Youtube Challenge

Using applications, configuring, problems
Message
Author
User avatar
cimarron
Posts: 292
Joined: Fri 31 May 2013, 01:57

#31 Post by cimarron »

You must have missed my post, greengeek. Your video plays fine on my Thinkpad X24, about 12 years old, Pentium III(M) running at 733MHz (limited to keep it from overheating) with 256M RAM. I've got GuyDog on it. And Firefox 16 with Flash 11.1, and NoScript to allow just the scripts I want.

For playing video, GuyDog made a big difference for me over my previous LuPu 5.1.

User avatar
greengeek
Posts: 5789
Joined: Tue 20 Jul 2010, 09:34
Location: Republic of Novo Zelande

#32 Post by greengeek »

You're right - sorry cimarron! I did miss it. I think I must have glossed over it in the expectation that somebody was going to pop up with a 233MHz something-or-other that could do the job. No chance of that I realise now.

OK, so far you are in the lead. I think I'm going to try to dig up an old PIII 700 and see if I can beat you :-)

User avatar
greengeek
Posts: 5789
Joined: Tue 20 Jul 2010, 09:34
Location: Republic of Novo Zelande

#33 Post by greengeek »

Users of less powerful machines may get some pointers from sindi's post here

itisix
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon 09 Jun 2014, 21:27

#34 Post by itisix »

Hi,

I'm a total puppy noob and there is something eluding me.
I have a PIV 2.4 with 1GB or ram and I cannot play youtube decently. I have puppy slacko 5.7, firefox 17.0.11 and Flash 11.2.
Unfortunately, my graphics card is total crap onboard intel something.
Any ideas?

Thanks

User avatar
Semme
Posts: 8399
Joined: Sun 07 Aug 2011, 20:07
Location: World_Hub

#35 Post by Semme »

Rt-clk a video, go to settings and disable hw acceleration. If that doesn't cut it, remove eleven and try this version.
>>> Living with the immediacy of death helps you sort out your priorities. It helps you live a life less trivial <<<

itisix
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon 09 Jun 2014, 21:27

#36 Post by itisix »

Thanks.

Better, but not perfect yet. Maybe it's the computer in general that is slow.

itisix
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon 09 Jun 2014, 21:27

#37 Post by itisix »

It's the CPU is maxing while playing youtube. Even as I write this, it gets up to over 60%. Firefox and Firefox plugin container are the culprits. I have installed no plugins (except flash).

User avatar
mikeb
Posts: 11297
Joined: Thu 23 Nov 2006, 13:56

#38 Post by mikeb »

does seem a bit high ...what resolution are you playing.

I find anything vp8 based has high overhead even in mplayer/vlc.

What about trying html5?

Any better/worse with full screen...3d drivers are needed for that to work well.

Graphics driver... are you using vesa or an actual intel one as the former will be considerably worse?

Should not have to be resorting to downloading vids with that spec...got an intel atom dual core 1.6/intel vid and its smooth.

mike

itisix
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon 09 Jun 2014, 21:27

#39 Post by itisix »

HTML5 made it worse.
Resolution is 1024*768, but lower doesn't make much difference.

User avatar
Semme
Posts: 8399
Joined: Sun 07 Aug 2011, 20:07
Location: World_Hub

#40 Post by Semme »

How are you running Pup? Depending on setup, swap can make quite a difference.

http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=29356

http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=60302
>>> Living with the immediacy of death helps you sort out your priorities. It helps you live a life less trivial <<<

itisix
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon 09 Jun 2014, 21:27

#41 Post by itisix »

I have a full install on the hard drive and booting from it. No swap. But it never uses that much RAM anyway.

User avatar
mikeb
Posts: 11297
Joined: Thu 23 Nov 2006, 13:56

#42 Post by mikeb »

Hmm yes html5 seems a bit naff to me too...but some swear by it BUT it does suggest you might be using vesa or xvesa video.

That resolution you quoted...is that in flash or html5 as if it flash ..either way no chance of that being smooth..only way for those is with a real video player AND/OR graphics card hardware support.

mike

itisix
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon 09 Jun 2014, 21:27

#43 Post by itisix »

Tested with opera and chromium. Opera gets a little better than FF and CH.

I'm also getting a lot of CPU power going into X:0 -br -nolisten tcp

I got this from my video info:

video-info-glx 1.5.1 Ter 10 Jun 2014 on Slacko Puppy 5.7 Linux 3.4.82 i686
2.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation 82845G/GL[Brookdale-G]/GE Chipset Integrated Graphics Device (rev 01)
oem: Brookdale-G Graphics Chip Accelerated VGA BIOS
product: Brookdale-G Graphics Controller Hardware Version 0.0

X Server: Xorg Driver: intel
X.Org version: 1.12.4
dimensions: 1024x768 pixels (169x126 millimeters)
depth of root window: 24 planes

direct rendering: Yes
server glx vendor string: SGI
server glx version string: 1.4
OpenGL vendor string: Tungsten Graphics, Inc
OpenGL renderer string: Mesa DRI Intel(R) 845G x86/MMX/SSE2
OpenGL version string: 1.3 Mesa 8.0.4

Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 2.40GHz
Core 0: @2400 MHz

...the above also recorded at '/tmp/root/video-info-glx'.

itisix
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon 09 Jun 2014, 21:27

#44 Post by itisix »

What is really bugging me is that I have another PIV 2.4 with 1GB of ram. That one has a crap 3D card (not onboard) and I can run youtube videos on it, using a lightweight version of Windows XP. I just decided I was going to finally make the move for a linux media center.

User avatar
mikeb
Posts: 11297
Joined: Thu 23 Nov 2006, 13:56

#45 Post by mikeb »

Hmm ok... is glxgears giving you a decent fps... ?

X cpu is showing xorg is having a heavy time.... with flash acceleration ONLY helps with full screen anyway.
Again 1024x768 video on flash I would not even attempt if thats what you are trying to play.

Unfortunately you may be right in that the intel video is your bottleneck here and ANY other video card would perform better.

And yes XP will perform better in this instance... better video drivers and flash player system ... a slight bias there generally. Especially if you use the activex flash player on IE..but then you have the problem of extreme virus vunerability.
(I did once experiment and had better flash performance using firefox on wine and best of all IE/flash on wine than any native arrangement)

mike

itisix
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon 09 Jun 2014, 21:27

#46 Post by itisix »

But shouldn't HTML5 run smoother?

User avatar
mikeb
Posts: 11297
Joined: Thu 23 Nov 2006, 13:56

#47 Post by mikeb »

IF you have a video card supporting it otherwise I find it uses more cpu than flash....but hey its marvellous for those that do :D . Bit like web pages that need hi speed broadband , this weeks browser and a quad core to be seen .

Amazing really that say streaming xvid can play smoothly full screen on a pentium 3 but methods chosen for the web require considerable techinical resources...small rant there. Its more about market control (google vs MS vs adobe etc) than the best system for the job.

Mike

itisix
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon 09 Jun 2014, 21:27

#48 Post by itisix »

Sad to say, but my puppy experience has been a total flop. Not only did I not get to play youtube videos decently, the drive mounting on the dvd player and USB is, at best, poor. Half the time puppy doesn't even know they are there. I was thinking about xbmc with this tiny win xp I use, but xp has been dropped by xbmc. I'll try openelec and maybe android on the pc (maybe... no java). Puppy looks and feels good, but in this case it has not suited me.

Thanks guys

User avatar
mikeb
Posts: 11297
Joined: Thu 23 Nov 2006, 13:56

#49 Post by mikeb »

but xp has been dropped by xbmc.
are they working for microsoft :D ..open source that would make bill G proud...

no problem...in the end you go with what works

mike

itisix
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon 09 Jun 2014, 21:27

#50 Post by itisix »

[quote]As you may have read, the official Microsoft support for Windows XP will ended at April 8th, 2014. This means the end of life for this 13 years old operating system which has fulfilled it’s purpose. After this date there will be no more updates any more, plugging possible security leaks. At the same time we have also ended support for Windows XP in the upcoming XBMC 13.0 release. It’s time to let go and move on. Some of you may still be using Windows XP including XBMC and are now becoming vulnerable in near future.
What are the options

There are several options to explore which vary in costs and difficulty depending on your skills. So let’s sum them up.

The most expensive is throwing away the hardware and just buying a new one. In this day and age it’s better to save a few bucks and keep using the old hardware of course. Be mindful that when you think you are savings some cash you might actually be spending more than you think. Older hardware have the tendency to be more power hungry than newer and smaller devices. So it could be, that after a few months you would have been better of buying new hardware. Especially when you are going to use it as a HTPC, that will be running couple of hours a day or longer. All this of course depends on the hardware you own, want to buy and your specific needs.



endofxp_to_win7-8_linux

Either way, you have to decide which operating system you are going to be using, except of course if you are buying an Android device. You could choose again for a Windows based solution and buy a Windows 7 or 8 license. Another option is to go for one of the free Linux distributions available that have become more user-friendly for the less technical people. Each option has their pros and cons. The internet is filled with information to help you go through this.

Disclaimer: There are a many pros and cons on what flavour operating system you should use and everyone has their own opinion. We will not venture into this territory. Please do your own research on the web as there are many reviews and tutorials out there. We simply want to point out the options available to replace the old Windows XP when you want to keep using XBMC “safely

Post Reply