration or
something.
big disadvantage, IMHO: gnash requires the boost library, and that took
forever to compile. really. i've compiled firefox a couple of times in the
past, and i've compiled kernels on this ibook, and they didn't take as long
as boost did...
I'm not a C or C++ hacker, but from what I hear using C++ and using
Boost, while easier to maintain, doesn't have the performance of
writing in C. Is this true?
|