Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 29th Aug 2007 21:55 UTC, submitted by deanna
Thread beginning with comment 266930
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
>>So how does it compare to swfdec...?
>They're both quite incomplete yet. I think swfdec is more realistic by calling its version 0.5.1 than gnash calling it 0.8.1, but anyway, they're getting there gradually.
Another basic difference is the license.
One is GPL while the other is LGPL.






Member since:
2006-04-28
>>So how does it compare to swfdec...?
They're both quite incomplete yet. I think swfdec is more realistic by calling its version 0.5.1 than gnash calling it 0.8.1, but anyway, they're getting there gradually.
None will play smoothly flash sites, but some things do work. swfdec is in general a bit ahead and play more content correctly.
Both play youtube videos, though (it's been a priority for both projects). While both use 100% CPU on my box (P4 2.6 Ghz) swfdec plays them smoothly, while with gnash they are rather choppy. With none you can adjust the volume in the player, but at least with swfdec you get to see it correctly (gnash has a visual bug).
So I'd say that swfdec is one step ahead of gnash right now, but both need still work to be considered a decent replacement for Adobe's flash player. They progress steadily, though, so maybe in a year or even less they'll be ready to replace Adobe's player in 95% of the cases.