Did anyone refile bug for Flash Player shows green/purple in compressed window?

[Phill Whiteside]

Hi,

whilst I know this will be of use to the issues you people are seeing, the
dropping of adobe flash is not really a bad thing. HTML5 can do all it did
and with lower resources. As to when HTML5 will be adopted?.... I would
advise against holding your breath. On the flip side, as you-tube does
actively support it, may be it is time for people to actually nag the other
sites to death? complaining on here is preaching to the converted, email
them! Only when they see enough people complain will they ever consider
changing their own systems, and even after that it could take a while....
Still, the sooner started, sooner finished :D It is just the same issue
faced with graphic cards manufacturers not releasing linux drivers.... in
the last few years, things have gotten a bit better, but only because they
realise they are missing out on a market.

Regards,

Phill.

On 8 August 2013 00:04, John Hupp <lubuntu at prpcompany.com> wrote:

>  On 8/7/2013 4:26 PM, Aere Greenway wrote:
>
> On 08/07/2013 01:28 PM, John Hupp wrote:
>
> On 8/7/2013 3:11 PM, Aere Greenway wrote:
>
> On 08/07/2013 12:08 PM, John Hupp wrote:
>
> There was this helpful bug report on file at
> http://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1178982.
>
> It described behavior on Dell PC's with integrated Intel graphics, in
> which Adobe Flash Player would display only with shades of purple and green
> in a horizontally compressed window (or at least that's how I would
> describe what I see on a Dell Dimension 2400).
>
> The work-around (Comment #1) was to change the Xorg acceleration method to
> UXA.
>
> But the bug was closed because the OP didn't have possession of the
> machine anymore.
>
> I have not been able to find an active refile of the bug.  Is there one?
> (I'd like to vote it up!)
>
> --John
>
>  John:
>
> I reported that it affects me, as well.
>
>  Hi, Aere.
>
> I did too -- in the above bug.  But that bug is now closed and presumably
> getting no attention from developers.  Are you just saying that you
> reported in the above bug that it affects you too, or are you referring to
> a different bug report?
>
> --John
>
>  John:
>
> Sorry - I was just thinking that the bug was not getting attention because
> of lack of impact on users.
>
> Not being able to even watch YouTube videos on these machines (in addition
> to the choppy color gradients), led me to conclude that Linux is abandoning
> all of these machines because of their older Intel graphics.
>
> I have a newer machine (a Dell Inspiron 620) with Intel graphics that
> works just fine.  But all of my older Dell machines have the problem.
>
> So I said a few appropriate words (not appropriate to repeat here), and
> looked into getting NVIDIA cards for the machines I need to go forward into
> the future with.
>
> Where it was the kernel developers abandoning these machines, it seems I
> have no choice.  What can Lubuntu do if the graphics of all these machines
> has been dumped by the kernel developers (those same developers who would
> not even consider a minor change for supporting fake-PAE)?
>
> Eventually, I will get the useful parts from these machines, and discard
> them.  I can still use them for testing my new software (for the time
> being).
>
> Who knows what machines they will condemn to the trash heap in the next
> release...
>
> I was sort of hoping against all odds that Ubuntu's new graphics handler
> might support the graphics of these machines, but given their track-record,
> the odds are definitely against it.
>
>
> For what it's worth, I have just found that the workaround detailed in
> Comment #1 in the bug report (
> http://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1178982) does work.
> On my system there was no existing /etc/X11/xorg.conf, so I created it and
> added the specified lines as the sole content of the file.
>
> The colors and the proper window size were restored.  This Dell has an
> Intel 845G chipset, so this workaround may fix this problem on any
> motherboard with the same chipset (or even other Intel chipsets that use
> the same Intel driver).
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Verging strictly off-topic, but remaining with the question of getting
> Flash to work decently well:
>
> On this former XP machine with a Celeron 2.4 GHz and 1 GB RAM, YouTube
> videos in the default window size and playing at 360p seemed to perform
> normally.  Likewise, video from Hulu can be set to a lower quality to help
> assure continuous play.  But video from Vimeo can only be set to HD-Off (if
> HD is available).  And with video from the broadcast network sites CBS.com,
> NBC.com and ABC.com, you can only change screen size.  So it seems that
> videos from Vimeo, CBS, NBC and ABC offer very little accommodation for
> lower-spec setups.  And relatedly, I find that video that plays OK on a
> Windows PC with a dual core Intel E2200 @ 2.20 GHz -- even with just 1.3
> Mbps download on my DSL service -- plays badly on the 2.4 GHz Celeron using
> the same Internet connection.  So in this case processing power is more
> important than Internet connection speed.
>
> 2.4 GHz is the minimum required spec for Flash (the last I knew), but
> perhaps that merely means that you'll be able to play *something* (like
> YouTube or Hulu videos at a lower-quality setting), not that you'll be able
> to play everything.
>
> Does anyone know if there is a way to lower the quality settings for sites
> like Vimeo, CBS, NBC and ABC, even if there is no quality-setting tool in
> the player interface?  (Or does anyone differ with the assessment I offer
> above?)
>
> --
> Lubuntu-users mailing list
> Lubuntu-users at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/lubuntu-users
>
> --
> <https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/lubuntu-users>
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/phillw
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/lubuntu-users/attachments/20130808/78bfea40/attachment.html>