FF is much more stable without Flash 10, but...

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
16 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

FF is much more stable without Flash 10, but...

Alan Beagley-2
AMD dual-core system with eCS 2.1GA.

I've been using FF 4.0.1 since it was released, but without Flash 10,
and I've been able to play many YouTube videos using HTML5. I haven't
had the hangs that I used to have -- until this morning: I went to a Web
page, and it seemed to display OK, but then I got the hourglass mouse
pointer and nothing I did would kill FF. I found it strange that in the
process list it was MULTIPT.EXE and PMSHELL.EXE that were hogging the
CPU, while FF was using little or no CPU time.

-=-
Alan
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF is much more stable without Flash 10, but...

Mr. G
On Thu, 2 Jun 2011 13:38:35 UTC, Alan Beagley <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> AMD dual-core system with eCS 2.1GA.
>
> I've been using FF 4.0.1 since it was released, but without Flash 10,
> and I've been able to play many YouTube videos using HTML5. I haven't
> had the hangs that I used to have -- until this morning: I went to a Web
> page, and it seemed to display OK, but then I got the hourglass mouse
> pointer and nothing I did would kill FF. I found it strange that in the
> process list it was MULTIPT.EXE and PMSHELL.EXE that were hogging the
> CPU, while FF was using little or no CPU time.
>
> -=-
> Alan

I believe you need to be more specific. What web page? Also, think about
which addons you are using.
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF is much more stable without Flash 10, but...

Dave Yeo-3
Mr. G wrote:

> On Thu, 2 Jun 2011 13:38:35 UTC, Alan Beagley<[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> AMD dual-core system with eCS 2.1GA.
>>
>> I've been using FF 4.0.1 since it was released, but without Flash 10,
>> and I've been able to play many YouTube videos using HTML5. I haven't
>> had the hangs that I used to have -- until this morning: I went to a Web
>> page, and it seemed to display OK, but then I got the hourglass mouse
>> pointer and nothing I did would kill FF. I found it strange that in the
>> process list it was MULTIPT.EXE and PMSHELL.EXE that were hogging the
>> CPU, while FF was using little or no CPU time.
>>
>> -=-
>> Alan
>
> I believe you need to be more specific. What web page? Also, think about
> which addons you are using.

Also how long the system was up and how long Firefox was running.
Dave
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF is much more stable without Flash 10, but...

Alan Beagley-2
On 06/02/11 08:06 pm, Dave Yeo wrote:

>>> AMD dual-core system with eCS 2.1GA.
>>>
>>> I've been using FF 4.0.1 since it was released, but without Flash 10,
>>> and I've been able to play many YouTube videos using HTML5. I haven't
>>> had the hangs that I used to have -- until this morning: I went to a Web
>>> page, and it seemed to display OK, but then I got the hourglass mouse
>>> pointer and nothing I did would kill FF. I found it strange that in the
>>> process list it was MULTIPT.EXE and PMSHELL.EXE that were hogging the
>>> CPU, while FF was using little or no CPU time.

>> I believe you need to be more specific. What web page? Also, think about
>> which addons you are using.

I can't find that Web site now. I think it might have been one for which
I clicked a link by accident.

Add-ons:

Flagfox 4.1.3
Flash and Video Download 0.2
Saved Password Editor 2.0.6

> Also how long the system was up and how long Firefox was running.
> Dave

Don't recall how long FF had been running; I had watched a few YouTube
videos (in HTML5), but I don't usually leave FF running when I'm not
using it.

The system could have been up a day or two.

-=-
Alan
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF is much more stable without Flash 10, but...

Dave Yeo-3
Alan Beagley wrote:
>> Also how long the system was up and how long Firefox was running.
>> Dave
>
> Don't recall how long FF had been running; I had watched a few YouTube
> videos (in HTML5), but I don't usually leave FF running when I'm not
> using it.
>
> The system could have been up a day or two.

Not long, unless you had a lot of tabs open, as in over 20 or 30.
I find that SeaMonkey can get weird if it has been up for a few days
with lots of tabs open, and often it seems to be the WPS that suffers.
Dave
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF is much more stable without Flash 10, but...

Peter Brown-2
In reply to this post by Alan Beagley-2
Hi Alan

Alan Beagley wrote:

> AMD dual-core system with eCS 2.1GA.
>
> I've been using FF 4.0.1 since it was released, but without Flash 10,
> and I've been able to play many YouTube videos using HTML5. I haven't
> had the hangs that I used to have -- until this morning: I went to a Web
> page, and it seemed to display OK, but then I got the hourglass mouse
> pointer and nothing I did would kill FF. I found it strange that in the
> process list it was MULTIPT.EXE and PMSHELL.EXE that were hogging the
> CPU, while FF was using little or no CPU time.
>
> -=-
> Alan



I have found MULTIPT.EXE causes problems even with no Seamonkey running
(I don't use FF) so suspect that something on my system may need "tweaking".

Regards

Pete


_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF is much more stable without Flash 10, but...

David T. Johnson
In reply to this post by Alan Beagley-2
Alan Beagley wrote:

> AMD dual-core system with eCS 2.1GA.
>
> I've been using FF 4.0.1 since it was released, but without Flash 10,
> and I've been able to play many YouTube videos using HTML5. I haven't
> had the hangs that I used to have -- until this morning: I went to a Web
> page, and it seemed to display OK, but then I got the hourglass mouse
> pointer and nothing I did would kill FF. I found it strange that in the
> process list it was MULTIPT.EXE and PMSHELL.EXE that were hogging the
> CPU, while FF was using little or no CPU time.
>

Flash is not good software to have on your system, be it OS/2 or Windows
or whatever.  However, the HTML 5 WebM implementation in Firefox 4 is
still shaky on OS/2 in my experience, depending on your video and audio
hardware and drivers.  If you are running the SNAP video driver, try
turning the DPMS feature off and/or try enabling the GTF feature.  You
might also try a different audio driver, either earlier or later
depending on what you're using.


--
Posted with OS/2 Warp 4.52
and Sea Monkey 1.5a
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF is much more stable without Flash 10, but...

Steve Wendt
On 06/10/11 10:42 am, David T. Johnson wrote:

>> mouse pointer and nothing I did would kill FF. I found it strange that
>> in the process list it was MULTIPT.EXE and PMSHELL.EXE that were
>> hogging the CPU, while FF was using little or no CPU time.
>
> If you are running the SNAP video driver, try
> turning the DPMS feature off and/or try enabling the GTF feature.

What possible correlation have you made that elicits this suggestion?
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF is much more stable without Flash 10, but...

David Tholen
In reply to this post by David T. Johnson
David T. Johnson wrote:

> Flash is not good software to have on your system, be it OS/2 or Windows
> or whatever.  However, the HTML 5 WebM implementation in Firefox 4 is
> still shaky on OS/2 in my experience, depending on your video and audio
> hardware and drivers.  If you are running the SNAP video driver, try
> turning the DPMS feature off and/or try enabling the GTF feature.  You
> might also try a different audio driver, either earlier or later
> depending on what you're using.

DPMS I can understand; you usually don't want the display to go to sleep
while watching a video that lasts longer than the idle timer.

I don't know about GTF; what does GTF stand for?  Graphics something Format?
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF is much more stable without Flash 10, but...

Steve Wendt
On 06/18/11 03:54 pm, David Tholen wrote:

> I don't know about GTF; what does GTF stand for? Graphics something Format?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalized_Timing_Formula

But it doesn't have any relevance to anything in this newsgroup.
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: FF is much more stable without Flash 10, but...

David Tholen
Steve Wendt wrote:

>> I don't know about GTF; what does GTF stand for? Graphics something
>> Format?

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalized_Timing_Formula
>
> But it doesn't have any relevance to anything in this newsgroup.

Yeah, I found what GTF stands for by clicking on the Help button.
What's odd is that before asking, I had used the Seek and Scan
utility to look for .INF and .HLP files with GTF in it, and it
came up empty.  With no restriction on filename, there were lots
of hits in unrelated files.  I wonder where that help file is
hidden?

The relevance to this newsgroup is only to the extent that
Johnson's suggestion of enabling/disabling GTF helps Firefox
play WebM video better.
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [OT] GTF

Steve Wendt
On 06/18/11 04:49 pm, David Tholen wrote:

> I wonder where that help file is hidden?

You mean this one?
C:\os2\help\sddvcfg.hlp

> The relevance to this newsgroup is only to the extent that
> Johnson's suggestion of enabling/disabling GTF helps Firefox
> play WebM video better.

I think that's called "grasping at straws."
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [OT] GTF

David Tholen
Steve Wendt wrote:

>> I wonder where that help file is hidden?

> You mean this one?
> C:\os2\help\sddvcfg.hlp

Yep.  And this time Seek and Scan found it.  But it didn't
the earlier attempt.  Of course, that was while my system
was misbehaving following the Firefox crash in PMMERGE.DLL
(I've since had a crash in OS2KRNL and needed to reboot).
But I can't imagine why a problem in PMMERGE would cause a
simple file scan to fail a pattern match.

>> The relevance to this newsgroup is only to the extent that
>> Johnson's suggestion of enabling/disabling GTF helps Firefox
>> play WebM video better.

> I think that's called "grasping at straws."

Well, Firefox doesn't play WebM very well on my system, so
a Firefox newsgroup seems like the right place to look for
suggestions that might improve things.  But I'm not the
kind of person that tries something simply for the sake of
trying something.  I prefer to try and understand what the
change is doing, but unknown acronyms inhibit that process.
I have discovered that WebM plays better if I pause the
playback until after the complete file has downloaded;
maybe the video card and network card share an interrupt?
But I also need to avoid doing other things with the system
while a video is playing to avoid stuttering.
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [OT] GTF

Steve Wendt
On 06/18/11 07:12 pm, David Tholen wrote:

> I have discovered that WebM plays better if I pause the
> playback until after the complete file has downloaded;

Sounds normal to me.  If you stream it with something that supports
overlays (such as VLC or MPlayer), assuming you have support for them,
it may work better.  Of course, local playback after download always
works better than streaming.
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [OT] GTF

David Tholen
Steve Wendt wrote:

>> I have discovered that WebM plays better if I pause the
>> playback until after the complete file has downloaded;

> Sounds normal to me.  If you stream it with something that supports
> overlays (such as VLC or MPlayer), assuming you have support for them,
> it may work better.  Of course, local playback after download always
> works better than streaming.

However, the two-color progress bar clearly shows that the
download is more than keeping up with the playback, so the
stuttering isn't due to buffering issues.

What's puzzling is that if stuttering starts to occur, and
I pause the playback until the download is complete, then
resume playback, it still stutters, but if I reposition the
playback point by sliding the indicator on the progress bar,
playback is smooth.
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WebM playback

Steve Wendt
On 06/19/11 03:53 pm, David Tholen wrote:

> However, the two-color progress bar clearly shows that the
> download is more than keeping up with the playback, so the
> stuttering isn't due to buffering issues.
>
> What's puzzling is that if stuttering starts to occur, and
> I pause the playback until the download is complete, then
> resume playback, it still stutters, but if I reposition the
> playback point by sliding the indicator on the progress bar,
> playback is smooth.

I assume you are talking about YouTube, primarily?  You certainly aren't
the first to mention that here.  I'm not sure if this is cross-platform,
or not.
_______________________________________________
dev-ports-os2 mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-ports-os2